In message <c237bb41.52d6f%[email protected]>, dated Tue, 3 Apr 2007, Ken Javor <[email protected]> writes:
>If the smart battery is a safety issue, then the smart battery fit >should be different (by industry standard) than a dumb battery >replacement, so that the consumer is unable to accidentally or even >intentionally replace the battery incorrectly. It doesn't work; the Sum Yung Gais just copy the shape, and if one company is successfully ousted for patent or design infringement, another starts up 24 hours later. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________
