Searching \ for '[EE] word for generic component' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=word+generic+component
Search entire site for: 'word for generic component'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[EE] word for generic component'
2006\04\22@034903 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
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


2006\04\22@040422 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 4/22/06, Wouter van Ooijen <spam_OUTwouterTakeThisOuTspamvoti.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

2006\04\22@050845 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> 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


2006\04\22@065759 by Philip Pemberton

face picon face
In message <003f01c665ec$5b4edca0$0b00a8c0@PAARD>
         "Wouter van Ooijen" <.....wouterKILLspamspam@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
philpemspamKILLspamdsl.pipex.com         | Cheetah: Athlon64 3200+ A8VDeluxeV2 512M+100G
http://www.philpem.me.uk/     | Tiger: Toshiba SatPro4600 Celeron700 256M+40G

2006\04\22@083915 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
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


2006\04\22@131621 by olin piclist

face picon face
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

2006\04\24@043130 by Alan B. Pearce
face picon face
>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.

2006\04\24@115104 by David Minkler

flavicon
face
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}

2006\04\24@120233 by Denny Esterline

picon face
I'm a little surprised no one else came up with this:

"or equivalent"


-Denny

2006\04\24@135425 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> 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


2006\04\24@163409 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
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

2006\04\24@174540 by David VanHorn

picon face
>
> > "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

2006\04\25@012703 by Denny Esterline

picon face
> > > "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





2006\04\25@014642 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> 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


2006\04\25@043330 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>> 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.

2006\04\25@062234 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> 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


2006\04\25@070749 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
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

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2006 , 2007 only
- Today
- New search...