-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
This is from a web-site that is replaying Usenet, including
net.ham-radio, from 30 years ago (currently early summer 1985). The
site is:
http://www.olduse.net
If you prefer to use your own newsreader, the site also supports an NNTP
connection at:
nntp.olduse.net:119
>From net.ham-radio Sun Jun 21 13:27:32 2015
>Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
>Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
>Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zet a!sabre!bellcore!decvax!genrad!grkermi!panda!talco tt!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!wmartin
>From:
>Newsgroups: net.analog,net.audio,net.ham-radio
>Subject: Electronics wearing out
>Message-ID: >
>Date: Fri, 7-Jun-85 15:41:15 EDT
>Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.11251
>Posted: Fri Jun 7 15:41:15 1985
>Date-Received: Tue, 11-Jun-85 03:39:30 EDT
>Distribution: net
>Organization: USAMC ALMSA
>Lines: 47
>Xref: watmath net.analog:320 net.audio:5110 net.ham-radio:2813
I have been hearing and reading disturbing things about electronic
components simply "wearing out" from use, or circuit designs which
use batteries for volatile ROMs and which will become useless after
some period of time unless deliberately maintained. The former
example includes a recent net.audio posting about the laser assembly
in a CD player having to be replaced after 5 years or so of use, and the
latter includes the control programming for the ICOM (and other brands)
of shortwave receivers and amateur equipment, wherein an on-board
battery must stay alive to keep a ROM programmed to keep the radio in
operable condition.
This troubles me. I had thought that we had a reasonable progression of
development of electronics during these days of solid-state gear
replacing tube equipment that meant longer life for any device. LED's
with essentially eternal lives replaced easily-burned-out incandescent
lamps. Transistors replaced tubes, and ICs and VLSI replaced discrete
components, and, assuming weeding out infant mortality and no actual
damage to the circuit, like overvoltage, it should continue to operate
indefinitely. Dipped caps replaced paper ones, etc.
But now I see that designers either deliberately build in inevitable
failures (the use of volatile ROMs and batteries instead of PROMs or
other permanent devices) or the solid-state stuff I was led to believe
had indefinitely-long lives really is as short-lived as vacuum tubes
(the laser diodes mentioned above).
I may be insane, but I really expect electronic equipment to operate
forever. I don't want to buy any that has built-in and inevitable
failure. I have a lot of old gear, some older than myself, that still
works. I expect this tube gear to wear out from heat and voltage
stresses but it hasn't yet. If I buy new stuff, without the tube-caused
heat and high-voltage stress, I expect it to last longer than I will!
I realize that consumer products have built-in planned obsolescence.
I'm not talking about small appliances, which I expect to die and be
replaced. I'm talking about multi-hundred-dollar equipment. Am I
totally unjustified in expecting such things to be designed to
continue to work indefinitely without maintenance, except for
mechanical stuff like motors, belts, pots, etc? (I would expect to
maintain anything mechanical -- purely electronic gear is different.)
Am I alone in this concern?
Regards,
Will Martin
USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin or ARPA/MILNET:
>From net.ham-radio Sun Jun 21 13:27:35 2015
>Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
>Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site umd5.UUCP
>Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decv ax!genrad!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!cvl!umd5!zben
>From:
>Newsgroups: net.analog,net.audio,net.ham-radio
>Subject: Re: Electronics wearing out
>Message-ID: >
>Date: Sun, 9-Jun-85 07:20:17 EDT
>Article-I.D.: umd5.564
>Posted: Sun Jun 9 07:20:17 1985
>Date-Received: Tue, 11-Jun-85 07:47:12 EDT
>References: >
>Reply-To: (Ben Cranston)
>Distribution: net
>Organization: U of Md, CSC, College Park, Md
>Lines: 18
>Xref: watmath net.analog:323 net.audio:5115 net.ham-radio:2815
>Summary: Don't forget EPROMs
In article > (Will Martin ) writes:
>I have been hearing and reading disturbing things about electronic
>components simply "wearing out" from use, ...
>I may be insane, but I really expect electronic equipment to operate
>forever. ...
>Am I alone in this concern?
