Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kash johal who wrote (82358)	12/8/1999 12:46:00 PM
From: Bill Jackson	Respond to of 1579086

Kash, I am not an EE, but I do sense a degree of confusion, and you feel this is intentional? Just going from first principals he does seem to make errors and then backtracks and inconsistencies creep in as if he has forgotten what he said a while back. Maybe just getting old and forgetfull. Well that should make him surge at our throats. Bill

To: kash johal who wrote (82358)	12/8/1999 2:25:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579086

Re: "You will notice that Elmer will IGNORE the facts regarding the Intel data sheets which also vilate the P=IV equation." Who's ignoring anything? Re: "You will notice that Elmer will IGNORE the facts regarding his own FUD. First he said that folks use a "wave meter" to test power taking 500ms. Then he changed it to a dynamic IDD test calibrated to a known database. Then he denied the need for a database." Kash you're full of it. I never used the term "wave meter". That's a figment of your over active imagination. I said "wave integrator" and I did say 500ms, that was a typo, should have been 500us. I never said it was calibrated to any database, you're imagining things again but I sure did deny the need for a database. You are so confused you can't even go back and read the prior posts. This very simplistic test is just plain over your head. Let me see if I can make this real simple: 1. Set Vcc to Vcc_High 2. Run a set of patterns which represent high activity. 3. Measure the current. 4. Compare it to a preset limit (the datasheet spec! Who would have thought?). 5. Pass or fail accordingly. Industry standard stuff. ~100ms and you're done, move on to the next test. Is that so hard to comprehend? Could you perhaps handle opens and shorts? There are a number of remedial test methodology classes available for design engineers. Perhaps you should look into one. EP