[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: FCB1010 cutting corners

4 * COG sounds about right. Only the cost *impact* would have been 6$ (4 x 
the incremental cost).

EEPROMs of this type should actually be a bit cheaper even, sub 1$ in 10k 
type volumes.

However without knowing (from the product architecture) what *scales with* 
the size of this EEPROM, it's hard to estimate the total cost impact - but 
it unlikely to be limited to the component alone. More message storage 
implies more variables for the microprocessor to manage, implying possibly 
more RAM, larger code size (larger micro / code ROM), possibly more 
code (-->larger project scope so higher initial/organizational cost).

All of this would have eaten up margin / earn-back rate, given a viable 
market-tested price point, which is the mechanism by which to recoup 
development cost. Etc, etc.... Nic

>From: "Chris Roberts" <cpr@musetrap.com>
>Reply-To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
>To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
>Subject: Re: FCB1010 cutting corners
>Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:35:09 -0800
>I've heard it said that COG*4 is what it ends up costing the consumer, so
>maybe $12.00?
> >-- Original Message --
> >Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:18:07 -0800 (PST)
> >From: S V G <vsyevolod@yahoo.com>
> >Subject: Re: FCB1010 cutting corners
> >To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
> >Reply-To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
> >
> >
> >
> >     In response to the statement that Behringer could have used a $3.00
> >chip instead of a $1.50
> >chip...  I wonder what the actual cost to the consumer would be with a
> >increase in materials
> >cost?  Of course, $1.50 doesn't sound like much to concern yourself 
> >though if it did make a
> >$20 price increase at the end, this is a significant thing to factor in
> >the marketing point
> >of view anyway).  Does anyone have a sense of this?  Kim??? others???
> >
> >     Stephen
> >
> >
> ><<Behringer cut a lot of corners, most likely to maintain some overall
> >cost of the unit (which is probably the number one reason why the unit
> >so well, sadly).  They chose a serial EEPROM chip (the main non-volitile
> >storage chip - permanent memory) which is only 2Kbytes big.  This is a
> >chip. For about $3.00 they could have used a pin-for-pin chip from the
> >manufacturer which is 64Kbytes big (32 times the storage for only twice
> >price).  Note for all you tweakers that this is a tiny surface mount 
> >soldered directly on the board, so its not easy for a trained tech to
> >change, let alone a random user.>>
> >
> >
> >
> >__________________________________
> >Do you Yahoo!?
> >Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
> >http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
> >

Send a QuickGreet with MSN Messenger