Searching \ for 'Wind' 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/index.htm?key=wind
Search entire site for: 'Wind'.

No exact or substring matches. trying for part
PICList Thread
'Programming environment in Windows and/or Linux'
1995\06\27@105236 by Brian Lane

flavicon
face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Mon, 26 Jun 1995, Ben Kwok-Yiu Li wrote:

> I'm hoping to develop and design apps for the 16C5x, 16Cxx line of the
> PIC processor.  However, can anyone tell me of a good working enviornment
> for Windows or Linux.  I'm looking for an editor, compiler(if avaliable),
> assembler, simulator type of package that uses windows.  If nothing
> exists, can someone suggest to me the best environemtnt to develop.  Thks
> for all the help.

 Under Linux there is an assembler called pictools from a progrmammer in
England(He's probably on this list, I did some beta on it and lost
touch). For programming the 16C84 you can use a Russ Reiss
programmer(from CCI last year) and my picpgmr program available from
ftp.eskimo.com/~blane/

 I don't remember the site for pictools, but an archie search should
find it.

  Brian

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      email spam_OUTblaneTakeThisOuTspamguetech.com with 'Subject: blane-info' for PGP key

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBL/AYdDjG6hZbrEUtAQHowwP/ftWmL3L3S/ktBTK9DMWNzmT+gMPSQiT5
TBVrFDzaI05vWVlExb7JGbzo9IW9ZM8lXjHAuZ0gFgWvanteRCvjJpXEulH4uFnT
7RX9pPChe3K1L3JdzjU6R5cfoZAPnU0cm807jMY1kBs6W9EajcqQufx46Ule91BK
eRiWbuiaHkM=
=0/Vv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


'Ready for non-window pics'
1995\08\22@184517 by Mike Keitz
flavicon
face
Martin Kirk <.....mlkKILLspamspam@spam@asu.edu> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Will someone please give me a brief list of the requirements for clearing
>the registers when moving one's code to non-windowed pics?  I assume it
>is a simple clear all registers operation.  Please confirm.
>

AFAIK, the non-window PICs have *exactly* the same chip in them as the
window ones.  So there should be no difference in operation between one type
and the other, other than inability to erase the non-window one.

(In an earlier thread, someone noted that newer versions of the window chips
have a non-erasable code protect bit.  So if this bit is set, a windowed
chip would be non-reusable as well.  Has Microchip issued an exact statement
on this?)

If you're counting on light through the window setting the RAM (registers?)
in a certain condition, this is very bad practice, not certain to work in
any case.  It is important to design your code so it doesn't assume anything
about the state of the RAM on power-up.  The special function registers are
reset as described in the table in the data book, but the RAM is not
guaranteed to be reset to any particular state, window chip or not.

There is no single "clear all registers" instruction.  However the FAQ
contains a good example of a loop which will do it.  Depending on the number
of locations that must be cleared for your code, it may be simpler to just
use a few clrf's on the vital locations.

-Mike

1995\08\22@195937 by Paul Christenson [N3EOP]

flavicon
face
>Will someone please give me a brief list of the requirements for clearing
>the registers when moving one's code to non-windowed pics?  I assume it
>is a simple clear all registers operation.  Please confirm.

Simpler than that.  Simply be sure to initialize each register before you
use it.  (Don't assume that it'll be zero before it's used.)

1995\08\23@005055 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
Martin Kirk (mlkspamKILLspamASU.EDU) wrote:

>Will someone please give me a brief list of the requirements for clearing
>the registers when moving one's code to non-windowed pics?  I assume it
>is a simple clear all registers operation.  Please confirm.

Martin:

For the 16C54/55/56:

   PORTA   EQU     004H

           MOVLW   PORTA       ;PREPARE TO ZERO ALL REGISTERS EXCEPT THE FSR,
           MOVWF   FSR         ;RTCC, PC, AND PROCESSOR STATUS REGISTERS.

   CLRRAM  CLRF    USEFSR           ;ZERO A REGISTER.

           INCFSZ  FSR         ;HAVE WE DONE THEM ALL?
           GOTO    CLRRAM           ;IF NOT, LOOP BACK AND ZERO ANOTHER.

For the 16C57/58:

   PORTA   EQU     004H

           MOVLW   PORTA       ;PREPARE TO ZERO ALL REGISTERS EXCEPT THE
           MOVWF   FSR         ;PROCESSOR STATUS, PC, RTCC, AND FSR
                               ;REGISTERS.

   CLRRAM  MOVLW   00011111B   ;ARE WE POINTING AT "USEFSR"?
           ANDWF   FSR,W       ;

           SKPNZ               ;IF NOT, SKIP AHEAD.

           BSF     FSR,BIT4    ;OTHERWISE, SKIP OVER THE PROCESSOR STATUS,
                               ;PC, RTCC, FSR, PORTA, PORTB, PORTC, AND
                               ;THE GLOBALLY-ACCESSIBLE FILE REGISTERS.

           CLRF    USEFSR      ;ZERO THE REGISTER AT WHICH WE'RE POINTING.

           INCFSZ  FSR         ;HAVE WE DONE THEM ALL?
           GOTO    CLRRAM      ;IF NOT, LOOP BACK AND ZERO ANOTHER.

   ; ALL FILE REGISTERS ARE ZEROED AND WE'RE IN DATA SEGMENT 0.

For the 16C71:

   GPREGS  EQU     00CH
   LASTGP  EQU     02FH

           MOVLW   GPREGS+1        ;CLEAR ALL GENERAL-PURPOSE REGISTERS.
           MOVWF   FSR             ;THIS ROUTINE WAS WRITTEN BY DON LEKEI.
           MOVLW   LASTGP-GPREGS   ;
           MOVWF   GPREGS          ;
                                   ;
   CLRRAM  CLRF    USEFSR          ;
                                   ;
           INCF    FSR             ;
           DECFSZ  GPREGS          ;
           GOTO    CLRRAM          ;

For the 16C74:

   FRSTGP0 EQU     020H
   LASTGP0 EQU     07FH

           MOVLW   FRSTGP0     ;PREPARE TO ZERO ALL GENERAL-PURPOSE
           MOVWF   FSR         ;REGISTERS.

   CLRRAM  MOVLW   LASTGP0+1   ;ARE WE POINTING PAST THE FINAL PAGE-0
           XORWF   FSR,W       ;REGISTER?

           SKPNZ               ;IF NOT, SKIP AHEAD.

           BSF     FSR,BIT5    ;OTHERWISE, ADJUST FSR TO SKIP OVER THE PAGE-1
                               ;SPECIAL-PURPOSE REGISTERS.

           CLRF    USEFSR      ;ZERO THE REGISTER AT WHICH WE'RE POINTING.

           INCFSZ  FSR         ;HAVE WE DONE THEM ALL?
           GOTO    CLRRAM      ;IF NOT, LOOP BACK AND ZERO ANOTHER.

In addition to the equates shown in the above code fragments, you should be
aware that "USEFSR" is my name for the indirect register (register number 0);
some Microchip documentation now refers to this register as "INDF".

"FSR", of course, should be equated to the appropriate register (this is left
as an exercise for the reader).

Enjoy...

-Andy

--
Andrew Warren - .....fastfwdKILLspamspam.....ix.netcom.com
Fast Forward Engineering, Vista, California

1995\08\23@144349 by PETE KLAMMER

flavicon
face
I received on Tue, 22 Aug 1995 18:44:59 from Mike Keitz <EraseMEmkeitzspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTBEV.NET>:

> Subject: Re: Ready for non-window pics
>
> Martin Kirk <mlkspamspam_OUTasu.edu> wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >Will someone please give me a brief list of the requirements for clearing
> >the registers when moving one's code to non-windowed pics?  I assume it
> >is a simple clear all registers operation.  Please confirm.
> >
>
> AFAIK, the non-window PICs have *exactly* the same chip in them as the
> window ones.  So there should be no difference in operation between one type
> and the other, other than inability to erase the non-window one.
>
> (In an earlier thread, someone noted that newer versions of the window chips
> have a non-erasable code protect bit.  So if this bit is set, a windowed
> chip would be non-reusable as well.  Has Microchip issued an exact statement
> on this?)

I have two PIC17C44-JW (windowed) engineering samples, one now a doorstop,
the other now a paperweight.  Microchip did confirm that the code-protect on
these windowed parts is not erasable.  One representative told me that there
is some kind of metal or metalization over those fuses.  Since the dice are
exactly the same in windowed and OTP parts, this is obviously intended to
make it more difficult for a would-be hacker to split open an OTP package
and create his/her own ``window'' to selectively erase the code-protect fuse
of a code-protected part.  When I posted my speculations on the MCHIPBBS
about the implementation (some fuse bits are eraseable, some are not) it was
removed and I was sent a private BBS mail message explaining that management
was understandably touchy about the topic.

The only difference between windowed and non-windowed parts is that an
erased windowed part tends to come up initialized the same way every time,
with zeros in lots of places which should not be relied upon.

Peter F. Klammer, Racom Systems Inc.                   @spam@PKlammerKILLspamspamACM.Org
6080 Greenwood Plaza Boulevard                            (303)773-7411
Englewood, CO  80111                                  FAX:(303)771-4708


'windowed PIC clockspeeds'
1995\09\08@174732 by Papageorgiou Spiros
flavicon
face
Hi PICers,

I bought a PICStart board and it came with two PICs. A 16C55 and a 16C71.
Both with windows (/JW versions). The question is:
I thought that the info on the IC will state the clockspeed that are made for.
but it doesn't. So, Can i run the PICs at the maximum colckspeed?
(16Mhz the 16c71 and 20Mhz the 16c55).
Anybody knows the power cnsumption of the PICs at those clockspeeds?

Thanx in advance

Spiros Papageorgiou

Email: KILLspampapageKILLspamspamtheseas.ntua.gr
RemoveMEmc89114TakeThisOuTspamcentral.ntua.gr

1995\09\08@180641 by John Payson

flavicon
face
> I bought a PICStart board and it came with two PICs. A 16C55 and a 16C71.
> Both with windows (/JW versions). The question is:
> I thought that the info on the IC will state the clockspeed that are made for.
> but it doesn't. So, Can i run the PICs at the maximum colckspeed?
> (16Mhz the 16c71 and 20Mhz the 16c55).
> Anybody knows the power cnsumption of the PICs at those clockspeeds?

Due to the added expense of a cerdip package, the marginal cost increase
for using a fast (e.g. 16MHz) versus slow die is not significant; thus,
AFAIK, all of the cerdip package PICs are in the fastest speeds available
and I would expect that they use the same power/current as the PDIP versions
at the same speed.

1995\09\08@181302 by Sheldon Ward

picon face
>I bought a PICStart board and it came with two PICs. A 16C55 and a 16C71.
>Both with windows (/JW versions). The question is:
>I thought that the info on the IC will state the clockspeed that are made for.
>but it doesn't. So, Can i run the PICs at the maximum colckspeed?
>(16Mhz the 16c71 and 20Mhz the 16c55).

The windowed versions (JW) can be used with any type of clock (RC, xtal,
etc.) and thus at any speed (0 to 20MHz for 16c55)  Remember to set the
programmer for the type of clock used thou.

>Anybody knows the power cnsumption of the PICs at those clockspeeds?

The power required can be found in the Microchip Data Book that came with
the PICStart.


Later,


Sheldon
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*                                                                   *
* spamBeGoneSheldonspamBeGonespamDirect.Ca            In beautiful Langley, B.C., Canada   *
*                                                                   *
* The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect my own.  *
*                                                                   *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


'mpasm for windows'
1995\10\12@104510 by eyal
flavicon
face
Microchip has a program called mpasmwin.exe.
It is an mpasm assembler for 16 bit ms-windows.
The version I got is v01.20, and it support the most of the pic
microcontrolres.

There is a windows host programmer for the pic16c84 writen by
someone that work with hardware similar to to an589.


Eyal Oppenheimer
ASE R&D
Aladdin Knowledge Systems Ltd.
Tel:    +972-3-537-5795
Fax:    +972-3-537-5796
E-mail: TakeThisOuTeyalEraseMEspamspam_OUTaladdin.co.il
WWW Home Page:  http://www.aks.com/

1995\10\12@122307 by John T

picon face
The latest version of MPASM is 1.21. If you download the .zip file from the
Microchip BBS, it will contain both the DOS and Windows versions.

John Magrane
FAE Bell Industries
408 734-8570
RemoveME72712.2347spamTakeThisOuTcompuserve.com

1995\10\12@185138 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
   If you download the .zip file from the Microchip BBS, it will contain
   both the DOS and Windows versions.

Grumble, grumble.  Microchip has a (rather nice) web site.  How come
all the software and stuff only seems to be available from their BBS?

BillW

'windows downloader'
1995\10\16@101753 by Stuart Allman

flavicon
face
Is there a windows downloader for the Picstart kit in progress?

Stuart Allman
studioEraseMEspam.....halcyon.com


'mps16c on mac with softwindows'
1996\03\20@174637 by Paul Bjork
flavicon
face
Has anyone tried running the PICStart 16c (v1.3) on a Macintosh with Softwindows
2.1 Windows emulation?  I can get other developer's systems working in this
mode, but the communication for the PICStart just doesn't quite "catch".

The manual for the PICStart is very sketchy on communication parameters such as
Baud rate, parity, etc.  I've tried common combinations of these, hardware
handshaking and Xon/Xoff, too.  I know that the signals are different connecting
for the Mac are different than RS-232 but the special hardware I got with
Softwindows is supposed to take care of most of those cases.

Any sources for information on this, or experience out there?  Please, no guff
about the Macintosh.  I just can't give up my Mac even though all the
engineering hardware is made for the PC.

1996\03\20@214151 by reginald neale

flavicon
face
>
> Has anyone tried running the PICStart 16c (v1.3) on a Macintosh with
Softwindows
> 2.1 Windows emulation?  I can get other developer's systems working in this
> mode, but the communication for the PICStart just doesn't quite "catch".
>
> The manual for the PICStart is very sketchy on communication parameters such
as
> Baud rate, parity, etc.  I've tried common combinations of these, hardware
> handshaking and Xon/Xoff, too.  I know that the signals are different
connecting
> for the Mac are different than RS-232 but the special hardware I got with
> Softwindows is supposed to take care of most of those cases.
>
> Any sources for information on this, or experience out there?  Please, no guff
> about the Macintosh.  I just can't give up my Mac even though all the
> engineering hardware is made for the PC.
>
Paul:

I'm in the same boat. The problem is that Microchip chose to use a bastard
communications protocol for the serial link to the programmer. They aren't
going to be bothered doing anything to make it useable for us Mac people.


....Reg Neale.............standard disclaimer applies.......
"Ignorance is a renewable resource."    P. J. O'Rourke......

1996\03\28@194905 by jim

flavicon
picon face
On Wed, 20 Mar 1996 16:46:13 -0600, you wrote:

>Has anyone tried running the PICStart 16c (v1.3) on a Macintosh with
Softwindows
>2.1 Windows emulation?  I can get other developer's systems working in this
>mode, but the communication for the PICStart just doesn't quite "catch".
>
>The manual for the PICStart is very sketchy on communication parameters such as
>Baud rate, parity, etc.  I've tried common combinations of these, hardware
>handshaking and Xon/Xoff, too.  I know that the signals are different
connecting
>for the Mac are different than RS-232 but the special hardware I got with
>Softwindows is supposed to take care of most of those cases.
>
>Any sources for information on this, or experience out there?  Please, no guff
>about the Macintosh.  I just can't give up my Mac even though all the
>engineering hardware is made for the PC.

