Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 18 replies
  • Subscribers 2563 subscribers
  • Views 3425 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

What to do when a review doesn't go as planned

scottiebabe

I am currently having an issue reviewing the MAX77714 EVK where the 32k XO isn't running. Its not really a hardware issue as I can get the XO to run just with the capacitance of 2 10x scope probes. The issue has to do with configuring the PMIC to enable its on die load capacitors for the 32k oscillator.

 

I can't even try to enable the load capacitors because the evaluation software doesn't have the correct register map for the PMIC. The evaluation tool locates the 32KLOAD bitfield in register 0x31:

image

 

When actually the bitfield is in register 0x30 (from the datasheet: https://datasheets.maximintegrated.com/en/ds/MAX77714.pdf ):

image

 

Actually as I write this, even if the 32KLoad register was addressed correctly in the evaluation software it is readonly so I still wouldn't be able to change it. So why isn't it booting with a value of 0b00 instead of 0b10? Wrong OTP config?

 

So, my questions is what do reviewers typically do in this situation?I don't want to write a scathing review over something so silly.

 

I suppose I will start by seeing if maxim will confirm the issue with the EVK and see if they can provide a software fix or want to send new hardware.

 

One of the uncertainties I had with my last review was determining if I am reviewing the silicon product or the evaluation platform. In this case, am I reviewing the MAX77714 or the EVK and software for the MAX77714? Or, a bit a both? Or, is it up to the reviewer?

 

Thanks

Parents

  • Like many other roadtesters and yourself, I too have run into issues with development boards before. Progress is very slow and each step seems to be a struggle - but keep trying. Use the manufacturer's forums and log a question early (as some take a while to gather useful replies) - perhaps drop a line to state you are evaluating this product for another company. Posting into E14 as well may get useful responses from your fellow roadtesters - after all you are testing the same product and not in a competition against each other - or others that have tested similar technologies may also reply helpfully.

     

    If you keep trying but get no where then I believe that is still useful in your final roadtest review. I've seen a few roadtests where people have obviously given up far too early which were disappointing to read and other roadtests that fail but it is obvious much effort was expended in trying to get the system working. If I were a manufacturer I'd find it useful feedback from end users on what issues they had. Maybe they decide to review their online beginners tutorials? Maybe a driver needs reworking?

     

    If your report end up like that and later you become aware of the steps needed to progress, even after the roadtest period, I believe it is nice to do a follow up blog linked from the original roadtest.

     

    ...and good luck :-)

  • in reply to 14rhb

      wrote:

     

    If you keep trying but get no where then I believe that is still useful in your final roadtest review.... If I were a manufacturer I'd find it useful feedback from end users on what issues they had. Maybe they decide to review their online beginners tutorials? Maybe a driver needs reworking?

     

    Agreed...  Unfortunately, on one of my RoadTests, the administrator of the technical forum responded promptly to my issue and stated he was forwarding it to the appropriate people but I never got a technical response even after a reminder and several months.  I then contacted Randall for assistance and got a sales person's response about sorrow for the issue and they would look into it. I decided to publish after waiting a while and offered to rewrite the RoadTest if they addressed the issues.  But I never got a technical response other than the forum administrator finally saying they had other pressing issues.  The product is no longer being sold.  The manufacturer has other well-regarded products.  About all you can do is document the issues and rate them fairly whether bad or good.

Reply
  • in reply to 14rhb

      wrote:

     

    If you keep trying but get no where then I believe that is still useful in your final roadtest review.... If I were a manufacturer I'd find it useful feedback from end users on what issues they had. Maybe they decide to review their online beginners tutorials? Maybe a driver needs reworking?

     

    Agreed...  Unfortunately, on one of my RoadTests, the administrator of the technical forum responded promptly to my issue and stated he was forwarding it to the appropriate people but I never got a technical response even after a reminder and several months.  I then contacted Randall for assistance and got a sales person's response about sorrow for the issue and they would look into it. I decided to publish after waiting a while and offered to rewrite the RoadTest if they addressed the issues.  But I never got a technical response other than the forum administrator finally saying they had other pressing issues.  The product is no longer being sold.  The manufacturer has other well-regarded products.  About all you can do is document the issues and rate them fairly whether bad or good.

Children
  • in reply to fmilburn

    I've found the same where a 'less mature' product is very soon superceded; once I recall before I'd even finished roadtesting it! The urgency of getting a roadtest completed in the allocated time period is no different to a manufacturer who may have bought this board to plug a new quick-turnaround development opportunity. Good manufacturer assistance for both cases is highly valued, and any manufacturer that can provide that level of support will outshine the others.