Focussed on USING BC..

Larry Smith ([email protected])
Fri, 7 Jun 1996 11:09:35 -0700

----- Begin Included Message -----

>From [email protected] Fri Jun 7 10:48 PDT 1996
From: "Don Abernathey" <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 10:48:38 -0700
To: [email protected]
Subject: Focussed on USING BC..
Mime-Version: 1.0

John R. Benham, Larry Smith, and Roy McCammon all wrote good stuff
about the technical motivation for using BC. Thank you guys!

My collegue Jeff Moll stated the real reason for my inquiry on BC when
he used the word "ignorance". I too have analyzed BC and as a result
I'm a proponent of the technology. However, I've never actually used

It would appear that I am not alone. The responses I have seen todate
suggest that there is alot of interest (for valid technical reasons)
and a vacuumn of actual experience - which piques my curriousity. Why
folks? Could it be that the actual users of BC aren't on the si
reflector? Or could it be that there are very few BC users?

The folks on the si-list often have a large say in the technical
requirements for a PCB vendor. We all know that not all PCB
vendors are licensed for BC. There is probably an additional learning
curve (translate that to mean more customer money) for every PCB even
with an established BC vendor. Basically, adding BC means extra
work/risk that I would like to quantify.

It would be very nice if those of you who know of other published work
done in this area could post the references (give you an excuse to
surf the web). I appreciate the feedback. I think I'll post my
original question to and see what I get
(besides screeming wacko responses). I'll post the good stuff to the
si reflector.

Thank you |
Don Abernathey |
(503)690-6234 |
[email protected] |

----- End Included Message -----