SoftWindows 3.0 was released on Monday. The comms emulation should be
better than that in 2.x - it's certainly had more testing.
jim


'Windowed PIC16C622'
1996\05\03@043245 by Bojan Dobaj
flavicon
face
Hi everyone,

I have accidentally program windowed version of PIC16C622 with code protect on
and I can't reprogram or erase it now. Does anyone have any suggestions, how
to save it?

Thanks...

Bojan Dobaj, Slovenia

1996\05\03@132141 by Kim Cooper

flavicon
face
    Sorry, ocde protect on the newer devices, the PIC16C622 included, is
    permanent.

    Kim Cooper
    Microchip Technology


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Windowed PIC16C622
Author:  Bojan Dobaj <EraseMEbojan.dobajspamUNI-MB.SI> at Internet_Exchange
Date:    5/3/96 10:33 AM


Hi everyone,

I have accidentally program windowed version of PIC16C622 with code protect on
and I can't reprogram or erase it now. Does anyone have any suggestions, how
to save it?

Thanks...

Bojan Dobaj, Slovenia

1996\05\03@142646 by Rodger Richey

picon face
    Bojan,

    Once you have code protected a PIC16C622, the part can not be erased
    and reprogrammed.  You have just transformed your PIC16C622 into a
    paper weight.

    Regards,

    Rodger Richey
    Sr. Applications Engineer
    Microchip Technology Incorporated


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Windowed PIC16C622
Author:  Bojan Dobaj <RemoveMEbojan.dobajEraseMEspamEraseMEUNI-MB.SI> at Internet_Exchange
Date:    5/3/96 10:33 AM


Hi everyone,

I have accidentally program windowed version of PIC16C622 with code protect on
and I can't reprogram or erase it now. Does anyone have any suggestions, how
to save it?

Thanks...

Bojan Dobaj, Slovenia

1996\05\03@152632 by Eric T. Brewer

flavicon
face
At 9:30 AM 5/3/96, Kim Cooper wrote:
>     Sorry, ocde protect on the newer devices, the PIC16C622 included, is
>     permanent.
>
>     Kim Cooper
>     Microchip Technology
>
>
Would you please provide a list of such devices?

Thanks,
eric

1996\05\03@212012 by Eric Smith

flavicon
face
Kim Cooper of Microchip wrote:
> Sorry, ocde protect on the newer devices, the PIC16C622 included, is
> permanent.

This is really disastrous, as sometimes the code protect bit is set
erroneously by the programmer.  I've seen this happen on both the PICSTART
and the Parallax programmers.  Maybe it's really a design defect in the
device?  Anyhow, two out of five of my windowed '622 parts are now only
suitable to be used as jewelry.

Eric

1996\05\03@230218 by Mike Keitz

flavicon
face
>Kim Cooper of Microchip wrote:
>> Sorry, ocde protect on the newer devices, the PIC16C622 included, is
>> permanent.
>
>This is really disastrous, as sometimes the code protect bit is set
>erroneously by the programmer.  I've seen this happen on both the PICSTART
>and the Parallax programmers.  Maybe it's really a design defect in the
>device?  Anyhow, two out of five of my windowed '622 parts are now only
>suitable to be used as jewelry.
>
They could put in annother unerasable bit which, when programmed, inhibits
writing to the code-protect bit (forces it to write 1 no matter what the
programmer loads to the config register).  This bit would be programmed at
the factory on ceramic devices, making it impossible to code-protect them.
The inhibit bit would be left blank on the plastic ones, allowing the code
protect to be set after programming by the customer (after the protect bit
is programmed, the state of the inhibit bit is not relevant).  Then there
would be no way to kill a ceramic PIC by protecting it by accident, and the
same die could be used in either version.

-Mike

'WARNING: CODE-PROTECT CAN BE HARMFUL TO WINDOWED P'
1996\05\03@233219 by PETE KLAMMER

flavicon
face
> Date: Fri, 03 May 1996 18:17:00 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Eric Smith <RemoveMEericspam_OUTspamKILLspamGOONSQUAD.SPIES.COM>
> Subject: Re: Windowed PIC16C622
>
> Kim Cooper of Microchip wrote:
> > Sorry, ocde protect on the newer devices, the PIC16C622 included, is
> > permanent.
>
> This is really disastrous, as sometimes the code protect bit is set
> erroneously by the programmer.  I've seen this happen on both the PICSTART
> and the Parallax programmers.  Maybe it's really a design defect in the
> device?  Anyhow, two out of five of my windowed '622 parts are now only
> suitable to be used as jewelry.
>
> Eric

I agree; they changed the rules without telling us.  There should be a
bright RED warning label on every new windowed PIC:
  WARNING: USING CODE-PROTECT ON THIS PART MAY BE BAD FOR ITS HEALTH!

I learned the hard way with a couple dearly-needed, direly-begged,
and painfully-lost 17C44 early engineering samples.  I got one shot of code
in each -- ``Wot!  OTP parts with windows!!?'' -- and now one is a doorstop
and the other is a paperweight.

I understand what Microchip did, but I still don't like it.  They put the
code-protect fuse (or *one* of them, anyway) under metalization, so it is
UV-proof.  The reason being, that the same dice are used for windowed or OTP
production parts, and Microchip wanted to thwart a certain kind of hacking:
popping the lid off an OTP and then selectively erasing just the
code-protect bit(s).  Worthy justification, I guess.  But even if I am smart
and careful enough to never leave embedded code-protect fuse settings in my
development code, its an inconvenience to have to either build different
files for development and production, without and with embedded fuse
settings, or else rely on manufacturing personnel to always remember to set
the code-protect fuse at the programming station.  Either way, it's an
invitation to forget one way or the other, and either accidentally lock up a
windowed part, or accidentally release unprotected code.

In truth, I have greater luxury than I admit: I use the PicMaster (ICE) for
most of my development, and -- SO FAR -- it hasn't become permanently
locked when I download code-protected hex files into it.

Peter F. Klammer, Racom Systems Inc.                   RemoveMEPKlammerTakeThisOuTspamspamACM.Org
6080 Greenwood Plaza Boulevard                            (303)773-7411
Englewood, CO  80111                                  FAX:(303)771-4708

'AVCASE51 & Windows NT/Clyde Smith-Stubbs'
1996\05\04@030520 by James Musselman

flavicon
face
Clyde Smith-Stubbs wrote:
>
> EraseMEdmanzerspamspamspamBeGonewimsey.com (Doug Manzer) wrote:
>
> > Although this runs fine in Borland C, the compiler gives me a
> > warning "Call to function without prototype" for:
> >This has nothing to do with the original thread.

I have AVCASE v2.12 for 80C31.  Mr Clyde, will this compiler run under windows
NT 3.51? 4.0?
thanks, James

--
Regards, James Musselman, President

Radix/Cobalt Instruments, Inc.
PO Box 897
Clovis, CA  93613 USA
tel  209-297-9000
fax  209-297-9400

Check out my home page  http://rdx.com

'WARNING: CODE-PROTECT CAN BE HARMFUL TO WINDOWED P'
1996\05\05@164114 by Przemek Klosowski

flavicon
face
Peter F. Klammer wrote

  I understand what Microchip did, but I still don't like it.  They put the
  code-protect fuse (or *one* of them, anyway) under metalization, so it is
  UV-proof.  The reason being, that the same dice are used for windowed or OTP

I believe that E(E)PROM cells can also be erased by soft Xrays. The problem
with Xrays is that they are 10-50 times more energetic than UV (UV quanta
by definition have energies in the range between 3 and 200 eV, and Xrays
are above that, with most typical Xray generators using 5,000-50,000 eV).
Thus, Xrays can induce radiation damage in the semiconductor, so you have to
be very careful with the dose. On the other hand, a little metalization won't
prevent the erasure by Xrays.

I suppose that a friendly dentist or crystallographer would let someone use
their Xray machine; would someone be willing to experiment a little with
the times necessary?

       p

1996\05\05@204255 by John Payson

flavicon
face
> I believe that E(E)PROM cells can also be erased by soft Xrays. The problem
> with Xrays is that they are 10-50 times more energetic than UV (UV quanta
> by definition have energies in the range between 3 and 200 eV, and Xrays
> are above that, with most typical Xray generators using 5,000-50,000 eV).
> Thus, Xrays can induce radiation damage in the semiconductor, so you have to
> be very careful with the dose. On the other hand, a little metalization won't
> prevent the erasure by Xrays.
>
> I suppose that a friendly dentist or crystallographer would let someone use
> their Xray machine; would someone be willing to experiment a little with
> the times necessary?

This would leave us back at square 1 it seems, in terms of security (though
no worse than many other OTP micros).  On the other hand, if X-rays work,
OTP's could be used as EPROMs :-)

Anyway, here's the idea I was thinking of for code-protect: rather than using
a "fuse" (EPROM location), why not have a RAM flag [i.e. latch] for that
purpose?  Require that in order for programming or reading to be performed
on the device, the PC must first feed the device a copy of the program within
it.  Have this behavior apply regardless of whether a "code-protect" flag is
set or not (there wouldn't have to be a code-protect flag).

While some care would need to be taken to prevent an unscrupulous person from
glitching the RAM flag, these semantics would allow a device with known cont-
ents to be verified (or programmed more) and a blank device (whose contents
are known implicitly) to be programmed and verified.

What do people think of this idea?

1996\05\08@143755 by PETE KLAMMER

flavicon
face
> Date: Sun, 05 May 1996 19:42:41 -0500
> From: John Payson <RemoveMEsupercatKILLspamspamMCS.COM>
> Subject: Re: WARNING: CODE-PROTECT CAN BE HARMFUL TO WINDOWED PARTS
>
> Anyway, here's the idea I was thinking of for code-protect: rather than using
> a "fuse" (EPROM location), why not have a RAM flag [i.e. latch] for that
> purpose?  Require that in order for programming or reading to be performed
> on the device, the PC must first feed the device a copy of the program within
> it.  Have this behavior apply regardless of whether a "code-protect" flag is
> set or not (there wouldn't have to be a code-protect flag).
>
> While some care would need to be taken to prevent an unscrupulous person from
> glitching the RAM flag, these semantics would allow a device with known cont-
> ents to be verified (or programmed more) and a blank device (whose contents
> are known implicitly) to be programmed and verified.
>
> What do people think of this idea?

You would have to be sure that the part did not ``betray'' where the
mismatch occurred, so that incremental trial-and-error contents guessing
would not work.

For reading a part, this seems pointless.  But for verification, it is
better than the scrambled-signature bytes we get now: send in a whole second
copy of the program, which is compared internally, without betrayal of where
any mismatch occurs, and return a single ``yes'' or ``no''.  In fact, who
needs readout capability at all (who ever ``forgot'' what hex file is stored
in a programmed part?).  Why not make PIC code (E)PROM write-only?  (from the
point of view of pins or pads, of course.)

Code-protection must also defeat another mechanism: incremental bit-burning.
Suppose location 0000 in a protected part contains FFF2, and when you read
it you get the scrambled signature C6C6 (I'm making this up).  Then you
attempt to burn location 0000 with FFFE, and read back, and nothing has
changed: bit 0 was already 0.  Then you attempt to burn location 0000 with
FFFD, and read back, and the signature changed to B2B2 (or whatever).  That
tells you bit 1 must have been a 1; you just cleared it.  The code-protect
fuse should prevent this (does it?).

Peter F. Klammer, Racom Systems Inc.                   PKlammerSTOPspamspamspam_OUTACM.Org
6080 Greenwood Plaza Boulevard                            (303)773-7411
Englewood, CO  80111                                  FAX:(303)771-4708

1996\05\08@153152 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
PETE KLAMMER <spamBeGonePICLISTSTOPspamspamEraseMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU> wrote:

> Code-protection must also defeat another mechanism: incremental
> bit-burning. ....  The code-protect fuse should prevent this (does
> it?).

Not on the first 64 bytes of the original 16C5x parts, Pete.

-Andy

Andrew Warren - KILLspamfastfwdspamBeGonespamix.netcom.com
Fast Forward Engineering, Vista, California
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2499

1996\05\08@165312 by Eric T. Brewer

flavicon
face
At 12:37 PM 5/8/96, PETE KLAMMER wrote:
{Quote hidden}

I think a best of both world situation would be to have two bits. The first
bit is a ReadWrite/*WriteOnly mode bit. Once cleared, the bit cannot be set
by being erased (as the code protect bit is today with having metal over
the EPROM
cell). This allows the code array to be read during testing at the factory
or by a
programmer.

The second bit would be a Verify/*NoVerify bit. Once cleared, the array can
no longer
be verified, but the bit can be set via UV erasure. If the bit is set, the
array can be
verified by entering verify, setting the PC to 0, sending all of the code
for the code array
to the PIC and then reading a Yes/No result. Failure to sequence through
all of the
code space will result in a No response.

Given this, a part can have the ReadWrite/*WriteOnly bit accidentally
cleared without
making the part into jewelry. The part is very secure. A person trying to
"crack" it
would have to set the Verify/*NoVerify bit, then send 512x12 words of data
to a 16c54,
and then see if it verified. If they are one bit off in the 6144 bit
sequence, they get back a
No. If they don't sequence through all of the code array, they get a No.
This means
they have 2^6144 combinations to try. The average case would be 2^3072.
That is pretty
damn secure. You couldn't cycle through that number of combinations in a
number of
lifetimes!

I would put forth, that the average company would leave the the Verify/*NoVerify
alone as the part is already secure enough. By not clearing the bit, it
allows for some
failure analysis to be done when you get a bad part back. Since you have
the code
which is supposed to be programmed into the part, you can verify the part
still has the
correct code. If it does not, you still do some simple checks such sequence
through 512
different verify operations with successive words of code being zero. If
you got a Yes,
then you know a location got zapped somehow. You could check to see if the whole
part got zapped. You could see if a column of bits are zapped. Anyways, you
get the
idea.

You might ask why even have a Verify/*NoVerify bit. You don't have to. It is for
the extra paranoid companies out there! I certainly wouldn't need it.

cheers,
eric

PS. I haven't seen this in practice or print anywhere before. If someone
actually
implements this, they should give credit (Peter and myself) where credit is
due! Not
asking for royalties or anything, just a fleeting glimpse of fame!


'Where can I find "windowed" 16c73?'
1996\06\26@100840 by Blum Dave
flavicon
face
Does anyone know where I can find "windowed" 16c73.

Everyone I contact are out-of-stock.

All I need are 2-4 of them.

David J. Blum
spamBeGoneblumdspamKILLspamnovell1-bto.chnt.gtegsc.com

'Where can I find "windowed" 16c73? -Reply'
1996\06\26@121219 by Mark Jurras

flavicon
face
I just got three PIC16C73/JW parts from Pioneer last week. Better price than
Digi-key too.

Good Luck,

- -Mark

>>> Blum Dave <.....blumdspam_OUTspamNOVELL1-BTO.CHNT.GTEGSC.COM> 26 June 1996  11:22 am
>>>
Does anyone know where I can find "windowed" 16c73.

Everyone I contact are out-of-stock.

