Re: Looking for PCB layout designer

• Previous message: ohaya: "Re: Can an electrolytic capacitor "sing"?"
• In reply to: Fritz Schlunder: "Re: Looking for PCB layout designer"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]

Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 22:24:32 -0500

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 13:18:14 -0700, Fritz Schlunder wrote:

>
> "keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
> news:pan.2005.03.27.17.32.57.791930@att.bizzzz...
>> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 06:37:54 -0700, Fritz Schlunder wrote:
>
>> It's rather hard to compare single-layer boards with ten-layer complexity.
>> Sure, if you have the same functino to perform a single layer will be a
>> tad tougher. One doesn't add layers if they're not needed. I was
>> objecting to your stating that 10+ layer boards and BGAs weren't all that
>> common ten years ago. They were.
>
>
> Well that is the problem with words like "common" whose definition wasn't
> quantified in this context. So we can both be right on this. My version of
> the definition of "common" is evidently different from yours.

Common <> consumer products. Even there, the Japaneese were using BGAs
extensively *ten* years ago. Hell man, it's 2005! BGAs weren't uncommon
in '90. Sure, people were scared of 'em, but change is good for the soul.
 
> That said, in 1995 I was using a 486 DX33 and it didn't have any BGA
> parts on it. In 1999 I worked for an electronics manufacturing company
> with X-ray equipment needed for working with BGAs. While that was in no
> way amazing in 1999, not all of the local competitors in the business
> had the tools needed for working with BGA parts.

Consumer PC crap. Cost is king in this market, not reliability,
performance, size, or any other metric. Cost is only second to *COST*.
Sure multi-layer boards are more expensice (the board manufacturers yelped
at a $5 adder to go to six layer), but that does *not* mean that they
weren't common. Mainframes have been using boards with more layers than
I've got fingers and toes (full compliment, BTW) for 25 years, or more.

>> > In many ways I consider computer motherboards to represent the most
>> > complicated electronic consumer product (PCB wise) which is made in
>> > large volume. Motherboard manufactureres have been using four layer
>> > (as I understand it usually six layer now) boards for ages. That
>> > isn't to say 10+ layer boards aren't in common use.
>>
>> Consumer products aren't the end-all in technology. They pushed more
>> by cost than technology.
>
>
> That is often true, but consumer products dominate in terms of volume.
> In terms of the total number of PCBs produced in 1995, I'm sure the
> number using 10+ layers takes a very small part of the pie.

It is not "often" true. It *IS* true. The quantity of boards produced
isn't much of a metric either. The *fact* is that 10 layer is simple to
design and manufacture. the house I last worked with didn't have any
problem with controlled impedances (50 inner 75 outer) on a 10-layer .062"
board. All I had to do is specify the impedances and stack and they came
back with all the other importan parameters (like trace widths, fishing
lands out of BGA messes, etc.). This stuff is *WELL* known.

>> > I never claimed any such thing. Designing and then routing a fully
>> > functional ten layer board is well within my capability.
>>
>> I see. It's only impossible for others. For you...
>
>
> I never said it was impossible for others either. But regardless this
> is way off topic of my main point in my first post. My orignal point
> was I had a problem with employers effectively descriminating against
> smart people. Descrimination against smart people (as well as
> responsible people) is rather epidemic in our society. Most people are
> totally unaware of this simply because it doesn't effect them.

If you think they want a shingle, sure. That's what the lawyers want to
see. ...can't discriminate. The *fact* is that revelant experience
talks. Pretty paper with a seal on it gets the foot in the door.
Intelligence isn't quantifiable, but education and experience is.

> Take for instance the minimum driver licensing age. It varies by state
> in the US, but is typically somewhere around 16. When I was 13 I was
> definitely responsible enough to drive a car, which would have been very
> valuable for me for transport to and from college. No bussing system or
> mass transit was available in this area. Unfortunately due to societal
> descrimination against responsible people I had to ride a bicyle (uphill
> both directions in the snow, etc.) to school instead. How fair was
> that?

That sore arm is comming back!

There is *NO* way I want to be on the same road as a 13YO. I'm not too
happy with unconditional licenses at 16, these days. Because you feel
you were discriminated against, because you sere SOOooo smart, you have my
pity.

> Of course, one might argue that even a very responsible 13 year old
> shouldn't be allow to drive since if they caused a car wreck (even if a
> pure accident and not due to irresponsible behavior) they could not pay
> for the damages.

Neither can a 16YO. But I'm not in charge.

> I would counter that argument by saying that the very responsible 13
> year old wouldn't be able to pay for the damages since our society
> further descriminates against the responsible and capable 13 year old
> with child labor laws that prevent them from working for money.

What do you think about a drunk being able to drive better at a .25%BAC
better than a 90YO granny stone-cold sober? Should the drunk be able to
drive, drunk?

> The point is many aspects of our society are simply too ridged. The
> rules are too unbending. There isn't enough room for exceptions. My
> specific qualm at the moment is with employers that descriminate against
> smart people with their X years experience requirements. Why do I even
> mention the problem? Well I want to change it, that is why. The way I
> see it the first step towards fixing this problem is to make people
> aware that it even exists by pointing it out in a public forum. One of
> the later steps is to figure out what method of hiring people would be
> better and more fair.

...better go to Holland. I hear they have some grand windmills there.

Just *why* do you believe that experince isn't important? You whine
about it a lot, but I don't see *you* hiring the gifted and otherwise
unproven. If you have a better way, you should be able to kick ass in the
market.

