parts researcher

[John Larkin]

We could use an occasional parts researcher. Anyone need a part-time
job? Maybe 5 or 10 hours a month.

[sea moss]

On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 12:50:57 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
> We could use an occasional parts researcher. Anyone need a part-time
> job? Maybe 5 or 10 hours a month.

What types of parts do you need to research? For silicon parts, your new staff member should be able to help.

[John Larkin]

A lot of connectors, hardware, passives, cables, relays, and of course
silicon. Part of the work is to look into price, availability, and
second-sourcing, maybe to read some data sheets and discuss needs with
the engineers.

I don't want any staff members to spend a lot of time looking for
parts!

I don't mind looking for silicon so much. All that other stuff is
distracting.

For example, I want to find a pre-assembled 10-pin cable to connect
this LCD thing to a controller board a few inches away.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/fd9y8d7rjxxbztr/VM800_3.jpg?raw=1

[Lasse Langwadt Christensen]

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/221464801522

or http://dev.dirtypcbs.com/store/cables

[Don Y]

On 9/10/2021 4:43 PM, John Larkin wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 13:19:27 -0700 (PDT), sea moss
> <danlu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 12:50:57 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
>>> We could use an occasional parts researcher. Anyone need a part-time
>>> job? Maybe 5 or 10 hours a month.
>>
>> What types of parts do you need to research? For silicon parts, your new staff member should be able to help.
>
> A lot of connectors, hardware, passives, cables, relays, and of course
> silicon. Part of the work is to look into price, availability, and
> second-sourcing, maybe to read some data sheets and discuss needs with
> the engineers.
>
> I don't want any staff members to spend a lot of time looking for
> parts!

"5-10 hours a month" is "a lot of time"?

Don't your folks spend that much -- and more -- just trying to stay current
with the offerings available in those industries? Or, do they let that
knowledge atrophy cuz it's "too expensive" to keep current?

> I don't mind looking for silicon so much. All that other stuff is
> distracting.

Let your distis do the gruntwork -- if you have decent quantities.
They'll be more than happy to find a part that THEY sell to meet
your needs! And, drop off samples to get you started.

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 18:15:54 -0700, Don Y
<blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote:

>On 9/10/2021 4:43 PM, John Larkin wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 13:19:27 -0700 (PDT), sea moss
>> <danlu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 12:50:57 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
>>>> We could use an occasional parts researcher. Anyone need a part-time
>>>> job? Maybe 5 or 10 hours a month.
>>>
>>> What types of parts do you need to research? For silicon parts, your new staff member should be able to help.
>>
>> A lot of connectors, hardware, passives, cables, relays, and of course
>> silicon. Part of the work is to look into price, availability, and
>> second-sourcing, maybe to read some data sheets and discuss needs with
>> the engineers.
>>
>> I don't want any staff members to spend a lot of time looking for
>> parts!
>
>"5-10 hours a month" is "a lot of time"?
>
>Don't your folks spend that much -- and more -- just trying to stay current
>with the offerings available in those industries? Or, do they let that
>knowledge atrophy cuz it's "too expensive" to keep current?
>
>> I don't mind looking for silicon so much. All that other stuff is
>> distracting.
>
>Let your distis do the gruntwork -- if you have decent quantities.
>They'll be more than happy to find a part that THEY sell to meet
>your needs! And, drop off samples to get you started.

And tell me which other distributors have the 2nd source parts in
stock.



--

Father Brown's figure remained quite dark and still;
but in that instant he had lost his head. His head was
always most valuable when he had lost it.

[Don Y]

Tell the disti that is one of your selection criteria.

When Moto released the 68K, they knew that folks (at the time)
were insistent on second sources. Hence, naming *8* for
that product.

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 20:35:53 -0700, Don Y

You seem to be suggesting that we write up a specification (for what
may be a fuzzy requirement, namely a problem to be solved) and send
that to multiple distributors and evaluate their responses.

That sounds like a lot of work, but I could hire some part-timer to do
it.

[Joe Gwinn]

On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 18:57:59 -0700, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com

Back when I was designing at the discrete-components level, working
for a pipsqueak company, I insisted on triple sources for everything I
could not buy a lifetime supply of. Electronically, we were not doing
anything leading edge. So, we never had any obsolescence dramas.

Joe Gwinn

[legg]

Part of engineering discipline is not to put your design into a
difficult supply position.

The only way to learn this, is to force the engineer to spec
the actual part numbers or drawing, for quotation - ie rub his
nose in it.

You don't want your staff looking for parts because . . . .

RL

[Fred Bloggs]

On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 3:50:57 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> We could use an occasional parts researcher. Anyone need a part-time
> job? Maybe 5 or 10 hours a month.

Too bad unemployed English majors can't do the job, because then you could find a service to do it for 5$.

[speff]

On Friday, 10 September 2021 at 21:50:57 UTC+2, John Larkin wrote:
> We could use an occasional parts researcher. Anyone need a part-time
> job? Maybe 5 or 10 hours a month.

Hey, John- if nobody else suitable has interest I could maybe give it a try. Could be interesting. After the 19th or so.

I have doubts that it’s an easily outsourced function though- we’ve/I’ve tried outsourcing some research-type functions with somewhat mixed results. There are a lot of “cultural” aspects at play in a functional company.


-

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Sat, 11 Sep 2021 10:59:27 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joeg...@comcast.net>

That adds a lot of work, like seeing if the pins line up on relays.
Good sort of thing to outsource.

ICs are less easy to multi-source than passives.

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

Because their time is valuable, and because we will finish more
product designs if someone can research parts for us.

I don't make them order office supplies or snacks either. People who
are good at design are rare and should get all the help we can give
them.

