SX48BD-G - can't even give them away
Beau Schwabe
Posts: 6,566
Unfortunately this is what happens with an EOL (End Of Life Product), but with over 90 thousand still in stock, you should re-think your business model.
My suggestion would be to create a NEW product (or products) that incorporate the SX chip, but in Parallel, that SAME product could use a Propeller. It is very important to keep the functionality identical during this stage. This way you generate an outward flow for the SX and then when it is actually gone, you use the Propeller in it's place. Design the PCB board so that it will take either one chip or the other.
At least that way at your current "giveaway price" of $0.78 that's about $71 thousand dollars locked in assets you can't even benefit from.
The 40-Pin DIP Propeller suffers a similar fate but in reverse .... Out of Stock until September? If you expect to gain any traction, this is not the way to do it. This is not the first time this has happened either. If I was a manufacturer and was designing a new product, the availability issues would not paint a very confident picture, especially with something like Propeller2 on the end of a carrot stick ... After spending 20% of my life working at Parallax and working night and day on the Propeller2 I feel as though I have some say in this. Throw more effort into SMART R&D projects that use more of your product and inside know how than outsourcing to someone you have limited control over. Lay the efforts of R&D out in a way that they form building blocks for your current and future products.... i.e. You did this with the Basic Stamp I and II ... and avoid R&D that leads to singular products that are difficult to expand or build upon. They may be neat and cool, but don't contribute much to the bottom line and in fact can be detrimental to the bottom line.
My suggestion would be to create a NEW product (or products) that incorporate the SX chip, but in Parallel, that SAME product could use a Propeller. It is very important to keep the functionality identical during this stage. This way you generate an outward flow for the SX and then when it is actually gone, you use the Propeller in it's place. Design the PCB board so that it will take either one chip or the other.
At least that way at your current "giveaway price" of $0.78 that's about $71 thousand dollars locked in assets you can't even benefit from.
The 40-Pin DIP Propeller suffers a similar fate but in reverse .... Out of Stock until September? If you expect to gain any traction, this is not the way to do it. This is not the first time this has happened either. If I was a manufacturer and was designing a new product, the availability issues would not paint a very confident picture, especially with something like Propeller2 on the end of a carrot stick ... After spending 20% of my life working at Parallax and working night and day on the Propeller2 I feel as though I have some say in this. Throw more effort into SMART R&D projects that use more of your product and inside know how than outsourcing to someone you have limited control over. Lay the efforts of R&D out in a way that they form building blocks for your current and future products.... i.e. You did this with the Basic Stamp I and II ... and avoid R&D that leads to singular products that are difficult to expand or build upon. They may be neat and cool, but don't contribute much to the bottom line and in fact can be detrimental to the bottom line.
Comments
https://twitter.com/ParallaxInc
but this seems to be a silly thing to do, given the supply problems:
But that's just me.
There are Caveats to that as well.... From an industrial point of view and what might be easier to replace if something goes wrong, a DIP might make more sense, however depending on the circumstance for size and real-estate a smaller QFN might be better suited.
Since February, I have designed 6 boards used in industrial automation and there have been a mix between DIP and surface mount components. This coming from a manufacturing and design company that I work for now where we have our own pick and place machine and oven to deal with the surface mount components. Still in many cases a DIP is preferred.
But that's just me.
I thought I read the QFN package was EOL.
Am I remembering incorrectly or has Parallax changed their mind about this?
Digikey is out of both DIP and QFP but they have QFN chips in stock. Mouser doesn't have any QFN chips but they have both QFP.
I personally mainly use QFP chips. I really dislike QFN type packages since it's next to impossible to probe the leads on the chip once they've been soldered.
Edit: Can you guys see the "DIP" and "QFP" Mouser links? The links are blue but it's not obvious to me links had been added to the post. Don't answer the question about seeing the links here. Comment about the links (if you want to) in this thread.
I've never played with an SX (or a BASIC Stamp for that matter) so I have no idea of its capabilities. I'm guessing a PIC32 with MMBASIC on it would eat their lunches?
At least that way at your current "giveaway price" of $0.78 that's about $71 thousand dollars locked in assets you can't even benefit from.
