Searching \ for '[PIC] noppp for 16F84' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/microchip/devices.htm?key=16F
Search entire site for: 'noppp for 16F84'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[PIC] noppp for 16F84'
2002\07\13@020855 by Jay Jacobs

flavicon
face
First time poster, short-to-mid time reader and geez you guys sure talk a
lot!

After careful consideration and trying to stretch the pennies I've
gathered, I decided to build the noppp programmer and pick up a few
16F84's to learn on.

I built the noppp circuit on a bread board, just to see if it worked well
enough for me to solder it together and box it up proper.

The problem:
 noppp.exe (run under win98 in dos window) won't see the circuit.
 becuase it said that may happen, I tried to program, but it won't
program the pic. saying "Failed at 0000: Expecting 3000, found 3FFF."

What I did:
 Verified and reverified my parts and placements (I'm doing "version 2"
of the noppp schematic).
 I'm using the 1N34 diodes (not the alternatives).
 I've run through the noppp "Test" suite in the software and everything
came out perfectly within spec.
 I'm using a weird ribbon cable/db25 cable running to a db25 connector I
hand soldered, these are probably the first things I'd replace if I didn't
have piclist to run to.  The cable is a flat ribbon cable and is almost 3'
long on one side and about 8" on the other (three connectors like an IDE
cable, but db25).  I tried both ends (noppp connected to middle connector
in both)

My big questions:
 Would the noppp tests return the right values in the tests if the cable
or parrallel port weren't working at all?  (just a realty check)
 Could I have fried the pic by leaving it in the circuit while powering
it up the first time?
 Is is bad to just leave it in there? (I took it out to test and to see
if following directions would help programming it)
 What steps should I take next?
 while I'm at it, How can I get an extra few hours in my day to play with
this stuff?

I'm using a pentium 266 runing win98, it's got two db25 ports on the back,
I'm not sure which is which, but one is male and one is female, which is
normally the parallel port? (female by com port, male on a card by ps2
mouse port -- I've been using the female becuase it's the only cable I
had.)

 Other then that, I'm just trying to load up the bincnt.asm application
from cheapic to see if I can make some LED's flash, so there shouldn't be
anything funny about that, and I use mplab's IDE to turn it into hex.

As far as I can tell, it's either the parallel port and I could drag out a
printer to see if that's working, or it's the cable.  Other slim
possibilites are bad db25 connector or a bad pic, but it's fresh from
jameco on thursday.

Thanks for the help,

Jay Jacobs

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\13@030558 by Pic Dude

flavicon
face
When I first started with PICs about 4 months ago, I
also built a NoPPP as it seemed so much simpler, and
I did not have a 7407 (f/the popular Tait programmer)
laying around.  But it did not work.  I tried some
mild debugging, to no avail, but then just went for
the Tait, which worked very well.  The 7407 and the
transistors are about $1 (total), and a one-chip
programmer should not be a concern for someone who
intends to get into microcontrollers.

For the same reasoning, I'd recommend picking up the
PIC16F84 even though you're about to be flooded with
emails preaching the extra functionality and lower
cost of its predecessor, the PIC16F628.  Yes, it
does more, and yes, it costs less, and yes, the 16F84
is obsolete, so you can't even get it in some places
anymore.  But for your first circuit or 2, use the
chip that comes with gobs and gobs of support all
over the web.

Now I'll go put on the armor and wait for the 16F628
advocates to wake up... :-)

Cheers,
-Neil.




{Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@031324 by Moreton

flavicon
face
I suspect the real reason for the 16F84's popularity is that the
donwloadable demo of the Hitech 'C' compiler supports the 'F84 and
nothing else!  Seems to me that if you want free C for the PIC, you have
to use the 16F84?

BTW, my favourite PIC now is the 18F452, maybe this will become the new
16F877?

PM


{Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@044026 by Michael Pettersson

flavicon
face
> I suspect the real reason for the 16F84's popularity is that the
> donwloadable demo of the Hitech 'C' compiler supports the 'F84 and
> nothing else!  Seems to me that if you want free C for the PIC, you have
> to use the 16F84?

I have no bigger problem getting CC5xfree to work with the 16F877
It's easy to attach this into mplab.

http://www.bknd.com

CC5X supports:

12 bits core:    PIC12, PIC16C5X
14 bits core:    PIC12, PIC14, PIC16

> BTW, my favourite PIC now is the 18F452, maybe this will become the new
> 16F877?

BKND also has a CC8B demo (1k generated code) for the 18F family.

I hope that the 877 still will be out there for my hobby intrest..