>Will Martin
>USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin or ARPA/MILNET:
Don't forget that data saved in FAMOS (Floating Avalanche Metal Oxide Semi)
memories like 2732, 2764, etc is only guaranteed for a mean of 100 years!
I guess I'm thinking of early-sales versions of computer-controlled gear
that were shipped with EPROM instead of real ROM. For example, the first
person in our group who got an H19 got two 2716s, the next got two 2316s
(same pinout hard ROM), the next got one 2732, the next got one 2332 etc.
- --
Ben Cranston ...{seismo!umcp-cs,ihnp4!rlgvax}!cvl!umd5!zben
>From net.ham-radio Sun Jun 21 13:27:42 2015
>Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
>Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihu1m.UUCP
>Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!ihu1m !mstach
>From: (Dan Hoelker)
>Newsgroups: net.ham-radio
>Subject: Re: Electronics wearing out
>Message-ID: >
>Date: Mon, 10-Jun-85 18:49:17 EDT
>Article-I.D.: ihu1m.458
>Posted: Mon Jun 10 18:49:17 1985
>Date-Received: Tue, 11-Jun-85 05:08:57 EDT
>References: >
>Distribution: net
>Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
>Lines: 41
>Xref: dummy dummy:1
>X-OldUsenet-Modified: added Xref
> I have been hearing and reading disturbing things about electronic
> components simply "wearing out" from use, or circuit designs which
> use batteries for volatile ROMs and which will become useless after
> some period of time unless deliberately maintained. The former
> example includes a recent net.audio posting about the laser assembly
> in a CD player having to be replaced after 5 years or so of use, and the
> latter includes the control programming for the ICOM (and other brands)
> of shortwave receivers and amateur equipment, wherein an on-board
> battery must stay alive to keep a ROM programmed to keep the radio in
> operable condition.
>
> .
> .
> .
>
> Regards,
> Will Martin
>
> USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin or ARPA/MILNET:
I don't think anything lasts forever. The "forever" LEDs that were mentioned
in the above article also wear out after a given amount of use. Fortunately
this is about 250,000 hours (~30 years), longer than most people
would keep something ( except radio amateurs. :-) ). I would assume
the CD laser life is rated in hours also, with 5 years probably being
the "average" based on some study of how often Joe Average uses his.
Losing all programmability when a battery goes dead does sound like
a design flaw. As far as I know my Yaesu 2M only loses its memory
when the battery goes. But I sure like the feature that I can turn off
the radio without losing the memory, so it seems like a small price
to pay.
You also have to remember that manufacturers make a tradeoff between
reliability and cost, with cost usually being much more important
to the manufacturer. A part that lasts longer may be significantly
more expensive, especially when talking in millions of units. When
it comes to the bottom line, the cheaper part wins.
Dan Hoelker
KA9MHK
ihu1m!mstach
>From net.ham-radio Sun Jun 21 13:27:44 2015
>Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
>Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site azure.UUCP
>Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decv ax!tektronix!teklds!azure!michaelk
>From: (Michael Kersenbrock)
>Newsgroups: net.analog,net.audio,net.ham-radio
>Subject: Re: Electronics wearing out
>Message-ID: >
>Date: Tue, 11-Jun-85 22:17:29 EDT
>Article-I.D.: azure.255
>Posted: Tue Jun 11 22:17:29 1985
>Date-Received: Fri, 14-Jun-85 01:11:42 EDT
>References: >
>Distribution: net
>Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
>Lines: 26
>Xref: watmath net.analog:327 net.audio:5141 net.ham-radio:2822
[]
> I have been hearing and reading disturbing things about electronic
> components simply "wearing out" from use, or circuit designs which
> use batteries for volatile ROMs and which will become useless after
> some period of time unless deliberately maintained. The former
> example includes a recent net.audio posting about the laser assembly
> in a CD player having to be replaced after 5 years or so of use, and the
> latter includes the control programming for the ICOM (and other brands)
> of shortwave receivers and amateur equipment, wherein an on-board
> battery must stay alive to keep a ROM programmed to keep the radio in
> operable condition.
