13 Aug
2006
13 Aug
'06
7:04 a.m.
On Aug 12, 2006, at 4:48 PM, der Mouse wrote:
So, there's a fairly clear way in which surface-mount is harder to work
with than DIPs: you can't breadboard the things, and doing flying leads
is (at best) a good deal harder.
Ok, you don't like surface mount technology. I get the point.
Less common in the workshops of people who do nothing but
through-hole assembly perhaps.
This sounds as though you're talking strictly
about soldering them
to a printed-circuit board. If so, that's a lose right there,
compared to DIPs, if you can't connect to them (without equipment
prohibitively expensive for hobbyist use) except via a PCB.
Well that's pretty
much a given...there's really no other way to do
that. [...] Quick-turn PCB houses are super cheap these days,
though,
Hm? So moving to SMT means that instead of buying a $1.19 part to
breadboard a circuit with, I instead can buy a $0.89 part and throw
$12.99 at the minimum order for a PCB so I can connect to it.
Remind me again how surface mount is better?
Oh, okay, let's say I can bundle ten chips' PCBs into that order. So I
have $0.89+$1.299. This is still a dollar more than the $1.19 DIP. As I've
said a few times, things are *different*...trying to treat it
like "a smaller version of through-hole construction" will not work.
Different...and harder, it appears, since at a minimum you need less
common (and more expensive) tools, and that's if you're doing a
finished design and just trying to assemble the thing. If you're
breadboarding, even your parts are more expensive, since you have to
add the piggyback carrier to the part cost.
As I said above...it's clear you don't like surface mount technology,
and you're going to PICK PICK PICK at any positive thing anyone says
about it, totally ignoring statements from people who actually have
real-world experience with it. That sure is a nice attitude.
Now I remember why I left this list a few years ago.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Cape Coral, FL