All I need are 2-4 of them.

David J. Blum
TakeThisOuTblumd.....spamTakeThisOuTnovell1-bto.chnt.gtegsc.com

1996\06\26@131444 by Keith Kotay

flavicon
face
>
> I just got three PIC16C73/JW parts from Pioneer last week. Better price than
>  Digi-key too.
>
I tried to get these from Digi-Key yesterday and was told that
they won't be in until September.

Keith

Keith D. Kotay
TakeThisOuTkotayKILLspamspamspamcs.dartmouth.edu
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~kotay


'MPLAB in Windows 95'
1996\07\05@123735 by John B C Walker
flavicon
picon face
Dear All,

Sorry, this is going back to a topic discussed not too long ago, and of
course, I can't remember what was said.

I'm running Windows 95 here and MPLAB 3.01. MPLAB used to function fine,
but now I can't create a new project, or open the development setup under
the options menu, or some other functions for that matter.
Is there a way to solve this? I *can't* go back to using MPSIM!

Cheers.

J.W.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
       Johnnie Walker
       MSc Digital Systems Engineering
       Heriot-Watt University
       email: .....ceejbcwspamRemoveMEcee.hw.ac.uk
              RemoveMEceejbwspamspamBeGonepp.hw.ac.uk
              spamBeGoneceejbw@spam@spamspam_OUTtorduff.hw.ac.uk
       www: http://www.cee.hw.ac.uk/~ceejbcw
       tel: (0131) 343 2864
-----------------------------------------------------------------

1996\07\08@120907 by Jim Kape

picon face
    John,

    The probable cause of your problem is an old BWCC.DLL file in your
    \windows or \windows\system directory.  You need to go to DOS and find
    that file, then replace it with the BWCC.DLL that is in your MPLAB
    directory.  This should fix the problem.

    Good Luck,

    Jim



______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: MPLAB in Windows 95
Author:  John B C Walker <TakeThisOuTceejbcwspamspamCEE.HW.AC.UK> at Internet_Exchange
Date:    7/5/96 5:37 PM


Dear All,

Sorry, this is going back to a topic discussed not too long ago, and of
course, I can't remember what was said.

I'm running Windows 95 here and MPLAB 3.01. MPLAB used to function fine,
but now I can't create a new project, or open the development setup under
the options menu, or some other functions for that matter.
Is there a way to solve this? I *can't* go back to using MPSIM!

Cheers.

J.W.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
       Johnnie Walker
       MSc Digital Systems Engineering
       Heriot-Watt University
       email: ceejbcwEraseMEspamcee.hw.ac.uk
              RemoveMEceejbwEraseMEspamspam_OUTpp.hw.ac.uk
              @spam@ceejbwRemoveMEspamEraseMEtorduff.hw.ac.uk
       www: http://www.cee.hw.ac.uk/~ceejbcw
       tel: (0131) 343 2864
-----------------------------------------------------------------


'MPLAB watch window'
1996\09\03@194401 by Peter Yates
flavicon
face
Hi

Does anyone know of a way to add the W register to a watch window
in MPLAB. When I try to add it, I get a "symbol not found" message.
I know you can view it in the Special Function Register window, but
sometimes it would be more convenient to add it to a watch window.

Thanks
Peter

1996\09\05@023511 by ostandal

flavicon
face
Peter Yates wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Does anyone know of a way to add the W register to a watch window
> in MPLAB. When I try to add it, I get a "symbol not found" message.
> I know you can view it in the Special Function Register window, but
> sometimes it would be more convenient to add it to a watch window.
>
> Thanks
> Peter

Simply add the workregister in the watch window by typing a w
--
Yours sincerely

¯yvind Standal
Moholt alle 32-42
7035 Trondheim
Tlf:    priv. 73888573  arb. 74080600
email:  EraseMEostandalspam@spam@nortroll.no
www:    http://www.stud.ntnu.no/~standal


'Parallel-port programming in a Windows world'
1996\10\05@020823 by Karen L. Black
flavicon
face
I have a 16C84 that is to be programmed in-circuit as part of our customers'
system configuration.  Ideally, this would run under Windows NT.  However,
it appears that the parallel-port programming model (as seen in Messrs.
Tait and Goodwin, and the Microchip ECH) wants direct port-level communication
with the parallel port, and from what little I know of NT, this is not
allowed.

Has anyone else tried to integrate a parallel-port programmer under NT?
Can someone perhaps point me to "model" printer driver code, so I can figure
out how to include what I need?

Thanks,
Karen Black
Blodgett, OR

1996\10\05@081942 by anick

flavicon
face
Karen L. Black wrote:
>
> I have a 16C84 that is to be programmed in-circuit as part of our customers'
> system configuration.  Ideally, this would run under Windows NT.  However,
> it appears that the parallel-port programming model (as seen in Messrs.
> Tait and Goodwin, and the Microchip ECH) wants direct port-level communication
> with the parallel port, and from what little I know of NT, this is not
> allowed.
>
> Has anyone else tried to integrate a parallel-port programmer under NT?
> Can someone perhaps point me to "model" printer driver code, so I can figure
> out how to include what I need?
>
> Thanks,
> Karen Black
> Blodgett, OR

Having tried to write a printer driver for NT, and having a lot of
difficulty it was much easier and almost as good, we went to Windows 95
instead.
Your simplest solution is to NOT use NT. Writing a 'printer driver' for
NT, to put it simply....is HELL. If you dont really need to use NT for
in-circuit programming dont!!! Just use a DOS boot disk and do it that
way. If you have the NT DDK (Device Driver Kit) from Microsoft there is
a sample UNIDRIVER for NT included. Supposedly you can just write a
diver script that will do what you need, and It MAY write directly to
the port. Also under NT nearly all IO is done via a file interface from
the NT API, But I'm not sure about the printer ports.

I hope this kind of helps, but for my money I would not bother with NT..

--
Alan Nickerson
---------
It seems to me that the best new ideas come from
people who don't know that they "can't".  -- Paul Mathews,
@spam@optoengspam_OUTspam.....WHIDBEY.COM

1996\10\05@112808 by Martin Darwin

flavicon
face
Take a look at issue 74 (September 1996) of Circuit Cellar Ink.  There is
an article about writing a VxD for Windows 95 that allows access to the
printer port. Although VxD's don't currently work in NT, Microsoft may put
support in for them soon.

MD


On Fri, 4 Oct 1996, Karen L. Black wrote:

{Quote hidden}

'Windows PIC Programmer App'
1996\10\10@142347 by Maurice De Jersey

picon face
Hi,

I have just downloaded MPLAB in the hope that it would have
a Windows based PIC START 16B and/or 16C programmer application.
But alas it does not.  Does anyone know of a Windows based
application to drive the PIC START 16B and 16C?

Cheers
Maurice

1996\10\11@075415 by tjaart

flavicon
face
Maurice De Jersey wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have just downloaded MPLAB in the hope that it would have
> a Windows based PIC START 16B and/or 16C programmer application.
> But alas it does not.  Does anyone know of a Windows based
> application to drive the PIC START 16B and 16C?
>
> Cheers
> Maurice

Get the PICSTART PLUS (+-R900). It is supported by MPLAB, and supports
ALL PIC products (18,28,40 pin)

Ciao

1996\10\11@123622 by robin.abbott

flavicon
face
Maurice, you may wish to look at our programmer and Windows
based dev. kits - see the web page below...

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                                                                       |
|   spamBeGonerobin.abbottEraseMEspamdial.pipex.com                                         |
|                                                                       |
|  PIC programmers and BASIC development systems from                   |
|    FOREST Electronic Developments. Visit our home page at             |
|                                                                       |
|      http://www.ibmpcug.co.uk/~gmwarner/fed.htm                       |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+


'MPLAB 3.10.03 crashes Windows 3.1'
1996\11\02@175159 by Ian Chapman
flavicon
picon face
I wonder whether anyone recognises the following problem and can suggest
a solution.  I have just installed MPLAB 3.10.03 under Windows 3.1 and I
find that it crashes my PC every time I run it.  Unfortunately, I have
not previously used MPLAB and so I cannot say whether this is a problem
with other versions.  However, MPASM for Windows in the same package
runs fine.

The specific symptoms on double-clicking the MPLAB icon are that the
hourglass appears, the hard disk is accessed in several bursts of a few
seconds and then continuously.  Nothing further seems to happen.  At
this point, the mouse is still able to move the hourglass around but the
system appears otherwise dead (e.g. "Caps Lock" and "Num Lock" no longer
toggle the LEDs on the keyboard).  CTRL-ALT-DEL does not produce the
usual Windows response (e.g. "The application has stopped responding to
the system") but instead fills the screen with garbage and a system
reset appears to be the only option.

Before anyone asks, I have deleted all copies of BWCC.DLL other than the
one in the MPLAB directory (confirmed by BWCCFIX.EXE).

Now I know there are plenty of people out there who have MPLAB working
happily.  I tend to blame my system, but I haven't had this type of
major problem with any other Windows software (I assume that the odd
non-reproducible General Protection Fault is not untypical).

I'd appreciate any helpful suggestions.
--
Ian Chapman
[ Any opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my computer ]

1996\11\02@182322 by Darrel Johansen

picon face
Ian Chapman wrote:
>
> ...I have just installed MPLAB 3.10.03 under Windows 3.1 and I
> find that it crashes my PC every time I run it...

Ian,

3.10.03 is an interim release of MPLAB and it was found to exhibit the
symptoms you describe on some PC's.  Get the latest version v3.12 and
you should be able to run just fine.

Darrel Johansen
Microchip Technology, Inc.

1996\11\03@123650 by Ian Chapman

flavicon
picon face
Darrel Johansen (Microchip Technology, Inc.) <darreljspamBeGonespamPRIMENET.COM>
wrote:

>3.10.03 is an interim release of MPLAB and it was found to exhibit the
>symptoms you describe on some PC's.  Get the latest version v3.12 and
>you should be able to run just fine.

Thanks for your speedy response.  I tried downloading and installing the
latest version today (MPL31200) but unfortunately MPLAB still fails with
exactly the same symptoms.  I had previously emptied my MPLAB directory
to make sure that no residue was carried across from v3.10 (although I
can't vouch for other directories).  I have also double-checked that no
rogue copies of BWCC.DLL are lurking.

For your information, only Program Manager is running before MPLAB fails
to start.  To recap, the precise order of events is: on double-clicking
the MPLAB icon, the hourglass appears and the hard disk is accessed a
few times, then all of the Program Manager icons disappear, then the
hard disk is accessed continuously and the keyboard appears to lock up
(Caps Lock and Num Lock don't work).  Nothing further seems to happen,
and CTRL-ALT-DEL fills the screen with repetitive garbage (white blocks
and strange characters).

I'd appreciate any further thoughts.  Thanks in advance.
--
Ian Chapman
[ Any opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my computer ]

1996\11\03@182702 by Darrel Johansen

picon face
Ian Chapman wrote:

> Thanks for your speedy response.  I tried downloading and installing the
> latest version today (MPL31200) but unfortunately MPLAB still fails with
> exactly the same symptoms.

I guess we need to back up then and find out more about your system.
How much memory/disk space do you have?  What kind of CPU?  You're using
Windows 3.1 by itself (not running under some other operating system
like).  MPLAB needs a 386 or greater, about 4M of RAM, a few megs of
free disk space.  Did the install work without any errors or messages
(or is it the install itself that is failing)?

Darrel J.

'MPLAB crashes Windows 3.1'
1996\11\05@054314 by Roland Andrag

flavicon
face
> Ian Chapman wrote:
>
> > Thanks for your speedy response.  I tried downloading and installing the
> > latest version today (MPL31200) but unfortunately MPLAB still fails with
> > exactly the same symptoms.
>
> I guess we need to back up then and find out more about your system.
> How much memory/disk space do you have?  What kind of CPU?  You're using
> Windows 3.1 by itself (not running under some other operating system
> like).  MPLAB needs a 386 or greater, about 4M of RAM, a few megs of
> free disk space.  Did the install work without any errors or messages
> (or is it the install itself that is failing)?
>
> Darrel J.

Hello Ian & Everyone!!

I am experiencing more or less the same problem - Double click on
icon (hourglass),  hard disk starts running,  icons disappear.  Only
my system does not freeze - I get a General protection fault.  Im am
not quite sure what version of MPLAB I have - I downloaded it from
the web site about 1 or two months ago.  I have since erased the
installation,  all copies of BCCWIN.DLL (or whatever),  and
reinstalled it,  with the same results.  Installation goes fine, no
problems reported.
My system runs on a P100,  16 Mb ram, 1.2 Gb hdd (around 300 Mb free),
etc. etc.

That's about it..

Cheers
   Roland

PS.  The most enjoyable aspect of reading this group everyday is the
fact that there are NO off topic postings, NO stupid arguments on the
operation of capacitors,  and that I get it in a digest form with ALL
the messages present and in the right order - no reply's to original
messages I have not received,  and probably will never receive.  I
find newsgroups very unreliable,  and would be very much in favour of
keeping this list is the form that is is now.

Ok, now I'm really done..
Cheers..

1996\11\05@115318 by Darrel Johansen

picon face
    Roland Andrag wrote:

    >I am experiencing more or less the same problem - Double click on
    >icon (hourglass),  hard disk starts running,  icons disappear.  Only
    >my system does not freeze - I get a General protection fault.  Im am
    >not quite sure what version of MPLAB I have - I downloaded it from
    >the web site about 1 or two months ago.  I have since erased the
    >installation,  all copies of BCCWIN.DLL (or whatever),  and
    >reinstalled it,  with the same results.  Installation goes fine, no
    >problems reported.

_________________________________________________________________________

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

Roland,

As I asked Ian in his orginal post, download the latest version of MPLAB
(v.3.12).  There is a known problem with some of the interim released versions
that could produce problems like you and he described.

It may be that the transfer protocol was not correct, and the .EXE file that he
downloaded was corrupted and will not install.  We know of no other system
problems that would cause general protection faults on start up.  If you are
still having problems with v.3.12, let us know.


Darrel.
RemoveMEdarrel.johansen@spam@spamspamBeGonemicrochip.com

'MPLAB 3.10.03 crashes Windows 3.1'
1996\11\05@175357 by Ian Chapman

flavicon
picon face
Darrel,

I suggest that we take this up in private e-mail as we may be getting
off-topic for the PICLIST: as you'll see in a moment, I think I have
pinned this down to a problem with my PC.  For the record:

>How much memory/disk space do you have?
8MB of memory and 200Mb of free disk space.

>What kind of CPU?
TI 486DLC (equivalent to Cyrix 486).

>You're using
>Windows 3.1 by itself (not running under some other operating system
>like).
Correct.

>Did the install work without any errors or messages
>(or is it the install itself that is failing)?
The install worked fine (no error messages).

I tried booting up with minimal AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS files and
MPLAB started up fine.  I assume there must be some conflict which has
not shown up with other software.  I'll try replacing lines in each file
until the problem re-appears and see what conclusions I can draw.

Thanks for your help so far.
--
Ian Chapman

'!@#$%^&* Windows '95 can't find my PICMASTER'
1996\11\18@122837 by Mark Jurras

flavicon
face
I just got upgraded (I kicked and screamed the whole way) to Windows 95.
The method that the computer guys used was: Take computer. Back-Up entire
HD. Delete Windows 3.11 directory. Install Windows '95. Load Microsoft
Office and Groupunwise. Return Computer with most applications not working.

