Radio Shack has officially bit the dust, which leaves the eBook a minor problem. Historically we have used the Shack as a reference for parts. I will probably clean this up over the next year.

Do we want to add a different vendor for parts, or let readers fend for themselves? I like BG Micro,because they are local to me, but their is a possible issue with favoritism.

 

AAC is worldwide. It would be best to not specify a vendor.

 

A valid point, one I had though of. The other side is those beginners wondering what parts to get, and where.

 

How about somebody like Premier Farnell.

They trade in over 100 countries worldwide. A little expensive and not for everyone but their parts descriptions are good and usually accompanied with a data sheet to at least point members in the right direction.

 

Hello,

Digikey and Mouser also deliver to a lot of countries, like Farnell/Newark.
You could try to list the partnumbers for all three companies.

Bertus

 

Hello,

Digikey and Mouser also deliver to a lot of countries, like Farnell/Newark.
You could try to list the partnumbers for all three companies.

Bertus

I thought of that but that makes it a lot of work for the editor.
All three companies provide useful links to manufacturers' data sheets.
Can we narrow it down to one company? Digikey, Mouser, Newark.

 

I would think that listing a manufacturer's part number should be sufficient -- the person writing that section would just be expected to identify the manufacturer and their part number or, in some cases, just a common part number for a broadly manufactured class of part. This would especially be the case if there was a page in the E-book near the beginning of the appropriate section that talked briefly about the major options available in different parts of the world (which would be something that would be easily maintained as major suppliers come and go) and also a paragraph or two on how to look for part numbers starting with a specific part number from a specific manufacturer.

 

I would think that listing a manufacturer's part number should be sufficient -- the person writing that section would just be expected to identify the manufacturer and their part number or, in some cases, just a common part number for a broadly manufactured class of part. This would especially be the case if there was a page in the E-book near the beginning of the appropriate section that talked briefly about the major options available in different parts of the world (which would be something that would be easily maintained as major suppliers come and go) and also a paragraph or two on how to look for part numbers starting with a specific part number from a specific manufacturer.

That sounds like the most sensible. I use Digikey, but if you were to take a poll (theoretically), you'd find no clear cut leader, IMHO.

 

Also, listing a vendor's part number (and Vendor ID, of course) is beneficial even if that vendor doesn't sell to that part of the world. As long as the vendor has a quality online presence, anyone interested in obtaining that part can use that vendor's website as the starting point for their search of information that they can then turn to whoever they can get parts from in their part of the world.

 

Hello,

We could give part names and values of components.
We could give the three companies as reliable suppliers (without giving any part numbers of the suppliers).
(sometimes I noticed that part numbers at suppliers can change).

Bertus

 

A thought, we could add an appendix with the majority of the components listed along with vendors.

We need to get Dennis on board with this. It is going to be a heck of a lot of work.

 

To avoid giving yourself a lot of extra work, simply list the manufacturer's part number. Let Google do the rest.

 

We already have a resource on the forum to help in selecting components. It includes links to cross-reference resources: Components Selection Guide,

AFAIK, what we are missing is a supplier guide.

 

I cannot find the article today but, I think it was from popular electronics. It was about why, out of all of the transistor models out there, that the 2N3055, 2N3904, and of so many audio amps, the LM386 became so popular for DIY projects. Their claim was that RadioShack made these popular.

I would claim that RadioShack picked them because they were popular in production devices. As such, they were made in huge volume and the lowest cost devices for RadioShack to stock on their shelves.

Anyhow, I think the owner of the site should talk to a few big distributors and post and find out who will pay for the recommendation (exclusive or not). This site, with all the guests passing through, should have some value to them. It is just not practical to make a recommendation to one without expecting something back. This site must have costs for web servers and software that needs to be covered.

Another option is that Jameco lets people specify a part list (professors for example) and the customer just asks for 1 kit. Jameco will compile it and send it (at a discount vs. The individual parts I think).

They will also arrange PCB etching to go with the kits and pay a commission to the kit 'designer'.

 

It's hard to say what the driver was. How many people spec parts for products based on a preference for using the parts that they are familiar with? So there is an aspect of it that is a self-reinforcing positive feedback loop.

 

True enough. When I started I was going to use the Shack exclusively, but soon realized that wasn't going to work.