Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > sci.electronics.design > #740015

Re: Drives me Nuts

Show all headers | View raw

On Sun, 01 Feb 2026 10:38:51 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
wrote:

>On Sun, 01 Feb 2026 17:31:41 +0000, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Datasheets that don't provide pinouts. Even more annoying than Bill
>>Sloman.
>
>There's lots of frustration in data sheets.
>
>Block diagram and pinouts way down somewhere. It's not obvious what
>some parts actually do.
>
>Silly block diagrams, if any.
>
>Frequency response curves that hide bad things.
>
>Table of contents at the end.
>
>No DC data on RF parts. Adjust the gate bias trimpot until it works.
>
>No outline drawing.
>
>Crazy package names for standard packages.
>
>One data sheet for lots of different parts, with no way to tell which
>is which.
>
>Application schematics that leave things out, or are flat wrong.
>
>"Murder Mystery" data sheets, where you have to read literally
>hundreds of pages and look here and there for clues.
>
>Impossible keyword searches. There is a pin called MODE, but the word
>is used in many other places.
>
>Pages of disclaimers and compliance junk.
>
>Useless or insanely complex timing diagrams. Why can't they just say
>what the maximum SPI clock rate is?
>
>The min/max input voltages are VCC+.3 and VEE-.3.  What happens beyond
>that?
>
>No washability specs, or outright lies.
>
>Recent issue: no transient overload specs on resistors.
>
>No C:V data on ceramic caps. A 10uF 10v cap might be 2uF at 10 volts.
>
>No negative voltage specs on aluminum caps. Some polymers are pretty
>good.
>
>No hints of over-voltage behavior on alum caps. Some just leak and get
>warm, some die hard with no warning.
>
>1000 hour lifetime spec on alum caps. That's 40 days. Really?
>
>Common-mode inductors with huge current ratings, but saturate with
>tiny normal-mode currents.
>
>Power inductor current specs that ignore skin and proximity effects.
>Envision smoke.
>
>Impossible mosfet current and power ratings. IR started that nonsense.
>
>Important gotchas buried in tiny footnotes.
>
>.... just for starters...

That's one hell of a list! One very obvious thing they could do and
for which there can be no legitimate objection would be to standardize
the order in which a part's characteristics are listed. So you can
quickly find what you want to know OTOH, or have to read through an
entire datasheet just to discover that the info you need isn't within
it OTO.

Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Drives me Nuts Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> - 2026-02-01 17:31 +0000
  Re: Drives me Nuts "Edward Rawde" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-01 13:26 -0500
  Re: Drives me Nuts john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-01 10:38 -0800
    Re: Drives me Nuts Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com> - 2026-02-01 23:38 +0000
    Re: Drives me Nuts Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-03 18:55 +1100
  Re: Drives me Nuts Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-03 18:18 +1100

csiph-web