I own one of those amateur radio devices (actually a Kenwood). After
five years or so, when the battery goes dead, I do not intend to
pay out several hundred dollars to replace the radio. I plan to pay
two dollars and replace the battery. It's just a little lithium
cell that keeps the 4-bit CMOS uC alive when the radio is turned off.
(Actually it isn't even necessary except that you'd have to reprogram
the radio everytime you changed out the ni-cads to another battery pack).
Other uses (like terminal baud rate storage, etc) would be similar.
It may be a pain to waste several minutes every 5 years to reprogram
whatever the battery went out in, but then ...
Mike Kersenbrock
Tektronix Microcomputer Development Products
Aloha, Oregon
>From net.ham-radio Sun Jun 21 13:27:47 2015
>Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
>Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
>Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decv ax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-jon!moroney
>From: (Mike Moroney)
>Newsgroups: net.analog,net.audio,net.ham-radio
>Subject: Re: Electronics wearing out
>Message-ID: >
>Date: Thu, 13-Jun-85 10:36:00 EDT
>Article-I.D.: decwrl.2663
>Posted: Thu Jun 13 10:36:00 1985
>Date-Received: Sat, 15-Jun-85 06:39:24 EDT
>Sender:
>Organization: DEC Engineering Network
>Lines: 5
>Xref: watmath net.analog:328 net.audio:5145 net.ham-radio:2828
I have to agree with you. I will never knowingly buy an electronic device
which depends on a battery keeping a RAM alive, especially when ROM's of the
same size are cheaper.
- -Mike
>From net.ham-radio Sun Jun 21 13:27:50 2015
>Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
>Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site edison.UUCP
>Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decv ax!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs!edison!dca
>From: (David C. Albrecht)
>Newsgroups: net.analog,net.audio,net.ham-radio
>Subject: Re: Re: Electronics wearing out
>Message-ID: >
>Date: Mon, 17-Jun-85 09:25:38 EDT
>Article-I.D.: edison.508
>Posted: Mon Jun 17 09:25:38 1985
>Date-Received: Thu, 20-Jun-85 07:43:39 EDT
>References: >
>Organization: General Electric Company, Charlottesville, VA
>Lines: 14
>Xref: watmath net.analog:335 net.audio:5157 net.ham-radio:2845
> I have to agree with you. I will never knowingly buy an electronic device
- -> which depends on a battery keeping a RAM alive, especially when ROM's of the
> same size are cheaper.
>
> -Mike
Do WHAT? I don't remember the original posting but I would imagine the
RAM is used to store transient information such as station presets and
perhaps volume settings. A ROM? be serious, you can have any color you
like so long as it's blue, and volume you want so long as it's 5 any
station you want if you can get them to move to 101.2 :-)
David Albrecht
General Electric
>From net.ham-radio Sun Jun 21 13:27:53 2015
>Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
>Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.4 $; site trsvax
>Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm !mtuxo!mtunh!inuxi!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!convex!trsvax!mikey
>From: mikey@trsvax
>Newsgroups: net.ham-radio
>Subject: Re: Electronics wearing out
>Message-ID: <52800059@trsvax>
>Date: Mon, 17-Jun-85 12:12:00 EDT
>Article-I.D.: trsvax.52800059
>Posted: Mon Jun 17 12:12:00 1985
>Date-Received: Fri, 21-Jun-85 00:52:36 EDT
>References: >
>Lines: 17
>Nf-ID: #R:ihu1m.UUCP:-45800:trsvax:52800059:000:687
>Nf-From: trsvax!mikey Jun 17 09:12:00 1985
>Xref: dummy dummy:1
>X-OldUsenet-Modified: added Xref
There seems to be a slight misunderstanding here. There are two types
of battery backup. The first is just a battery backup of RAM for
storage of your "memory" channels or your frequently used operating
parameters. Big deal if that goes dead. You replace the battery and
just reprogram your memory. The problem is some new equipment is
designed so that a number of units use the same board and the unit is
programmed "on the fly" on the production line and an on board battery
keeps it alive. The problem is that if you loose the battery, you loose
everything, including the ability to reprogram. This means a return to
the factory, and a bill.