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Sat, 11 Sep 2021 08:40:00 -0700 (PDT), speff <spe...@gmail.com>
wrote:

We would appreciate help now and then. It could sometimes be dull
though, like finding relays and MS connectors. We have a project
coming up with both!

Email me please.

If the researcher actually understood electronic design, the
requirements could be a lot less specific. And the function more
valuable.

[Joe Gwinn]

On Sat, 11 Sep 2021 08:42:53 -0700, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
wrote:

At the time (late 1970s), it did not, and was useful for pushing
transistor makers and their reps off their sales pitches for their
proprietary super-dooper kind of transistor. For one thing, we didn't
need super-dooper. Conversation-stopping question: "Great. Who else
makes this exact same transistor?

The answer was always to go to a 2Nxxxx (or the European equivalent),
which were made to a spec the manufacturers did not control.

Passives were already there.

PWBs were one- or two-sided through-hole.

>ICs are less easy to multi-source than passives.

Well, we were using only 74-series TTL and 4000-series CMOS in the
day, so there were lots of second sources.

Still are, 50 years later. Raise a toast to jellybean components.


A year ago, I did a design that used a TI CD40106B (CMOS Hex
Schmitt-Trigger Inverters) to buffer angle-encoder outputs and match
them to Arduino digital inputs.


Joe Gwinn

[Don Y]

No, I'm suggesting you do enough business with a disti/rep that you can
describe what you wawnt, to him, and let him figure out the likely parts
that he sells -- and would like to sell TO you -- and run those past
you. So you, nor your grunt, need to dig through dozens of manufacturer's
catalogs.

> That sounds like a lot of work, but I could hire some part-timer to do
> it.

Again, 5-10 hours a month is too much for staff? How much time do they
spend reading trade mags, research papers, attending conferences, department
meetings, project meetings, etc.? Or, are those hours also considered
wasteful?

Maybe hire someone to do each of those things, FOR THEM, as well?

[Don Y]

On 9/11/2021 12:02 PM, Joe Gwinn wrote:
> At the time (late 1970s), it did not, and was useful for pushing
> transistor makers and their reps off their sales pitches for their
> proprietary super-dooper kind of transistor. For one thing, we didn't
> need super-dooper. Conversation-stopping question: "Great. Who else
> makes this exact same transistor?
>
> The answer was always to go to a 2Nxxxx (or the European equivalent),
> which were made to a spec the manufacturers did not control.
>
> Passives were already there.
>
> PWBs were one- or two-sided through-hole.

That's largely impossible, nowadays -- esp if you use a CPU in your
design. Even worse if an MCU. Even (integrated) peripheral devices
tend to not be pin compatible.

I'm captive to my choice of MCU -- but, only to the extent that
I rely on the various subsystems embodied within it. So, think
really hard before using some device specific aspect -- do you really
*need* this?

And, let the field be schlock parts that are a dime a dozen
moving any functionality that *could* burden them into the MCU
(where it *can* be portable to another processor)

>> ICs are less easy to multi-source than passives.
>
> Well, we were using only 74-series TTL and 4000-series CMOS in the
> day, so there were lots of second sources.

Back then, I worked on a design that used 4K devices, ECL 10K, MECL III
and HiNil. Because each requirement could only be met by specific
devices in specific families. Purchasing guy lost a lot of hair
trying to find alternates.

> Still are, 50 years later. Raise a toast to jellybean components.
>
> A year ago, I did a design that used a TI CD40106B (CMOS Hex
> Schmitt-Trigger Inverters) to buffer angle-encoder outputs and match
> them to Arduino digital inputs.

And what do you use as a second source for the Arduino? Assuming,
of course, that your code is 100% portable (and not arduino-specific).

[Don Y]

Same reason he doesn't want them talking to factory reps, distis,
answering phone calls, dealing with email, attending meetings
or offsites, taking lunch breaks, browsing the 'net, etc.

These "distractions" are the very things that expose folks to new
ideas. Trying to keep people "on" continuously leads to less
inspired designs. Look at the folks who work in large bullpens.

Put them in a bubble and see how many NOVEL ideas they come up with!

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

Why do you make up nonsense like that? It's not even very good
nonsense.

>
>These "distractions" are the very things that expose folks to new
>ideas. Trying to keep people "on" continuously leads to less
>inspired designs. Look at the folks who work in large bullpens.
>
>Put them in a bubble and see how many NOVEL ideas they come up with!

Researching availability and price and pinouts of connectors and
relays isn't our concept of inspired new ideas.

Some junior engineer might learn something from that sort of thing. To
a serious designer, it's wasted time. Tell the kid what we want and
see what she comes up with.

[Don Y]

Oh, those "non-design" activities are acceptable uses of their time?
But, looking through selector guides to pick specific parts (and
discovering other devices that may be of use in TOMORROW'S design)
isn't?

Talk about nonsense...

>> These "distractions" are the very things that expose folks to new
>> ideas. Trying to keep people "on" continuously leads to less
>> inspired designs. Look at the folks who work in large bullpens.
>>
>> Put them in a bubble and see how many NOVEL ideas they come up with!
>
> Researching availability and price and pinouts of connectors and
> relays isn't our concept of inspired new ideas.

How do you know what's available if you haven't LOOKED?
Or, do you keep both feet planted firmly in the past? Never
looking to see how the world around you has changed?

Some years ago, I had to design a device that had an attached
"sensor array". The array had to be movable without altering the
position of the instrument to which it was attached. So,
a coiled cord is the logical connection mechanism.

Sixty sensors in the array. Obviously silly to look for a 60
conductor COILED cord! So, some sort of processing will be
required *in* the array. Which means the (disposable) array
is now more expensive. How *much* more?

What's a realistic number of conductors? Should I offload that
selection job to a droid and delay my design of the array *and*
the portion of the instrument that will accept those connections?
What criteria should I give him for his selection? Summarize
ALL of the available offerings? Tell me about those that have
10 conductors or more?

