Post by thread:[EE] word for generic component

What is the word for a component (let's say a 7805, or a 74HC595) from an unspecified manufacturer? My supplier uses the abberviation -MBR, dunno what that abbreviates. Partminer seems to use that too. Google turns up 'Master Boot Record' and 'Membrane Bio Reactor'. I guess it is not one of those two. Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

On 4/22/06, Wouter van Ooijen <spam_OUTwouterTakeThisOuTvoti.nl> wrote: > What is the word for a component (let's say a 7805, or a 74HC595) from > an unspecified manufacturer? My supplier uses the abberviation -MBR, > dunno what that abbreviates. Partminer seems to use that too. Google > turns up 'Master Boot Record' and 'Membrane Bio Reactor'. I guess it is > not one of those two. > > Wouter van Ooijen Just a guess: Multi-BRand. I do not think this is a general recognized abbreviation. My company uses the following system. Each component will have a datasheet. Each approved vendor will need to be added to the system. If a component has more than one vendor, they will in general put each vendor's datasheet inside. Regards, Xiaofan

> Just a guess: Multi-BRand. sounds very plausible > I do not think this is a general recognized abbreviation. My > company uses the following system. Each component will have a datasheet. > Each approved vendor will need to be added to the system. If a component > has more than one vendor, they will in general put each > vendor's datasheet inside. I think that is what most (all?) serious manuafcturers do. But I run a small internet shop, mainly for electronics hobbyists. I buy and sell a lot of -MBR components, so I would like to add the appropriate term to the descriptions. Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

In message <003f01c665ec$5b4edca0$0b00a8c0@PAARD> "Wouter van Ooijen" <.....wouterKILLspam@spam@voti.nl> wrote: > I think that is what most (all?) serious manuafcturers do. But I run a > small internet shop, mainly for electronics hobbyists. I buy and sell a > lot of -MBR components, so I would like to add the appropriate term to > the descriptions. Multiple brands with similar spec, Generic, Jellybean, Bog-standard, Garden-variety... Take your pick :) -- Phil. | Kitsune: Acorn RiscPC SA202 64M+6G ViewFinder philpemKILLspamdsl.pipex.com | Cheetah: Athlon64 3200+ A8VDeluxeV2 512M+100G http://www.philpem.me.uk/ | Tiger: Toshiba SatPro4600 Celeron700 256M+40G

Wouter, On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 09:49:00 +0200, Wouter van Ooijen wrote: > What is the word for a component (let's say a 7805, or a 74HC595) from > an unspecified manufacturer? You've already used it: Generic. If you put that on a component's description, I would expect it to be from a random manufacturer(s). > My supplier uses the abberviation -MBR, > dunno what that abbreviates. Partminer seems to use that too. Google > turns up 'Master Boot Record' and 'Membrane Bio Reactor'. I guess it is > not one of those two. Quite! :-) There is no single or group of three words that I can think of for which MBR would be an abbreviation, and "Multiple BRand" which others suggest is about as good as any, I think. If you want to use one word, then "Generic" is the one I'd suggest! Cheers, Howard Winter St.Albans, England

Wouter van Ooijen wrote: > I think that is what most (all?) serious manuafcturers do. But I run a > small internet shop, mainly for electronics hobbyists. I buy and sell > a lot of -MBR components, so I would like to add the appropriate term > to the descriptions. I would say "generic", or "various manufacturers". ****************************************************************** Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, (978) 742-9014. #1 PIC consultant in 2004 program year. http://www.embedinc.com/products

>I think that is what most (all?) serious manuafcturers do. >But I run a small internet shop, mainly for electronics >hobbyists. I buy and sell a lot of -MBR components, so I >would like to add the appropriate term to the descriptions. I would use the full wording rather than an abbreviation. Saves the sort of confusion you are having, especially when selling into a multi-lingual area such as you are.

I can see it now ... Some "bright" marketing guy sees this happening and opens a distribution house called "Generic". Now, all the buyers are running around trying to figure out if the engineer meant that they had to purchase the part from "Generic" or if generic would do. It happened when all the Shippers (the document that you fill out to get your shipping department to send stuff somewhere) had a group of check boxes for who you wanted them to use (FedEx, UPS, ...) and included was a check box for "best way". Sure enough, along came "Best Way" shipping. Dave Howard Winter wrote: {Quote hidden}>Wouter, > >On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 09:49:00 +0200, Wouter van Ooijen wrote: > > > >>What is the word for a component (let's say a 7805, or a 74HC595) from >>an unspecified manufacturer? >> >> > >You've already used it: Generic. If you put that on a component's description, I would expect it to be from a >random manufacturer(s). > > > >>My supplier uses the abberviation -MBR, >>dunno what that abbreviates. Partminer seems to use that too. Google >>turns up 'Master Boot Record' and 'Membrane Bio Reactor'. I guess it is >>not one of those two. >> >> > >Quite! :-) There is no single or group of three words that I can think of for which MBR would be an >abbreviation, and "Multiple BRand" which others suggest is about as good as any, I think. > >If you want to use one word, then "Generic" is the one I'd suggest! > >Cheers, > > >Howard Winter >St.Albans, England > > > >

