About Mike

Mike Buetow is president of the Printed Circuit Engineering Association (pcea.net). He previously was editor-in-chief of Circuits Assembly magazine, the leading publication for electronics manufacturing, and PCD&F, the leading publication for printed circuit design and fabrication. He spent 21 years as vice president and editorial director of UP Media Group, for which he oversaw all editorial and production aspects. He has more than 30 years' experience in the electronics industry, including six years at IPC, an electronics trade association, at which he was a technical projects manager and communications director. He has also held editorial positions at SMT Magazine, community newspapers and in book publishing. He is a graduate of the University of Illinois. Follow Mike on Twitter: @mikebuetow

‘Board Talk’

Today we launched Board Talk, the bulletin board for the Printed Circuit Board industry, a service brought to you by UP Media Group, Printed Circuit Design & Fab and CIRCUITS ASSEMBLY magazines.

The bulletin board — the URL is www.theprintedcircuitboard.com — is open to anyone in the industry. We’ve set up categories for PCB design, fabrication, assembly, market data, trade shows and press releases. Members are invited to create their own topics (threads) for discussing anything industry related that they have on their mind.

We also are happy to announce an agreement with the IPC Designers Council to offer Board Talk as a communications center for news, announcements and meetings, plus information on the Designers Certification program.

Please check it out!

Why France Publishers are Putting the Screws to Google

More than any other single factor, Google changed the model for publishing, and now some countries are fighting back.

France is threatening legislation that would force Google to pay publishers for indexing their stories on Google News. In response, Google said it would stop indexing stories from French publishers if such legislation is passed.

This is the latest in a string of volleys against the world’s largest search engine, which has long sought ways to leverage its advantage in one area (search) to also dominate another (advertising). In Brazil, for example, the nation’s publishers have decided to opt out of Google’s index, rationalizing that the dubious promise of higher traffic wasn’t worth the loss of a captive market.

Most anti-trust courts have found such behavior illegal; Google thus far has managed to skirt any real trouble, thanks in part to the presence of Yahoo and Microsoft’s Bing. But Google aggregates so much content, and circumvents so many paywalls, it’s difficult to prove that there’s fair value to a given participant.

This is something to watch as most publishers, including UP Media, have been batted around like a mouse in a cat’s clutches Google, and few of us will feel much empathy if the search giant were to be forced to play by the rules.

 

 

Why Not Nick?

Nick Martin, the founder and, until last week, CEO of Altium, is fighting back against the board that tossed him out.

But the real question isn’t whether he will regain his spot atop the CAD tool developer. It’s why the board saw fit to relieve him of his duties in the first place.

Some contend privately that at least one board member wants to sell the company but that Martin, who is the company’s largest shareholder, has been reluctant to go along. If so, pushing him out would mean removing, in part, one big barrier. For its part, the board has publicly stated that the decision to leave was Martin’s — something he vehemently contests, and which seems unlikely on its surface — and that the company has not returned the type of shareholder value the board seeks.

So while it’s true the move to Shanghai coincided with an improved bottom line and a higher share price, it’s also true the stock hasn’t topped $1 in years (chart — the top line = $1; the current price is about 80 cents). No one is getting rich owning Altium right now. If the board is getting antsy, it’s understandable. Whether that merits replacing  Altium’s answer to Steve Jobs — a design visionary who, according to many we’ve spoken with, has always put the technology first — is for the historians to determine.

 

SMTAI: Mixed Blessings

The biggest news from SMTAI this year actually came before the exhibition even began.

Just moments after the conclusion of a terrific and touching keynote presentation, newly elected SMTA president Bill Barthel announced that IPC would locate its semiannual technical committee meetings at SMTAI next year, effectively bringing to an end (at least for now) the annual (and competing) IPC Midwest show.

