>
> Hi folks,
>
> Microchip have publish a revised programming specification for all 12-Bit
> core parts. These include all 16C5x and 12C50x parts. The new programming
> specification increases the over-programming pulse count from x3 to x11.
> (Yes the parts take twice as long to program!)  The maximum retry count has
> been reduced from 25 attempts to 8 attempts.
>
> Microchip have asked that the revision be implemented immediately as it is
> possible that 12-Bit core parts will not achieve long term stability if
> programmed with the old programming specification.
>
> Accordingly, I have posted TM4 software driver version 1.00.09 and this
> update is compliant with the new specification and can be used with the
> WARP-3, PP1, PICSTART 16B "PHOENIX" upgrade and the Picstart 16C "PHOENIX"
> upgrade.
>
> www.pipeline.com.au/users/newfound/zip/tm4-com.zip
> http://www.pipeline.com.au/users/newfound/zip/tm4disk.zip
>
> For users of other programmers consider "heavying" the manufacturer for
> your update. I beleive there is a firmware upgrade for the picstart plus
> available.
>
> Jim

> Is the PicStart Plus firmware revision you refer to, the 1.50 version,
> Jim (or anyone else who knows?)  I just got a PicStart Plus at the
> seminar, need to know if it needs a change (doesn't look like it?)
>
>   Come to think of it, I'd better upgrade my older Parallax programmer
> for this programming change!
>
>   Mark Willis, .....mwillisKILLspam@spam@nwlink.com
>
> Jim robertson wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Microchip have publish a revised programming specification for all 12-Bit
> > core parts. These include all 16C5x and 12C50x parts. The new programming
> > specification increases the over-programming pulse count from x3 to x11.
> > (Yes the parts take twice as long to program!)  The maximum retry count has
> > been reduced from 25 attempts to 8 attempts.
> >
> > Microchip have asked that the revision be implemented immediately as it is
> > possible that 12-Bit core parts will not achieve long term stability if
> > programmed with the old programming specification.
> >
> > Accordingly, I have posted TM4 software driver version 1.00.09 and this
> > update is compliant with the new specification and can be used with the
> > WARP-3, PP1, PICSTART 16B "PHOENIX" upgrade and the Picstart 16C "PHOENIX"
> > upgrade.
> >
> > www.pipeline.com.au/users/newfound/zip/tm4-com.zip
> > www.pipeline.com.au/users/newfound/zip/tm4disk.zip
> >
> > For users of other programmers consider "heavying" the manufacturer for
> > your update. I beleive there is a firmware upgrade for the picstart plus
> > available.
> >
> > Jim
>
>

>At 14:32 1/07/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>At the seminar in Toronto (June 16),  we were advised that Firmware v1.50
>>was released to accomodate the 12C67x which has a different programming
>>specification than others.
>>
>>No mention was made of changes to the programming specifications of the
>>other 12 bit core devices.
>
>The change for the 12C67x was because there was no existing 8-pin device
>with the 14-Bit core  (as opposed to the 12-bit core  12C50x parts)
>supported by the PS+ There were also changes with the OSC bits in the
>config word  (There are 7 oscillator options!), however, I still can't see
>why this would require a firmware change but it was one of the reasons

>
>For those asking, I do not know if PS+ firmware 1.50 will do the job. You
>can always check on there web site.
>
>Personally, if microchip follow their own advice, there will not be a need
>to change the firmware only an updated MPLAB should be required.  None of
>my programmer users have had to rush for new firmware. These settings were
>always mean't to be programmable.
>
>
>>For older PicStart Plus programmers,  the firmware is supposedly available
>>on the website -- download it and burn it into a 17C42 before dismantling
>>the programmer and inserting the newly programmed 17C42 in place of the
>>original.
>
>You have buckley's chance of burning the picstart plus firmware into a
>17C42 (2K).  You need a 17C44 (8K) and even this is nearly full.
>
>>Tom
>>
>>>
>>> Is the PicStart Plus firmware revision you refer to, the 1.50 version,
>>> Jim (or anyone else who knows?)  I just got a PicStart Plus at the
>>> seminar, need to know if it needs a change (doesn't look like it?)
>>>
>>>   Come to think of it, I'd better upgrade my older Parallax programmer
>>> for this programming change!
>
>Parallax? Good luck!
>
>Jim
>
>>>   Mark Willis, EraseMEmwillisnwlink.com
>>
>
>