OTOH, by doing that research myself, I can hypothesize different
approaches that might work with the item I'm looking at THIS MOMENT
("Gee, 8 conductors... I could mux 8 sensors onto each of 8 wires...
but, still need power and ground so 8 isn't viable. Maybe 10 onto
6 wires, plus power and ground? But, then how do I control/infer
the current multiplex selector?")

I can also see how many vendors offer cables of a particular type
so I can infer their existing markets -- if everyone is selling
4 conductor cables, that suggests that most other customers are
looking for *4* conductors, and not 10 or 12 or... Do I want
to tie my design (because the choice of cable is a significant
part of the actual design approach) to a single vendor -- who is
EAGER to meet my needs (and lock in my sole-sourced design)?

> Some junior engineer might learn something from that sort of thing. To
> a serious designer, it's wasted time. Tell the kid what we want and
> see what she comes up with.

You underestimate what your "senior engineers" learn by being exposed
to The Outside World.

Does the Junior Engineer read technical journals *for* them and
filter only those articles that he/she deems appropriate from
"wasting" the senior engineers' time? Likewise, attend seminars
and industry conferences -- so the senior engineers don't have
to waste *days* on those things?

Does the junior engineer interface with customers to determine
their needs and opine likely product offerings? Or, do you waste
your senior engineer's time by exposing them to the needs of
real and potential customers?

Great "family" you've got, there!-

[legg]

On Sat, 11 Sep 2021 08:49:00 -0700, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
wrote:

The correct guy to go 'searching' is a rabid purchasing agent
armed with a solid part spec and a purchase order.

RL

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

We have a purchasing agent, but she doesn't know enough about
electronics to find new parts for us.

The ideal parts researcher would have ideas too. As in "Are you sure
you want that kind of part? How about..." It's ideally a design
function.

[Don Y]

On 9/12/2021 9:10 AM, legg wrote:
> The correct guy to go 'searching' is a rabid purchasing agent
> armed with a solid part spec and a purchase order.

No, the engineer is most quaified -- as he/she may use insights from
that search to refine his/her design!

Given the amount of time Larkin spends posting OT stuff on USENET,
I'd wager *he* could spend those "5 - 10 hours per month" doing
the work with no loss -- other than an "audience".

Let's assume he's a one-man shop. 5-10 hours monthly translates to
75 - 150 minutes per week. As a one man shop, he'd not need to
spend any time in "team meetings" -- except with customers. I
wonder how much time (besides USENET) he devotes to reading trade
mags? Sales literature? Research papers?

If he's TWICE that size -- TWO designers -- then they'd each spend
35 - 70 minutes a week on this effort. Of course, in addition to solving
their immediate goal (finding a specific part), they'd also LEARN
about OTHER parts that are available.

Like "browsing" through a databook in years past.

But, those two people might have to "waste" time on meetings to
discuss their progress/plans, so that's a given overhead.

So, I doubt he's really concerned with the TIME involved.
Maybe business is really slow? Or, super competitive and he has
razor thin margins on his products?

Or, maybe he just wants another "audience" -- someone to marvel
in his explanations of why part A is no good but part B might be?

Or, maybe he's trying to get some free labor beyond the clerical
aspect of the job?

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Sun, 12 Sep 2021 12:39:17 -0700, Don Y
<blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote:

>On 9/12/2021 9:10 AM, legg wrote:
>> The correct guy to go 'searching' is a rabid purchasing agent
>> armed with a solid part spec and a purchase order.
>
>No, the engineer is most quaified -- as he/she may use insights from
>that search to refine his/her design!
>
>Given the amount of time Larkin spends posting OT stuff on USENET,
>I'd wager *he* could spend those "5 - 10 hours per month" doing
>the work with no loss -- other than an "audience".

Parts research is boring.

>
>Let's assume he's a one-man shop.

25. 8 engineers.

>5-10 hours monthly translates to
>75 - 150 minutes per week. As a one man shop, he'd not need to
>spend any time in "team meetings" -- except with customers. I
>wonder how much time (besides USENET) he devotes to reading trade
>mags? Sales literature? Research papers?
>
>If he's TWICE that size -- TWO designers -- then they'd each spend
>35 - 70 minutes a week on this effort. Of course, in addition to solving
>their immediate goal (finding a specific part), they'd also LEARN
>about OTHER parts that are available.
>
>Like "browsing" through a databook in years past.
>
>But, those two people might have to "waste" time on meetings to
>discuss their progress/plans, so that's a given overhead.
>
>So, I doubt he's really concerned with the TIME involved.
>Maybe business is really slow? Or, super competitive and he has
>razor thin margins on his products?
>
>Or, maybe he just wants another "audience" -- someone to marvel
>in his explanations of why part A is no good but part B might be?
>
>Or, maybe he's trying to get some free labor beyond the clerical
>aspect of the job?

We'd pay pretty well for this function.

[Don Y]

On 9/12/2021 1:10 PM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Sep 2021 12:39:17 -0700, Don Y
> <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 9/12/2021 9:10 AM, legg wrote:
>>> The correct guy to go 'searching' is a rabid purchasing agent
>>> armed with a solid part spec and a purchase order.
>>
>> No, the engineer is most quaified -- as he/she may use insights from
>> that search to refine his/her design!
>>
>> Given the amount of time Larkin spends posting OT stuff on USENET,
>> I'd wager *he* could spend those "5 - 10 hours per month" doing
>> the work with no loss -- other than an "audience".
>
> Parts research is boring.

As is reading research papers, attending seminars, TRAVELING
to those seminars, filling out time cards, TESTING products,
writing specifications, etc.

"School" was boring. All those classes!

OTOH, filling one's head with all those ideas has a long term
payout -- something that folks who spent those hours SURFING
(far less boring!) wouldn't appreciate.