There was notable relief among exhibitors when they learned the news. While SMTAI is the larger show, with roughly twice the booths and a greater number of attendees, and is generally recognized for having a much stronger technical conference, the difference hasn’t been so clear-cut as to make the decision as to which show to attend a slam-dunk. Many of those on the show floor, including quite a few conference speakers, welcomed the news as a time-saver and cost-cutter. A few exhibitors did express concern over the location, adding that the Orlando site of this year’s show is the only electronics manufacturing event of any size in the Southeast US. The deal is agreed to but not yet signed, and covers only 2013, as far as we’ve been told. Yet it’s a move of enough significance that it could make SMTAI the best technical event for electronics assembly in North America. (Disclosure: I’m on the technical conference program committee.)

Speaking of the conference, the program was well attended. I moderated a panel looking at what we’ve learned (and what we still need to figure out) about lead-free solders and materials, and as we have for the past umpteen years, co-chaired the EMS session with Sue Mucha. Some of the posters were excellent, with one from Matt Kelly of IBM underscoring the importance of performing DfM as early as possible in the product conception process.

The keynoter, NASA’s Brooks Kimmel, was an inspired choice, offering a very personal 45-minute presentation relating how the agency’s technology benefits not just the space program but also has made its way into everyday life.

Many exhibitors noted the two-day show appeared slower than last couple years. A few said they had busy spurts, with a couple saying the first day was consistently busy. That was disappointing, as insofar as I could tell, there were more machines on the floor than ever, and several companies set up a full package-on-package (PoP) assembv line featuring equipment and materials by Juki, IBL Bare Board Group and others.

Aisles were spaced pretty tight, but still it was not unusual to look up and down and not see more than a handful of attendees walking around. I know the folks at SMTA pulled out all the stops to market the show, and I am left to wonder whether Orlando is a good venue for this type of show. That said, the registration and execution of the event were flawless.

Overheard:

Some grumbling about the new IPC SIR test, which one distinguished engineer went so far as to refer to as “garbage.” A new B-52 test coupon is being studied.

DEK general manager Brian Smith said business has picked up for them in the last month.

Those looking for a test lab to investigate possible counterfeit components might consider GD4 Test Services in Austin, TX.

Semblant has two new machines coming out that handle mid- and lower-volume surface finishing.

ASM (Siplace) president Jeff Timms acknowledged a “definite” onshoring trend, and added that they also see OEMs bringing production back in-house from EMS companies in Asia. He was very bullish on ASM’s management, and touted the company’s new operation in Manaus, Brazil, which will be fully operational in November.

XOS has become the latest company to compete in the XRF arena, using their equipment to spot counterfeit components.

 

US Manufacturing Needs a Brand Makeover

When I was growing up, it seemed like everyone believed that United States manufacturers made the greatest products in the world. From our home appliances to our cars, we all chose Made in America products for their quality and their value. No other country put as much pride, innovation, and workmanship into their design, and looking elsewhere wasn’t even an option.

US manufacturing was a flagship of our economy, and nothing could knock it from its pedestal — or so we thought.

Of course, the sentiment has changed since then as the economy has grown more global, and countries like China compete on price. But the pendulum is swinging back — or should I say forward — as Made in America quality once again becomes a status symbol for consumers and a competitive advantage for manufacturers here at home.

My company recently conducted its annual Industry Market Barometer survey of U.S. manufacturers on the growth and outlook of the industrial sector as well as strategies companies are employing to get there. The findings confirm this transformation.

In the end, we heard from more than 1,600 manufacturers, and nearly eight out of 10 of them indicated that they expect growth this year. By standing behind their Made in America quality, these manufacturers are even taking back business from the Chinese. They’re borrowing a page from the playbook of The Rodon Group of Hatfield, PA, an injection molder of small plastic parts.

A few years ago, when they sensed Chinese competitors gaining ground, Rodon launched an online “Cheaper than China” campaign to focus on their American manufacturing values. Within two years, their sales jumped more than 30%. These companies never lost sight of the glory of American manufacturing, and now the world is coming to share their point of view.

Our research shows that U.S. manufacturers are entering new markets, expanding into new regions, and increasing their exports. With their gears fully in motion, American companies are looking to hire more workers to meet new market demand. And that’s where this engine of economic growth suddenly starts to sputter.

Our research supports what we are all seeing every day: Despite an unemployment rate of close to 8%, manufacturing jobs are going unfilled. Nearly half of our respondents want to bring in line workers, skilled trade workers and engineers. But the people who are qualified for these jobs are either untrained or uninterested. This is a symptom of a larger problem. Despite the resurging interest in U.S. products, American manufacturing is in need of a brand makeover.