> I'm a little surprised no one else came up with this: > "or equivalent" That would imply - a single standard - that all others actually comply to this standard The truth is that when you de design for an MBR component you must - for each separate parameter - use the worst value found among the possible sources, and you will probably not even know which sources are possible! For instance: what is the maximum input voltage for an 7805? Different datasheets can (and will!) give different answers. Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

Denny Esterline wrote: > I'm a little surprised no one else came up with this: > > "or equivalent" "Equivalent" needs a context. A component only can be considered equivalent in the context of a specific product with specific specs and a specific production process. It may not be equivalent in a different situation. Gerhard

> > > "or equivalent" > > "Equivalent" needs a context. A component only can be considered > equivalent > in the context of a specific product with specific specs and a specific > production process. It may not be equivalent in a different situation. Gads, I can see this one coming... "Well, it's got 14 little legs..", or "It's almost the same color".. I've been burned by counterfeit chips, chinese NIMH cells, chinese neodymium magnets, magnetic read head substitutions, "equivalent" SMPS controller chips, counterfeit transistors, buggy modem chips (almost implements V.XXXXstandard properly), known defective chips shipped because good ones couldn't be made. Connectors that were a little cheaper, but "equivalent" (if only they'd changed the other connector to tin as well...) There are a whole lot of definitions of "equivalent". -- > Feel the power of the dark side! Atmel AVR

> > > "or equivalent" > > > > "Equivalent" needs a context. A component only can be considered > > equivalent > > in the context of a specific product with specific specs and a specific > > production process. It may not be equivalent in a different situation. > > > Gads, I can see this one coming... "Well, it's got 14 little legs..", or > "It's almost the same color".. <trim> > There are a whole lot of definitions of "equivalent". > I absolutly agree. I've been burned by 'equivilant' before myself. But the whole context of this discussion is the idea of specifing a generic component. If I specify on a BOM to use a Texas Instruments uA7805C or equivilant, that is enough information for a _rational_ person to make an _informed_ judgement. Of course defining 'rational' and 'informed' could start it's own flame war :-) But I'm forced to wonder, if other manufacturer's parts are not acceptable to the design, then why are we looking for a way to indicate that a "generic" part is acceptable? -Denny

> But I'm forced to wonder, if other manufacturer's parts are > not acceptable to the design, then why are we looking for a > way to indicate that a "generic" part is acceptable? I don't think you are. A serious buyer will in most cases want a specific manufacturer. *I* was looking for a word or phrase to properly label the generic components (7805, 74HC595, BC550C, etc) I sell. 'unspecified manufacturer' seems to be the best so far. Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

>> I'm a little surprised no one else came up with this: >> "or equivalent" > >That would imply >- a single standard > that all others actually comply to this standard > >The truth is that when you de design for an MBR component you must - for >each separate parameter - use the worst value found among the possible >sources, and you will probably not even know which sources are possible! > >For instance: what is the maximum input voltage for an 7805? Different >datasheets can (and will!) give different answers. Then the wording should be "or similar" - and if you are not specifying which brand is your base brand that you supply, then they cannot make assumptions like that about what the limits of the ratings are.

> Then the wording should be "or similar" - and if you are not > specifying which brand is your base brand that you supply, > then they cannot make assumptions like that about what the > limits of the ratings are. "7805 or similar"? that does not make sense: all possible sources supply '7805' (with probably some letters added). "7805, unspecified manufacturer" makes more sense. But it does make sense in one case: "max232 or similar" because just '232' does IMHO not sufficiently identify the chip, compare to 7805 which does. Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

Wouter van Ooijen wrote: > *I* was looking for a word or phrase to properly > label the generic components (7805, 74HC595, BC550C, etc) I sell. > 'unspecified manufacturer' seems to be the best so far. I think that's enough. It would be for me. Maybe you add your two most common suppliers, if they exist. Gerhard