> The whole process has problems including the resume
> writing/submittal/review steps. The resume process gives a great
> advantage to people who are dishonest and those who are perfectly
> comfortable bragging about how great they are. An honest/modest person
> who feels uncomfortable bragging about themself will have a
> disadvantage. He who lies on their resume the most is the most likely
> to be contacted for an interview. This isn't right. This is bad.

A resume == job? Fraud == goodness? My we are on a roll, eh?

> I propose employers should adopt a strategy of creating long
> questionaires/quizzes available to any prospective employee. The
> employer is free to make up the quiz/questionaire however they see fit,
> but presumably would include actual questions relevant to the job
> requirements. For example, for a digital design type job one question
> might be:

No can do. See: "discrimination", "lawyer", "law suit", "bankruptcy".

> You want to implement the function: Output = A + B'C'D'A + (CD + B').
> How would you do this?

Are you asking me? I wouldn't give it any thought. If that's all "you"
have for me to do, you can't afford me. Any half-idiot would plug it into
a program and have the bloody thing designed *and* timed.

> (leave space for the would be employee to enter schematics)

What if the candidate thinks in HDL? What if the candidate can solve
such trivial problems by inspection? Are you saying that you're so
tight-assed that only schematics may apply? ***, schematics come
*way* after the problem has been solved.

> If the would be employee can't answer this or produces an ugly quagmire
> of over 100 gates, then they could quickly be excluded from a face to
> face interview. On the other hand if they produce a very elegant
> solution using the least possible gates, then it might be justifiable to
> do a face to face interview provided the rest of their answers to the
> other questions are reasonable.

Are you saying that every employee should have identical skills? Man, you
have a warped sense of reality. The fact is that projects form around hte
people, not the other way around. If everyone were cookies from the same
cutter, nothing would get done.
 
> Or maybe a question for switch mode power supply designer:

Ah, so now you have to have a seperate (and regulated) test for every
member of the team. Have fun with the lawyers.

> (show full and detailed schematics of a typical SMPS) The above
> powersupply has been found to have an unstable control loop. (provide
> relevant details such as capacitor ESR, etc.) Modify the schematics so
> the power supply is stable.

> Or for some other type of electronics job, maybe one question might be
> like:
>
> (show schematics of some circuit with a few errors in it) When the
> circuit shown above was prototyped and tested on the bench the device
> didn't work right. What is wrong with the design? Provide a
> description of how you might fix it.
>
> You get the idea.

Yes, I get *your* idea. You're inviting every Tom, ***, and Esquire into
your house to feed off your bottom line. If that's what *you* want to do,
fine. The fact is that you're way out of line.

> The employer can make the test as long as they want (and should). This
> will also be helpful for would be employees that don't know for sure if
> they are applying for the right kind of job and if they could handle it
> or not. This kind of test would be far more fair than a strict X years
> experience requirement.

There is *nothing* better than x-years of *relevant* experience.
Experience carries a lot of information with it. Newbs haven't had the
opportunity to fail. We learn from failures more than text books.

>> > And yes I am an exceptionally bright individual (in some ways,
>> > although admittedly not all). After completeing public school
>> > through eighth grade I started college at age 13. I then graduated
>> > with an associates of business degree at age 15 with a 3.86 GPA.
>> > During that time I did peer tutoring and tutored many of my peers in
>> > subject such as mathematics. Many of my tutees had many more years
>> > of "experience" learning mathematical concepts than me (having had to
>> > go through high school, etc.), yet I had in much less time managed to
>> > master all of the mathematics that my particular college taught.
>>
>> Wow! Is your arm sore?
>
>
> No, but it seemed relevant that I established some degree of credibility
> since you were using words that suggested I was an idiot.

Not! It added nothing but braggadocio to your errant claims.

>> > I never claimed any such thing. I contend experience is very
>> > valuable, however, I believe X years of experience isn't as good a
>> > metric of competance as directly measuring or observing ability.
>>
>> One minutes observation isn't much to go on either. I'll take relevant
>> experience anytime.
>
>
> No need for it to be a minute, a pre-interview test could be made
> arbitrarily lengthy since the employer doesn't have to pay employee
> candidates jack doodly.
>
> Without a doubt experience is a very valuable thing.

Then what *IS* your point? Yikes!

>> > Not that long ago I read an employment ad that was looking for a
>> > groundskeeper. The primary responsibility was to pick up trash and
>> > mow the grass. They wanted 1+ year of experience. I don't know
>> > about some people, but I don't need one whole year to learn how to
>> > mow grass and pick up garbage.
>>
>> You miss the point. If they have one year experience, they'll be more
>> likely to hang around past the first check. The candidate *may* be
>> more reliable than one still wet behind the ears.
>
>
> I agree in this example such a requirement may have something to do with
> employees hanging around with this kind of job. On the other hand
> prospective employees for design/engineering jobs such as the OP's are
> comparatively stable, but they do need to have some degree of mental
> flexibility. Discriminating against the most mentally flexible people
> doesn't make much sense for a job that requires mental flexibility.

The fact is that you assume a *lot*. I trust you don't own your own
engineering business (nor do I).

-- 
  Keith

• Previous message: ohaya: "Re: Can an electrolytic capacitor "sing"?"
• In reply to: Fritz Schlunder: "Re: Looking for PCB layout designer"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]