🚀 go-pugleaf

I posted a query a while ago asking if anyone in this newsgroup
was interested in signal integrity & I got a few responses that
fell into 2 catagories:
1) "I know nothing about it but am interested, please tell me."
2) Professionals who asked "What do you have in mind?"

For those who want some introductory info on the subject, sometime in
the next month I will post a list of recommended papers on the topic, 
and maybe a few books.

To the professionals:
My philosophy is that signal integrity does not so much contribute to
profits as shields the company from financial loses due to noise
problems.  I believe that the companies benefit from small, lean
engineering groups in signal integrity & that the signal integrity
tasks are best dealt with by professionals that focus on the topic.

With my previous employer I had to do mechanical design, thermal 
design & signal integrity (SI), so I know it is not always possible to 
focus on SI. With my new employer I do get to focus on SI.  It has been
my experience that I profit from sharing ideas with other professionals
in SI.  I am new to newsgroups & nets like this & am curious about the 
potential for the beneficial sharing of information.  If your engineering
group is small then it can be beneficial to have someone outside the 
company to talk with.

After all, crosstalk & reflections have been known for over 20 years, but
there are still a lot of unresolved issues/problems in this field.

Also, what about a grassroots movement to change some of the hardware
standards to make our life a little easier?  If some of the integrated
circuits were designed differently, we could get rid of some termination
resistors.  But that would require agreement on the circuit board
impedance.  Now, the way changes like this are made is by committees of 
engineers who have the budget & time to travel to committee meetings.
Do we have to spend money to improve our lot?  Can we organize through
the nets?

This is what I had in mind.

Bob Canright
canright@convex.com