I love Ti and Nationals products...but the support when you have very technicle questions is frustrating to call/text into tech support and wait for someone capabale of answering.
It is like an impedance mismatch wher the alot of enrgy is reflected instead of absorbed.
Or should I say knowledge impedance mismatch.
Now that I have gotten "plugged into the sales and FAE support locally I am much happer with the support.
But if you are just starting out in engineering or not a big company that pulls support to you it leavves a bad tast in your mouth.
Some metrics to use to measure how things are going a year from now:
-Number of engineers in silicon valley in 2011 and in 2012
-Number of new products introduced from 'National' divisions 2011 2012
-Amount of sales from 'National' products in 2011 and in 2012
Wouldn't it be something to actually get metrics like this, post merger, from technology companies? I'm not holding my breath...
I'm going to be a bit of an ombudsman here and say that both seaEE and Edmond have a point, it is a timely and well-done interview, and it is good PR for TI, in that it could have been a bit more 'hard hitting'.
That said, it is really good to catch up with Gregg at this juncture and see what's going on, and there is a lot to talk about, for example the advanced lab in Silicon Valley that's focused on advanced analog/mixed-signal circuits for low-power pattern recognition is really exciting, at a time when much of that functionality is being done using relatively high-power digital processing. I'm looking forward to seeing what comes out of that work, especially for facial/industrial data analytics.
Clearly, Gregg's picture is rosy, though as most of us know, any acquisition comes with issues that have to be worked through to get to that 'sweet spot' where all pistons are firing at once. I am pretty sure TI will work it out, but if there are any warts they'll come to the fore on discussions like this. In the meantime, and based on DKC's comment above, it seems like a clear win for 'long-suffering' NSC staff.
Looking forward to hearing more about this!
I worked at Nat Semi for a few years (under Brian Halla's leadership). All I can say is that the quality of the engineering staff was pretty good, but the middle and upper management was terrible. Halla should have cleaned house a couple of times and didn't, and Mcleod had no vision to speak of. So if TI handle it properly it should work out well for the long suffering staff of NSC as well as TI.
As a designer, and both a presenter and attendee of the technology sharing sessions, I've been able to share a level of detail not possible at external conferences. Also, I continue to make contacts with experts in other fields that I am currently integrating into my work. The expansive range of knowledge between the two companies is shared in a setting that encourages follow up discussions to blend this pool of knowledge into our work. This spirit of collaboration continues to be encouraged.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.