While Americans are proud of the quality of our products, many have a far different perception of manufacturing jobs. They see manufacturing as “dead,” lacking opportunities or challenges, and even as dirty or “undesirable” work. They’re blind to the reality that today’s manufacturing jobs blend design with technology and robotics, and many pay extremely well. With shop classes disappearing and families and educators pushing students of all abilities toward a bachelor’s degree, however, younger generations have no opportunity to be exposed to the rewards of a manufacturing career.

Respondents to our survey are vocal about this issue. They stress the importance of STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) curricula, along with support for technical and vocational schools. One of them notes that we must “get the message out that manufacturing isn’t dead in the US; it has just gone high-tech.”

It’s gratifying to hear from individuals like Tracy Tenpenny, vice president of sales and marketing with Tailored Label Products (TLP) in Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin. Tracy advocated for TLP’s sponsorship of a program called Second Chance Partners, which helps high school students to gain manufacturing skills. Many of these students come from challenging backgrounds, and they are at risk of not finishing high school. Through Second Chance, they continue working toward their diplomas while beginning to learn a trade. TLP actually installed a classroom at their plant so that these students can continue their academics there for two hours a day. The rest of the time, they are working at TLP and other area manufacturers. TLP is not only introducing them to a new profession; the company has hired two of these students.

Rodon, too, has innovated to develop a solution. The company formed a consortium of about 50 local manufacturers. Together, these firms have approached two-year colleges and trade schools in their area, asking them to send graduates their way. Not only does this help Rodon and neighboring companies to grow; it’s a competitive advantage for the schools, who are able to demonstrate a return on their training. In addition, consortium members are presenting at middle schools and high schools to ignite students’ interest in manufacturing.

These are just two of many examples of manufacturers who are taking the initiative to help their industry make a comeback. Families, educators, associations, government, and businesses are all stepping up. We were gratified to endorse National Manufacturing Day, another wonderful example, with manufacturers opening their doors to students and their families, and associations offering insights and resources to aspiring and current manufacturers alike.

US manufacturers, after all, have a passion for their industry. Eight out of 10 of those we surveyed would choose their industries all over again, and they want to share their enthusiasm with the next generation. Great things are possible when bright, ambitious young people have the opportunity to apply skills and knowledge to real-world applications, and contribute meaningfully to the growth of a company, a sector – and ultimately the economic vitality of our nation. To engage this new generation, we must restore — and elevate — the US manufacturing brand.

Eileen Markowitz is president of Thomas Industrial Network.

SMTAI-IPC Midwest Pact a Long Time Coming

John Mitchell is putting his money where his mouth is.

As the new IPC president, installed just this spring, had made clear in multiple conversations we’ve had, he takes adding value for customers seriously, and he looks for ways various associations can coalesce.

That vision became reality yesterday when Mitchell took to the dais at the SMTA International trade show to announce the two groups would colocate their respective fall shows starting in 2013.

Under terms of the agreement, which remains to be signed, IPC will hold its semiannual standards committee meetings at the SMTAI show in Ft. Worth, TX, next October. IPC will retain its IPC Midwest brand, but the decision effectively tables, for now at least, the Chicago area trade show IPC has sponsored for the past several years.

It’s a welcome change from the past decade, during which something of a Cold War formed between the two dominant North American industry electronics trade groups as each competed for the minds (and bodies) of assembly engineers.

While acknowledging that some wrinkles could still remain, most of the folks we spoke with in Orlando this week are supportive of the move. Many IPC committee members are also regular presenters at the much-lauded SMTAI technical conference, and this allows them to reduce their fall travel. Moreover, it will cut costs for some exhibitors that have tried to pull double duty in the past.

It says here SMTA, which has been burned by colocation arrangements in the past, deserves a mountain of credit for putting aside any bad feelings for the good of its members. And IPC, in particular Mitchell, should be lauded for recognizing that success is not a zero-sum game, and that win-win relationships are possible even among trade associations.

