Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.electronics.design > #429851 > unrolled thread

Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP

Started byblocher@columbus.rr.com
First post2016-09-29 16:59 -0700
Last post2016-10-03 14:56 +1100
Articles 5 on this page of 45 — 16 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.electronics.design

Contents

  Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP blocher@columbus.rr.com - 2016-09-29 16:59 -0700
    Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP "John Miles, KE5FX" <jmiles@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 17:51 -0700
      Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-09-30 05:50 -0700
        Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-09-30 05:55 -0700
          Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-09-30 07:45 -0700
            Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP krw <krw@nowhere.com> - 2016-10-01 23:19 -0400
        Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Chris Jones <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> - 2016-10-01 00:15 +1000
          Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP jack4747@gmail.com - 2016-09-30 07:20 -0700
            Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2016-09-30 08:31 -0700
              Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-09-30 08:46 -0700
                Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-09-30 12:37 -0700
                  Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-09-30 14:23 -0700
                  Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Neon John <no@never.com> - 2016-10-01 10:47 -0400
                  Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2016-10-01 11:52 -0700
                    Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2016-10-01 15:06 -0400
                      Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2016-10-01 12:28 -0700
                      Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP krw <krw@nowhere.com> - 2016-10-01 23:21 -0400
                  Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2016-10-02 14:21 -0700
          Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-09-30 15:09 +0000
        Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2016-10-01 13:42 -0400
          Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-10-01 11:16 -0700
            Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2016-10-01 14:29 -0400
              Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-10-01 14:15 -0700
                Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-10-01 14:52 -0700
                  Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2016-10-01 15:12 -0700
                    Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-10-01 16:09 -0700
                      Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2016-10-01 16:11 -0700
                        Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-10-02 09:00 -0700
                          Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2016-10-02 09:11 -0700
                            Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-10-02 11:13 -0700
                  Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-10-01 15:23 -0700
                    Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-10-01 15:36 -0700
                      Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-10-01 15:48 -0700
                      Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-10-01 16:08 -0700
                        Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2016-10-01 20:01 -0400
                        Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2016-10-02 10:10 -0400
        Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP krw <krw@nowhere.com> - 2016-10-01 23:17 -0400
      Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-09-30 08:44 -0700
        Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP "John Miles, KE5FX" <jmiles@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 17:38 -0700
          Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-09-30 17:48 -0700
          Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-09-30 18:45 -0700
            Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP "tom" <tmiller11147@verizon.net> - 2016-09-30 22:31 -0400
            Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP "John Miles, KE5FX" <jmiles@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 20:15 -0700
            Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Don Kuenz <g@crcomp.net> - 2016-10-03 15:12 +0000
        Re: Qualcomm in talks to acquire NXP Chris Jones <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> - 2016-10-03 14:56 +1100

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#429999

FromWinfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu>
Date2016-09-30 18:45 -0700
Message-ID<nsn4fr02luv@drn.newsguy.com>
In reply to#429991
John Miles, KE5FX wrote...
>
> PSA: if anyone does need a Q3236 for anything,
> you can get a better version of it from Peregrine: 
> http://www.psemi.com/pdf/app_notes/an09.pdf .  
>
> I like Peregrine.  They haven't sent me any bullshit
> DMCA notices lately, and they make neat stuff.

 But dammit, they lock their datasheets.  I couldn't
 copy and paste their PE3236 part number to get more
 info.  Nor could I paste to modify the an09.pdf file
 name to better identify what it was in my computer.
 The sooner these idiot blokes get the message that
 locking datasheets is counterproductive, the better
 off everybody will be.  If that ever happens.

 Sheesh!!!!


-- 
 Thanks,
    - Win

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430007

From"tom" <tmiller11147@verizon.net>
Date2016-09-30 22:31 -0400
Message-ID<nsn73b$99t$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#429999
"Winfield Hill" <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote in message 
news:nsn4fr02luv@drn.newsguy.com...
> John Miles, KE5FX wrote...
>>
>> PSA: if anyone does need a Q3236 for anything,
>> you can get a better version of it from Peregrine:
>> http://www.psemi.com/pdf/app_notes/an09.pdf .
>>
>> I like Peregrine.  They haven't sent me any bullshit
>> DMCA notices lately, and they make neat stuff.
>
> But dammit, they lock their datasheets.  I couldn't
> copy and paste their PE3236 part number to get more
> info.  Nor could I paste to modify the an09.pdf file
> name to better identify what it was in my computer.
> The sooner these idiot blokes get the message that
> locking datasheets is counterproductive, the better
> off everybody will be.  If that ever happens.
>
> Sheesh!!!!
>
>
> -- 
> Thanks,
>    - Win

Maybe that is a comment you and Paul can put in your next edition.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430010

From"John Miles, KE5FX" <jmiles@gmail.com>
Date2016-09-30 20:15 -0700
Message-ID<b3c645f7-d34a-4eb3-93a1-7203c04b6df7@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#429999
On Friday, September 30, 2016 at 6:45:46 PM UTC-7, Winfield Hill wrote:
>  But dammit, they lock their datasheets.  I couldn't
>  copy and paste their PE3236 part number to get more
>  info. 

