Pro EE's Which large IC manufacturers make you cringe? No Docs/No support/etc - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / beginners

author: jakeisprobably
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 20, 2016, 09:48:11 pm
content: Which large IC manufacturers make you cringe? Why? Who's bad at a hobbyist level versus pro level?I want to know who to avoid before I learn the hard way.EDITED:So after a couple of days this thread has had some interesting responses. In the interest of other beginners like myself the following is a condensed summary of the first 32 posts from this thread.The listing is in roughly the same order as first mentioned.Listed: Manufacturer - Number of Opinions - Summary ExplanationCon ListMaxim- 9- Availability/Lead Times/ExpensiveMarvell- 2- NDA's/Small Quantity SourcingBroadcom- 2- NDA's/Small Quantity Sourcing/MOQSTmicro- 2- Datasheets/App notesHID (RFID)- 1- Price/Sample PolicyRenesas- 2- NDA's/MOQnVidia- 1- SupportMicrochip- 5- Quality/Price/Part Numbering/ErrataFairchild- 2- Datasheet Incomplete or UnclearAMD- 1- "Embedded stuff became NRND before release"Intel- 1- 'Poor Strategy'Qualcomm- 1- NDA/MOQInfineon- 1- "Microcontrollers suck big-time"Cypress- 1- "They are weird"Linear Technology- 1- High market priceTexas Instruments- 3- Spec Noise/Forced IDE Use/Info-management/Closed Personal e-system SupportAnalog Devices- 2- SupportON Semiconductor- 1- 'Image Sensor NDA'Globcomm- 1- NDAAptina- 1- NDAFreescale- 1- Product Availability/Lead TimeXilinx- 1- 'Harder than Altera to use'I didn't ask for the "Pros" side but I will just list the brand and number of opinions.NXP- 6STmicro- 2Maxim- 1AMD- 1Texas Instruments- 4Analog Devices- 1Linear Technology- 3Fairchild- 1ON Semiconductor- 1Atmel- 1FTDI- 1Freescale- 1IRF- 1IXYS- 1ADI- 1

author: Dago
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 06:47:54 am
content: I tend to avoid Maxim due to (often) poor availability and long lead times for the products.

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 07:42:07 am
content: Seconded, some really interesting parts but you dare not design any of their unique stuff in.Marvell/Broadcom pain in the tail for NDAs and small quantity sourcing.Regards, Dan.

author: tron9000
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 08:05:19 am
content: thirded on Maxim, They make some pretty Schmick stuff, but you go to the supplier and find they are too expensive or are obsolete.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 09:01:56 am
content: +1 on maximi'll add that i would love to kick whoever writes the datasheets/appnotes (or who decided the policy on how to write those) for st parts square in the nuts

author: Rerouter
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 09:08:00 am
content: HID, yes the RFID ones,They wont even let you buy a sample unless you sign on to buy X in the next 2 years... which is the whole point of buying a sample...

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 09:17:41 am
content: Renesas is another one to avoid

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 11:28:26 am
content: Quote from: ebclr on July 21, 2016, 09:17:41 amPerhaps it is usefull to explain why ?

author: XFDDesign
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 04:35:47 pm
content: Jumping in on the Maxim bandwagon.They make some incredible parts.And do their best to not sell them to you.At Intel, there were managers who would go cube to cube looking for maxim databooks and then disposing of them, the supply problem was that bad.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 05:31:43 pm
content: Quote from: XFDDesign on July 21, 2016, 04:35:47 pmMaxim stories..I want more! i want more!

author: f5r5e5d
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 05:32:34 pm
content: is Maxim still that bad? - in the late 90's I designed in a sw C filter part, built a 1st run, it sold OK for our small niche productsbut when we wanted to build a 2nd batch, a year or so later, the parts were unavailable in distribution, with official 18-24 mo lead time

author: Ice-Tea
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 05:36:48 pm
content: At some point, I tried to get nVidia support on a project. Never got any. AMD was a bit better, albeit far from a breeze.

author: langwadt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 05:48:51 pm
content: Quote from: f5r5e5d on July 21, 2016, 05:32:34 pmI think if you buy something standard like max232 from them they are ok, but for the special partsit seems like they make pizza mask prototype run so you can get samples but unless some one ordersa million they never get produced in volume

author: jakeisprobably
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 06:22:46 pm
content: Quote from: JPortici on July 21, 2016, 09:01:56 amI have seen a few comments like this elsewhere as well. What is so bad about ST?I am very inexperienced, but have been trying to broaden my prospective as much as possible. I started a new datasheet manufacturers thread on here to help me get better acquainted with the full scope of the EE market.I have been researching ST off and on for 2 days in my spare time and they appear to have more information and informative assistance than any other manufacturer I have researched thus far. I've actually been overwhelmed by the sheer scope of it.Although just a minor note, I've also noticed their IC's always appear to be of high visual quality. Just comparing the 50 to 100 circuit boards I have in my parts salvage pile, ST's finish quality and consistency is outstanding if not the best. After seeing their direct sale microcontroller development environment, reasonable hobby level price point, and Dave's positive feedback on them, I'm practically a wannabe "fanboy" already. I think it's the only microcontroller brand out there that Dave hasn't condemned the user base to "Fanboy" status yet...I always wanted to lead a movement....But seriously what is the flip side of ST? What am I missing from what I can see on the surface?

