aC,
I read the same article, but after I had just read a Press Release from SMTC dated November 3, 1997. I took a whole different take on the matter, based on what I had read. I concluded that SMTC would benefit greatly from the expansion in the analog market, based on the expected growth. There will, of course be additions to the industry, but IMP did not strike me as a major threat based on their size, and the major head start SMTC has in this field.
From SMTC Press Release dated November 3, 1997 :
>>''Conventional methods for protecting serial ports are useless for the high speed signals used on USB. The RailClamp is designed to overcome the inherent disadvantages of using signal diodes for ESD suppression. Solutions must provide low capacitance, extremely fast response times, low clamping and operating voltages, low leakage current, a small footprint package, and the ability to handle multiple ESD strikes without damage or degradation,'' added Dugan."<<
This thing sounds like a pain to design, has operating characteristics that allow little or no error, and who knows what may be involved in manufacturing the device. I think this is typical of analog devices, and with the people SMTC has hired over the past two years, this will probably be a key factor for them to maintain a leadership position. The hiring of these people keeps looking better and better to me, every time I think about it.
IMP probably has at least a year to market, and that's a LONG time in SMTC years. Just look at all the new product families they have introduced in the past year. It will be tough for a smaller company to keep pace, and second source status will probably be the most logical position they assume, if they are even successful.
DID ANYONE SEE THIS IN ONE OF MY LINKS? :o)
>>"Jay,
I bought a VRM from IBM on-line via their
spares ordering system. It is around $30 (plus
tax, shipping etc.) and is actually the P55C VRM
made by Semtech."<<
I wonder who else, other than IBM, puts their little sticker over the SMTC label on component sales? By the way, nice markup IBM :o)
I consider it VERY signifigant that IBM does not manufacture these devices themselves. This is not a small or incapable company, and it demonstrates the lack of interest many potential possible SMTC competitors have for the analog device market. Thank you IBM, and a special thanks to Jim Edwards (IBM Aptiva technician) for that post!
I think ADI, Maxim, or National Semiconductor might be more likely competitors for SMTC to contend with; now that would be a good battle. I think I'll just mosey on over to their websites now, and see what they're up to.
Regards, JB
P.S. Good, timely information on all the links, thanks to everyone! Stu, hang in there baby, I remember EXACTLY where you are (it's only a buck away from me)! |