/regards

Michael

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\13@094645 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 02:01:07AM -0500, Pic Dude wrote:
> When I first started with PICs about 4 months ago, I
> also built a NoPPP as it seemed so much simpler, and
> I did not have a 7407 (f/the popular Tait programmer)
> laying around.  But it did not work.  I tried some
> mild debugging, to no avail, but then just went for
> the Tait, which worked very well.  The 7407 and the
> transistors are about $1 (total), and a one-chip
> programmer should not be a concern for someone who
> intends to get into microcontrollers.

I'm in nearly total agreement here. And the 7407 or 7406 will work well because
they are open collector, so the pullup resistors required will ensure proper
operation even with 3.3V parallel ports that are so popular today.

{Quote hidden}

Neil, Neil, Neil...

Thanks for doing my job for me. You did everything except for the comparison
page: http://www.finitesite.com/d3jsys/16F628.html

>
> Now I'll go put on the armor and wait for the 16F628
> advocates to wake up... :-)

Well good morning! We've of course had these discussions before and honestly
I do see both the pro and the con somewhat. But I want to quote the PicDude
here:

"Yes, it does more, and yes, it costs less, and yes the 16F84 is obsolete..."

Does more? Cost less? It's a no brainer right? But the con...

"But for your first circuit or 2, use the chip that comes with gobs and gobs
of support all over the web..."

And this should be a major plus for the 16F84 except for two things:

1) All of the circuitry designed for the 16F84 works fine with the 16F628.

2) All of the code designed for the 16F84 works fine with the 16F628 except
for two or three very minor exceptions. Neil loves to point out that having
to modify code will derail a novice. I'm willing to admit that it's debateable
however the mods, described here at

http://www.dontronics.com/cat_hard_micro_pic.html#628spec

are so minor that adding/modifying three or four extra lines of code are
certainly worth the effort. BTW points 1 and 3 of the list are critical.

Now I'd like to posit that switching actually simplifies the first few
projects, The blinky LED, the input switch, the HD44780 LCD, and the serial
port. Here why:

1) Everything up to the serial port isn't timing critical. In fact most
tutorials use the 16F84 RC oscillator mode. But since the 16F628 has its 4 Mhz
INTRC mode, no external circuitry is required at all, just the chip.

2) The initial programmer is simpler to build and debug. One can work with
Low Voltage Programming (LVP) for quite a while, especially with the 4 projects
above, without too much trouble. My Trivial LVP is a great example for this.

http://www.finitesite.com/d3jsys

3) Then doing serial it's much more efficient to use the hardware USART, which
the 16F84 doesn't have, over bitbanging. And there's excellent support
including Fr. McGahee's PICUART.ZIP drop in turorial which both teaches and
works. And all hardware USART literature applies.

So that's the info. Make your own decision. But IMHO for the 18 pin midrange
part, the 16F628 has no peer. Especially if your "trying to stretch the
pennies I've gathered..."

BAJ



>
> Cheers,
> -Neil.
>
>
>
>
> {Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@114608 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 07:41:44AM +0100, Peter Moreton wrote:
> I suspect the real reason for the 16F84's popularity is that the
> donwloadable demo of the Hitech 'C' compiler supports the 'F84 and
> nothing else!  Seems to me that if you want free C for the PIC, you have
> to use the 16F84?

Nope. While the SDCC PIC port that Scott is feverishly working on is in the
late alpha stage, I believe that it will soon become the free PIC C compiler
gold standard.

Also everything for the 16F84 works for the 16F628 with minor modifications.

>
> BTW, my favourite PIC now is the 18F452, maybe this will become the new
> 16F877?

The 18F452 will suffer worse than the the 16F628 and the 16F877. at least in
hobbyist circles for many of the reasons that PicDude outlines below. There's
an extended instruction set, a modified architecture, a vastly different
programming algorithm, and even some modifications to the programmer
required. Couple that with a complete dearth of tutorials and a somewhat
tough time actually getting parts, and I feel it's going to be a road that's
going to take years to traverse.

>
> PM
>
>
> {Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@120056 by Pic Dude

flavicon
face
Totally agree with you Byron.  And yes, that's exactly
why I still advocate it (no mods, think of your first
"Hello World!" in C).

In the meanwhile, since everyone else thinks that 16F84's
are more expensive now, I've been picking them up cheap
(from those other folks).  Last purchase was US$5 for 7
new chips.  And I still have a few new 16F628's that I
haven't touched yet, cause I haven't needed to.

I'll be a convertee soon though.

BTW, MY favourite PIC is the 16F872, since it's small (and
most of my apps seem to be crunched for space), has more
than enough code and EEPROM space for me for now, is
programmable with the Tait, and most importantly, has A/D
converters.