CAD Tool Survey

PRINTED CIRCUIT DESIGN & FAB is undertaking a survey of how printed circuit board designers, design engineers and other layout specialists use and think about various CAD tools. Results will be published in an upcoming issue of PCD&F. Please be assured that the data collected are revealed only in the aggregate. No individual data will be revealed.

The survey will take about 3 minutes to complete. Please click below to begin: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/NC35KK8

Because this is a survey, not a poll, the audience being surveyed is not selected or controlled. In short, the more responses we receive, the more representative the results will be. So feel free to share this link with other designers.

If you have any questions, please contact me at [email protected]. Thanks!

Bragging Rights

I want to call attention today to a great new contest for designers being run by Sunstone Circuits.

The contest works like this: From now until Dec. 16, design engineers can share their PCB-related design success stories online at Sunstone’s website.

Friends and others to the site can vote for the best project. All entrants and voters are entered into a sweepstakes to win a series of prizes, ranging from gift cards to an iPad.

It’s a great way for designers talk (and yes, perhaps, brag) a bit about what they do. And while Sunstone certainly benefits from the exposure, I’m glad to see a company taking steps to highlight the remarkable things designers can do.

‘The Magic One’

It was 50 years ago today when a then 33-year-old scientist at General Electric invented the first practical visible-spectrum light-emitting diode, a device that GE colleagues at the time called “the magic one” because its light, unlike infrared lasers, was visible to the human eye.

Dr. Nick Holonyak, Jr. could not have known then the door he was opening, but today LEDs are not only the foundation of a massive government-driven push to eliminate the popular (but higher energy consuming) incandescent, but also a potentially enormous market for the manufacturers of LED and driver printed circuit boards at the core of LEDs.

 

LEDs contain metal or graphite core bare boards, generally with lead-free solder paste. They are not easy to rework, on account of their heat-sinking core. The LED components are typically surface-mounted, although some versions have radial-leaded parts, explains Scott Mauldin of LEDnovation, an OEM of residential and industrial LED lighting.

Many PCB and EMS companies have an opportunity to play in this market today, thanks to one man’s bright idea 50 years ago. We owe Holonyak a big round of applause.

Image courtesy Scott Mauldin, LEDnovation

What Should HP Do?

The news out of Palo Alto isn’t good.

Now, that won’t exactly come as a shock to most observers, as HP has been flat for some time. But CEO Meg Whitman yesterday acknowledged that the pain will intensify before the patient recovers, telling analysts that revenues would fall 11 to 13% over the next fiscal year.


In real dollars, that’s a drop of up to $16.5 billion, roughly the size of Jabil Circuit, or, the companies ranked No. 15 to 50 on the CIRCUITS ASSEMBLY Top 50.

Worse, Whitman said not to expect a turnaround before 2016.

Give Whitman credit for honesty, although keep in mind that, by setting the bar low, she raises the prospects for future knighthood should HP’s recovery come faster.

But what Whitman did not disclose is what, exactly, HP’s prescription for saving itself is. In all likelihood, that strategy will focus on paring of the company’s core product lines — servers, PCs and printer. Perhaps it will follow IBM’s lead and sell or spin off its PC unit, an idea that the company itself has floated in the past.

It says here, however, the company HP should be emulating is Apple. HP once was as respected as any business in the tech industry, admired for its stable and forward-thinking leadership, its commitment to research and development, and a manufacturer of the top rank. Today, that path is more remembrance than reality. The company has long since moved away from its manufacturing roots, outsourcing almost anything it could. (Foxconn has been a major beneficiary.) What HP, along with Dell and many of the other big PC makers, is learning the hard way is, you give away the family jewels at your own peril. By offloading its fixed assets — and that includes its people — HP also gave away its competitive advantage. It’s become a parody of itself, a business confined to imitation, not innovation. Sure, HP has to retool, but it should do so by going back to its roots, much like Apple did when Steve Jobs was welcomed back after 11 years wandering the desert.

“Invent” was a favorite marketing campaign of HP. The company should practice what it preaches, bring design and manufacturing back in-house, and strive to be the technology leader it once was. It can be done. But HP has to be committed to the task.