Fortunately they seem to have stopped doing that in 
their newer data sheets.  The one for the PE42020 from 
2014 isn't marked [SECURED] but the PE4140 from 2009 is.

I agree with Tom, though -- way too many companies still
do this crap, and some flames in print from you guys 
might help.  Safe to say the lawyers don't read Usenet...

-- john, KE5FX

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430202

FromDon Kuenz <g@crcomp.net>
Date2016-10-03 15:12 +0000
Message-ID<20161003a@crcomp.net>
In reply to#429999
Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> John Miles, KE5FX wrote...
>>
>> PSA: if anyone does need a Q3236 for anything,
>> you can get a better version of it from Peregrine:
>> http://www.psemi.com/pdf/app_notes/an09.pdf .
>>
>> I like Peregrine.  They haven't sent me any bullshit
>> DMCA notices lately, and they make neat stuff.
>
> But dammit, they lock their datasheets.  I couldn't
> copy and paste their PE3236 part number to get more
> info.  Nor could I paste to modify the an09.pdf file
> name to better identify what it was in my computer.
> The sooner these idiot blokes get the message that
> locking datasheets is counterproductive, the better
> off everybody will be.  If that ever happens.
>
> Sheesh!!!!

There's neither a file name nor a copy and paste lock on unix. OTOH
Foxit on Windows tells me "Sorry, copying text from this document is not
allowed." Now that's just the sort of provocation that can turn nearly
everyone into an angry cuss.

Thank you,

--
Don Kuenz KB7RPU

    He who would not be frustrate of his hope to write well hereafter in
laudable things ought himself to be a true poem. - Milton

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#430188

FromChris Jones <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com>
Date2016-10-03 14:56 +1100
Message-ID<OFkIz.69335$V95.38808@fx30.fr7>
In reply to#429922
On 01/10/2016 01:44, John Larkin wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Sep 2016 17:51:00 -0700 (PDT), "John Miles, KE5FX"
> <jmiles@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 5:00:09 PM UTC-7, blo...@columbus.rr.com wrote:
>>> http://www.wsj.com/articles/qualcomm-in-talks-to-acquire-nxp-semiconductors-1475170033
>>
>> Bummer.  Qualcomm is nothing but an overstaffed law firm that occasionally sells semiconductors when they have nothing better to do.
>>
>> This is what happens if you post an online copy of a 15-year old, publicly available data sheet for a widely used part: http://www.ke5fx.com/usrc/q3236.pdf
>>
>> Oops, it looks like they missed one: http://f1chf.free.fr/boite%20blanche/QUALCOMM/q3236.pdf
>>
>> Bunch of asshats.
>>
>> -- john, KE5FX
>
> Why would anyone want to keep people from seeing their data sheets?
> But lots of people do.

As pointed out above, they are a bunch of asshats. Same with all the 
semiconductor companies giving out pointless SPICE models that are 
pretty much an ideal component, although they have accurate in-house 
models because they need them in order to design the chip in the first 
place, and all of their competitors have already reverse engineered a 
complete netlist of the part, if it was any good.

Perhaps they know that they almost certainly are infringing somebody's 
patent (of course they are - virtually every textbook circuit has been 
patented in the last 20 years, at least once and usually several times). 
Maybe they think that keeping everything confidential will reduce the 
likelihood of patent trolls latching onto that part as a potential thing 
to sue about. Also, they probably don't want hobbyists asking questions 
about how to use their parts, pointing out the embarrasing mistakes in 
the datasheet, and generally doing things that were not written in their 
business plan.


> That chip looks klunky by modern standards anyhow.
>
> Several people make things like this:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/jskjlc4
>
> which is astonishing, especially for $5 or so.
Hmm they still haven't integrated the loop filter. See US6891412 for one 
way to do that, but I guess that doesn't expire until 2025. There are 
some other ways to do it also.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | sci.electronics.design

csiph-web