George, correct me if I am wrong but the last time I was on the IPC web site the viewer was there and it was FREE. You don't have to buy anything to have what you had with SM-782. However the web version did let you create land patterns but it was very limited. http://landpatterns.ipc.org/default.asp If you wanted to have the electronic version of SM-782 (Excel format), you had to pay $50.00 US. I did buy that version and used it quite a bit. Today IPC charges $50 for the hard copy of IPC-7351 and gives you a CD with the viewer. No calculator with this package. If you go to PCB Libraries you can buy the new calculator for $177.00 US I think. That is more than what I paid for the old one but it works a lot better. http://www.pcblibraries.com/store/detail.aspx?ID=16 Anyway, just because Nick changed jobs doesn't mean that he or anyone else is trying to "hoodwink" anyone. IMHO. :) Donald At 04:51 PM 3/21/2005, you wrote: ><ONLINE> > >The thing I don't care for is that a company has the appearance of pushing >thru a standard that directly benefits themselves. This is not a company >getting indirect benefit from increased exposure, this is a company >developing a tool that has the appearance of driving the standard that it >supports, with the involvement of an IPC insider. Perhaps if some free >functionality had been maintained (such as just providing the numbers >without actually creating the package symbol), I would feel that we (the DC >members) hadn't been "hoodwinked." As it is, the appearance is otherwise. > >The IPC "profits" (and I agree that some of those costs are necessary), >PCBLibraries profits (which is not in itself bad), but the designers have to >purchase a tool that provides the same function (admittedly with more >features) as a tool that was previously provided for free. I have to >believe that if the standard hadn't been championed by one of the developers >of the (for-profit) tool, some volunteer effort might have upgraded the >existing SM-782 on-line tool to continue to work for free. I would have >been happy to contribute to this tool, I am sure other ( web / asp / >JavaScript / java / MySQL / whatever ) savvy designers would have >participated as well. PCBStandards would still have made money from its >tool, IPC would have still made money to support its efforts from the >standard, the designers would not have had to purchase a replacement for a >tool they had used for years for free, peace would have reined in the world, >and the Easter bunny would have delivered his eggs on time. > >Nothing personal, Nick, I am sure you did not see anything wrong with this >and I am not trying to throw stones at you personally. But the appearance >of some "funny-business" is there. And I had to vent in public, too, Chris. > ><:^/ > >-- >George Patrick >Tektronix, Inc. >Central Engineering, PCB Design Group >P.O. Box 500, M/S 39-512 >Beaverton, OR 97077-0001 >Phone: 503-627-5272 Fax: 503-627-5587 >http://www.tektronix.com http://www.pcb-designer.com > >It's my opinion, not Tektronix' > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: DesignerCouncil [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris >Ball >Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 13:33 >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Re: [DC] IPC Design Specifications (or new subject maybe) > > >Nick- > >I waited as long as I could.... Maybe I'm way off with this, and if so, I >apologize, but... I'm thinking you might be a little biased. > >Does PCBLibraries get a % on every copy of 7351 sold? I have to say it >feels kind of funny to get funneled into your company's website from a >utility delivered as part of a spec from IPC. > >Even if PCBLibraries gets no $ from the sale of the spec, your voluntary >participation garners you a whole bunch of exposure. Doesn't seem kosher to >me somehow... especially knowing that you recently left IPC. > >I sense a change in the force, Luke. > >-Chris > > > > > > "Nick Ban (PCBL)" > <[log in to unmask]> To: >[log in to unmask] > Sent by: DesignerCouncil cc: > <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: >[DC] IPC Design > Specifications > 03/21/2005 01:46 PM > Please respond to Nick > > > > > > > >Please don't misunderstand me, I am not for IPC becoming wealthy. However, >I >would like to see it operational 5 years from now. > >Lowering cost of the standards may get more people to purchase more, but >that does not necessarily mean that IPC will be able to make up its >expenses >in creating and promoting of the standard (ie sustain itself). > >It seems to me it's about choosing the lesser of two evils: > >1. Higher cost standards to cover the expenses > - Some cannot afford and probably illegally reproduce > standards; operating expenses met. >2. Low cost standards to make more affordable > - cost of creating standards remains high (even with the > cutbacks of the last several years), and liabilities > cannot be paid despite the fact that everybody in > the industry uses the standards. > >While most standard users would prefer option 2, it is not a good business >model of any company that isn't otherwise adequately funded. > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ray Johnston [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 11:54 AM >To: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask] >Subject: Re: [DC] IPC Design Specifications > >Nick, >I don't think it about getting specifications and training for free. Its >more about getting more affordable for the individual designer. >Whether a member is an individual or a company should not be an issue when >discounting to members. We all want standards to help get the job done >right, but if they are unattainable