[MRCA] Seventies Technology

[Peter Gottlieb]

For most people and companies money is tight.  It's a luxury to have enough 
money/margin to where you can say you don't care, you want the best possible 
(and most who say they don't care about money already have plenty, which is why 
it's not an issue as they're all set).  So when some Chinese company comes in 
with a scope at one third the cost the question is more likely to be "can it do 
the job for the current project" rather than is it the best.  Also, most 
companies do not do their own instrument repairs; they send them back to the 
manufacturer.  With skilled labor costs so high in the US and Europe and 
reliability very high to start with, the most economical choice is usually board 
level replacement, or sometimes even entire unit replacement.  Yes, that dynamic 
is very different in China and India for example where the situation is 
different. Test equipment from HP, Tektronix etc were never designed for the 
hobbyist market.

As for the latest features in the latest unrepairable consumer infotainment 
device, to some degree we're in a transition stage marked by rapid change.  
Computer CPUs have plateaued and so will these devices, which will bring a 
little more stability and desire for longer service life.  Besides, the phones 
are so cheap now they're essentially free especially compared to the cost of the 
service.  If they last for the life of the two year contract you will get a new 
one anyway.  As I said, this will keep up until there is some maturity such as 
truly carrier-independent devices, universal apps across devices, and so forth.

Peter




On 5/23/2014 8:24 AM, mstangelo at comcast.net wrote:
> John,
>
> We tend to romanticize about the past. The state of technology is dictated by the market.
>
> I started working after college in the telecom industry for an international record carrier in 1976. We designed most of our hardware. I went through two design phases:
>
> 1. We used TTL logic but the power consumption was high for large systems. We then migrated to CMOS logic. The power consumption went down and we gradually overcome the ESD issues. There were two problems we had to overcome, reliability and programmability. The most unreliable parts of our system were mechanical, interconnects, manual switches and relays.
>
> 2. We started using multi-board microprocessor systems then single board microprocessors. Because of Moore's law the technology changed fast. We had reliable systems but we designed for shorted life cycles but the replacement technology was cheaper, more powerful and used less power. Minimizing power consumption and the installation footprint was important. We had good systems and a reputation for reliability with our customer base.
>
> At this point, in the 1980's, because of the evolving technology and deregulation, everything changed. You were practically guaranteed a job for life in the telecom industry. There was little competition because of monopolistic practices, especially when dealing with overseas carriers.
>
> We started purchasing off the shelf systems and I went form a design to system engineer. My company was broken up and the carrier part was purchased by a Satellite company started by a couple of accountants. I still remember our first meeting with them. They admitted that they were not technical and in for it for the money. However, they were very astute.
>
> They said the low cost was more important than reliability. Our major customers, banks and trading houses, were cutting costs and laying off people. Long term relationships did not matter; they wanted the lowest cost service. We had an in-house instrumentation calibration lab that was NIST traceable. They closed it down stating everything is digital these days and did not have to be calibrated.
>
> You call phase 1 the golden age because as an you could repair it because commodity replacement parts were available. However, it had it's shortcomings and was replace by phase 2 and eventually ASIC's and FPGA's.
>
> The TE area is a shell of itself today. Look at HP. High end test equipment was expensive back then and could only be afforded by the defense and telecom industries.
>
> Like you I'd rather fix stuff than through it out but the market does not want long lasting durable goods. They want Walmart and Harbor Freight.
>
> Mike N2MS
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: J. Forster <jfor at quikus.com>
> To: Rob Flory <farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com>
> Cc: mrca <mrca at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Fri, 23 May 2014 13:12:15 -0000 (UTC)
> Subject: Re: [MRCA] Seventies Technology
>
> IMO, the equipment "was built with the intention that it last", but rather
> it was NOT built NOT to last.
>
> Viz. In some iPods the batteries could not be repleced.
>
> The paradeigm of 'build it cheap. It'll last until it's obsolete in 6
> months" had not yet reached the TE areas.
>
> Personally, I am disgusted with the new feature de jour of cell phones.
>
> YMMV,
>
> -John
>
> ==================
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> MRCA mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mrca
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:MRCA at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>