Spurious Response wrote:

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:23:50 -0500, clifto wrote:

Spurious Response wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:39:50 -0500, clifto wrote:
Glen Walpert wrote:
My nutshell summary of the published test results is that lead free is
significantly harder to do right than tin-lead, requiring tighter
process controls, but if done right it can be more reliable than
tin-lead for non-shock situations.

MORE reliable? Please elaborate.


SHOCK.... and AWE!

Aw, not so shocking.

Not when it is shorting out!

It reminds me of the old stacked type "Record changers".

That is exactly what they did to your collection if you played them
from a stack.

RoHS = "Circuit Changers"

Start with one circuit, the one you designed, and find out in short
order that the element Tin has decided to change your circuit into some
pile of crap.

RoHS is going to create MORE landfill waste., and MORE downtime, and
more costly repair cycles, etc., etc., etc. ad infinitum.

Worst "technological advancement" ever introduced, in all of human
history.

Get a grip and wipe the froth from your lips.

SO ! What are you going to do about it ?

Graham