Changing the revision would have forced them to use new part/order numbers for the customers. I'm sure they didn't want something like that. On 29/01/2020 14:25, silverdr_at_wfmh.org.pl wrote: > >> On 2020-01-29, at 12:37, Frank Wolf <webmaster_at_frank-wolf.org> wrote: >> >> No... circuit seems to be identical. >> >> Though they changed the masks which was expensive they didn't want to >> introduce new part numbers. > No, but the revision would be expected to change, wouldn't it? It looks like a negligence to me. Might even be deliberate like with 8521s labeled as 6526s. >Received on 2020-05-30 00:29:05
Archive generated by hypermail 2.3.0.