This is not such a 'giveaway price' as many modern small MCUs are comfortably below that price - and they have UARTs and ADC and SPI and i2c ports, and better stacks & interrupt priority levels, and Calibrated Oscillators and Debug.
There is quite a lot the SX48 does not have, in modern MCU terms.
The wider Vcc aspect of SX48 is perhaps under promoted ?
The 40-Pin DIP Propeller suffers a similar fate but in reverse .... Out of Stock until September? If you expect to gain any traction, this is not the way to do it. This is not the first time this has happened either. If I was a manufacturer and was designing a new product, the availability issues would not paint a very confident picture, especially with something like Propeller2 on the end of a carrot stick ...
Yes, when you are single sourced, supply chain management needs extreme care.
I know vendors who used to carry many months of extra stock, because of this potential impact on customers.
How much this bites, will depend on how many customers hit line-stop levels.
I assure you Beau there's no sense in trying to create demand by making an SX product, providing more development tools, not to mention the opportunity cost of investing time here instead of forward-looking demands to stimulate demand. Price doesn't change the demand for these, either - they'll go at the same rate at ten cents each. Anyway, these remaining chips are an overshoot in our supply to promise support for design-in customers.
As for the DIP Propellers - unexpected demand. We will have them shortly and someone from Parallax will provide an update soon.
Ken Gracey
Contact me by email.
Ken Gracey
Robert at Robot Workshop may have some of these still avalable:
http://www.robotworkshop.com/robotworkshop/projects/parallax/sx48oem.pdf
EDIT: Looks like he may have some blank boards left:
http://forums.parallax.com/discussion/160515/sx-chip-sale#latest
I've never played with an SX (or a BASIC Stamp for that matter) so I have no idea of its capabilities. I'm guessing a PIC32 with MMBASIC on it would eat their lunches?
Andre may still have SX-Key programmers available:
http://www.xgamestation.com/view_product.php?id=25
Besides, itsn't the SX-48 used in some version of o the BS2?
SX-Basic works, but there is an Assembler as well.
I'm not sure. I think Gunther did it originally. I don't know if Parallax ows any of the IP.
Ken - "Only 71K left? They're finally going away!" ... No, that's the dollar amount you get by selling them at the current price ... you have over 90K of them left ... Attention to detail Sir
I wasn't asking for you to make an SX product that would require providing more development tools. That's dumb, you have people there at Parallax capable of developing on SX already. Instead to the user it would be like driving a car without knowing the engine details. All the customer would need to care about is getting from Point A to Point B.
Martin, we just took delivery of some SX-Keys from Guenther. They should appear on our web site shortly.
Whether I work for Parallax or not is irrelevant, now I am a customer.
Come on.... this is heading past provocative. My kids answer back all too often, and no doubt yours also on occasion. It's not comfortable, and the forum community doesn't need this. If you have an issue with supplies, maybe an E-mail to Parallax sales could be a better communication channel?
In any event, it would be nice to get the old-Beau back, with your positive engineering insights that offer so much inspiration.
We can have our today flow positive or negative; yesterday has already passed to ground.
Martin, we just took delivery of some SX-Keys from Guenther. They should appear on our web site shortly.
Hi Folks, the SX-Key store page has been re-activated for ordering; we have 28 in stock.
As an asset, this stock isn't a big deal. It's purpose is to insure product availability, and to hedge risk cheaply, which is a nice return aside from sales.
This post was not to bash, but more constructive criticism. There are potential lost sales here no matter how you slice it, but there is a way to move the product with relatively little effort and minimal cost impact. It's really just a way of thinking you need to adjust.
Here is a real scenario that I came across in my business where I saw a similar opportunity for Parallax.
We have 5,000 power supplies that have been discontinued from the manufacture, each power supply cost us $20 ... so essentially we have $100k locked in assets that can't be used. (Call this the SX) We have since sourced an alternative power supply that will work, but the footprint of the terminals are different between the power supplies. (Call this the Propeller or a capable PIC) ... do you see where I'm going?
It is against company policy to design a new product around a discontinued item (lost sales in SX) unless a new item can be sourced that is a drop-in replacement. Now, since the footprint is slightly different, the "new" PCB's can take either the old power supply or the new power supply allowing us to use assets that would otherwise be stagnate.