Whoops..sent this only privately to Paul.  Microchip won't see it there.

Paul B. Webster VK2BZC wrote:
>
> Matt Bonner wrote:
>
> > One thing to watch out for: the JW devices are _rated_ to 125,
> > but not _tested_ at 125.  This is not made clear in the specs.
>
>   This is a funny distinction.  Surely JW devices come from the same
> batches as OTPs?  Now, how do they test devices?  You can't test an OTP
> device by programming it and running a program, can you?  Only by
> sampling, because then you've cooked it.  Unless you "sample" test by
> making QTP (note: I didn't say OTP that time!) devices for orders and
> testing them, but then you have to know what the program is supposed to
> do to see whether it is actually working or not.
>
>   What am I rambling about?  Just seems to me that only JW devices could
> be fully tested and characterised prior to shipment so whatever testing
> OTPs get, it must be to a lesser spec anyway.  Have I missed something?
>
I was told this by a MChip FAE at a MChip seminar (after using the JW
device at high temp for a couple of years).  My first thought was that
he hadn't recovered from the sixties.  I guess what the specs all come
down to is butt-covering - but to be fair, maybe what he meant was that
the screening procedures are different for JWs.  What he did do,
however, was to challenge me to find _anywhere_ in the data book that
said the JW was spec'ed to 125.  He said that you have to go to an
E-suffix part for that.

Microchip, can you clarify this?  Brian Boles...I know you're watching.

--Matt