Tim Schwartz <
t...@bristolnj.com> wrote:
> On 12/29/2014 2:24 PM, Dave Platt wrote:
>> In article <m7s6to$sei$
1...@dont-email.me>, N_Cook <
div...@tcp.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Why would anyone bother faking such tiddlers? I've never heard of anyone
>>> gorging 1 cent or 1 penny coins, equally it just makes no sense
>>
>> Since they're a part which is listed as "obsolete" or "end of life" by
>> most manufacturers, there still may be a bit of "boutique" demand from
>> some customers who either have to use the same part number (e.g. for
>> servicing) or re-quality their design.
>>
>> I sorta suspect that once a counterfeiter has a parts-marking line set
>> up, it's no big deal for them to just re-mark a few thousand of
>> whatever unlabeled overrun transistors they've got their hands on,
>> with every conceivable part number, and then just list them as
>> "available" in their catalogs. The incremental cost of ginning up
>> fakes for any given part number would be next to zero.
>>
>>
>>
> Dave,
>
> I suspect you are correct. There is someone somewhere who will take
> scrap/surplus/defective parts and put whatever number on it that they
> think they can sell.
>
> Take the Japanese marking system of transistors (2SA,B,C,D) each number
> is unique to a manufacturer. So, if Sony wants to make a transistor
> that is identical to an NEC device, it will still get its own number.
> This is different from JEDEC devices where many manufacturers made the
> 2N3055 for example. They also don't generally revise parts. So while
didn't know this. interesting.