If your engineers can't be bothered exposing themselves to
what's happening in their industry, then they are likely firmly
tied to the past -- which is never a good thing in a tech company.

If *you* don't want them bothered with that stuff, then I
pity them for the bind they've found themselves in.

>> Let's assume he's a one-man shop.
>
> 25. 8 engineers.

So, each engineer, on average, spends *one* hour PER MONTH on
this activity? They likely spend more time in the toilet in
that month...

Will you be outsourcing that activity, as well?

Or, do you NOT consider it boring??

>> 5-10 hours monthly translates to
>> 75 - 150 minutes per week. As a one man shop, he'd not need to
>> spend any time in "team meetings" -- except with customers. I
>> wonder how much time (besides USENET) he devotes to reading trade
>> mags? Sales literature? Research papers?
>>
>> If he's TWICE that size -- TWO designers -- then they'd each spend
>> 35 - 70 minutes a week on this effort. Of course, in addition to solving
>> their immediate goal (finding a specific part), they'd also LEARN
>> about OTHER parts that are available.
>>
>> Like "browsing" through a databook in years past.
>>
>> But, those two people might have to "waste" time on meetings to
>> discuss their progress/plans, so that's a given overhead.
>>
>> So, I doubt he's really concerned with the TIME involved.
>> Maybe business is really slow? Or, super competitive and he has
>> razor thin margins on his products?
>>
>> Or, maybe he just wants another "audience" -- someone to marvel
>> in his explanations of why part A is no good but part B might be?
>>
>> Or, maybe he's trying to get some free labor beyond the clerical
>> aspect of the job?
>
> We'd pay pretty well for this function.

So, if you pay your engineers $100/hr, and opt to pay the "grunt"
$50? $75? $99.99?

What are you saving? Recall that you now have the added overhead
of interfacing to another person who likely isn't very invested in
your organization ("I got a better paying gig! Sorry...").

And, the possibility for misunderstandings between them.

No, it sounds like you just want another audience.

I run my designs by my colleagues on periodic offsights. *NOT*
to impress them -- they already know my track record, abilities,
value to their designs, etc. I want them to tell me what I've
done wrong or overlooked.

My original "you have USPS mail" design called for a sensor located
*in* the mailbox. The wire is already hanging in the garage at the
closest point to the mbox, waiting to be buried.

One of my colleagues questioned why I wasn't going to use the
same mechanism (video scene analysis) that i was using to watch
for visitors to the front door? After all, there are fewer
timeliness constraints on "detecting mail delivery" (it would
be nice to know within an hour or so) than detecting guests at
the front door (which has to be "real-time").

D'oh!

I'd been more preoccupied with how to detect mail going IN the
box than noticing if the mailman had visited it!

Now I've got an extra network drop with no assigned functionality.
<frown>

[John Miles, KE5FX]

On Sunday, September 12, 2021 at 1:10:47 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> Parts research is boring.

I think there's some truth to every reply in the thread, which is
darned rare around here. Yes, parts research is tedious, but it's
also what product development *is* these days. I spend as
much time looking for parts as I do using them.

Back in the 1980s-1990s, the DigiKey catalog was about the size of
an issue of Electronic Design, maybe 200 pages at most. Now, it's
almost 3000 pages long and as thick as a metro-area phone book.
The cover says it has 465,000 parts.

Oh, wait, no, that's the 2010 catalog, the last one I have. They stopped
printing them ten years ago in 2011. The web site currently shows
13,000,000 parts. You can't actually GET most of them, but that still
leaves millions of parts that you can specify.

Meanwhile, Electronic Design is about half as thick and full of not
much in particular. I don't know if they even bother to print it anymore.

So I think I agree with those who say that part selection can't be
delegated, or at least shouldn't be. It's tedious, but I hate to call it
boring, because if you took the 2010 catalog back to 1980,
nobody would complain that it was "boring." They would be too
busy naming their firstborn son after you. We should count our
blessings.

-- john, KE5FX

[Don Y]

On 9/12/2021 2:06 PM, John Miles, KE5FX wrote:
> On Sunday, September 12, 2021 at 1:10:47 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> Parts research is boring.
>
> I think there's some truth to every reply in the thread, which is
> darned rare around here. Yes, parts research is tedious, but it's
> also what product development *is* these days. I spend as
> much time looking for parts as I do using them.
>
> Back in the 1980s-1990s, the DigiKey catalog was about the size of
> an issue of Electronic Design, maybe 200 pages at most. Now, it's
> almost 3000 pages long and as thick as a metro-area phone book.
> The cover says it has 465,000 parts.
>
> Oh, wait, no, that's the 2010 catalog, the last one I have. They stopped
> printing them ten years ago in 2011. The web site currently shows
> 13,000,000 parts. You can't actually GET most of them, but that still
> leaves millions of parts that you can specify.

And, with the exception of passives and discretes, many parts have datasheets
that rival the digikey catalog in size; considerably moreso in complexity!
The datasheets for the MCUs I evaluate are close to 2000pp, each. Yet,
I have to have more than a cursory understanding of the capabilities
and liabilities of each device *before* I can design it into a product.

*THEN* worry about pricing, availability, etc.

> Meanwhile, Electronic Design is about half as thick and full of not
> much in particular. I don't know if they even bother to print it anymore.
>
> So I think I agree with those who say that part selection can't be
> delegated, or at least shouldn't be. It's tedious, but I hate to call it
> boring, because if you took the 2010 catalog back to 1980,
> nobody would complain that it was "boring." They would be too
> busy naming their firstborn son after you. We should count our
> blessings.

The days of browsing a databook ("catalogue") to get a feel for
what's available are long past. You can't just leave "it" on
the seat, in the car, and systematically thumb through it as
you're waiting for traffic lights ("Took a peek at 10 parts,
today, on the drive to work. Tomorrow I'll be exposed to 10
more!")