>Leo van Loon
>SBB simpeltronics
>Netherlands
>tel +31 (0481) 450034
>fax+31 (0481) 450051
>mail RemoveMEsbb.simpeltronspam_OUTKILLspamtip.nl
>url http://www.sbb-simpeltronics.nl
>SBB simpeltronics ontwikkelt technische projecten voor basisschool en
>basisvorming.
>SBB simpeltronics develops technical projects for children in primary and
>secondary education.
>
>-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>Van: Jim robertson <RemoveMEnewfoundTakeThisOuTspamPIPELINE.COM.AU>
>Aan: EraseMEPICLISTspamspamBeGoneMITVMA.MIT.EDU <RemoveMEPICLISTKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>Datum: donderdag 2 juli 1998 3:51
>Onderwerp: Re: Important revision for 16C5x/12C50x programmers
>
>
>>At 14:32 1/07/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>>At the seminar in Toronto (June 16),  we were advised that Firmware v1.50
>>>was released to accomodate the 12C67x which has a different programming
>>>specification than others.
>>>
>>>No mention was made of changes to the programming specifications of the
>>>other 12 bit core devices.
>>
>>The change for the 12C67x was because there was no existing 8-pin device
>>with the 14-Bit core  (as opposed to the 12-bit core  12C50x parts)
>>supported by the PS+ There were also changes with the OSC bits in the
>>config word  (There are 7 oscillator options!), however, I still can't see
>>why this would require a firmware change but it was one of the reasons
>given.
>>
>>For those asking, I do not know if PS+ firmware 1.50 will do the job. You
>>can always check on there web site.
>>
>>Personally, if microchip follow their own advice, there will not be a need
>>to change the firmware only an updated MPLAB should be required.  None of
>>my programmer users have had to rush for new firmware. These settings were
>>always mean't to be programmable.
>>
>>
>>>For older PicStart Plus programmers,  the firmware is supposedly available
>>>on the website -- download it and burn it into a 17C42 before dismantling
>>>the programmer and inserting the newly programmed 17C42 in place of the
>>>original.
>>
>>You have buckley's chance of burning the picstart plus firmware into a
>>17C42 (2K).  You need a 17C44 (8K) and even this is nearly full.
>>
>>>Tom
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is the PicStart Plus firmware revision you refer to, the 1.50 version,
>>>> Jim (or anyone else who knows?)  I just got a PicStart Plus at the
>>>> seminar, need to know if it needs a change (doesn't look like it?)
>>>>
>>>>   Come to think of it, I'd better upgrade my older Parallax programmer
>>>> for this programming change!
>>
>>Parallax? Good luck!
>>
>>Jim
>>
>>>>   Mark Willis, mwillisSTOPspamspam_OUTnwlink.com
>>>
>>
>>
>

>Andy Kunz wrote:
>>
>> >>>   Come to think of it, I'd better upgrade my older Parallax programmer
>> >>> for this programming change!
>> >
>> >Parallax? Good luck!
>>
>> Jim,
>>
>> He probably means the Parallax programmer with the Carmacon software in it.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> ==================================================================
>> Andy Kunz - Statistical Research, Inc. - Westfield, New Jersey USA
>> ==================================================================
>
>  Parallax has a $50 firmware upgrade available on their web pages;
>I've had that programmer for over a year, it needs more recent device
>support anyways (unless I just use the PCPlus for recent chips.)

> Andy Kunz wrote:
> >
> > >>>   Come to think of it, I'd better upgrade my older Parallax programmer
> > >>> for this programming change!
> > >
> > >Parallax? Good luck!
> >
> > Jim,
> >
> > He probably means the Parallax programmer with the Carmacon software in it.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > ==================================================================
> > Andy Kunz - Statistical Research, Inc. - Westfield, New Jersey USA
> > ==================================================================
>
>   Parallax has a $50 firmware upgrade available on their web pages;
> I've had that programmer for over a year, it needs more recent device
> support anyways (unless I just use the PCPlus for recent chips.)
>
>   I much prefer Parallel port interfaces, serial ports aren't commonly
> free on my machines & everything else I develop embedded stuff with is
> parallel-based, EMP-20 & the Parallax unit, I had to add a serial port &
> lose modem use on my embedded machine to get the use of the PCPlus
> programmer;  I seriously doubt I'll change the Parallax unit over to
> Carmacon style, unless there's some real advantage to doing so, to me!
>
>   (Had to stop PIC work for much of a year due to work, and moving, so
> maybe there's something I don't know here.)
>
>   Mark, KILLspammwillisspamBeGonenwlink.com
>
>

>not the erasing that degrades the chip.
>
>--
>Friendly Regards
>
>Tjaart van der Walt
>.....tjaartspam_OUTwasp.co.za
>
>Add your voice !!
>Vote at the Great G Com Public Vote. Go to :
>http://www.wasp.co.za/~tjaart/gcomvote.html
>
>|--------------------------------------------------|
>|                WASP International                |
>|R&D Engineer : GSM peripheral services development|
>|--------------------------------------------------|
>|SMS TakeThisOuT0832123443.....TakeThisOuTwasp.co.za  (160 chars max)|
>|     http://www.wasp.co.za/~tjaart/index.html     |
>|Voice: +27-(0)11-622-8686  Fax: +27-(0)11-622-8973|
>|          WGS-84 : 26¡10.52'S 28¡06.19'E          |
>|--------------------------------------------------|
>

> (In fact more people are concerned by this than not having there PICs
> programmed fully going by the email I have received as strange as that may
> seem.)
>
> I would like to know what exactly erodes the life of an EPROM cell. Is it
> not a transaction of the cell charge?  If this is the case then the
> _additional_ programming pulses will have little effect in comparison to
> the initial programming pulse, right?