I have reloaded from scratch MPLAB 3.12.0 and it doesn't find my PICMASTER
emulator. I have checked the connections and port settings. I can't even
select it in the OPTIONS-->DEVELOPMENT menu. It is ghosted. How do I set my
emulator back up????

- -Mark

1996\11\18@150229 by Clyde Smith-Stubbs

flavicon
face
Mark Jurras <.....JURRAM@spam@spamEraseMETORRINGTON.COM> wrote:

> I just got upgraded (I kicked and screamed the whole way) to Windows 95.
> I have reloaded from scratch MPLAB 3.12.0 and it doesn't find my PICMASTER

Deleting Win3.1 was probably not the best way to do it, but anyway, the
problem is probably that you have to install the Picmaster module as well -
you need pmr31000.exe. This was certainly the case with earlier versions
of MPLAB.

You won't regret moving to Win95. Now if Microchip would only support WinNT...

Clyde

--
Clyde Smith-Stubbs       | HI-TECH Software,       | Voice: +61 7 3354 2411
.....clydeRemoveMEspamhitech.com.au      | P.O. Box 103, Alderley, | Fax:   +61 7 3354 2422
http://www.hitech.com.au | QLD, 4051, AUSTRALIA.   |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For info on the World's best C cross compilers for embedded systems, point
your WWW browser at http://www.hitech.com.au, or email .....infoSTOPspamspam@spam@hitech.com.au

1996\11\18@155926 by Ray Gardiner

flavicon
face
>I just got upgraded (I kicked and screamed the whole way) to Windows 95.
>The method that the computer guys used was: Take computer. Back-Up entire
>HD. Delete Windows 3.11 directory. Install Windows '95. Load Microsoft
>Office and Groupunwise. Return Computer with most applications not working.
>
>I have reloaded from scratch MPLAB 3.12.0 and it doesn't find my PICMASTER
>emulator. I have checked the connections and port settings. I can't even
>select it in the OPTIONS-->DEVELOPMENT menu. It is ghosted. How do I set my
>emulator back up????
>
>- -Mark

Hi Mark,

I had similiar problems a few weeks back, couldn't get MPLAB to look at
the emulator, tried all the IO addresses etc.. I ended up re-installing
the emulator dll's pmr31000.exe and it started to work again. However
since then I suspect the real problem was a path problem. Before doing
the re-installation try adding a  "." to the front of the path in
autoexec.bat. Assuming the emulator dll's are in the application directory.

Good Luck,


Ray Gardiner, Shepparton, Victoria 3630,  Australia,   rayEraseMEspam@spam@netspace.net.au

1996\11\18@202024 by Wireless Scientific

flavicon
face
At 11:11 AM 11/18/96, Mark Jurras wrote:
>I just got upgraded (I kicked and screamed the whole way) to Windows 95.
>The method that the computer guys used was: Take computer. Back-Up entire
>HD. Delete Windows 3.11 directory. Install Windows '95. Load Microsoft
>Office and Groupunwise. Return Computer with most applications not working.
>
>I have reloaded from scratch MPLAB 3.12.0 and it doesn't find my PICMASTER
>emulator. I have checked the connections and port settings. I can't even
>select it in the OPTIONS-->DEVELOPMENT menu. It is ghosted. How do I set my
>emulator back up????
>
>- -Mark


edit the mplab.ini manually, set the port.

1996\11\19@102410 by Ian Stirling

flavicon
face
>
> I just got upgraded (I kicked and screamed the whole way) to Windows 95.
> The method that the computer guys used was: Take computer. Back-Up entire
> HD. Delete Windows 3.11 directory. Install Windows '95. Load Microsoft
> Office and Groupunwise. Return Computer with most applications not working.
>
> I have reloaded from scratch MPLAB 3.12.0 and it doesn't find my PICMASTER
> emulator. I have checked the connections and port settings. I can't even
> select it in the OPTIONS-->DEVELOPMENT menu. It is ghosted. How do I set my
> emulator back up????

I have not run that software, but I do know that windows 95 handles the
paralell port in a totally different way to win 3.1[1] which breaks a lot
of bit banging programs.
I'm not aware of a way round it, other than getting a 95 version of the
software.
Sorry.

>
> - -Mark
>


--
Ian Stirling.                        |  http://www.mauve.demon.co.uk/
AKA Caeser, Bolonewbie.              |  With information on the PDA I'm making.

'Swap: CCS Compiler for Protel for Windows'
1996\11\20@133427 by Mike (UK)

picon face
I have Protel for Windows PCB layout package. I am looking for
CCS C compiler for 14 bit pics.

Swaps anyone?

1996\11\21@085937 by Cheng Huat Tan

flavicon
face
At 13:22 20/11/96 EST, you wrote:
>I have Protel for Windows PCB layout package. I am looking for
>CCS C compiler for 14 bit pics.
>
>Swaps anyone?
>

You can check out at http://www.execpc.com/~ccs/picc
Cheng Huat TAN
Department of Electronics and Computer Science
University of Southampton
Southampton UK SO 17 1BJ
RemoveMEcht195spamspamBeGoneecs.soton.ac.uk

1996\11\22@044550 by nogueira

flavicon
face
Cheng Huat Tan wrote:
>
>At 13:22 20/11/96 EST, you wrote:
>I have Protel for Windows PCB layout package. I am looking for
>CCS C compiler for 14 bit pics.
>
>Swaps anyone?

who is interested in this swap? Please send e-mail to me
at spamBeGonenogueiraKILLspamspam@spam@mandic.com.br

Octavio
--
========================================================
Octavio Nogueira
e-mail:   nogueiraspam_OUTspam@spam@mandic.com.br
homepage: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/tato
voice/fax: +55 11 240-6474
"ProPic" The first Production PIC Programmer running in
Windows and under US$ 20.00.
========================================================

'!@#$%^&* Windows '95 can't find my PICMASTER'
1996\11\22@091540 by Clyde Smith-Stubbs

flavicon
face
Ian Stirling <spamBeGoneis06@spam@spamSTUDENTS.STIR.AC.UK> wrote:

> I have not run that software, but I do know that windows 95 handles the
> paralell port in a totally different way to win 3.1[1] which breaks a lot
> of bit banging programs.
> I'm not aware of a way round it, other than getting a 95 version of the
> software.
> Sorry.

1) The PICMAster does not interface through the parallel port;
2) Win95 does initially virtualize hardware, but grants direct access
  to 16 bit programs unless something else is using the port;
3) The PICMaster and MPLAB work just fine under Win95. WinNT is, sadly,
  a different story. Microchip do not thus far seem to have made any
  commitment to Win32 versions of their software.


--
Clyde Smith-Stubbs       | HI-TECH Software,       | Voice: +61 7 3354 2411
RemoveMEclydeEraseMEspamKILLspamhitech.com.au      | P.O. Box 103, Alderley, | Fax:   +61 7 3354 2422
http://www.hitech.com.au | QLD, 4051, AUSTRALIA.   |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For info on the World's best C cross compilers for embedded systems, point
your WWW browser at http://www.hitech.com.au, or email spamBeGoneinfospam_OUTspamRemoveMEhitech.com.au

'Windows (Was Re: PIC Spreadsheet )'
1996\11\28@102719 by Martin McCormick

flavicon
face
In message <.....9611262316.AA24522spamRemoveMEtrojan.hitech.com.au>, Clyde Smith-Stubbs writes
:
>G'day Martin,
>

>They have, actually - it's called Windows NT. I can name about 2 Microsoft
>products that are worth using - WinNT and MS Publisher. You do need some
>memory to run NT (32MB is good) but since memory prices have crashed this
>is no longer a problem (memory used to be the most expensive part of a
>PC).

       That is absolutely true.  My first computer was an Apple II and
upgrading it to 64 K was like buying gold.

       What you say about NT is correct.  It is supposed to be more stable
than any of the Windowsx.x versions or Win95.

       I am the one who sometimes wastes the list time talking about using
the PIC utilities with a speech synthesizer driver.  The reason I haven't
upgraded to Windows yet is that there are a large number of applications
that don't work correctly with the speech drivers that are available for
windows.  The GUI isn't the problem.  What is wrong is that Microsoft has such
loose program behavior standards that developers don't have to use
standard system calls if they don't want to.  When they reinvent the wheel,
the speech drivers can't read any data being generated because it never goes
through the standard pipe.  By the time you see it on the screen, it is
simply a frame of video.  Trying to read that is much more difficult than
reading the ASCII that generated that video.

       Some of the American blindness organizations have been trying to
get program developers to write their code so that it will work with speech
drivers, but this is a waste of time and is sort of like swatting flies
rather than cleaning up the mess where they breed.  Microsoft should make
their operating systems so that standard works and anything else breaks.
This would make 99% of the access problems go away all by themselves.

       If I am going to spend the kind of money that I will need to spend to
upgrade, I want to do more than set the clock and run the occasional word
processor or telecommunications program.  I can do that right now.

       Having the option of either being able to download an ASCII file
of a document or being able to get an unencripted PDF or PostScript file
would buy some time until Windows cleans up its act and the benefits
outweigh the costs.

Cheers.


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ  Stillwater, OK 36.7N97.4W
OSU Center for Computing and Information Services Data Communications Group


'MPLAB and Windows 95'
1996\12\03@100016 by Stephen H Alsop
picon face
I keep getting Windows 95 errors (eg Kernel32 and Explorer errors) when
running the latest version of MPLAB.  I have re-installed Windows and MPLAB
several times and have to accept it is yet another Windows 95 problem.

Has anyone found any patches or new downloads to Windows 95 to help cure
some of its problems.  I would be grateful for any pointers.

----- Stephen H Alsop -----
email: s.ssystemsspam@spam@easynet.co.uk
www  : http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~s.ssystems
S&S Systems Ltd, Bretton Court, Manor Road, Wales Village, Sheffield, S31
8PD, England
Tel: 01909 773399  *  Fax: 01909 773645

'PIC 16C74 window version chip'
1996\12\13@053532 by Cheng Huat Tan

flavicon
face
Hi,

Can anyone tell me where can I find a 16C74 window version chip. I have
learn from Farnell(UK) tell me that the window version is now obsolete. Is
it true ?

Thank you very much

CH TAN
Cheng Huat TAN
Department of Electronics and Computer Science
University of Southampton
Southampton UK SO 17 1BJ
EraseMEcht195RemoveMEspamSTOPspamecs.soton.ac.uk
http://whirligig.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~cht195/

1996\12\13@065408 by Jim Robertson

flavicon
face
At 10:28 AM 12/13/96 +0000, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Can anyone tell me where can I find a 16C74 window version chip. I have
>learn from Farnell(UK) tell me that the window version is now obsolete. Is
>it true ?
>
>Thank you very much
>
>CH TAN
>Cheng Huat TAN


I think what they meant was that the 16C74 has been superseded by the
16C74A. Ask them for a 16c74A and see if that helps.

If you get a 16C74A remember the following:

The 16c74A is slightly different from the 16C74. For starters, the 16C74A
code protection cannot be erased so don't program it. (Please! don't let
this start other thread on the subject!) The PWRTE bit is reversed on the
16C74A and the 16C74A adds a brownout circuit controlled with the "BODEN"
bit in the config word.

Just make sure you use the .INC file for the 16C74A and don't use code
protection and you should be ok.

Jim

1996\12\13@074647 by Lynn Richardson

flavicon
face
On Fri, 13 Dec 1996, Cheng Huat Tan wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Can anyone tell me where can I find a 16C74 window version chip. I have
> learn from Farnell(UK) tell me that the window version is now obsolete. Is
> it true ?
>
> Thank you very much
>
> CH TAN
> Cheng Huat TAN
> Department of Electronics and Computer Science
> University of Southampton
> Southampton UK SO 17 1BJ
> RemoveMEcht195KILLspamspamTakeThisOuTecs.soton.ac.uk
> http://whirligig.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~cht195/
>

It may be that it has been replaced by the 16C74A.  This has a 'brown-out'
detector and may require changes to 16C74 programs as it uses a previously
unused bit.

_____________________________________________
Lynn Richardson           | spamBeGonelrichspam@spam@qni.com    \
Progress Instrument, Inc. | wa0znl.ampr.org  |
807 NW Commerce Drive     |  [44.46.176.3]   |
Lee's Summit, MO 64086    |                  |
(816)524-4442 F:246-4556  |                  /
---------------------------------------------

'Reprogramming non windowed devices'
1996\12\30@151047 by Tim Kerby

picon face
This sounds to me like it is both impossible and stupid trying it but I have
heard that the plastic cases on prom PICs are only opaque to uv and the
devices can still be erased with longer erase times.  I don't believe it but
if it were true it would save a lot of development costs buying windowed
ceramic devices.

Comments on this would be nice
                               Tim

1996\12\31@031028 by Mike

flavicon
face
>This sounds to me like it is both impossible and stupid trying it but I have
>heard that the plastic cases on prom PICs are only opaque to uv and the
>devices can still be erased with longer erase times.  I don't believe it but
>if it were true it would save a lot of development costs buying windowed
>ceramic devices.
>
>Comments on this would be nice
>                                Tim

I hear that low level X-rays can erase these devices, period of times unknown
and resulting reliability unknown. I understand there is a company in USA
that does this with the 68HC705C8 ? - Any body comment here ?

I suppose it wouldn't be too difficult to set up a verify program to
repetitively read back the EPROM whilst it was under 'radiation' - the
important thing would be to do it safely - if at all !

I wonder if an old monitor, with the EHT turned up might do it ?

Rgds


Mike

There is no a'priori reason that the ultimate truth will be interesting
or even useful, those moments of frustration during philosophical debate
would be replaced by the sheer terror which accompanies true knowledge.


'Reprogramming non windowed devices'
1997\01\07@043914 by Wolfram Liebchen
flavicon
face
At 16:09 31.12.96 +0800, you wrote:
>I suppose it wouldn't be too difficult to set up a verify program to
>repetitively read back the EPROM whilst it was under 'radiation' - the
>important thing would be to do it safely - if at all !

I would not power the PIC while radiated with x-rays, because the radiation
will also have influence on the digital logic. So you you could have
latch-up or something worse.

Wolfram


+-----------------------------------------------------+
| Wolfram Liebchen                                    |
| Forschungsinstitut fŸr Optik, TŸbingen, Deutschland |
| RemoveMEliebchenspam_OUTspamffo.fgan.de                         |
+-----------------------------------------------------+

1997\01\07@141953 by Tim Kerby

picon face
Too right.  It would erase the PIC in my programmer too.  And where would I
get my hands on an xray source at school with all the safety regulations?

Thanks for the replies.

Tim



>I would not power the PIC while radiated with x-rays, because the radiation
>will also have influence on the digital logic. So you you could have
>latch-up or something worse.
>
>Wolfram
>

1997\01\08@003633 by Mike

flavicon
face
>At 16:09 31.12.96 +0800, you wrote:
>>I suppose it wouldn't be too difficult to set up a verify program to
>>repetitively read back the EPROM whilst it was under 'radiation' - the
>>important thing would be to do it safely - if at all !
>
>I would not power the PIC while radiated with x-rays, because the radiation
>will also have influence on the digital logic. So you you could have
>latch-up or something worse.


