Identifying and Finding a Replacement for 6208A Chip: Suggestions Needed

This is not the XC6206, the datasheet gives a completely different gauge.

Sooner ME6208 (the manufacturer agrees) - but there is no certainty as the datasheet does not provide the method of marking.

Zielonka wrote:

I suggest you look at the XC6206 and ME6208 datasheet, this is the same system, but different manufacturers. The note specifies the method of marking. The chip in the photo is a 3.0V stabilizer.

It is possible that the colleague is right, but this discussion is unnecessary because the facts are inexorable:

trymer01 wrote:

This is not the XC6206, the datasheet gives a completely different gauge

just have a look at the datasheet - page 18 (for SOT-89 - completely different character layout, only 4 characters, and it would be a feature of 65xx or 66xx).
ME6208 - the datasheet does not specify the method of marking ! Let a friend rub his eyes!
Or please indicate in the datasheet where is it given? Because logic dictates that a friend should prove it.
So my colleague's guesses about the XC6206 and ME6208 are just guesses, not supported by documentation, which is required in this type of advice.

Zielonka wrote:

Nevertheless, the systems can be used interchangeably.

Buddy - please follow this "discussion":
To the question

guziec wrote:

What is this deal?

The colleague replies:

Zielonka wrote:

Probably: https://www.torexsemi.com/file/xc6206/XC6206.pdf

And this is not true - and I only deny it:

trymer01 wrote:

This is not the XC6206, the datasheet gives a completely different gauge.

A colleague is stubbornly discussing

Zielonka wrote:

I suggest you look at the XC6206 and ME6208 datasheet, this is the same system, but different manufacturers. The note specifies the method of marking.

Completely omitting the obvious facts (catalog note ME6208).
Why this discussion? - this is not the XC6206.
Alternatively, one can be used instead of the other, but not vice versa because they are not substitutes, they have different parameters. And this is another untruth proclaimed by a colleague on this topic. Is the accidental similarity of the sign (XC 62 06 and ME 62 08) is enough for a friend to say that it is the same system?
And finally

Zielonka wrote:

stamping of XC6208

?? - anyone talked about such a deal?
Chaos, disinformation and errors - that's all that my colleague has spawned here.
One last time to warn you - please stop these discussions that mislead other users. This is a technique, you should be precise in what statements they must also refer to documents, applications, etc. - advice on identification and substitutes must be "supported" and not on the "because I think so" principle.