'+5V from 120 VAC power,err is human'
I have no idea what's going on here....couple of weeks ago I was surprised
because I found a mistake on MICROCHIP application's webpage and nobody had
a care about it ....who cares? seemed to be the answer.
Today,a buddy trying to be helpful and contribute to the list with a useful
diagram, included a mistake, little in size compared to the one I posted
before and the result this time.... replies coming ,so many that I've
learned a new sentence in English...*Stop teasing, please*
>> Oh boy! Bit of a blunder there, you've shown C1 as an electrolytic!
Paul B. Webster
>I love simulated-only circuits. Does a modern simulator simulate
>sound & smoke effects for parts with exceeded SOA ? ;)
Eduardo R. wrote:
> I have no idea what's going on here....couple of weeks ago I was
> surprised because I found a mistake on MICROCHIP application's
> webpage and nobody had a care about it ....who cares? seemed to be
> the answer.
No, that's not what I, and others said. I said that it was a fact of
life that Microchip (and other companies) have a *limited* maintenance
budget on their spec sheets. The spec sheets have mistakes which may
require more or less expertise to detect on reading.
While it might be *nice* for them to employ more staff to review the
datasheets with a "fine toothed comb", receive e-mail plus all other
forms of communications regarding errata and promptly re-draft the
datasheets on the web and subsequently in print, we must presume their
cost-benefit analysis of such an arrangement is that costs to them
exceeds benefit to them.
Now, I think we perceive that few *if any* of us are in a position to
tell them singly or jointly that our decision to purchase their product
is predicated on the total accuracy of their literature and that they
stand to lose or gain profits accordingly that would offset the cost to
them of such extra staff.
Further, many of us feel it of considerable importance that our
technical competence is sufficient to recognise and work around such
errata, considering this to actually be part of the design process.
To say we "don't care" is not then true. We do care, but prefer not
to make too much fuss for little likely result, rather to "get on with
the job" and figure out how to make the thing work anyway.
> Today,a buddy trying to be helpful and contribute to the list with a
> useful diagram, included a mistake, little in size compared to the one
> I posted before and the result this time.... replies coming ,so many
> that I've learned a new sentence in English... *Stop teasing, please*
So we're all supposed to criticise Microchip, but not your mate?
Hmmm, I don't know about this, do only big companies have a
responsibility for what they publish? Anyway, glad you can recognise
teasing when you see it, but I'm still not sure - would he have (or has
he actually) gone ahead and constructed a prototype using an
More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1998
, 1999 only
- New search...