author: Jeroen3
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 06:24:15 pm
content: Thanks for the warning about maxim. I was about to use some of their specialties for a long tern availability project. (10 years)Do they have public longevity dates and extendive pcn rapports such as NXP and ST? I can't find them.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 09:21:06 pm
content: The problem with ST? It comes when you have to actually work with it. a lot of information is implied or miswritten.Case in point, try to set up the SPI in an stm32f1. The set up procedure in the datasheet doesn't state that you need to tell the peripheral not to work in i2s mode... and nothing works. but if you look at the code generated by the peripheral library you'll see that another unmentioned register is set.or maybe it IS mentioned but not where it should be, in the set up procedure, where seone who already uses micro only care to look atThen you have code examples that doesn't compile for unknown errors (the fucking define has been defined)this morning, i have do design a datalogger addon for a product with a small memory chip so i say myself hey let's look at stm micros to do that so we can start fiddle with them for something. The rtc calendar datasheet never explicitly mention the lenght of the record for the date. It only says 'numbers are saved as BCD'. But how many for the year? and the sub second?Shit like that.. i think i'll use a pic (or maybe a psoc) for thatIt might be me, that i'm so picky because i grew up with microchip datasheets. Take any microchip datasheet and look at any register definition. Do the same in a stm datasheet. That will be pretty self evident (at least, for me, it is)

author: poorchava
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 09:26:53 pm
content: Maxim for Monstrous lead times and high prices.Microchip for crappy, inefficient and expensive (relatively) microcontroller ridden with bugs. Their non-mcu stuff is mostly ok though.Sent from my HTC One M8s using Tapatalk.

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 10:16:15 pm
content: Maxim can be ok in my experience if you deal directly with them and make large contracts.If you want to use their ics for small production runs (hundreds to thousands) you better make sure you have those ics in your factory stock, because indeed they might be hard to get.But is that not the case for all special ics, I mean if you want to run production you need to know the lead times and reserve/order in advance. Couple of years back with the tsunami I remember that japanese elcos had a 18 month lead time and some jelly bean parts were also unobtanium.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 10:21:29 pm
content: Spotted an odd one today,https://www.fairchildsemi.com/datasheets/FP/FPF2280.pdfNote the description "low off-state current <1uA".I don't like descriptions. Alright, let's check the tables. . . .huh...Tim

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2016, 11:22:49 pm
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on July 21, 2016, 10:21:29 pmIf your "huh" is at the Quiescent current of 58/100uA, perhaps you didn't spot the 'condition' column which has #EN=0V, i.e. not off-state. Or perhaps it's at the mention of it in what I tend to think of as the marketing claims section of the data sheet but its conspicuous absence from the more substantive section of the data sheet. One parameter that always seems to go this way is 1/f noise corner frequencies - lovely spec in the up front blurb but no mention in tables and no limits or ranges on the noise graph, if there is one.Generally I find Fairchild data sheets OK to good, but I have to agree that this isn't one of their finest. I'd hazard a guess that this is one of those parameters that they know the part will meet if some other parameter passes testing so they don't test it and if they don't test it they don't list it in the characteristics table.I have a general peeve with most data sheets that they don't make their conventions clear. e.g. The above example - does inclusion in the characteristics table, without a qualifying footnote, mean that a parameter is tested? There's a tendency to not be clear about what is tested, what is known only by characterization and what is "guaranteed" by design. Usually the figure that most matters to your design is the one that is most vaguely specified.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2016, 01:53:56 am
content: Yes indeedy -- they give I_Q active (\EN low), but not inactive (\EN high)!Tim

author: Jeroen3
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2016, 05:27:09 am
content: Quote from: JPortici on July 21, 2016, 09:21:06 pmYou have to shift standard identifiers in a CAN filter. Little details that were not written at first.

author: ovnr
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2016, 09:19:32 am
content: ST has had some datasheets with incorrect information (no, not microcontrollers), so I generally avoid their parts if they're not just second-source jellybean stuff.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2016, 09:35:59 am
content: Maxim because they are MaximAMD because their embedded stuff became NRND before releasedIntel because they strategically screw up everyting in my area of interest (I will buy it in my PC of course)Renesas, Qualcomm, Broadcom, Mediatek, Sony because NDA and MOQ, or they just dont make anything interestingInfineon, becasuse their microcontrollers suck big timeMicrochip most of the time, because the Errata breaks your design all the time. There are big exceptions with this one though.Anything made by Chinese companies.Cypress semiconductor because they are weirdAnd the list goes on. I think it is easier to say, who I like.TI, AD, Linear, ST, NXP, Fairchild, ON, Atmel, FTDI (yes), Freescale, IRF, IXYS.You can design almost everything with them. No need to go to the wild west.