mikey at trsvax
KA5MJQ
>From net.ham-radio Sun Jun 21 13:27:55 2015
>Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
>Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
>Path: utzoo!henry
>From: (Henry Spencer)
>Newsgroups: net.analog,net.audio,net.ham-radio
>Subject: Re: Electronics wearing out
>Message-ID: >
>Date: Mon, 17-Jun-85 14:52:02 EDT
>Article-I.D.: utzoo.5689
>Posted: Mon Jun 17 14:52:02 1985
>Date-Received: Mon, 17-Jun-85 14:52:02 EDT
>References: >
>Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
>Lines: 93
>Xref: dummy dummy:1
>X-OldUsenet-Modified: added Xref
Unfortunately, there really are wear-out mechanisms even in semiconductors.
They are less obvious than the ones in tubes, but no less real.
Plastic IC packages (used for most ICs in commercial equipment) are not
hermetically sealed, and may eventually develop leaks that let air and
moisture at the chip; the resulting corrosion kills it. Why do you think
the military uses ceramic (truly hermetic) packages almost exclusively?
Diffusion does occur even in solids. Various forms of material migration
can occur in the presence of electric currents. These things are significant
concerns to semiconductor manufacturers. Remember that commercial ICs are
optimized for low cost rather than ultimate maximum lifetime.
Power spikes, static, and similar forms of overstressing may possibly
account for a significant fraction of semiconductor failures in the field.
It is very difficult to shield completely against such things, although
"99%" protection is much easier and increasingly common. Note that power
behavior during powerup and powerdown is rather ill-specified and hard
to control completely.
EPROMs and EEPROMs inherently have limited lifetimes if they are being
reprogrammed regularly, because the erase/program techniques involve
pushing electrons through materials that are normally insulators. The
technique used to do this is basically brute force. This unavoidably
involves some degradation of the insulator. Do it too many times, and
it won't insulate any more.
EPROMs and EEPROMs will *eventually* lose their contents anyway, because
they rely on holding charge on very-well-insulated electrodes. Although
the insulation around those electrodes is of truly superb quality, it's
not perfect, and the charge will leak off eventually. In the absence of
unusual stress, this takes a very long time. Nobody is quite sure how
long, because we haven't had the devices that long! Extrapolations from
stress tests may not be 100% valid, although they do give hints.
Circuit designs which use batteries for volatile memories simply need
their batteries replaced occasionally. They don't "become useless"
any more than a flashlight becomes useless, although in some cases the
battery replacement may be a lot of hassle. (When expected battery
lifetime exceeds expected equipment lifetime, it's tempting to just
solder the battery in.)
Things like semiconductor lasers in CD players are being operated "hard
and hot"; this aggravates failure mechanisms like material migration
and solid diffusion. Often there is a deliberate tradeoff between power
output and lifetime, as with incandescent bulbs. For example, stadium
lighting is often run at higher-than-normal voltages; the bulbs burn out
quickly but yield a lot more light meanwhile, and this is a reasonable
tradeoff in that application. Similarly, commercial semiconductor lasers
have very limited power outputs because of difficult technical problems.
Getting the necessary power with available components may *require* some
deliberate loss of lifetime. Even when higher-power components really are
available, it may be a good deal cheaper to opt for shorter life. (Just
how much extra are most consumers willing to pay for long-life components?
Regular incandescent bulbs heavily outsell long-life bulbs, remember.)
> This troubles me. I had thought that we had a reasonable progression of
> development of electronics during these days of solid-state gear
> replacing tube equipment that meant longer life for any device. ...
Longer, yes. But not infinite. Not even the phone company's highly
conservative, heavily over-engineered equipment is expected to last more
than 40-50 years (and this is *not* a zero-maintenance lifetime, either).
> But now I see that designers either deliberately build in inevitable
> failures (the use of volatile ROMs and batteries instead of PROMs or
> other permanent devices) or the solid-state stuff I was led to believe
> had indefinitely-long lives really is as short-lived as vacuum tubes
> (the laser diodes mentioned above).
You pays your money and you takes your choice. If you are willing to
pay double or triple current prices, you could probably get some very
long-lived equipment. (The high cost of military electronics is not
*all* corruption and overcharging.) (95%, maybe.)