Would depend on the frequency of the X-ray source and its intensity...

Anyway you could always power the PIC through a current limited supply
and force power removal and re-application should an over current be
detected - with the outputs open you could over-current test at say 10mA ?

You would only have to power up the unit for long enouigh to do a blank
check - and say every 10 seconds or so whilst under the X-ray source ?

Rgds


Mike

Socrates once gave the advice to "by all means get married... If you
get a good wife you will become happy, if you get a bad one you will
become a philosopher."

Become an Engineer and avoid making this problematic decision.


'Libraries for Windraft and Winboard'
1997\03\05@063222 by efoc
flavicon
face
Hi Peeps,
       I have just downloaded the Windraft V1.26a and Winboard V2.12 drafting
tools. Does anybody have or can anybody point me to a source for
Libraries for the PIC series.

--

Cheers Peter ..........

==================================
New Ideas come from those who
didn't know it wasn't possible
==================================

1997\03\05@090754 by rrose

flavicon
face
>         I have just downloaded the Windraft V1.26a and Winboard V2.12 drafting
> tools. Does anybody have or can anybody point me to a source for
> Libraries for the PIC series.

I have created a library for the Microchip PIC and EEPROM products.
I'm in the process of adding some of the new EEPROMs to the library.
If you want a copy when I get done, drop me a note.


Richard Rosenheim
rrosespamspamaccessnv.com

1997\03\05@090758 by rrose

flavicon
face
>         I have just downloaded the Windraft V1.26a and Winboard V2.12 drafting
> tools. Does anybody have or can anybody point me to a source for
> Libraries for the PIC series.

Oops, I forgot to mention that I only have created the library for
WinDraft.


Richard Rosenheim
spam_OUTrrosespam_OUTspamspam_OUTaccessnv.com

1997\03\05@115451 by David W. Duley

picon face
In a message dated 97-03-05 06:32:37 EST, you write:

<<
Hi Peeps,
        I have just downloaded the Windraft V1.26a and Winboard V2.12
drafting
tools. Does anybody have or can anybody point me to a source for
Libraries for the PIC series.

--

Cheers Peter ..........

==================================
New Ideas come from those who
didn't know it wasn't possible
==================================
 >>
Peter,
Lots O Luck with those to pieces of S____.  I struggled with WinDraft and
WinBoard for several months and I came to several conclusions:
1) The writers of these applications (and they barely qualify as
applications) have not now or ever have written Windows code. (and this
includes these two things)
2) These two programs started out as a high school fortran project on a
comadore PET. and later ported to Windows.
3) The writers of these two programs have sighed a serect pact with all of
the other low cost PCB packages on the market with the net effect of making
everyone else look good, including other high school fortran projects!


Seriously though, I hope they fixed a whole lot of bugs.  After loosing all
your changes to a dialog box that presents you with an error mesage with one
option namley CLOSE,  you may change your mind.  They were helpful at first
when I called them but they promised me a new version would be comming out
soon (It never did) and then they started to flat out ignore me.
I quickly changed to SuperCad  and Super PCB by mental automation. Not bug
free but a whole lot better.

In answer to your  original question:  Check out the IVEX web site.  They
used to have a FTP section from users.  One of the files was PIC libraries.

Good luck
Dave Duley
V.P. DreiTek Inc.

1997\03\07@145354 by D. R. Chicotel

flavicon
face
At 11:53 AM 3/5/97 -0500, you wrote:
>In a message dated 97-03-05 06:32:37 EST, you write:

>Peter,
>Lots O Luck with those two pieces of S____.  I struggled with WinDraft and
>WinBoard for several months and I came to several conclusions:
>1) The writers of these applications (and they barely qualify as
>applications) have not now or ever have written Windows code. (and this
>includes these two things)
>2) These two programs started out as a high school fortran project on a
>comadore PET. and later ported to Windows.
>3) The writers of these two programs have sighed a serect pact with all of
>the other low cost PCB packages on the market with the net effect of making
>everyone else look good, including other high school fortran projects!
>

I thought you were joking until I spent half a day reviewing these two
programs.  Now I know you weren't joking.  In fact, you may have been too
kind.  No wonder they're free.  (I guess you get what you pay for.)

1997\03\07@191544 by David W. Duley

picon face
In a message dated 97-03-07 15:42:48 EST, you write:

<< In a message dated 97-03-05 06:32:37 EST, you write:

>Peter,
>Lots O Luck with those two pieces of S____.  I struggled with WinDraft and
>WinBoard for several months and I came to several conclusions:
>1) The writers of these applications (and they barely qualify as
>applications) have not now or ever have written Windows code. (and this
>includes these two things)
>2) These two programs started out as a high school fortran project on a
>comadore PET. and later ported to Windows.
>3) The writers of these two programs have sighed a serect pact with all of
>the other low cost PCB packages on the market with the net effect of making
>everyone else look good, including other high school fortran projects!
>

I thought you were joking until I spent half a day reviewing these two
programs.  Now I know you weren't joking.  In fact, you may have been too
kind.  No wonder they're free.  (I guess you get what you pay for.) >>


Peter,
Yeah I might have padded the truth a bit but I didn't want to hurt your
feelings.  After all you may have been one of the people (like me) that paid
$29.95 for it.
I know it costs a bit more than free but SuperCad and SuperPCB from Mental
Automation (the're on the net) worked out great for me.  I couldn't quite
muster the $5000+ for OrCad.  I got both packages in the professional version
for about $800.  They have a scaled down version for low end use (4"X4" and
two layer) for around $150(?).  Its not without bugs but then what is.  At
least I have used it to produce 8 PCB's to date and some were up to 6 layers.
No complaints from the board house.  I hate to get those condesending calls
from the head layout guy at the PCB house telling me 25 different ways that
my layout sucks!
Good luck
Dave Duley
V.P. DreiTek inc.

'Those damned Windoze lusers'
1997\03\25@064209 by Frank A. Vostenbosch

flavicon
face
A one-line question and a one-line answer to that question need
not take up 60 lines if you switch off this bloody ms-tnef garbage!

> Date:    Mon, 24 Mar 1997 16:11:09 -0800
> From:    Robert Zeff <rzeffspam_OUTspamAINET.COM>
> Subject: Re: I2C peripherals?
>
> ------ =_NextPart_000_01BC386E.1A0933E0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> http://www.semiconductors.philips.com/
> --
> Robert
>
> {Original Message removed}

1997\03\25@065037 by tjaart

flavicon
face
Frank A. Vostenbosch wrote:
>
> A one-line question and a one-line answer to that question need
> not take up 60 lines if you switch off this bloody ms-tnef garbage!

A two line insult need not take 60 lines plus your reply-garbage
if you think before you hit that 'reply' button. (Or is is a 60 line
Unix script?)

--
Friendly Regards

Tjaart van der Walt
RemoveMEtjaartKILLspamspam@spam@wasp.co.za
_____________________________________________________________
| Another sun-deprived R&D Engineer slaving away in a dungeon |
|             WASP International  http://wasp.co.za           |
|             GSM and GPS value-added applications            |
|  Voice : +27-(0)11-622-8686   |   Fax : +27-(0)11-622-8686  |
|_____________________________________________________________|

1997\03\25@071321 by Wolfram Liebchen

flavicon
face
At 10:35 25.03.97 +0000, you wrote:
>A one-line question and a one-line answer to that question need
>not take up 60 lines if you switch off this bloody ms-tnef garbage!

----------------------------------------------------^^^^^^^---------

Well, Microsoft doesn't lie!

As a German I would pronounce "ms-tnef" as "MS-Tinnef", which is explained
in the German dictionary as "worthless things / lumber, made by MS".

It's a rare phenomenon, that MS tells the truth so frankly!

regards,

Wolfram




+-----------------------------------------------------+
| Wolfram Liebchen                                    |
| Forschungsinstitut fŸr Optik, TŸbingen, Deutschland |
| liebchenspamBeGonespam.....ffo.fgan.de                         |
+-----------------------------------------------------+


'Cheap 84 programmer and Windows.'
1997\05\27@033340 by Don McKenzie
flavicon
face
Nigel Goodwin wrote:

snip-----
>I'm currently converting
> my parallel port version to run under Windows. I now have an early Windows
> version running, and if anyones interested I'll put it on my web site for
> dwonload - it's not finished yet, but it does work!.
> Nigel.

>         | Lower Pilsley   | Web Page : http://www.lpilsley.demon.co.uk |

I know of about 200 people that may have a future interest in that
Nigel!
You are adding the F84 upgrade aren't you? :)

Don McKenzie  KILLspamdonspam.....dontronics.com   http://www.dontronics.com

PICSTART and Newfound PIC Programmers Firmware Upgrades.
SLI, the serial LCD that auto detects baud rates from 100 to 125K bps.
SimmStick(tm) A PIC proto PCB the size of a 30 pin Simm Memory Module.
Send a blank message to spam_OUTinfospamKILLspamdontronics.com for more details.


'MPLAB not compliant to Windows NT 4.0'
1997\06\10@100943 by ms
flavicon
face
Hi folks,

Up to now I was using MPLAB 3.09.03 within a Windows 3.1 environment.
But at the moment I've to change my PC from Windows 3.1 to Windows NT
4.0.

After re-installation under Windows NT (incl. PICMASTER DLLs for MPLAB)
MPLAB seems to work properly except that it isn't able to find the I/O
probe card - there always appears the message "There is no I/O probe
card at this address" when I try to select the emulator. I've verified
that I've selected the right address.

Is there any solution to get MPLAB running under NT 4.0 ?
Any help will be appreciated.

Best regards,

Marc Schmaeche

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
        ZENTRUM  FUER  ANGEWANDTE  MIKROELEKTRONIK  UND  NEUE
        TECHNOLOGIEN  DER  BAYERISCHEN  FACHHOCHSCHULEN  E.V.

 Dipl.-Ing. M.Schmaeche     Tel.:   +49 (0)9131 691145
 ZAM-Anwenderzentrum Nbg.   Fax:    +49 (0)9131 691166
 Am Weichselgarten 7        E-Mail: RemoveMEmsRemoveMEspamEraseMEzam.nf.fh-nuernberg.de
 91058 Erlangen, Germany             (Ger/Eng/Spa welcome)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

1997\06\10@204248 by Lee Jones

flavicon
face
> Up to now I was using MPLAB 3.09.03 within a Windows 3.1
> environment.  But at the moment I've to change my PC from
> Windows 3.1 to Windows NT 4.0.
>
> After re-installation under Windows NT (incl. PICMASTER DLLs
> for MPLAB)  MPLAB seems to work properly except that it isn't
> able to find the I/O probe card.

Of course not.  MPLAB does direct acces to the hardware (bad).
Windows NT is a true protected mode operating system (good).

> Is there any solution to get MPLAB running under NT 4.0 ?

Yes.  Customer pressure on Microchip until they write and
release drivers for Windows NT.  I've been asking for it
since June of last year (1996, when I got my Picstart Plus).

                                               Lee Jones

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Jones Computer Communications             KILLspamleespamspamBeGonefrumble.claremont.edu
509 Black Hills Dr, Claremont, CA 91711         voice: 909-621-9008
-------------------------------------------------------------------

1997\06\11@011135 by Mike Smith

flavicon
face
{Quote hidden}

To make it work, they'll still have to write to the hardware, but it will
have to be done in a Vxd device driver.  Maybe MicroChip don't have any
programmers that can use the DDK...   Answer - vote with your dollars.
(Actually, I got mine free from one of their seminars - thanks MicroChip &
Zatek)

MikeS
<KILLspammikesmith_ozspamBeGonespamrelaymail.net>

1997\06\11@073921 by ags

flavicon
face
> To make it work, they'll still have to write to the hardware, but it will
> have to be done in a Vxd device driver.  Maybe MicroChip don't have any
> programmers that can use the DDK...   Answer - vote with your dollars.
> (Actually, I got mine free from one of their seminars - thanks MicroChip
&
> Zatek)
Actually VxD's are only for Win 3.x and Win 95.  To write to hardware in NT
you have to write a Kernel mode Physical Device Driver.
A simple one of these is not very difficult, but when you work in "kernel
world" it is REALLY easy to hose the entire OS.  (My favorite bug so far
was a pointer bug that wrote into CMOS memory.)

Alan G. Smith

P.S.  If anyone needs a really simple Driver for hardware, I can talk with
you about doing it on a contract basis.

+---------------------------------------------------------
| Alan G. Smith
| @spam@agsSTOPspamspam@spam@poboxes.com
| http://www.innovatus.com/ags

1997\06\11@100221 by Clyde Smith-Stubbs

flavicon
face
On Wed, Jun 11, 1997 at 07:39:15AM -0400, Alan G. Smith wrote:
> Actually VxD's are only for Win 3.x and Win 95.  To write to hardware in NT
> you have to write a Kernel mode Physical Device Driver.

Yes and no. You do need a kernel mode driver, but this is only directly
accessible to Win32 programs that explicitly call it. If you want to
virtualize a piece of hardware, you also need a virtual device driver
for Win16 programs running under NT. What happens is that the Win16 program
does an IN or OUT instruction, NT traps it, and passes it to the virtual
device driver (which has registered itself to handle such traps for the
appropriate addresses). The VxD then makes calls to the real (kernel) device
driver to perform the I/O, and passes the result back to the 16 bit program.

This is how the serial and parallel ports are virtualized under NT - I have
a multi-port serial card in my PC under NT4.0, and I can map these very
different hardware ports via the standard serial port VxD to be accessed
from a 16 bit DOS program! The DOS program thinks it's accessing COM3 or COM4
as a standard 16450 UART, but in fact it's talking to a device driver
which in turn is talking to the processor on the intelligent multi-port
card.

All this stuff is well covered in the MSDN library CD.

Writing such a virtual device driver is not overly difficult, nor is a
simple kernel device driver for a dumb piece of hardware like the PICMaster
interface board. In fact there is a skeleton driver in the DDK that will
allow access to any I/O port you care to configure. Using this plus
a VxD would allow MPLAB to work. I toyed with doing this myself at
one time, but it seems you need Visual C++ to compile kernel
device drivers and I couldn't persuade myself to use it (I use Watcom
for casting spells under Windoze.) Microsoft used to supply a pre-compiled
version of the generic port driver, but it's only in source form on
the NT4.0 DDK so far as I can see.


--
Clyde Smith-Stubbs   |HI-TECH Software,      |Voice: +61 7 3354 2411
clydespamBeGonespamspamBeGonehtsoft.com     |P.O. Box 103, Alderley,|Fax:   +61 7 3354 2422
http://www.htsoft.com|QLD, 4051, AUSTRALIA.  |PGP: finger spamBeGoneclydespamhtsoft.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download a FREE beta version of our new ANSI C compiler for the PIC
microcontroller! Point your WWW browser at http://www.htsoft.com/

'Windows driver for the f84 and cheap programmers.'
1997\06\11@124110 by Don McKenzie

flavicon
face
I knew if I asked long enough, Nigel Goodwin would write the extra code
to cover PIC16F84 programming on the David Tait type parallel port
programmers.

Well, he's gone a step further and done it under windows. The only
problem is he (and me for that matter) doesn't have an F84 to try it out
on.

Those who have used and enjoyed Nigel's work in the past, can now give
the Windows version a try. I have made it the first link at:
http://www.dontronics.com/new.html

And yes, he is looking for feedback.