then eventually the standard will be no >more. It is more the individual then a company that keeps the standards a >standard. I know from where I sit I get the (non-member)company I work for >to buy standards from the IPC, because they are necessary. I am the only >member at this company and in the past have had some trouble getting them >to > >bite on the IPC standards. >What I'm trying to say is that because a company has individual member(s), >the company will buy standards at full price, and Rane (the company I work >for) buys these standards for both Engineering and manufacturing. >I would think this is worth more than a discount. > >Well thanks for letting me rant. > >Ray Johnston >Lead CAD Designer >Rane Corporation >425-355-6000 >rayj@rane,com > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Nick Ban (PCBL)" <[log in to unmask]> >To: <[log in to unmask]> >Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 3:36 PM >Subject: Re: [DC] IPC Design Specifications > > > >I saw the movie, not sure if that's exactly what it was called, but I know > > what you're talking about. So IPC should basically give its standards and > > training materials out to the industry for free to help it out. > > Consequently, shut down due to lack of revenue. Isn't what you're saying > > going to benefit the industry once and never again? > > > > IPC cannot function like the government and subsidize development without > > getting some kind of income. The government gets your taxes (unless one > > figures out clever loopholes and doesn't want to pay their due), IPC > > doesn't > > (that's why it charges for its standards). > > > > Companies like Hallmark, Coretec, Mentor and Overland can help the > > designers > > more directly because its core business is in another area and very > > profitable. IPC mainly relies on membership dues (how much was the DC > > membership again, $50? per year?) and sale of standards, among some other > > things. > > > > I see how what you're proposing would benefit the industry in the next > > year, > > but 2, 3 or 5 years from now, who will? I suspect another entity would > > arise > > to fill that void with the same intent of supporting its continued > > existence. Do we then we can ask them to give away its standards just the > > same "for the sake of the industry"... and then repeat the cycle? > > > > Keeping in mind most volunteers are doing it as a "side job" to get > > visibility and other intangible benefits, why would anyone even bother > > investing in creating, promoting and updating standards? > > > > Like I said, if volunteers can find it in their hearts to contribute much > > more than they do now (ie travel/hotel and time), for example >coordinating > > and signing off on meeting room contracts, catering, promotion campaigns, > > graphics work, etc., the list goes on... basically satisfy all the > > requirements of creating such reliable standards, why don't they? > > > > Hint: it would cost too much time and effort (not just once, but on an > > ongoing basis) and they would probably end up having to charge people for > > the standards like IPC. > > > > > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DesignerCouncil [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of > > Brooks,Bill > > Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 4:53 PM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Re: [DC] IPC Design Specifications > > > > Nick... I see what you are saying... > > > > It just doesn't work that way in my mind. > >>From where I stand, The industry as a whole stands to gain the most from > > better trained designers... why not have 'the industry' help fund their > > education? They make grants and scholarships to colleges and >universities, > > they support their political affiliations, why not invest in the designer > > community that stands to make them the most profit through adopting >better > > design practices? Some companies already see this and are doing something > > about it... > > > > We expect our government to spend money on R&D to further our economic > > strength... well, why not support the designers of the products we want >to > > fuel our economy with? 'Pay it Forward' so to speak... you ever see that > > movie? If not, you should rent it... what a great concept. Just like > > designers need to invest in their careers, the PCB industry and the > > foundations that support industry need to invest in its PCB Designers. > > > > That's where I am coming from... but hey it's just an idea... maybe it > > will > > never catch on... or then again it might... and what companies are going > > to > > get to claim the honors and praise from it if it does catch on and the > > industry invests in it's designer community... ? I know Coretec and >Mentor > > are investing in the Designer community now... I'm sure there are others > > that designers can name that have been big heroes, like Hallmark Circuits > > for one, like Overland Storage for another, who helped the local >Designers > > here... I think there is a great opportunity here to 'raise the bar' to a > > higher level and really make an investment in the DC... make it a much > > stronger force for bringing together designers and industry and > > strengthening our place in the world. We just need to see folks think of > > it > > as an investment in their own futures as corporations. > > > > Then someday making specs available will be a trivial matter. And they > > won't > > have to do all the copy protection 'stuff' to the disks. The DC will be >in > > the black instead of the red... and I will keep hoping for the day. Who > > knows I may see it in my lifetime... it could happen.... not everyone is >a > > mercenary. > > > > > > Bill Brooks - KG6VVP > > PCB Design Engineer , C.I.D.