30-pin SIMMS

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Sun Feb 28 11:14:16 1999

Originally, the SIPP was considered much more reliable than the SIMM. The
SIMM sockets were a new product at that time and failure rates were pretty
high, and it was easy to package a system more densely with SIPPs than with
SIMM's. It was easy to bend the pins on the SIPP's, though, and retailers
soon tired of having to hand-hold customers whose problems were simply bent
pins, as, once bent, the pins tended to bend again and again until they
were broken and repair was improbably if at all possible. Consequently,
SIMMs, though less reliable but easier to install, and less likely, in
either event, to sustain long-term damage took over the market.
Ultimately, socket problems were defeated by persistence, educating the
user public, and improved socketing technology.

Dick

----------
> From: Max Eskin <max82_at_surfree.com>
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
> Subject: Re: 30-pin SIMMS
> Date: Saturday, February 27, 1999 9:10 PM
>
> On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, Tony Duell wrote:
> >A SIPP is exactly a SIMM with pins soldered on - even the pinouts are
the
> >same. And thus SIPPs suffer from bent pins, just like individual chips
> >do. That's why they went out of fashion.
>
> But why did anyone attach the pins in the first place?
>
> --Max Eskin (max82_at_surfree.com)
Received on Sun Feb 28 1999 - 11:14:16 GMT