The only way you can hope to find out what's available is to
go looking for X -- and stumble on Y and Z in the process,
even if neither Y nor Z are useful to your present needs.
If they "leave an impression" (because they are "interesting",
for some value of "interesting"), then you may think to go looking
for them in the future, when a *possible* need arises.

If you've no idea that they exist, then you'll likely never even
think to search for them!

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Sun, 12 Sep 2021 14:06:44 -0700 (PDT), "John Miles, KE5FX"
<jmi...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, September 12, 2021 at 1:10:47 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> Parts research is boring.
>
>I think there's some truth to every reply in the thread, which is
>darned rare around here. Yes, parts research is tedious, but it's
>also what product development *is* these days. I spend as
>much time looking for parts as I do using them.

Then you could design more if someone did parts research for you.

I need a particular 61-pin circular MS connector with PCB pins, that
mates with another particular MS connector. Price might be $85 but
might be $350. It won't enrich my life to hunt around for that one.

>
>Back in the 1980s-1990s, the DigiKey catalog was about the size of
>an issue of Electronic Design, maybe 200 pages at most. Now, it's
>almost 3000 pages long and as thick as a metro-area phone book.
>The cover says it has 465,000 parts.

Yes. And the search engine keeps getting worse.

>
>Oh, wait, no, that's the 2010 catalog, the last one I have. They stopped
>printing them ten years ago in 2011. The web site currently shows
>13,000,000 parts. You can't actually GET most of them, but that still
>leaves millions of parts that you can specify.

Not specify: hunt for.

>
>Meanwhile, Electronic Design is about half as thick and full of not
>much in particular. I don't know if they even bother to print it anymore.
>
>So I think I agree with those who say that part selection can't be
>delegated, or at least shouldn't be. It's tedious, but I hate to call it
>boring, because if you took the 2010 catalog back to 1980,
>nobody would complain that it was "boring." They would be too
>busy naming their firstborn son after you. We should count our
>blessings.

Lots of big companies have components engineers. Big mistake?

[Joe Gwinn]

On Sun, 12 Sep 2021 14:49:29 -0700, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
wrote:

Kinda. Their often purpose is to tell people what components they
cannot use.

There was a big push to standardize components several years ago,
basically by generating and enforcing an approved component list.
(Impendent of the approved supplier list.) At the time, one company
had about 20,000 engineers, and their component engineering group had
about 20 engineers total. Turns out that those component engineers
are not smarter than 1,000 ordinary EEs. And certainly not 1,000
times faster.

Joe Gwinn

[Don Y]

On 9/12/2021 3:09 PM, Joe Gwinn wrote:
>>> So I think I agree with those who say that part selection can't be
>>> delegated, or at least shouldn't be. It's tedious, but I hate to call it
>>> boring, because if you took the 2010 catalog back to 1980,
>>> nobody would complain that it was "boring." They would be too
>>> busy naming their firstborn son after you. We should count our
>>> blessings.
>>
>> Lots of big companies have components engineers. Big mistake?
>
> Kinda. Their often purpose is to tell people what components they
> cannot use.

Or, question why part X has been specified instead of part Y which
sure looks similar (or is from a different vendor).

"Let's each pick our favorite parts without concern for what parts
the organization is already using, has already qualified, has staff
trained to troubleshoot, etc."

> There was a big push to standardize components several years ago,
> basically by generating and enforcing an approved component list.
> (Impendent of the approved supplier list.) At the time, one company
> had about 20,000 engineers, and their component engineering group had
> about 20 engineers total. Turns out that those component engineers
> are not smarter than 1,000 ordinary EEs. And certainly not 1,000
> times faster.

But likely contributed a disproportionate amount more!

"Gee, Bob, the XYZ123 that you specified in your design is on
back order --- 36 weeks. Bill is using an ABC456 and has no problems
getting them by the boatload. How much effort for you to redesign
for the ABC456, instead?"

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Sun, 12 Sep 2021 18:09:42 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joeg...@comcast.net>

That's valuable information.

>
>There was a big push to standardize components several years ago,
>basically by generating and enforcing an approved component list.
>(Impendent of the approved supplier list.) At the time, one company
>had about 20,000 engineers, and their component engineering group had
>about 20 engineers total. Turns out that those component engineers
>are not smarter than 1,000 ordinary EEs. And certainly not 1,000
>times faster.

We have about 7000 different parts in stock. That's too many. We
certainly don't want to add any new ones if it can be avoided.
Sometimes it can't.

Imagine if 20,000 engineers started using any parts they could find
online. You might have 200K different parts in the stockroom. Or 2
million.

[Joe Gwinn]

On Sun, 12 Sep 2021 15:34:53 -0700, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com

That was exactly the hope and rationale, but the chosen solution had a
serious scaling problem.

Joe Gwinn

[John Miles, KE5FX]

On Sunday, September 12, 2021 at 3:35:02 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> Imagine if 20,000 engineers started using any parts they could find
> online. You might have 200K different parts in the stockroom. Or 2
> million.

Ideally you wouldn't even have a stockroom. You'd use the ones in Mansfield,
Thief River Falls, and similar places. Why keep all that stuff on YOUR books?

(Well, it worked for a while, at least...)

-- john, KE5FX

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

Most of our parts are on reels. We buy a reel and keep it in stock.
When we do a production run, we mount reels on the p+p machine, run
the lot of boards, count what's left on the reels, and put them back
in stock.

Ordering the right number of parts from Digikey for every board run
would be an expensive nightmare.