Cheers,
-Neil.



{Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@130633 by Bill & Pookie

picon face
Where can you get the PIC16F84

Bill


> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: pic microcontroller discussion list
> > [spam_OUTPICLISTTakeThisOuTspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU] On Behalf Of
Pic Dude
> > Sent: 13 July 2002 08:01
> > To: .....PICLISTKILLspamspam@spam@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [PIC] noppp for 16F84
> >
> >
> > ....... and yes, the 16F84
> > is obsolete, so you can't even get it in some
places
> > anymore.  ...........

> > Cheers,
> > -Neil.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\13@134214 by Pic Dude

flavicon
face
I'm sure you can still get the 16F84 at Digikey, etc.
The $5 for 7 pieces I was referring to was from a local
guy who wanted to migrate to the 16F628.

Cheers,
-Neil.




{Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@135247 by Jay Jacobs

flavicon
face
My goodness, my apolologies for sparking the holy war :)

I was just curious about the noppp circuit, and thanks for the feedback on
that, I think I will scrap that and go with Tait's design, or probably Bob
Blick's modifications of that for the 16F628 also.  The only probably now
being that I don't have a 7407 in my collection.  The local radio shack
didn't stock that, and I hate to do a mail order for just one chip!

Anyway, I'm sure I'll be posting again once I get a 7407 and if my "Hello
World" (blinking LEDs) circuit doesn't work.

Thanks!

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\13@162320 by Benjamin Bromilow

flavicon
face
If the test routine works then in theory the programmer should work. My
NOPPP programmer failed but so did the test (I'd put the transistor in
backwards- doh!). I'd redo the tests, re-check all voltages and check the
connections between the PIC and the circuit. The computer speed shouldn't be
causing problems because I've succesfully programmed using the NOPPP with a
750Mhz computer- well it was fast when the NOPPP came out ;) Try using a
different computer or at least a new parallel port card in the same computer
(if you've got one lying about). You can always try a different PIC. 11"
shouldn't cause problems- I've got my NOPPP on a 8" cable but after I got it
working I plugged that into a 2ft extension. No problems.

Ben

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\13@185933 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 10:08:38AM -0700, Bill & Pookie wrote:
> Where can you get the PIC16F84

It's still available. Places like Digikey (http://www.digikey.com), Jameco
(http://www.jameco.com) and others carry it. Dr. Peter Anderson (http://www.phanderson.com)
carries quite a few different types of parts including a variety of PICs.

But again, the newer PICs are better and they cost less. The only true
technological advantage that a 16F84 has over the others is that it can be
run with voltages up to 6 volts. But in no other capacity is it better or
cheaper than either the 16F628 or the 16F872.

BAJ

>
> Bill
>
>
> > >
> > > {Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@190352 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 12:52:09PM -0500, Jay Jacobs wrote:
> My goodness, my apolologies for sparking the holy war :)

None necessary. We have this discussion all the time. I always weigh in with
novice posters because often they are not aware of advances in the PIC line.
As PicDude correctly pointed out there is a massive information base for the
16F84. So novices think that it's the best chip to start with.

>
> I was just curious about the noppp circuit, and thanks for the feedback on
> that, I think I will scrap that and go with Tait's design, or probably Bob
> Blick's modifications of that for the 16F628 also.

There shouldn't need to be any change for the 16F628.

>  The only probably now
> being that I don't have a 7407 in my collection.  The local radio shack
> didn't stock that, and I hate to do a mail order for just one chip!

My TLVP design scraps the 7407 in favor of a 74HCT573, which is available
at the RatShack for $1.39. I purposely picked that chip because it's a
stock RadioShack item. The HCT does the level conversion for the modern 3.3V
parallel port, so no pullup resistors are necessary.

BTW I presume that you have 16F84's and you don't have any 16F628's right?
If that's the case then you'll have to build a HVP programmer.

>
> Anyway, I'm sure I'll be posting again once I get a 7407 and if my "Hello
> World" (blinking LEDs) circuit doesn't work.

Cool. See you soon.

BAJ

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\13@191836 by Jay Jacobs

flavicon
face
> My TLVP design scraps the 7407 in favor of a 74HCT573, which is available
> at the RatShack for $1.39. I purposely picked that chip because it's a
> stock RadioShack item. The HCT does the level conversion for the modern 3.3V
> parallel port, so no pullup resistors are necessary.
>
> BTW I presume that you have 16F84's and you don't have any 16F628's right?
> If that's the case then you'll have to build a HVP programmer.