author: bson
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 22, 2016, 10:40:13 am
content: Quote from: JPortici on July 21, 2016, 09:21:06 pmNXP hasmuchbetter documentation than ST. They also tend to have peripherals that are easier to work with from a software perspective. ST for example loves 16-bit timers, with no obvious means of chaining them, while NXP parts tend to use 32-bit timers with one or two 16-bit ones for special uses. If you've ever had to chain timers in an interrupt handler in a real-time system, say to implement a deadline scheduler, you know how much pain this introduces. Especially in Cortex parts where the FIR is no more. Other examples include weird-ass CSR flag management that's both poorly documented and very complicated to get water-tight except in the most naive designs. (Or accept the firmware might flake out and glitch once in a while.) TI documentation is also very good, though the peripherals are on par with ST, maybe slightly easier to work with but nothing like NXP. Good luck for example getting interrupt-driven bi-directional I2C to work on an MSP430... whoever designed that peripheral should be taken out back and shot.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2016, 10:55:35 am
content: Quote from: bson on July 22, 2016, 10:40:13 amYeah i know but I wrote that more to prove a point, if we'll ever have to do serious stuff with ARM cortex i already have decided that we'll use NXP, period.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2016, 02:54:33 pm
content: Quote from: blueskull on July 22, 2016, 09:49:51 amThey are absolutely lovely. Every time I feel privileged, when I design something with an LT part. Its like a small tingling feeling in the lower section and a huge feel of power, fidelity and confidence. Too many times I had the experience, when I replaced a TI or AD part with a LT one, and suddenly the system was in spec, no noise, working as intended, usually magnitudes smaller error than the datasheet specification.

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2016, 03:16:54 pm
content: The Linear tech stuff is very, very, nice, and sometimes that is more important then price.TI recently set me up good and proper, I lifted a design from a class D amp eval board, turns out the supplied BOM had snubbers that were wrong enough to desolder the resistors from the board due to the heat.Can I give an Honourable mention to whichever Herbert decided that rather then actually qualifying parts at a range of vales, they would do it at ONE, Ethernet phy vendors looking at you with respect to the bias current set resistor...I mean sure, sometimes something really, really needs to be precise, but usually a range of things will work and it would be nice to have that data as it sometimes saves a BOM line or three. If anything between 3k3 and 10k will work and meet spec then please do not specify 6.87k +-1%, that's just annoying.Regards, Dan.

author: aandrew
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2016, 04:16:57 pm
content: My shit list:Marvell - everything hiding behind NDAMany image sensor companies: Aptina, OnSemi, GlobeComm - under NDA and STILL impossible to useFreescale - every time they have a good part, auto industry wants it and zero stock/insane lead timeMicrochip - great devices, impossible part numberingTI for Processors - eleventy bajillion manuals and still can't find the info, forced use of IDEXilinx - I find their products *so much* harder to use than AlteraI'm sure there are more, but these are the big ones for me.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 23, 2016, 12:31:38 am
content: Quote from: aandrew on July 22, 2016, 04:16:57 pmOh man, twice I've put in a voltage regulator or comparator or something like that -- bought the wrong one, one letter difference and the PINS ARE BACKWARDS!Nobody else does this...(except the few small players they're probably competing with, that do reverse their pinouts).Moral of the story, read the datasheet intricately, making note of precisely the right part number. Similarly, inspect the component info / supplier link / BOM output / whatever for an exact match.(I regularly get questions from proto and production people, buying components -- sometimes it's trivial, like an NXP part lacking the comma-number at the end. There's nothing else it can be, so that's an easy resolution. Others enumerate packaging, like reel size -- that I couldn't give less than two shits about, personally! But some others, they put important things like packaging and pinout in those last letters/digits, and you need to be careful. That's why purchasing asks: they know it needs to be that precise.)Tim

author: XFDDesign
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 23, 2016, 04:24:59 am
content: In thinking about it as well, Pro engineering might not actually be the best basis.For all the brands we vocally choose not to use, wehaveto put up with a fair amount in a given day to get the job done. Every one of those frustrations should also count.And while it isn't an IC company, I have a blacklist on Agilent. They screwed up an MSO sale 11 years ago and I hold them to that failure. They can keep changing their name, I'll still reject buying anything from them.

author: mk_
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 23, 2016, 06:43:50 am
content: Quote from: jakeisprobably on July 20, 2016, 09:48:11 pmAnalog Devices "this part is not important enough to give you the support you asked for" AD8561 ultrafast comparator with some uncomplete specs, ADXL362 "oops, we haven`t tested this (specified) spec"TI: completly closed their personal mailsupport, also they offer parts that have lead time with 20 or more weeks - even in sample quantities (ISO5xxx series) and even Distributors don`t get the answers about shipping time (we had to wait 5 months for that simple answer.... looks like they go the MAXIM-way)Microchip: 2 erratas in 1 year are too much (processor, linear regulator(!!))Compared to that: NXP has great support on their uCs (LXP15xx, LPC43xx) and Linear Tech... well... at least here in EU they still know how to support a designer..