[Phil Hobbs]

jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Sep 2021 16:51:39 -0700 (PDT), "John Miles, KE5FX"
> <jmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, September 12, 2021 at 3:35:02 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>> Imagine if 20,000 engineers started using any parts they could find
>>> online. You might have 200K different parts in the stockroom. Or 2
>>> million.
>>
>> Ideally you wouldn't even have a stockroom. You'd use the ones in Mansfield,
>> Thief River Falls, and similar places. Why keep all that stuff on YOUR books?
>>
>> (Well, it worked for a while, at least...)
>>
>> -- john, KE5FX
>
> Most of our parts are on reels. We buy a reel and keep it in stock.
> When we do a production run, we mount reels on the p+p machine, run
> the lot of boards, count what's left on the reels, and put them back
> in stock.
>
> Ordering the right number of parts from Digikey for every board run
> would be an expensive nightmare.
>
>
>

Plus you not infrequently get some comedian in the warehouse sending you
a bag full of short tape strips. (This happens even though we have a
'continuous tape only' note in our distributor accounts.)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Sun, 12 Sep 2021 21:09:26 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:

>jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Sep 2021 16:51:39 -0700 (PDT), "John Miles, KE5FX"
>> <jmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday, September 12, 2021 at 3:35:02 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>> Imagine if 20,000 engineers started using any parts they could find
>>>> online. You might have 200K different parts in the stockroom. Or 2
>>>> million.
>>>
>>> Ideally you wouldn't even have a stockroom. You'd use the ones in Mansfield,
>>> Thief River Falls, and similar places. Why keep all that stuff on YOUR books?
>>>
>>> (Well, it worked for a while, at least...)
>>>
>>> -- john, KE5FX
>>
>> Most of our parts are on reels. We buy a reel and keep it in stock.
>> When we do a production run, we mount reels on the p+p machine, run
>> the lot of boards, count what's left on the reels, and put them back
>> in stock.
>>
>> Ordering the right number of parts from Digikey for every board run
>> would be an expensive nightmare.
>>
>>
>>
>Plus you not infrequently get some comedian in the warehouse sending you
>a bag full of short tape strips. (This happens even though we have a
>'continuous tape only' note in our distributor accounts.)

One reason the engineers are (theoretically) not allowed in the
stockroom is that it is claimed we mess up the leaders on tape+reel
parts.

Buying full reels avoids breaks and problems like that. Some parts
cost $0.00 each rounded to the nearest cent.





>
>Cheers
>
>Phil Hobbs

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, September 13, 2021 at 7:49:39 AM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Sep 2021 14:06:44 -0700 (PDT), "John Miles, KE5FX"
> <jmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Sunday, September 12, 2021 at 1:10:47 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >> Parts research is boring.
> >
> >I think there's some truth to every reply in the thread, which is
> >darned rare around here. Yes, parts research is tedious, but it's
> >also what product development *is* these days. I spend as
> >much time looking for parts as I do using them.
>
> Then you could design more if someone did parts research for you.

John Larkin doesn't seem to do design. If you find a new part that fits you problem you can design a new - and unexpected - solution.

An aspect of parts research is finding novel parts that can let you implement a new solution.

I got to publish my 1996 millidegree thermostat paper in part because I used a newly available cheap 20-bit A/D converter to converter the voltage output from the thermistor into a digital number with enough bits to let me get to milli-degree accuracy. One of the software guys asked me why I wasn't using a bridge circuit, and I had to point out that the A/D converter used the same voltage reference as was connected to the resistor in series with the thermistor, so it was effectively the other arm of the bridge.

Delegating finding new parts doesn't sound like a good idea. Delegating finding second sources and alternatives might work - to some extent - but tricks like double-pinning to accommodate two functional alternatives with different pin-outs might get missed.

<snip>

> Lots of big companies have components engineers. Big mistake?

Depends on exactly what they are doing.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Sun, 12 Sep 2021 13:10:38 -0700) it happened
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
<ahnsjgl1mqcb9s7fs...@4ax.com>:

>Parts research is boring.

No, it may give you new ideas

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

Sometimes. But finding sources for a suitable, reasonably priced,
multi-sourced SPDT relay is unlikely to be inspirational. Or a jumper
cable. Or a #2 stainless spacer. Or an SMA feedthru with a cap and
chain.

I do periodically review the "new products" pages on the semi web
sites, and check the few, mostly pitiful, ee news sites. Most of my
inspiration comes from customer problems.

I have to design 8 very demanding boards in the next 2 months,
world-class picosecond stuff. And architect two new product lines.
Hunting for relays and SMA caps is just a waste of time.

[Don Y]

On 9/13/2021 7:43 AM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 07:44:38 GMT, Jan Panteltje
> <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On a sunny day (Sun, 12 Sep 2021 13:10:38 -0700) it happened
>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
>> <ahnsjgl1mqcb9s7fs...@4ax.com>:
>>
>>> Parts research is boring.
>>
>> No, it may give you new ideas
>
> Sometimes. But finding sources for a suitable, reasonably priced,
> multi-sourced SPDT relay is unlikely to be inspirational. Or a jumper
> cable. Or a #2 stainless spacer. Or an SMA feedthru with a cap and
> chain.
>
> I do periodically review the "new products" pages on the semi web
> sites, and check the few, mostly pitiful, ee news sites. Most of my
> inspiration comes from customer problems.
>
> I have to design 8 very demanding boards in the next 2 months,
> world-class picosecond stuff. And architect two new product lines.
> Hunting for relays and SMA caps is just a waste of time.

But posting about covid on USENET isn't?

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

I'll get it all done.