Don McKenzie  spam_OUTdonSTOPspamspamdontronics.com   http://www.dontronics.com

PICSTART and Newfound PIC Programmers Firmware Upgrades.
SLI, the serial LCD that auto detects baud rates from 100 to 125K bps.
SimmStick(tm) A PIC proto PCB the size of a 30 pin Simm Memory Module.
Send a blank message to RemoveMEinfospamspamdontronics.com for more details.


'windowed PICs sensitive to light??'
1997\07\09@100053 by Tim Drury
flavicon
face
Here is my setup:

PIC14000 acting as I2C master sending 5 bytes to a PIC16C63 acting as I2C slave.
PIC16C63 buffers the I2C data and sends it to a PC via RS-232.  I can look on a
scope and see the 5 I2C bytes followed by the 5 (plus checksum, total 6) bytes
on the RS232 line.

One of the bytes from the PIC14000 indicates how many data bytes are in the
message.  There is a three byte header and two data bytes for this test.
I know the protocol of the I2C doesn't need a "number of bytes" parameter; that
info is used by the RS232 portion of the 16C63, so it has to stay.

Everything works fine until I place my hand between my 100W halogen desk lamp
and the PIC14000.  The PIC14000 still only sends 5 bytes but the PIC16C63 starts
sending lots of data (lots and lots...).  Presumably the 14000 is telling the
16C63
that there are more than 2 data bytes.  This is strange, but what is also
stranger
is that it only works with the light _on_.  When I block the light or turn it
off the
PIC losses its mind.  This doesn't bode well for a dark, windowless OTP 14000.
BTW, the 16C63 doesn't have any problems (that I can detect).

The first think I thought of is the internal 4Mhz clock of the 14000 is
fluctuating
enough that the I2C master clock and data timing are moving outside the limits.
That isn't happening.  I confirmed it on the scope.

Any ideas?  Will the OTP parts exhibit the same behavior?

-tim drury

1997\07\09@130458 by Mike

flavicon
face
At 10:02 AM 7/9/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Here is my setup:

<snip>

Make sure you clear or initiate all RAM variables before use.

The light ON might act to clear those RAM variables you didn't in
software - especially on power up...

We had a couple of MC68705R5S processors on a remote hybrid power station
and had the windows covered with black masking tape.

When we took a photo of the cabinet (with a flash) it went haywire and
relays clicked all over the place - fortunately the hardware safety
interlocks prevented the generators starting...

The point is that opaque masking tape was not opaque the the UV from an
electronic flash. We had to put aluminium foil (doubled over to avoid
pin holes) then cover this with tape to be sure we didn't let any other
light in...

Rgds

Mike


Some say there is no magic but, all things begin with thought then it becomes
academic, then some poor slob works out a practical way to implement all that
theory, this is called Engineering - for most people another form of magic.
                                                                      Massen

1997\07\10@053603 by Tom Handley

picon face
re: Errors with 14000/16C63

  Tim, this is probably obvious but are both those parts EPROM versions and did
you run the test with the windows covered up by a suitable opaque cover?

  - Tom

At 10:02 AM 7/9/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Here is my setup:
>
>PIC14000 acting as I2C master sending 5 bytes to a PIC16C63 acting as I2C
slave.
{Quote hidden}

starts
{Quote hidden}

1997\07\10@103052 by Tim Drury

flavicon
face
>Make sure you clear or initiate all RAM variables before use.
>
>The light ON might act to clear those RAM variables you didn't in
>software - especially on power up...
>
>We had a couple of MC68705R5S processors on a remote hybrid power station
>and had the windows covered with black masking tape.
>
>When we took a photo of the cabinet (with a flash) it went haywire and
>relays clicked all over the place - fortunately the hardware safety
>interlocks prevented the generators starting...
>
>The point is that opaque masking tape was not opaque the the UV from an
>electronic flash. We had to put aluminium foil (doubled over to avoid
>pin holes) then cover this with tape to be sure we didn't let any other
>light in...

Mike,

Thanks for the reply.  I read the FAQ regarding uninitialized variables.  I
didn't
think this problem affected me since it wasn't a "boot-up" problem.  This
occurred hours into the test after (I believe) every RAM location had been
accessed.

Anyway, I went through the code in fine detail and found a couple subtle bugs
that didn't relate to the uninitialized RAM problem.  After fixing them, the
problem went away.  I don't really know why.

The question I have is this: once the PIC is powered up, can it be affected
by light.  I would certainly think not, but my earlier problem hints that it
can.  I just don't know the answer.

Did you track your flash-bulb problem down to a specific uninitialized
register?  I can't find mine, and I hate solving a problem without knowing
what the answer was.  It unnerves me.

-tim

Attachment converted: wonderland:WINMAIL.DAT (????/----) (00003E74)

1997\07\10@105724 by John Payson

picon face
> The question I have is this: once the PIC is powered up, can it be affected
> by light.  I would certainly think not, but my earlier problem hints that it
> can.  I just don't know the answer.

From my experience, light has three effects on a 16C622/JW that I've been
able to identify:

[1] It seems to cause the comparators to misread slightly.

[2] If the light gets strong, it can increase current consumption (e.g. when
   the part is sleeping)

[3] If the light gets very strong (e.g. mini-Maglite at 1") the part will start
   to malfunction "randomly" [there's probably some pattern to what it does,
   but I've not identified it; it did cause a program crash].

1997\07\10@144311 by Mike

flavicon
face
At 10:32 AM 7/10/97 -0400, you wrote:

>>When we took a photo of the cabinet (with a flash) it went haywire and
>>relays clicked all over the place - fortunately the hardware safety
>>interlocks prevented the generators starting...
>>
>>The point is that opaque masking tape was not opaque the the UV from an
>>electronic flash. We had to put aluminium foil (doubled over to avoid
>>pin holes) then cover this with tape to be sure we didn't let any other
>>light in...

>Did you track your flash-bulb problem down to a specific uninitialized
>register?  I can't find mine, and I hate solving a problem without knowing
>what the answer was.  It unnerves me.

Both controllers were set up as state machines, so there were negligble
opportunities for uninitialised variables. It seems the direction registers
were momentarily inverted when the UV burst from the flash hit. One thing
we did as a precaution was to refresh the direction registers upon each
state change detected. WHen didn't have time to investigate any further and
found no other software precautions/changes necessary.

As a matter of policy ALL our windowed chips are covered with full opaque
metal tabs to be as sure as possible there is no chance of any light
causing alteration of operation.

It stands to reason that chips will have some susceptibility, especially
with design tolerances getting ever smaller and the energy per gate being
very small indeed.

Prior to the UV flash we noticed no difference in operation from normal
incandescent light bulbs, though these were MC68705R5S dies which were
NMOS and were made around 1988 so die sizes were a bit larger than etc...

Maybe some subtle thing like a flag or set of memory locations are being
changed - it would be quite easy to set up a test - that is a full
RAM XOR to report which RAM locations and/or flags change.

This would be a simple, yet most interesting experiment.

I know of one chap around 1985 that used a 2708 fully programmed and watched
how the bits were slowly erased by exposure to daylight as a possible
means to determine UV strength - I think consistency was a problem...

Rgds

Mike
Perth, Western Australia


Some say there is no magic but, all things begin with thought then it becomes
academic, then some poor slob works out a practical way to implement all that
theory, this is called Engineering - for most people another form of magic.
                                                                      Massen

1997\07\10@182906 by Andy Kunz

flavicon
face
>The question I have is this: once the PIC is powered up, can it be affected
>by light.  I would certainly think not, but my earlier problem hints that it
>can.  I just don't know the answer.

Yes.

I have seen all my windowed chips behave slightly differently, from
changing frequency (with the 8-pin devices on internal RC) to losing memory
in RAM.  All kinds of things.

Here's what to do with all those 5" disk write-protect tabs.  Use them as
EPROM window shades!

Andy

==================================================================
Andy Kunz - Montana Design - 409 S 6th St - Phillipsburg, NJ 08865
         Hardware & Software for Industry & R/C Hobbies
       "Go fast, turn right, and keep the wet side down!"
==================================================================

1997\07\14@100622 by Tim Drury

flavicon
face
>> The question I have is this: once the PIC is powered up, can it be affected
>> by light.  I would certainly think not, but my earlier problem hints that it
>> can.  I just don't know the answer.
>
>From my experience, light has three effects on a 16C622/JW that I've been
>able to identify:
>
>[1] It seems to cause the comparators to misread slightly.
>
>[2] If the light gets strong, it can increase current consumption (e.g. when
>    the part is sleeping)
>
>[3] If the light gets very strong (e.g. mini-Maglite at 1") the part will start
>    to malfunction "randomly" [there's probably some pattern to what it does,
>    but I've not identified it; it did cause a program crash].


Thanks for all the responses.  There is obviously a problem with windowed
PICs and light, but nothing that cannot be cured.

Did anyone notice, however, that my problem was NOT a problem with light,
but with _dark_??  My system ran fine with a 100W halogen desk lamp shining
but when I turned the light off, or if I put my hand between the PIC and the
lamp, then the system started to malfunction?

In this case, placing an opaque cover on the PIC made the problem worse.
What I needed to do was tape a light bulb to the PIC!  Kidding, of course.

As Mike stated, this would be an interesting problem to explore, but I don't
have the time.  I have to keep moving forward.

Thanks again, folks.

-tim


Attachment converted: wonderland:WINMAIL.DAT (????/----) (00003EFD)

1997\07\14@130245 by Andy Kunz

flavicon
face
>Did anyone notice, however, that my problem was NOT a problem with light,
>but with _dark_??  My system ran fine with a 100W halogen desk lamp shining
>but when I turned the light off, or if I put my hand between the PIC and the
>lamp, then the system started to malfunction?

I noticed that you _saw_ a problem when the chip was operating in the
proper mode.

This implies that the code was wrong.

Since then you fixed the code, I presume, and now the chip works correctly.

Amazing the neat little things you learn on this list!

Andy

==================================================================
Andy Kunz - Montana Design - 409 S 6th St - Phillipsburg, NJ 08865
         Hardware & Software for Industry & R/C Hobbies
       "Go fast, turn right, and keep the wet side down!"
==================================================================

1997\07\15@164255 by Tim Kerby

picon face
Halogen lights give off a load of uv - thats why they need a glass plate
over the bulb and you should be further than a metre away at all times.  It
could be erasing the chip.

Tim


At 10:02 09/07/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Here is my setup:
>
>PIC14000 acting as I2C master sending 5 bytes to a PIC16C63 acting as I2C
slave.
>PIC16C63 buffers the I2C data and sends it to a PC via RS-232.  I can look
on a
>scope and see the 5 I2C bytes followed by the 5 (plus checksum, total 6)
bytes
>on the RS232 line.
>
>One of the bytes from the PIC14000 indicates how many data bytes are in the
>message.  There is a three byte header and two data bytes for this test.
>I know the protocol of the I2C doesn't need a "number of bytes" parameter;
that
>info is used by the RS232 portion of the 16C63, so it has to stay.
>
>Everything works fine until I place my hand between my 100W halogen desk lamp
>and the PIC14000.  The PIC14000 still only sends 5 bytes but the PIC16C63
starts
>sending lots of data (lots and lots...).  Presumably the 14000 is telling the
> 16C63
>that there are more than 2 data bytes.  This is strange, but what is also
> stranger
>is that it only works with the light _on_.  When I block the light or turn it
> off the
>PIC losses its mind.  This doesn't bode well for a dark, windowless OTP
14000.
>BTW, the 16C63 doesn't have any problems (that I can detect).
>
>The first think I thought of is the internal 4Mhz clock of the 14000 is
> fluctuating
>enough that the I2C master clock and data timing are moving outside the
limits.
>That isn't happening.  I confirmed it on the scope.
>
>Any ideas?  Will the OTP parts exhibit the same behavior?
>
>-tim drury
>
>


------------------------------------------------------------------
Personal Web Pages: http://web.ukonline.co.uk/members/tim.kerby/
PIC Site: web.ukonline.co.uk/members/tim.kerby/pic/
The PIC Pages are under construction and I am looking for projects
------------------------------------------------------------------

1997\07\16@034840 by Keith Dowsett

flavicon
face
At 21:25 15/07/97 +0100, you wrote:
>Halogen lights give off a load of uv - thats why they need a glass plate
>over the bulb and you should be further than a metre away at all times.  It
>could be erasing the chip.
>
>Tim
>

Hmm, not all that much u.v. They have a colour temperature around 3200K
(sorry photograpy creeping in) which is similar to a domestic light bulb.
They emit a little more uv because the tube is silica rather than glass.

AFAIK the reason most of them have a glass plate in front is because they
frequently fail with a bang. Being sprayed with lots of red hot quartz
fragments is no fun (been there, done that).

Keith.
==========================================================
Keith Dowsett         "Variables won't; constants aren't."

E-mail: TakeThisOuTkdowsettspamspamRemoveMErpms.ac.uk
  WWW: http://kd.rpms.ac.uk/index.htm

'PicStart 16C. Windows Software'
1997\07\17@080629 by Carlos Salazar

flavicon
face
Hello...
I buy a Picstart 16c. The software is D.O.S based. I want to find a
Windows based software. I have the MPLAB 3.22, however this software
work only with picstart plus and  promate programer.

                       Thank's...
                       Carlos

1997\07\17@082958 by Dunn, Fred

picon face
Yeah, I think we're just going to have to learn to deal with it. I got
both the 16b1 and the 16c picstarters and have gotten one update on the
16b1 and nothing on the 16c, just after that they came out with the
picstart plus. I may be way off base here but I think we're out in the
cold on this one.

Fred

{Quote hidden}


'MPLAB with HP Palmtop windows CE'
1997\08\01@175616 by Stephen H Alsop
picon face
Does anyone know if MPLAB can be run on the new
Hewlett Packard Palmtop computers which have a small
version of Window preinstalled (call Windows CE)

If anyone has done this then I would be pleased to know how

Thanks

Stephen H Alsop    email: EraseMEsteveSTOPspamspamRemoveMEs.ssystems.easynet.co.uk
S&S Systems Ltd   www: http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~s.ssystems
Tel: 01909 773399 * Fax: 01909 773645

1997\08\01@194822 by PeterS

flavicon
face
Sadly not, as Microchip are still in 16-bit land and Windows CE requires
Win32 apps. Additionally, MPLAB would need to be recompiled for each
different vendor processor type.

When will the world move away from 16-bit apps? Who last bought a copy of
Windows 3.1?

Peter S


{Original Message removed}

1997\08\02@031106 by Mike

flavicon
face
At 05:35 PM 8/1/97 -0600, you wrote:
>Sadly not, as Microchip are still in 16-bit land and Windows CE requires
>Win32 apps. Additionally, MPLAB would need to be recompiled for each
>different vendor processor type.
>
>When will the world move away from 16-bit apps? Who last bought a copy of
>Windows 3.1?
>
>Peter S

What makes you think 32 bit apps are more efficient ?