Do you have these circuits posted anywhere?  A quick search didn't find
anything on it.  ...And yes, I currently only have a few pic 16F84's, once
I get my feet on solid ground, I'll move on to the 16F628's for all the
reasons mentioned before!  Thanks!

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\13@213658 by Pic Dude

flavicon
face
Exactly.  We have this discussion very often and are very
passionate about the subject.  This and working for $1 per
day. :-)

If the list is ever quiet and you need to send a test
message, just send one with the subject "Is the F628
better than the F84?"  :-) :-) :-)

Yes, I'm in a trouble-making mood today!

Cheers,
-Neil.



{Original Message removed}

2002\07\13@222837 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 06:16:47PM -0500, Jay Jacobs wrote:
> > My TLVP design scraps the 7407 in favor of a 74HCT573, which is available
> > at the RatShack for $1.39. I purposely picked that chip because it's a
> > stock RadioShack item. The HCT does the level conversion for the modern 3.3V
> > parallel port, so no pullup resistors are necessary.
> >
> > BTW I presume that you have 16F84's and you don't have any 16F628's right?
> > If that's the case then you'll have to build a HVP programmer.
>
> Do you have these circuits posted anywhere?  A quick search didn't find
> anything on it.

Sorry. I posted the URL in an earlier post so I didn't repeat it:

http://www.finitesite.com/d3jsys

Note that the LVP in TLVP means low voltage programming. This is important
because...

> ...And yes, I currently only have a few pic 16F84's,

Which doesn't have the feature! Actually building a high voltage programmer
isn't that much more difficult if you have a high voltage source. In fact
I just updated my LVP schematic with a circuit that I know has worked in the
past. However I caution you that IT IS UNTESTED IN ITS CURRENT FORM:

http://www.finitesite.com/d3jsys/proghvp.gif

A 9V battery could make a simple and cheap 14V source. Simply connect the
negative of the battery to the +5 line. The positive of the battery will
be about 14V. I'd probably give one diode drop to get it down to 13.4V and
the transistor will drop another 0.6V putting the final at about 12.8V which
should trigger HVP with no problem.

But everything should be available from the RatShack.

> once
> I get my feet on solid ground, I'll move on to the 16F628's for all the
> reasons mentioned before!  Thanks!

Cool. Glad to be of help.

BAJ

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\13@224326 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Byron A Jeff wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 10:08:38AM -0700, Bill & Pookie wrote:
> > Where can you get the PIC16F84
>
> But again, the newer PICs are better and they cost less. The only true
> technological advantage that a 16F84 has over the others is that it can be
> run with voltages up to 6 volts. But in no other capacity is it better or
> cheaper than either the 16F628 or the 16F872.

It is better for beginners in one important category,
you can get 16F84 in ANY hobby electronics shop, the
ones beginners go to when they drive down the road to
get parts. The 16F628 is not listed in any of the
hobby elec catalogues for 2002. Yes you can get them
from Arrow, Digikey, Farnell etc, ie the professional
type distributors, but not beginner friendly suppliers,
at least not around here. :o)
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


2002\07\14@085837 by Bill & Pookie

picon face
Thanks much.  I have the pickstartb that has paid
for itself, so am limited as to devices.

But the new ones do look like fun.

Bill


{Original Message removed}

2002\07\14@121713 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 05:59:34AM -0700, Bill & Pookie wrote:
> Thanks much.  I have the pickstartb that has paid
> for itself, so am limited as to devices.

Hmmm. Aren't picstartb upgradable? Also I'm almost certain that a 16F628
can be programmed with the 16F84 algorithm, subject only to the program
memory size limitations.

Anyway you can build programmers like my Trivial LVP programmer in an
afternoon with $10 or so worth of Radio Shack parts. The software for both
Windows (David Tait's FPP) and Linux (My updated version of Brian Lane's
picprg) are freely downloadable.


>
> But the new ones do look like fun.

Trust me when I say they can save you a ton of effort and may be worth the
investment in an alternate programmer.

So join in the fun!

http://www.finitesite.com/d3jsys

BAJ

>
> Bill
>
>
> {Original Message removed}

2002\07\15@040820 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>I suspect the real reason for the 16F84's popularity
>is that the donwloadable demo of the Hitech 'C' compiler
>supports the 'F84 and nothing else!  Seems to me that
>if you want free C for the PIC, you have to use the 16F84?