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 20:37:09 -0700, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com

wrote:

>On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 12:00:47 -0700, Don Y
><blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On 9/13/2021 7:43 AM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>> On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 07:44:38 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>>> <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On a sunny day (Sun, 12 Sep 2021 13:10:38 -0700) it happened
>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
>>>> <ahnsjgl1mqcb9s7fs...@4ax.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> Parts research is boring.
>>>>
>>>> No, it may give you new ideas
>>>
>>> Sometimes. But finding sources for a suitable, reasonably priced,
>>> multi-sourced SPDT relay is unlikely to be inspirational. Or a jumper
>>> cable. Or a #2 stainless spacer. Or an SMA feedthru with a cap and
>>> chain.
>>>
>>> I do periodically review the "new products" pages on the semi web
>>> sites, and check the few, mostly pitiful, ee news sites. Most of my
>>> inspiration comes from customer problems.
>>>
>>> I have to design 8 very demanding boards in the next 2 months,
>>> world-class picosecond stuff. And architect two new product lines.
>>> Hunting for relays and SMA caps is just a waste of time.
>>
>>But posting about covid on USENET isn't?
>
>I'll get it all done.

Actually, I haven't posted about the virus much.

Covid is really boring, but the science-as-a-social-activity aspects
are interesting.

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Tuesday, September 14, 2021 at 2:20:54 PM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 20:37:09 -0700, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 12:00:47 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote:
> >>On 9/13/2021 7:43 AM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 07:44:38 GMT, Jan Panteltje <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>> On a sunny day (Sun, 12 Sep 2021 13:10:38 -0700) it happened jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in <ahnsjgl1mqcb9s7fs...@4ax.com>:

<snip>

> >>But posting about covid on USENET isn't?
> >
> >I'll get it all done.
>
> Actually, I haven't posted about the virus much.

But more than you should have done. You don't know much, and most of what you think you know is wrong.

> Covid is really boring,

Less so if you appreciate what's actually going on. It's a life or death subject, and the USA has seen rather more Covid-19 deaths than it should have, partly due to the American enthusiasm for adopting very silly ideas, all of which seem to have been advanced here over the past year or so.

> but the science-as-a-social-activity aspects are interesting.

It's unfortunate that you don't know much about science either, and even less about science as a social activity, which it most certainly is.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Rhydian]

I've seen it done both ways.

In a previous company, you did your own parts selection, but adding any
new parts to the library, generating new schematic symbols, footprints,
etc, was all funnelled through one guy, who also did the PCB layouts. So
there was a strong pressure to re-use parts that were already in the
library.

It was a PITA. If the guy was out of the office, tough luck, that part
of the design had to be parked until he came back and got around to your
request. Then endless arguments about why similar-looking old part A
couldn't be used in place of proposed new part B.

Current place is more of a free-for-all, with twelve EEs all doing their
own schematics, layouts and additions to the library as needed.
Everything does get thoroughly reviewed, which catches a lot of the
duplicates, but we could really use a 'librarian' to handle some of this
stuff. It isn't seen (by senior mgmt) as adding any value at the
moment. We'll see.

We don't normally hold any production parts in stock, that all gets
subbed out to 3 or 4 contract assemblers who we pay to hold stocks for
us. That's also starting to change with the current parts shortage, for
new designs we're buying 2-3 years worth of critical parts, MCUs etc.

[Phil Hobbs]

Yeah, we have reels of small stuff too. However, for client work we
generally arrange things so that the customer buys the parts and pays
for the PCBAs directly. (We basically just do pilot runs for
clients--once they're happy they get the boards made on their own, under
license.)

[John Doe]

"the concepts "male" and "female" are essentially social constructions" (Bill Sloman)

Bozo the Clown...

--
Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:

> X-Received: by 2002:a0c:b304:: with SMTP id s4mr8697679qve.34.1631506008372; Sun, 12 Sep 2021 21:06:48 -0700 (PDT)
> X-Received: by 2002:a25:3d84:: with SMTP id k126mr12381167yba.43.1631506008068; Sun, 12 Sep 2021 21:06:48 -0700 (PDT)
> Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.mixmin.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
> Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
> Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2021 21:06:47 -0700 (PDT)
> In-Reply-To: <i4tsjgpl9rgj4anhf...@4ax.com>
> Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=14.202.161.14; posting-account=SJ46pgoAAABuUDuHc5uDiXN30ATE-zi-
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 14.202.161.14
> References: <eldnjgtslmpnbc981...@4ax.com> <4c94111c-5548-4b37...@googlegroups.com> <hrqnjg1tp212halno...@4ax.com> <i7hpjgtdvqoum1cit...@4ax.com> <kkjpjghkgmamd3cvu...@4ax.com> <th9sjg53eg84734ki...@4ax.com> <shll19$iml$1...@dont-email.me> <ahnsjgl1mqcb9s7fs...@4ax.com> <3aa2a147-86a1-4cc1...@googlegroups.com> <i4tsjgpl9rgj4anhf...@4ax.com>
> User-Agent: G2/1.0
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Message-ID: <b91270c4-dd26-4d07...@googlegroups.com>
> Subject: Re: parts researcher
> From: Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org>
> Injection-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 04:06:48 +0000
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:644587

[Edward Hernandez]

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4...@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1...@dont-email.me>:

> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is > CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another
incorectly formatted USENET posting on Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:05:26 -0000
(UTC) in message-id <si20a6$ktu$3...@dont-email.me>.

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

John Doe <alway...@message.header> wrote in
news:si20a6$ktu$3...@dont-email.me:

same shit over and over.

Definietely an abuser of this group and Usenet on the whole.

John Doe, the Usenet Total Retard.

GROW THE FUCK UP. You abusive punk fuck!

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 14:02:38 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

>John Doe <alway...@message.header> wrote in
>news:si20a6$ktu$3...@dont-email.me:
>
>same shit over and over.

Yup.

