The most important changes in electronic design over the past 25 years?

It can also mean roaring down the path at full tilt, full of gusto and exitement, only to discover way too late in the game that it was the wrong path. Seen it many times. One company that I warned about it in a friendly manner didn't listen, decided they don't need any consulting help. Long story short, this company is no more.

it?

I agree with all that. There is a level of childishness here that I don't find on the other newsgroups I frequent.

two categories of improvement:

1. parts to work with
2. functions of those parts

the contributions in the first category enabled what we all 'see' in the second category.

Electronics became smaller, cheaper, lower power, faster, and INCREDIBLY complex! Enabling a plethora of functions to come into existance...GPS everywhere, wireless widgets, awesome display screens, expansion of the internet, USB memory sticks, power scavenging, etc etc. But the major impact [to me] has been the shift towards software becoming the dominating factor of how those basic components became utilized. For example, whole companies have come into existance that provide only aps and software. Just as the industry moved away from providing a solution that EXACTLY fits the problem to providing a solution that is a 'slight' overkill with digital solution, we are now starting to provide WAAAYYY overkill by having WHOLE systems become the basic building block!

Can you imagine trying to print a data sheet for a whole system? It's like a data sheet for a micro, only more so.

With the advent of all these advancements, The list of 'new' things becomes long: video phones, digital TV, true artificial intelligence as part of the user interface, humanoid robots, etc etc

To me, the most monumental changes have been the advent of 'extremes' to make new components -- low temperature SQUIDS, gravity free crystal growth, etc; the acceptance of carbon composites; and exploration into nano, where ALL the rules of physics I was familiar with seem to have changed -- tunneling electrons [pure magic!]

Just how much improvement in basic components? longer battery life, higher energy density in inductors and capacitors, stronger materials has occurred since 80's? Seems like sometimes slow, but the synergy of ALL the small changes has been awesome.

Which are?

-- "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." (Richard Feynman)

Mostly uk.d-i-y and comp.lang.fortran I have to say that there is a lot of childish behaviour on another one, rec.sport.rugby.union

BTW I do see that there is a great deal of really good and useful stuff on the ng. It's just that there are a few people who seem intent on constantly proving their technical superiority. There are also some Neanderthal political attitudes on display. Is there a correlation? Perhaps

Yep - and as such they behave like Schrödinger's cat. If you know where they are, you do not know when.

I think that potential disaster lurks on both sides the decision. Actually, I've been in enough fiasco's that started with the team roaring down a path full tilt full of gusto and excitement that I tend to get very nervous any time I'm in that situation, regardless of the details.

If you try to force a team to do something according to your vision of "right" when they are either completely unwilling to buy into it, or unable to execute to your plan, then trying to go with that plan with that team is probably going to result in disaster. That's not to say that going strictly with the team's abilities _won't_ result in disaster

-- it's just that you should let your team's abilities steer your choices as long as doing so otherwise makes sense.

If you're in a situation where you can't change the team, because of time constraints, or hiring constraints, or for intra-office political reasons, then you're kind of stuck with what the team can do. If you can find _a_ way to get the job done with that team, even if that's not _the best way_ to get that job done in an ideal world, then it makes sense to pursue it.

The times when doing something the "wrong" way ("less globally optimum" way?) make sense is when the cost of doing so is not great, the chances of success doing it that way with that team are very good, and the chances of success doing it the "right" way with that team are very bad.

(And thanks -- this is a good thing to point out in the book!)

I wouldn't know about that, I was too big of a brute and didn't have anything to prove, nor did any one bother me. My problem was, the little shit heads (little man disease) always trying to get me to bail them out of their problems they started.

And you? it seems like you have first hand knowledge..

Jamie

Yes. I've done a lot of observing.

Oh, so you were the ring leader.

Jamie

In other words, a *continuum* of superposition states. Quantization, who needs it? :-)

Tim

They have been around for 50 years.

That's a

Inexpensive fast power FETs.

PHEMTs.

affordable as

You tell him his thing is 50 years old, and then suggest something that also doesn't qualify.

Brilliant.

No, I've usually been on the outside of any rings.

Neanderthal, meaning not agreeing with your own POV?

When in the UK, I once was invited to a Rugby club dinner. I learned more ribald songs in that one night, than ever before or since.

Being pedantically semantic about the subject line...

Better wording, in spite of the famous magazine by the same name, might be "electronics design". The expression "electronic design" sounds like a method for designing circuits.

On a sunny day (Mon, 4 Feb 2013 18:16:57 +0000 (UTC)) it happened John Doe wrote in :

Well it has moved that way a bit with all them slimulations.