It also supports the 16F627/8, but is limited to the memory size of the
F627.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu


2002\07\15@170055 by Dwayne Reid

flavicon
face
At 10:28 PM 7/13/02 -0400, Byron A Jeff wrote:
>  In fact
>I just updated my LVP schematic with a circuit that I know has worked in the
>past. However I caution you that IT IS UNTESTED IN ITS CURRENT FORM:
>
>http://www.finitesite.com/d3jsys/proghvp.gif

Hi there, Byron.

The circuit you posted for HV programming won't work.  I assume that the
2n2222 transitor is wired as an emitter follower: C to +13V, E to MCLR.

The reason it won't work is that the HCT573 has totem pole output drivers:
a HI is 5V, a LO is 0V.  The highest voltage you will see on the emitter of
the transistor is about 4.4V, not the +13V that you want.

The easiest solution is a 2 transistor switch: the HCT573 drives a NPN
transistor which in turn drives a PNP transistor fed from the +13V
rail.  The extra cost is minimal: 1 more transistor, 2 more resistors.

dwayne

--
Dwayne Reid   <.....dwaynerKILLspamspam.....planet.eon.net>
Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd    Edmonton, AB, CANADA
(780) 489-3199 voice          (780) 487-6397 fax

Celebrating 18 years of Engineering Innovation (1984 - 2002)
 .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-.   .-
    `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'   `-'
Do NOT send unsolicited commercial email to this email address.
This message neither grants consent to receive unsolicited
commercial email nor is intended to solicit commercial email.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
EraseMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu


2002\07\19@080146 by uter van ooijen & floortje hanneman

picon face
> The 18F452 will suffer worse than the the 16F628 and the 16F877. at least
in
> hobbyist circles for many of the reasons that PicDude outlines below.
There's
> an extended instruction set, a modified architecture, a vastly different
> programming algorithm, and even some modifications to the programmer
> required. Couple that with a complete dearth of tutorials and a somewhat
> tough time actually getting parts, and I feel it's going to be a road
that's
> going to take years to traverse.

I am working on a programmer, but I am not aware of hardware changes needed.
Please explain?

BTW I think the transition will be MUCH faster than a number of years, more
like a number of months.

Wouter

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listservspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2002\07\19@104033 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Fri, Jul 19, 2002 at 12:48:59AM +0200, wouter van ooijen & floortje hanneman wrote:
> > The 18F452 will suffer worse than the the 16F628 and the 16F877. at least
> in
> > hobbyist circles for many of the reasons that PicDude outlines below.
> There's
> > an extended instruction set, a modified architecture, a vastly different
> > programming algorithm, and even some modifications to the programmer
> > required. Couple that with a complete dearth of tutorials and a somewhat
> > tough time actually getting parts, and I feel it's going to be a road
> that's
> > going to take years to traverse.
>
> I am working on a programmer, but I am not aware of hardware changes needed.
> Please explain?

Wouter, you have to remember that I'm the LVP guy, so I always look at it from
that prospective. The PGM pin has moved from RB3 to RB5, so no 16FXXX LVP
programmer will work out of the box. It isn't a big deal, but it isn't simply
a software update either.

>
> BTW I think the transition will be MUCH faster than a number of years, more
> like a number of months.

I agree with you that in profession circles it would be foolish not to make
the move. But I qualified it with the hobby label on purpose. I still find
myself in a mindshare battle with the 16F84 with hobby PIC users. I haven't
bothered to discuss 16F87X parts or bootloaders in months. Michael Covington's
NOPPP programmer gets a lot of press even though I personally think it's a lot
more difficult to put together than my TLVP programmer.

The game in the hobby circuit is exposure and accessibility. My thesis remains
that it's still going to take awhile for the 18F series to percolate into the
collective hobby consciousness.

BAJ

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email @spam@listservKILLspamspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body


2002\07\21@162531 by uter van ooijen & floortje hanneman

picon face
> > I am working on a programmer, but I am not aware of hardware changes
needed.
> > Please explain?
>
> Wouter, you have to remember that I'm the LVP guy, so I always look at it
from
> that prospective. The PGM pin has moved from RB3 to RB5, so no 16FXXX LVP
> programmer will work out of the box. It isn't a big deal, but it isn't
simply
> a software update either.

OK, I understand. I am the in-cicruit programmer guy and one of the output
pins of my programmer just says 'connect to LVP pin'. When someone wants to
connect it to a socket which must accept any flash PIC I guess he has to
connect diodes to every portb pin except rb6 and rb7 (and to be future-proof
maybe to every other PIC pin too).

BTW can anyone give a reason for Microchip to use different pins for LVP on
different chips?

Wouter van Ooijen
--
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
Jal compiler, Wisp programmer, WLoader bootloader, PICs kopen

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads


More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2002 , 2003 only
- Today
- New search...