Windows 95 is 95% 16 bit drivers and libraries most of which is ported
over from win 3.11.

there is a lot of propoganda and hype Win NT comes close to be a 32 bit app
but even that uses 16 bit dlls !

rdgs

mike

1997\08\02@045451 by Mike Smith

flavicon
face
---Original Message-----
From: Mike <spam_OUTerazmusRemoveMEspamEraseMEWANTREE.COM.AU>
To: TakeThisOuTPICLISTRemoveMEspam@spam@MITVMA.MIT.EDU <EraseMEPICLISTRemoveMEspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: Saturday, 2 August 1997 17:15
Subject: Re: MPLAB with HP Palmtop windows CE



{Quote hidden}

That wasn't what he claimed.  CPM on a Z80 machine loads WordStar faster
than NT on a Pentium can load Word, but I know which I'd sooner use...
OTOH, Word stinks for editing straight text.

>Windows 95 is 95% 16 bit drivers and libraries most of which is ported
>over from win 3.11.

Are you *sure* about those percentages?  Most of the V-drivers are 32 bit
(quite a number were in 3.11 for example, the disk access system)  The
memory/system stuff is 32 bit.  Most of the GDI is thunked to 16 bit though.

>
>there is a lot of propoganda and hype Win NT comes close to be a 32 bit app
>but even that uses 16 bit dlls !
>

Only for running 16 bit Windows programs, I think.

MikeS
<spammikesmith_oz.....spamspamrelaymail.net>

I thunk, therefore I Windows.

1997\08\02@122429 by Eric van Es

flavicon
face
Mike wrote:

{Quote hidden}

So is there a TRUE 32-bit OS out there?
What will Win97 be? (If ever it surfaces from the rumours!)

--
eric van es
Mailto:vanesspam_OUTspam@spam@ilink.nis.za  WWW: http://www.nis.za/~vanes/
Cape Town, South-Africa
Looking for TEMPORARY/HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION?
http://www.nis.za/~vanes/accom.htm

1997\08\02@141122 by Leon Heller

flavicon
picon face
In message <PICLIST%.....97080117561683spamspam.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU>, Stephen H Alsop
<s.ssystemsKILLspamspamEraseMEEASYNET.CO.UK> writes
>Does anyone know if MPLAB can be run on the new
>Hewlett Packard Palmtop computers which have a small
>version of Window preinstalled (call Windows CE)
>
>If anyone has done this then I would be pleased to know how
>

I've got the HP 320LX. It won't run ordinary Windows software, however,
(or even DOS applications) because it doesn't use an 80X86 CPU. All the
new Windows CE palmtops use either the Hitachi SH3 or MIPS RISC
processors.

The next version of Windows CE will also be available for the 80X86, but
palmtops with these processors won't run ordinary Windows software
either, because the OS is so different. If the source code was
available, it wouldn't be too diificult to get small Windows
applications like MPLAB running on these palmtops, as the standard
development system is Visual C++ for Windows CE, that is used with the
ordinary Visual C++ compiler. I've just ordered it from MS.

Leon
--
Leon Heller: EraseMEleon@spam@spam@spam@lfheller.demon.co.uk http://www.lfheller.demon.co.uk
Tel: +44 (0) 118 947 1424
See http://www.lfheller.demon.co.uk/rcm.htm for details of a
low-cost reconfigurable computing module using the XC6216 FPGA

1997\08\02@141753 by Mike

flavicon
face
At 06:25 PM 8/2/97 +0930, you wrote:

>>What makes you think 32 bit apps are more efficient ?
>>
>
>That wasn't what he claimed.  CPM on a Z80 machine loads WordStar faster
>than NT on a Pentium can load Word, but I know which I'd sooner use...
>OTOH, Word stinks for editing straight text.

True - I made an interpetation based on the paradigm initiating his query.

>>Windows 95 is 95% 16 bit drivers and libraries most of which is ported
>>over from win 3.11.
>
>Are you *sure* about those percentages?  Most of the V-drivers are 32 bit
>(quite a number were in 3.11 for example, the disk access system)  The
>memory/system stuff is 32 bit.  Most of the GDI is thunked to 16 bit though.

No - but 95 for 95 - they were real cute numbers - I don't think its too
far off though.

>>there is a lot of propoganda and hype Win NT comes close to be a 32 bit app
>>but even that uses 16 bit dlls !

>Only for running 16 bit Windows programs, I think.

Not sure about the history - but it would be efficient for lots of 16 bit
code to handle smaller data items like characters - why would any OS
writer limit one instruction to 32 bits when they could get more than one ?

Rgds

mike
Perth, Western Australia

1997\08\02@161351 by Tim Kerby

picon face
Hi
I don't think it would run anway due to its memory and disk space
requirements.  I also think that applications tend to have to be ported to
windows CE due to the reduced enviroment.  I am however working on some pic
stuff for the new Psion Series 5 at the moment (when I get one in the next
week) which should be at beta stage by xmas if I get things together.
Maybe only an assembler and programmer to start but I might add to that.


Tim


------------------------------------------------------------------
Personal Web Pages: http://web.ukonline.co.uk/members/tim.kerby/
PIC Site: web.ukonline.co.uk/members/tim.kerby/pic/
The PIC Pages are under construction and I am looking for projects
------------------------------------------------------------------

1997\08\02@163049 by PeterS

flavicon
face
Where on earth have you been? 16bit apps on Intel are horrendously inefficient.
Flat model anything is better than Intel segmented stuff.

You're way off the mark on Win95. It is certainly not true 32 bit but 95% 16bit
- catch a clue.

NT IS 32 bit. Only 16bit code is used where 16bit compatibility is needed.

Peter S

{Original Message removed}

1997\08\02@180856 by Darrel Johansen

picon face
I wonder if anyone out there has tried MPLAB with the Toshiba Libretto?
It's only now becoming available outside of Japan, but it runs Win 95,
not CE.  It should run MPLAB, I would think.

Darrel
Tempe, AZ

1997\08\02@204956 by Griffith Wm. Kadnier

flavicon
face
WinNT IS a true 32 bit OS. It just provides 16 bit dlls for running legacy
apps ala Win 3.1.

If all you run is 32 bit applications, WinNT never even tries to load or
intercept any 16 bit code.

I would venture a guess that MCHIP has no in-house expertise or interest in
porting their (already) running apps to Win32. And they probably WON'T,
until they are forced to by market pressure.

They might even use BIOS calls, or non-standard library code to do direct
RS232 communication to the programmers/ICE's (a no-no in the Win32 world).

After all, they are a uP house, not a Windows dev OEM. If it works OK with
Win95 (and it does), they probably figure..."don't break it!"

That said, I'll put SoftIce for NT to work in the next few days, and see
what (and how) MPLAB is doing on an NT box.

gwk
Algorithmics Inc.

----------
{Quote hidden}

1997\08\03@025018 by Mike

flavicon
face
At 02:29 PM 8/2/97 -0600, you wrote:
>Where on earth have you been? 16bit apps on Intel are horrendously
inefficient.

Considering logic - are we talking about Apps with all their internal
management type programming or instructions themselves.

> Flat model anything is better than Intel segmented stuff.

Yes - totally agree - Intel put computing back 10 years when this came out :(

>You're way off the mark on Win95. It is certainly not true 32 bit but 95%
16bit
> - catch a clue.

Aye ? The vast proportion is a hodge podge of stuff which is 16 bit, th
numbers are obviously open to debate - it should be possible to scan the
code with a simple program which counts the number of 32 bit and 16 bit
instructions and outputs the proportion - the decoding wouldn't be too
hard since you wouldn't need to perform anywhere near a full dissassembly.

>NT IS 32 bit. Only 16bit code is used where 16bit compatibility is needed.

Alas - even NT has quite a  bit of 16 bit code in it - why would you want
full 32 bit addressing on smaller data structures - like disk drives OR
buffers etc ?

Are you saying you are going to force the OS to use 4 gigabyte addressing
(32bits) on everything - when 16 bit instructions can selectively be used
to operate on data structures of anything from one byte to 1 Megabyte ?

Rdgs

Mike
Perth, Western Australia

1997\08\03@025227 by Mike

flavicon
face
At 05:47 PM 8/2/97 -0700, you wrote:
>WinNT IS a true 32 bit OS. It just provides 16 bit dlls for running legacy
>apps ala Win 3.1.

Sorry - no such thing as a true 32 bit operating system - what is the
collective definition of a 16 or 32 bit operating system ANYWAY ???

>If all you run is 32 bit applications, WinNT never even tries to load or
>intercept any 16 bit code.

It may not load a 16bit dll 'app' BUT I would be willing to bet it is
riddled with 16 bit code since its more efficient to selectively use
16 bit instructions when its just a complete waste of resources to try
and FORCE a 4 gigabyte address space on each and every data structure ?

Rgds

mike
Perth, Western Australia


Some say there is no magic but, all things begin with thought then it becomes
academic, then some poor slob works out a practical way to implement all that
theory, this is called Engineering - for most people another form of magic.
                                                                      Massen

1997\08\03@141557 by Leon Heller

flavicon
picon face
In message <TakeThisOuT3.0.1.32.19970802173539.006b0ae0spampop-3.ukonline.co.uk>, Tim
Kerby <spamBeGonetim.kerbyKILLspamspamTakeThisOuTUKONLINE.CO.UK> writes
>Hi
>I don't think it would run anway due to its memory and disk space
>requirements.  I also think that applications tend to have to be ported to
>windows CE due to the reduced enviroment.  I am however working on some pic
>stuff for the new Psion Series 5 at the moment (when I get one in the next
>week) which should be at beta stage by xmas if I get things together.
>Maybe only an assembler and programmer to start but I might add to that.

A former colleague of mine developed an 8051 x-assembler for the Psion
Series 3, primarily so that he could mess about with his hobby whilst
not neglecting his family.

Leon
--
Leon Heller: EraseMEleon.....spamKILLspamlfheller.demon.co.uk http://www.lfheller.demon.co.uk
Tel: +44 (0) 118 947 1424
See http://www.lfheller.demon.co.uk/rcm.htm for details of a
low-cost reconfigurable computing module using the XC6216 FPGA

1997\08\03@223537 by Mike Smith

flavicon
face
---Original Message-----
From: Griffith Wm. Kadnier <spamgriffkspamALGOINC.COM>
To: PICLISTSTOPspamspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU <PICLISTSTOPspamspamKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: Sunday, 3 August 1997 10:20
Subject: Re: MPLAB with HP Palmtop windows CE



{Quote hidden}

Lets all pray Win98 breaks it into tiny pieces.  *That* should make them sit
up and take notice.  At least one of their competition's ICE's uses a Win32
base - even in beta, the difference is noticable.

MikeS
<@spam@mikesmith_oz.....spamspamrelaymail.net>

1997\08\03@224408 by Griffith Wm. Kadnier

flavicon
face
Mike,

Here Here. I would LOVE to do all of my PIC dev work on an NT box. Maybe
one of us can talk MCHIP into farming out a contract for the port ????  ;}

regards,
gwk
Algorithmics Inc.


----------
{Quote hidden}

legacy
> >apps ala Win 3.1.
> >
> >If all you run is 32 bit applications, WinNT never even tries to load or
> >intercept any 16 bit code.
> >
> >I would venture a guess that MCHIP has no in-house expertise or interest
in
> >porting their (already) running apps to Win32. And they probably WON'T,
> >until they are forced to by market pressure.
> >
> >They might even use BIOS calls, or non-standard library code to do
direct
> >RS232 communication to the programmers/ICE's (a no-no in the Win32
world).
> >
> >After all, they are a uP house, not a Windows dev OEM. If it works OK
with
> >Win95 (and it does), they probably figure..."don't break it!"
>
> Lets all pray Win98 breaks it into tiny pieces.  *That* should make them
sit
> up and take notice.  At least one of their competition's ICE's uses a
Win32
> base - even in beta, the difference is noticable.
>
> MikeS
> <spam_OUTmikesmith_ozTakeThisOuTspamEraseMErelaymail.net>

1997\08\04@013707 by Clyde Smith-Stubbs

flavicon
face
On Sun, Aug 03, 1997 at 07:43:15PM -0700, Griffith Wm. Kadnier wrote:

> Here Here. I would LOVE to do all of my PIC dev work on an NT box. Maybe
> one of us can talk MCHIP into farming out a contract for the port ????  ;}

They already did (can't say who to, but it wasn't us). That was about 12 months
ago (not a full 32 bit port, just an NT device driver).

--
Clyde Smith-Stubbs  |HI-TECH Software,      |Email: EraseMEclydespamBeGonespamKILLspamhtsoft.com
Ph:  +61 7 3354 2411|P.O. Box 103, Alderley,|WWW:  http://www.htsoft.com/
Fax: +61 7 3354 2422|QLD, 4051, AUSTRALIA.  |PGP: finger RemoveMEclydespamBeGonespamspamhtsoft.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANSI C for the PIC! Now shipping! See http://www.htsoft.com for more info.

1997\08\04@025803 by avrbasic

picon face
At 03:36 PM 4/8/97 +1000, you wrote:
>On Sun, Aug 03, 1997 at 07:43:15PM -0700, Griffith Wm. Kadnier wrote:
>
>> Here Here. I would LOVE to do all of my PIC dev work on an NT box. Maybe
>> one of us can talk MCHIP into farming out a contract for the port ????  ;}
>
>They already did (can't say who to, but it wasn't us). That was about 12 months
>ago (not a full 32 bit port, just an NT device driver).

12 months to write a NT driver?
I would read all the 42CD-ROM's from MSDN if required in 12 months.

:)

antti

No Limits                                 Go To
Basics of AVR                              AVR
AVRBASIC         http://www.avrbasic.com          Born for Basic

Grand opening in August.
Watch out for first week offers.

1997\08\04@081503 by ags

flavicon
face
> 12 months to write a NT driver?
> I would read all the 42CD-ROM's from MSDN if required in 12 months.
>
> :)
As someone that writes NT drivers for a living, there is much more involved than
would appear to the
uninitiated.
(Especially if you have misbehaving hardware designed by HW engineers that think
"Solder is my favorite
programming language" ;-) )

Have a great day!

--Alan G. Smith

+---------------------------------------------------------
| Alan G. Smith
| @spam@agsspamspampoboxes.com
| http://www.innovatus.com/ags

'Windows 32 bits (was re MPLAB on Windows CE)'
1997\08\04@212624 by John Payson

flavicon
face
The following question isn't really PIC related, but it seems to come up
now and again; perhaps it should go into a FAQ someplace?

> At 05:47 PM 8/2/97 -0700, you wrote:
> >WinNT IS a true 32 bit OS. It just provides 16 bit dlls for running legacy
> >apps ala Win 3.1.
>
> Sorry - no such thing as a true 32 bit operating system - what is the
> collective definition of a 16 or 32 bit operating system ANYWAY ???

In this context, the term "32-bit [operating system] refers to the mode in
which the 80x86 chip is run.  While it's possible to use both 16- and
32-bit instructions from within any mode, there are nonetheless two
issues to be considered:

[1] If an application passes a pointer to an OS call, what is the meaning
of the pointer?  Under Win16, a pointer contained a segment and an offset;
arithmetic on pointers beyond 64K wouldn't work.  Under WIn32, a pointer
contains a 32-bit virtual address and arrays up to 4GB (theoretical upper
limit) in size may be handled with having to be subdivided into 64K
chunks.

[2] What is the instruction-level default mode?  On the 80386 and higher,
the processor can run in two [broadly speaking] modes:

(a) Instructions whose operand is "word" sized should operate on the
16-bit registers AX, BX, CX, etc.; memory addresses should be of the form
(Address + [BX | BP] + [SI | DI]).