> I may be insane, but I really expect electronic equipment to operate
> forever. I don't want to buy any that has built-in and inevitable
> failure. ...
> I realize that consumer products have built-in planned obsolescence.
> I'm not talking about small appliances, which I expect to die and be
> replaced. I'm talking about multi-hundred-dollar equipment. Am I
> totally unjustified in expecting such things to be designed to
> continue to work indefinitely without maintenance, except for
> mechanical stuff like motors, belts, pots, etc?
Basically, yes. There ain't no way to make it work indefinitely. And
making it work "a long time" is quite expensive. Semiconductors have
made it relatively easy to build gear with far longer lifetimes than
tube equipment, but this is a (large) quantitative improvement rather
than a fundamental repeal of the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
- --
Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry
>From net.ham-radio Sun Jun 21 13:28:01 2015
>Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
>Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site pitt.UUCP
>Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!ulyss es!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!bellcore!decvax!genrad !panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rochester!cmu-cs-pt!cadre!pitt!hoffman
>From: (Bob Hoffman)
>Newsgroups: net.analog,net.audio,net.ham-radio
>Subject: Re: Electronics wearing out
>Message-ID: >
>Date: Wed, 19-Jun-85 11:20:11 EDT
>Article-I.D.: pitt.1005
>Posted: Wed Jun 19 11:20:11 1985
>Date-Received: Sun, 23-Jun-85 04:16:02 EDT
>References: > >
>Reply-To: (Bob Hoffman)
>Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science
>Lines: 50
>Xref: watmath net.analog:340 net.audio:5167 net.ham-radio:2868
Judging from the direction this discussion has been taking, I think
the point of the original note was lost. I don't think any of us
object to batteries being used in radios and the like to store
transient information. What's being objected to here is the use
of a battery-powered CMOS RAM _i_n_ _p_l_a_c_e_ _o_f a ROM for storing
the "permanent" part of the controller's memory.
In particular, Icom markets a series of radios with this sort of device.
The IC-R71A receiver, the IC-751 HF transceiver, the IC-271 144 MHz
transceiver, and the IC-471 440 MHz transceiver all use a
microprocessor based controller. Each radio, of course, has different
operating parameters, such as frequency range, modes, etc. Therefore,
the operating system must be different for each microprocessor. Now,
rather than using a ROM to store the operating system, they chose to
use a CMOS RAM backed up by a lithium battery.
If the battery should become disconnected, or if it should go dead
(claimed life: 6-7 years), the RAM loses its contents, and the radio
becomes completely useless. Unlike older receivers that used a
tuning capacitor to adjust the local oscillator frequency, it is now
done digitally with a voltage-controlled-oscillator and a digital
counter in a feedback loop. Without the microprocessor running, the
digital counter no longer works and the radio ceases to function.
Completely. As one person mentioned earlier, it becomes a ~$700
doorstop. The only repair is to send the radio (maybe just the RAM
module, I'm not sure) back to Icom to have the battery replaced and
the RAM reloaded.
What will happen when Icom decides to discontinue support for this line
of radios? I tend to keep my radios a long time. I dread the thought
of being helpless to prevent these units from failing.
If I were more adventurous, I would build a circuit to dump the contents
of the RAM into my computer and save the result on disk. Then, I could
either reprogram the RAM myself, or burn some ROMs to replace the whole
module.
What could have been Icom's motivation for doing this? Are they really
out to screw the public by making the radios obsolete before their time?
Could it be cheaper to manufacture this RAM module than a similar ROM?
Do I sound bitter? You bet. I own an R71A and a 271H and I think they're
excellent radios. Really first class. Except for their built-in
obsolescense. I had planned on getting a 471 next year, but am now
reconsidering.
Tnx for reading & 73,
- --
Bob Hoffman, N3CVL {allegra, bellcore, cadre, idis, psuvax1}!pitt!hoffman
Pitt Computer Science hoffman%pitt@csnet-relay
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (NetBSD)
iEYEARECAAYFAlWG+YsACgkQ6Pj0az779o7gBwCgsOxjAmxD4l z8CfEEjL7/ilS1
cJIAnjDQOOh0coG73mIPhdQBt52VDnVE
=wAb3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----