Member Since: April 7, 2006

Country: United States

  • News - Fluke, we love you but yo… | about a month ago

    According to that PDF, the trademark expired in Dec 2013 - probably at least worth checking to see if it has been removed. Can the yellow holster be removed - could they just destroy those?

  • Product TOL-09419 | about a year ago

    Should have used a gold finish for boards like this with bare contacts - silver tarnishes too easily.

  • Tutorial - The FCC and Open Source Hardware | about a year ago

    Re. devboards, I think there is probably a good argument that they could be exempt as “A digital device used exclusively as industrial, commercial, or medical test equipment.”

  • Product BOB-10680 | about 3 years ago

    A decoupling cap would have been nice…

  • Product SEN-09569 | about 3 years ago

    I think the ‘minimium load’ spec in the datasheet means minimum resistance, which is slghtly confusing as it could be misinterpreted as the device requiring a load.
    If it meant minimum current load, they would also quote a maximum, which they don’t.

  • News - Parts, and Parts of Parts… | about 4 years ago

    1) Why not have a ‘surplus bulk parts’ section on the website?
    2) Ebay - plenty of people buying & selling bulk lots of components
    3) There are plenty of chip brokers, but chances are they all check ebay so option 2 with a sensible start price is probably at least as good an option.

  • News - GLiP Project | about 4 years ago

    Like Siftibles then…

  • News - ATmega Slugs | about 4 years ago

    Jassper -
    Wrong date code - my guess is the copier didn’t have a real 328 to copy but copied a 168 and changed the part no. without realising the datecode would give it away.
    Why use copper ? - it’s a standard IC package, so that’s how it comes before the chip gets put in there - too much effort to remanufacture in a cheaper metal. Also means the weight and magnetic properties are right. Although weight is minimal, the difference in weight for a reel would likely be noticeable.
    Why send anything at all & not just take the money and run ? It is entirely possible that the person SF bought these from did not know they were fake, and were themselves duped. It is also possoble that the seller assumed the chips would be sold on or held in stock for a while, so there may have been a chance to make more sales before they were found out.
    As regards payment method - Deals with China are almost always done by bank transfer or Western Union, which are non-reversable and the sender has no comeback. You can be sure the bad guys will have covered their tracks.
    Not buying from China is rarely an option these days.
    Any manufacturer who allows their leadtimes to get out of hand is at risk of this. I bet Microchip are getting more design-ins recently. All the technical advantages in the world are pointless if you can’t get the parts.

  • News - The Matrix Revisted Again… | about 4 years ago

    Google “Siftibles” - similar idea, but better!

  • News - SparkFun Gets a Cease and… | about 5 years ago

    Someone (ideally a Sun/Sparc shareholder) needs to ask the CEO why they are employing lawyers who are either so STUPID that they think the products are identical, or are FRAUDULENTLY trying to steal a trademark by FALSELY claiming that products are identical.
    Surely it must be an offence of some sort to deliberately misrepresent in a trademark suit?
    Maybe change your name to Sparf Projects And Related Components. No phonetic similarity there…

No public wish lists :(