+, C.I.I. > > Tel: (760)597-1500 Ext 3772 Fax: (760)597-1510 > > e-mail:[log in to unmask] > > http://www.dtwc.com > > http://pcbwizards.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Nick Ban (PCBL) [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > > Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 12:55 PM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Re: [DC] IPC Design Specifications > > > > When you take the top-mgmt compensation and prop it up against the >overall > > costs (many specified below), it just won't compare. As much as I'd like > > to > > believe that it could, I seriously doubt that by reducing - even > > completely > > eliminating - top management compensation will put any kind of >significant > > dent in the cost of the standards, forget about 'slashing' the price to > > make > > them much more affordable. > > > > Programming, website management, graphics design, meeting planning, > > production, training, accounting, and customer support all sum up to much > > more than what top management makes, and this is only staff compensation. > > Then factor in the other operational costs. > > > > Our capitalistic society will find a way of doing things cheaper. If > > someone > > in the electronics industry knew that they can earn a decent living > > creating, producing, promoting, selling, and updating reliable and ANSI > > approved standards of the same caliber as IPC's ****at cheaper cost****, > > I'm > > inclined to believe they would have done it already, especially during >the > > industry's poor employment conditions of the past few years. > > > > > > Nick > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using >LISTSERV > > 1.8d > > To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in > > the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF DesignerCouncil. > > To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET > > DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL) > > Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > > > > E-mail Archives > > Please visit IPC web site >http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 > > for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] >or > > 847-615-7100 ext.2815 > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >----- > > DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using >LISTSERV > > > 1.8d > > To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in > > the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF DesignerCouncil. > > To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET > > DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL) > > Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > > > > > E-mail Archives > > Please visit IPC web site >http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 > > > for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] >or > > > 847-615-7100 ext.2815 > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >----- > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >----- > >DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV >1.8d >To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in >the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF DesignerCouncil. >To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET >DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL) >Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > >E-mail Archives >Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 >for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or >847-615-7100 ext.2815 >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >----- > > > > > > > > > >"This e-mail message is intended only for the use of the intended >recipient(s). >The information contained therein may be confidential or privileged, and >its disclosure or reproduction is strictly prohibited. >If you are not the intended recipient, please return it immediately to its >sender at the above address and destroy it." > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >----- >DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV >1.8d >To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in >the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF DesignerCouncil. >To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET >DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL) >Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > >E-mail Archives >Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 >for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or >847-615-7100 ext.2815 >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >----- > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV >1.8d >To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in >the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF DesignerCouncil. >To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET >DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL) >Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > >E-mail Archives >Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 >for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or >847-615-7100 ext.2815 >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Donald Kyle C.I.D.+ (IPC Certified Advanced Interconnect Designer) Senior Development Technician 281-285-7528 voice 281-285-8593 fax [log in to unmask] Schlumberger Sugar Land Product Center (SPC) Mail Drop MD155-1 155 Industrial Boulevard Sugar Land, Texas 77478 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF DesignerCouncil. To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL) Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------