No exact or substring matches. trying for part
'Wildly [OT]: Defective USB hardware.'
No evident connection to PICs, but - very upsetting.
Purchased a twin USB connector slot-plate yesterday for the all-in-one
motherboard I somewhat unwittingly purchased some time back which was
without all the interface attachments. Installed it (without shutting
down the PC) and tried to plug in the camera.
One socket worked, the other did not, at least "worked" in the sense
of - it plugged in. The other would not plug in - realise of course
that this was being done semi-blind peering around the back of an
It became evident that the USB port was *not* functional and the
hardware not recognized by Win98. Before shutting down I tried one last
re-plug in the "bad" socket, perhaps a little forcibly, accompanied by
the disturbing "phut" and smell of vaporised composite (whatever).
Peering around more with a light source revealed a short in the USB
socket. I hastily shut off the machine (was re-starting at the time
actually, in mid-install of the now BIOS-enabled USB hardware).
What moron designed these USB connectors? They contain four fingers,
punched into the outer shell, designed to contact the metal shell of
the USB connector (which is in fact, a line socket, not a plug as it
applies to the main pins).
Problem is, these point *outward*, not inward so that if they are, as
is bound to happen sometimes, mis-adjusted (mis-manufactured), pushing
the cord connector in buckles them further, and can be sufficient to
bend one to contact one of the four connector pins, in this case the
Am I the only one sufficiently heavy-handed to notice this, or is this
just another example of a reject from Engineering Design 1A, turning up
according to Parkinson's Law, in management?
'[PICLIST] [PIC] Interesting Results / Defective P'
I have done a programe that includes an IR input from a remote control,
output to ports for relays and IIC to Serial Memory 24C08 interface. I am
using 2 new 16F876 for development since last 2 days.
One of the PIC(no1) functions 100% perfectly. The otherPIC (No2) also is
getting programmed correctly by the same WARP 13 A programmer, the IR, and
ports work well but the IIC serial communication to the memory does not
work!!! Thus there is a partial response.
I loaded a 16C72 with the same software,( that was the chip I had and the
code was designed to eventually use a 16C72 with 24C08 instead of a 16F876),
and it also worked well (100% including IIC).
1. Have U also observed such a behaviour of a PIC giving partial response
despite the programming being reported OK.
2. Any reasons that could explain the above (The PIC is new and 2 days old)
3. If the Chip is partially defective, what is the most reliable method of
knowing it apart from trial and error and benchmarking with 1 or 2 more
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
'[EE]: defectives from Futurelec?'
Has anyone had component quality issues with orders from Futurelec in the US? I placed my first (and only) order with them recently for a National part everyone else seemed to be out of. The order was shipped from Beijing (unexpectedly), and a significant percentage of the chips turned out to be defective. I'm just wondering if anyone else has had similar experiences with Futurelec.
From: "Rob Robson" <silk.net> rob
> Has anyone had component quality issues with orders from Futurelec in the
> US? I placed my first (and only) order with them recently for a National
> part everyone else seemed to be out of. The order was shipped from
> Beijing (unexpectedly), and a significant percentage of the chips turned
> out to be defective. I'm just wondering if anyone else has had similar
> experiences with Futurelec.
I buy parts from Futurlec on a regular basis, and has never had any
component quality issues. Most of the time they come from Thailand, however.
Have you tried contacting their CS?
I have order from them before. So far I don't have
problem with the stuff. No defects. They ship mine
--- Rob Robson <silk.net> wrote: rob
> Has anyone had component quality issues with orders
> from Futurelec in the US? I placed my first (and
Possibly. See my post from a few days ago with the subject "Fragile
component leads." These parts supposedly originated from Futurelec.
> Has anyone had component quality issues with orders from
> Futurelec in the US? I placed my first (and only) order with
> them recently for a National part everyone else seemed to be
> out of. The order was shipped from Beijing (unexpectedly),
> and a significant percentage of the chips turned out to be
> defective. I'm just wondering if anyone else has had similar
> experiences with Futurelec.
For Australians, they ship from Thailand. Haven't had any problems over a
Australian suppliers sometimes want to charge you $4-5 for something like a
ULN2803, which is what, $0.35 in the US?
More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2006
, 2007 only
- New search...