> Or will any programming pulse regardless of whether is changes the cell
> voltage level erode the cell life?  If this is the case then maybe the life
> of JW parts become more of an issue.

> >I will keep my PP+ firmware as is for prototyping. Increasing the hit
> >rate 3 times will chop the JW life three times as well. For production
> >stuff, the hit rate should be high though.
> >
> >Hmmm. Mchip will sell three times as many JW part now...
> >
> >--
> >Friendly Regards
> >
> >Tjaart van der Walt
> >RemoveMEtjaartspamBeGonewasp.co.za
>
> Can we have some further info on the above? I have people emailing me
> asking if I will not change the JW programming algorithm because of it.
>
> (In fact more people are concerned by this than not having there PICs
> programmed fully going by the email I have received as strange as that may
> seem.)
>
> I would like to know what exactly erodes the life of an EPROM cell. Is it
> not a transaction of the cell charge?  If this is the case then the
> _additional_ programming pulses will have little effect in comparison to
> the initial programming pulse, right?

>
> The man posted this drawing:
>
> + 12V O---------------+
>                       |
>                       \
>                       / R1         (a few kohms)
>                       \
>                       /
>                       |
>                    |  > E
>                    | /
> GND   O------------|<       general-purpose NPN, eg. 2N3904
>                 B  | \
>                    |  | C
>                       |
>                       |
>                       O A?
>
> The question was, what is the potential measured between A? and GND, and
> what is its polarity, and what is the explanation for this.

> I've done this, and, yes, with I set to 5 mA, I measured *minus* 0.3
> Volts on the collector vs. ground with a Fluke 11 DMM.

> Date sent:      Mon, 06 Jul 1998 19:02:04 +0100
> From:           "Frank A. Vorstenbosch" <TakeThisOuTfrankspamFALSTAFF.DEMON.CO.UK>
> Subject:        Re: Important revision for 16C5x/12C50x programmers + OT (long
)
> To:             PICLISTEraseMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Send reply to:  pic microcontroller discussion list <RemoveMEPICLISTEraseMEspam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU>

> Peter L. Peres wrote:
> >
> > The man posted this drawing:
> >
> > + 12V O---------------+
> >                       |
> >                       \
> >                       / R1         (a few kohms)
> >                       \
> >                       /
> >                       |
> >                    |  > E
> >                    | /
> > GND   O------------|<       general-purpose NPN, eg. 2N3904
> >                 B  | \
> >                    |  | C
> >                       |
> >                       |
> >                       O A?
> >
> > The question was, what is the potential measured between A? and GND, and
> > what is its polarity, and what is the explanation for this.
>
> > I've done this, and, yes, with I set to 5 mA, I measured *minus* 0.3
> > Volts on the collector vs. ground with a Fluke 11 DMM.
>
> Yes, did that too.  Wasn't this some electro-optical effect, with the BC
> junction acting like a photodiode and the EB junction as an LED?  In that
> case, the voltage on the collector is just the photocurrent times the internal

> resistance of the voltmeter.
>
> Frank
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Frank A. Vorstenbosch    <UCE_ACCEPT="NONE">    Mobile:  +44-976-430 569
> Wimbledon, London SW19                          Home:   +44-181-544 1865
> @spam@frankRemoveMEEraseMEfalstaff.demon.co.uk                      Office: +44-181-636 3391
>

>> I will keep my PP+ firmware as is for prototyping. Increasing the hit
>> rate 3 times will chop the JW life three times as well. For production
>> stuff, the hit rate should be high though.
>>
>> Hmmm. Mchip will sell three times as many JW part now...
>
>
>     I've talked to some silicon designers to see if I could shed some
>     light on this issue.  I'm not a hardware engineer, and can't go into
>     any real depth on this, but according to the way it was explained to
>     me, increasing the number of programming pulses will not degrade the
>     EPROM cell, since very little current is flowing through the cell
>     after it gets charged up.  The real limiting factors are the
>     transistors that do the address switching when programming.  These
>     switch the 13 volts and are the main things that cause an EPROM
>     part to "age."
>
>     Again, I'm not speaking in an official capacity, and am certainly no
>     authority on EPROM's, but according to all information I can gather,
>     you should see no degradation in the life of JW parts using the new
>     programming algorithm.
>
>     And yes, there is no need for a firmware upgrade of PICSTART Plus to
>     support the new algorithm.  That's done with the new software upgrade
>     of MPLAB v3.99.06.
>