[John Doe]

A weird nym-shifting stalker, usually "Corvid" (also "Charger Boy", see sci.electronics.repair)...

see also...
=?UTF-8?Q?C=c3=b6rvid?= <b...@ckbirds.org>
=?UTF-8?B?8J+QriBDb3dzIGFyZSBOaWNlIPCfkK4=?= <ni...@cows.moo>
Banders <sn...@mailchute.com>
Covid-19 <alway...@message.header>
Corvid <b...@ckbirds.net>
Corvid <b...@ckbirds.org>
Cows Are Nice <co...@nice.moo>
Cows are nice <m...@cows.org>
Cows are Nice <ni...@cows.moo>
dogs <do...@home.com>
Edward H. <dtga...@gmail.com>
Edward Hernandez <dtga...@gmail.com>
Great Pumpkin <pum...@patch.net>
Jose Curvo <jcu...@mymail.com>
Local Favorite <how2r...@palomar.info>
Peter Weiner <dtga...@gmail.com>
Sea <fres...@coast.org>
Standard Poodle <stan...@poodle.com>
triangles <bu...@home.com>
and others...

--
Edward Hernandez <dtga...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!HQqjtrwtWYY0cW+c5n/Byw.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: Edward Hernandez <dtga...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
> Subject: Re: parts researcher
> Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:41:17 -0000 (UTC)
> Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
> Message-ID: <si25tt$mjo$1...@gioia.aioe.org>
> References: <eldnjgtslmpnbc981...@4ax.com> <4c94111c-5548-4b37...@googlegroups.com> <hrqnjg1tp212halno...@4ax.com> <i7hpjgtdvqoum1cit...@4ax.com> <kkjpjghkgmamd3cvu...@4ax.com> <th9sjg53eg84734ki...@4ax.com> <shll19$iml$1...@dont-email.me> <ahnsjgl1mqcb9s7fs...@4ax.com> <3aa2a147-86a1-4cc1...@googlegroups.com> <i4tsjgpl9rgj4anhf...@4ax.com> <b91270c4-dd26-4d07...@googlegroups.com> <si20a6$ktu$3...@dont-email.me>
> Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="23160"; posting-host="HQqjtrwtWYY0cW+c5n/Byw.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="ab...@aioe.org";
> X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
> Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:645386

[John Doe]

John claims to be a Christian. He also beats his chest for using a real
name. But when you talk about the New Testament, John runs away like a
little dog with its tail tucked between its legs...

--
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.supernews.com!news.supernews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 09:18:23 -0500
> From: jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com

> Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
> Subject: Re: parts researcher

> Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 07:18:25 -0700
> Message-ID: <3t89kg1kcpvn5d2k1...@4ax.com>
> References: <hrqnjg1tp212halno...@4ax.com> <i7hpjgtdvqoum1cit...@4ax.com> <kkjpjghkgmamd3cvu...@4ax.com> <th9sjg53eg84734ki...@4ax.com> <shll19$iml$1...@dont-email.me> <ahnsjgl1mqcb9s7fs...@4ax.com> <3aa2a147-86a1-4cc1...@googlegroups.com> <i4tsjgpl9rgj4anhf...@4ax.com> <b91270c4-dd26-4d07...@googlegroups.com> <si20a6$ktu$3...@dont-email.me> <si275u$sfv$2...@gioia.aioe.org>
> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.1/32.783
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Lines: 21
> X-Trace: sv3-fkwfi9QbSxpvqJYE3MoGNdH+e2hpPoXOkXBgz8pPmuzrADQqAe1I2L30rES7H/zyZ3lqk5n6txoA0xj!3YlBUuoNBNOdvJDB1YxzcXJRtyC4FeOO6o592qIMcYp/F98iuvk9ScvpSOSO7zgWWhPWyvySfM4W!HOsT1w==
> X-Complaints-To: www.supernews.com/docs/abuse.html
> X-DMCA-Complaints-To: www.supernews.com/docs/dmca.html
> X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
> X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
> X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
> X-Original-Bytes: 1847
> Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:645391

[John Doe]

The reactionary foulmouthed group idiot, a.k.a. "Always Wrong"...

--
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!5U2ooNuM5UP0Ynf/GmOnCg.user.46.165.242.91.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: DecadentLinux...@decadence.org

> Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
> Subject: Re: parts researcher

> Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 14:02:38 -0000 (UTC)
> Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
> Message-ID: <si275u$sfv$2...@gioia.aioe.org>

> References: <eldnjgtslmpnbc981...@4ax.com> <4c94111c-5548-4b37...@googlegroups.com> <hrqnjg1tp212halno...@4ax.com> <i7hpjgtdvqoum1cit...@4ax.com> <kkjpjghkgmamd3cvu...@4ax.com> <th9sjg53eg84734ki...@4ax.com> <shll19$iml$1...@dont-email.me> <ahnsjgl1mqcb9s7fs...@4ax.com> <3aa2a147-86a1-4cc1...@googlegroups.com> <i4tsjgpl9rgj4anhf...@4ax.com> <b91270c4-dd26-4d07...@googlegroups.com> <si20a6$ktu$3...@dont-email.me>

> Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="29183"; posting-host="5U2ooNuM5UP0Ynf/GmOnCg.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="ab...@aioe.org";
> User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25

> X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2

> Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:645390

[Edward Hernandez]

[Edward Hernandez]

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4...@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1...@dont-email.me>:

> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is > CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another

incorectly formatted USENET posting on Fri, 17 Sep 2021 16:42:48 -0000
(UTC) in message-id <si2gi7$604$3...@dont-email.me>.

[Edward Hernandez]

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4...@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1...@dont-email.me>:

> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is > CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another

incorectly formatted USENET posting on Fri, 17 Sep 2021 16:39:14 -0000
(UTC) in message-id <si2gbh$604$1...@dont-email.me>.

[Edward Hernandez]

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4...@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1...@dont-email.me>:

> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is > CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another

incorectly formatted USENET posting on Fri, 17 Sep 2021 16:41:52 -0000
(UTC) in message-id <si2ggg$604$2...@dont-email.me>.