(b) Instructions whose operand is "word" sized should operate on the
32-bit registers EAX, EBX, ECX, etc.; memory addresses should be of the
form (Address + [reg32] + [{1|2|4|8}*{reg32}).

If the machine is in mode "b", executing an instruction from set "a" will
require one or more override-prefix bytes; similarly, if it's in mode "a",
an instruction from mode "b" will require override prefix(es).

> >If all you run is 32 bit applications, WinNT never even tries to load or
> >intercept any 16 bit code.
>
> It may not load a 16bit dll 'app' BUT I would be willing to bet it is
> riddled with 16 bit code since its more efficient to selectively use
> 16 bit instructions when its just a complete waste of resources to try
> and FORCE a 4 gigabyte address space on each and every data structure ?

Actually, code size will often be smaller if a Win32 application
consistently uses 32-bit data types than if it mixes 32-bit and 16-bit
types (because 16-bit ops require extra prefixes).  While routines that
store large amounts of data in memory may benefit from using 16-bit types
(thereby saving 2 bytes per item) non-array variables should often be 32
bits to avoid extra prefix bytes.

1997\08\04@214725 by Griffith Wm. Kadnier

flavicon
face
Hi John,

Yes, as you correctly point out and expand on my thoughts, is the fact that
I was referring to NT OS code that does not use segment:offset semantics,
working fully in flat model (your "b" scenario).

gwk
Algorithmics Inc.

----------
> From: John Payson <TakeThisOuTsupercatKILLspamspam@spam@MCS.COM>
> To: .....PICLISTRemoveMEspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Windows 32 bits (was re MPLAB on Windows CE)
> Date: Monday, August 04, 1997 1:17 PM
>
> The following question isn't really PIC related, but it seems to come up
> now and again; perhaps it should go into a FAQ someplace?
>
> > At 05:47 PM 8/2/97 -0700, you wrote:
> > >WinNT IS a true 32 bit OS. It just provides 16 bit dlls for running
legacy
> > >apps ala Win 3.1.
> >
> > Sorry - no such thing as a true 32 bit operating system - what is the
> > collective definition of a 16 or 32 bit operating system ANYWAY ???
>
> In this context, the term "32-bit [operating system] refers to the mode
in
> which the 80x86 chip is run.  While it's possible to use both 16- and
> 32-bit instructions from within any mode, there are nonetheless two
> issues to be considered:
>
> [1] If an application passes a pointer to an OS call, what is the meaning
> of the pointer?  Under Win16, a pointer contained a segment and an
offset;
{Quote hidden}

"a",
> an instruction from mode "b" will require override prefix(es).
>
> > >If all you run is 32 bit applications, WinNT never even tries to load
or
{Quote hidden}

1997\08\05@064409 by nvdw

flavicon
face
> > It may not load a 16bit dll 'app' BUT I would be willing to bet it is
> > riddled with 16 bit code since its more efficient to selectively use
> > 16 bit instructions when its just a complete waste of resources to try
> > and FORCE a 4 gigabyte address space on each and every data structure ?

Win95 yes....Thats why it is faster and less RAM hungry, and less
stable.
NT no....

Try running around in both with SoftIce....

Nic.

'MPLAB with HP Palmtop windows CE'
1997\08\08@230911 by rajnish nischal

picon face
On Sat, 2 Aug 1997 03:11:06 -0400 Mike wrote,

______________Orignal Message_________________

At 05:35 PM 8/1/97 -0600, you wrote:
>Sadly not, as Microchip are still in 16-bit land and Windows CE
requires
>Win32 apps. Additionally, MPLAB would need to be recompiled for each
>different vendor processor type.
>
>When will the world move away from 16-bit apps? Who last bought a copy
of
>Windows 3.1?
>
>Peter S

What makes you think 32 bit apps are more efficient ?

Windows 95 is 95% 16 bit drivers and libraries most of which is ported
over from win 3.11.

there is a lot of propoganda and hype Win NT comes close to be a 32 bit
app
but even that uses 16 bit dlls !

rdgs

mike
_________________________


Caught on the Web :

>Webster's Dictionary definition of Windows95:
>
>Windows95: <win-doz-nin-te-fiv> n.
>   32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an
>   8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor,
>   written by a 2 bit company, that can't stand 1 bit of competition.


--

CarryOn

Rajnish.


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

1997\08\09@032241 by Mike Smith

flavicon
face
---Original Message-----
From: rajnish nischal <KILLspamrajnischalspamTakeThisOuTHOTMAIL.COM>
To: TakeThisOuTPICLISTspamspam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU <RemoveMEPICLISTspamspamSTOPspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: Saturday, 9 August 1997 12:40
Subject: Re: MPLAB with HP Palmtop windows CE



{Quote hidden}

Addendum: - that gets endlessly criticised by ppl who are sour that they
didn't buy shares in it way back when... <g>

MikeS
<.....mikesmith_ozEraseMEspamrelaymail.net>


'Scenix SX support under DOS & Linux (vs. Windows)'
1997\09\08@194718 by Eric Smith
flavicon
face
Andy Kunz <spamBeGonemontanaspamRemoveMEFAST.NET> wrote:
> [...] about Parallax not supporting the Scenix under DOS?

and Antti Lukats <.....anttiEraseMEspamSISTUDIO.COM> replied:
> and we still support x86 DOS for our software.
> (to be able to use them under Mac/Linux DOS EMU's)

When I placed an order for a Parallax SX Key, I inquired as to why the price
was listed as $199 in some places and $249 in others.  I was told that the
original $199 price was for DOS software, but that they had decided to sell
a "fancier" Windows version instead, so they raised the price.

I implored them to please either include the DOS version in the package, or
somehow make it available, for those of us that don't want to or can't run
Windows.  I specifically mentioned the possibility of use under Linux DOSEMU.

Even if they don't officially support the DOS version (and they certainly
aren't likely to support it under DOSEMU), I still want to try to use it.

They did say that they'd had a few requests for it.  I'd suggest that everyone
who is willing to buy the SX Key, and wants DOS software, please send a polite
request to Parallax:

       spaminfospam_OUTspam@spam@parallaxinc.com

Cheers,
Eric

1997\09\09@013847 by mikesmith_oz

flavicon
face
On  8 Sep 97 at 23:40, Eric Smith wrote:

> Andy Kunz <spammontana@spam@spamSTOPspamFAST.NET> wrote:
> > [...] about Parallax not supporting the Scenix under DOS?
>
> and Antti Lukats <spamBeGoneanttispamBeGonespam@spam@SISTUDIO.COM> replied:
> > and we still support x86 DOS for our software.
> > (to be able to use them under Mac/Linux DOS EMU's)
>
> When I placed an order for a Parallax SX Key, I inquired as to why
> the price was listed as $199 in some places and $249 in others.  I
> was told that the original $199 price was for DOS software, but that
> they had decided to sell a "fancier" Windows version instead, so
> they raised the price.

Are they available now?  *PRESS* release date shows as 22nd this
month.  What delivery date did you get quoted?
MikeS
<mikesmith_oz@nosp*m.relaymail.net>
(remove the you know what before replying)

'Speed of windowed /JW parts??'
1997\09\25@123437 by obo (Ingenieria Fotonica)

flavicon
face
Hello, i've noted that the windowed (JW) parts don't have any speed
specification. That means that they run at full speed (20 MHz for a 16C74,
10 Mhz for a 16F84, and so on)???
Thanks in advance to all,
Adolfo.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|         Adolfo Cobo Garcia  -  UNIVERSIDAD DE CANTABRIA               |
|    E.T.S.I.I. y Telecomunicacion, Grupo de Ingenieria Fotonica        |
|        Avda. Los Castros s/n  E-39005  Santander  SPAIN               |
|  Tfno. +34-42-201539  Fax +34-42-201873  Email: RemoveMEacoboRemoveMEspamRemoveMEteisa.unican.es |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

1997\09\25@135030 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
Adolfo Cobo (Ingenieria Fotonica) <PICLISTKILLspamspamspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU> wrote:

> Hello, i've noted that the windowed (JW) parts don't have any
> speed specification. That means that they run at full speed (20 MHz
> for a 16C74, 10 Mhz for a 16F84, and so on)???

   Yes.

   -Andy

=== Andrew Warren - spam_OUTfastfwd@spam@spamix.netcom.com
=== Fast Forward Engineering - Vista, California
=== http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2499


'Windows driver for F84 programming.'
1997\10\03@171346 by Don McKenzie
flavicon
face
Need Software for the parallel printer port programmers.

Windows PIC16x8x Programmer Software by Nigel Goodwin.
Nigel just updated this and is looking for feedback. 4-Oct-97

Free DOS Version also available.

http://www.dontronics.com/new.html

Don McKenzie  TakeThisOuTdonspam_OUTspamdontronics.com   http://www.dontronics.com

Basic Stamp Windows 95 Front End Now Available.
SimmStick(tm) Atmel & PIC proto PCB's. 30 pin Simm Module Format.
For more details, send a blank message to KILLspaminfo.....spamTakeThisOuTdontronics.com
or TakeThisOuTsimstickEraseMEspamRemoveMEdontronics.com or spam_OUTbasicsRemoveMEspam.....dontronics.com

'[OT, somewhat] Windows CE...'
1997\10\09@015827 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
I was surprised to see such a push for Windows CE at the ESC.  Is WINCE
really an embedded operating system?  I thought it was a small personal
computer operating system, which is an entirely different thing, at least
to me...

BillW

1997\10\09@023245 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
William Chops Westfield <spamPICLISTKILLspamspamKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU> wrote:

> I was surprised to see such a push for Windows CE at the ESC.  Is
> WINCE really an embedded operating system?  I thought it was a small
> personal computer operating system, which is an entirely different
> thing, at least to me...

Bill:

As far as I can tell, Windows CE is just a way for Microsoft to scare
people away from Embedded Java until Gates, Ballmer, and Myhrvold can
figure out what the embedded-systems world is all about and give us
what we REALLY want.

Whether you call Win-CE (or Embedded Java) an "embedded operating
system", "real-time operating system", or "small personal computer
operating system" is unimportant... The important thing is that Sun
and Microsoft will be battling each other in a market that's been
stagnating for a while, so good things are bound to come from the
competition.

Not that it matters to ME, of course... I write for half-K PICs
with 25 bytes of RAM.

-Andy

=== Andrew Warren - spamfastfwdspam_OUTspamix.netcom.com
=== Fast Forward Engineering - Vista, California
=== http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2499

1997\10\09@095023 by Ian Cameron

picon face
Andrew Warren wrote:

> Not that it matters to ME, of course... I write for half-K PICs
> with 25 bytes of RAM.

Yep, no chance of Microsoft encroaching on your pitch, there's
definitely not enough RAM/ROM in those :-]

Sorry, I just couldn't resist it...

Cheers, Ian.

1997\10\10@070821 by Mike Smith

flavicon
face
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Warren <STOPspamfastfwdspam_OUTspamspamBeGoneIX.NETCOM.COM>
To: spam_OUTPICLISTspamspamBeGoneMITVMA.MIT.EDU <EraseMEPICLISTspamKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: Thursday, 9 October 1997 16:03
Subject: Re: [OT, somewhat] Windows CE...


William Chops Westfield <EraseMEPICLISTRemoveMEspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

OTOH, I haven't seen anything from embedded java that I really want.  Java
looks nice, but not nice enough to switch from c++.  What embedded java h/w
is available in the characteristics WinCE h/w must have?
I *can* see attractions in a modicum of code transportability between
Win95 -> CE
I *can't* see much of this rather vapourous java, other than implementations
running on existing non-native java platforms.
Am I missing the point?

>Whether you call Win-CE (or Embedded Java) an "embedded operating
>system", "real-time operating system", or "small personal computer
>operating system" is unimportant... The important thing is that Sun

Yes, thats just playing with aliases <g>

>and Microsoft will be battling each other in a market that's been
>stagnating for a while, so good things are bound to come from the
>competition.

MS are probably happy - it gives them someone to point to when the
anti-trust suits get too close...

>Not that it matters to ME, of course... I write for half-K PICs
>with 25 bytes of RAM.

Where do you want to go today - well, a PIC without segmentation would be
nice, for a start.

'PIC-Master / MPLAB-ICE and Windows NT'
1997\10\16@055248 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
I wrote:

   If, like me, you think that NT-compatibility should be an
   absolute REQUIREMENT for any new development tools from
   Microchip, call your local Microchip rep or FAE and tell him
   so... Maybe if they hear it often enough, they'll actually do
   something about it.

then Marc Schmaeche wrote:

   I would recommend you (and everybody else who wants to work with
   NT) asking Microchip again and again for NT support. Maybe we
   will then receive NT support in this millenium.

and Tjaart van der Walt replied:

   I suppose If one was really tired of the quagmire of support, one
   could start mailing one's complaints directly to [list of
   Microchip upper management deleted].

Dudes:

Microchip's informal user surveys have allegedly indicated that
hardly any of us are using (or have plans to switch to) Windows NT.
I think they could use more-accurate information than they've gotten
from those informal surveys, so...

If you own or plan to acquire a PIC-Master or the new MPLAB-ICE
emulator within the next year, and either run Windows NT now or plan
to upgrade to it within the next year, please send a PRIVATE email to
me at:

   .....fastfwdspamspam_OUTix.netcom.com

with the word "survey" in the subject line and the word "yes" in
the message body.

Just to be fair, if you own or plan to buy an emulator and intend to
run it under Windows 3.x or Windows 95 rather than Windows NT, send
me a PRIVATE email with the word "survey" in the subject line and
the word "no" in the message body.

After a week or so, I'll tabulate the results and send them to the
appropriate people at Microchip.

There are over 1200 subscribers to the PICLIST, and I would REALLY
like to see responses from at least ten percent of you so we can have
some confidence in the survey results... So please take just a minute
to respond.

Remember:  "Survey" in the message SUBJECT, and "yes" or "no" in
the message BODY.  The survey results will be tabulated by an
automated process, so if you want to say something more than simply
"yes" or "no", send it in a separate message.

Thanks.

-Andy

P.S.  PLEASE remember to send those messages in PRIVATE email
     directly to me at:

         @spam@fastfwdEraseMEspamspamix.netcom.com

    Responses sent to the list will be ignored.

=== Andrew Warren - fastfwdTakeThisOuTspamKILLspamix.netcom.com
=== Fast Forward Engineering - Vista, California
=== http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2499

1997\10\16@082128 by Mike Smith

flavicon
face
<<Dudes:

Microchip's informal user surveys have allegedly indicated that
hardly any of us are using (or have plans to switch to) Windows NT.
I think they could use more-accurate information than they've gotten
from those informal surveys, so...

If you own or plan to acquire a PIC-Master or the new MPLAB-ICE
emulator within the next year, and either run Windows NT now or plan
to upgrade to it within the next year, please send a PRIVATE email to
me at:>>



Clarification - is the MPLAB-ICE the same unit as the ICEPIC made by RF
Solutions?


MikeS
<RemoveMEmikesmith_ozTakeThisOuTspamrelaymail.net>

1997\10\16@091137 by Clyde Smith-Stubbs

flavicon
face
On Thu, Oct 16, 1997 at 09:51:59PM +0930, Mike Smith wrote:

> Clarification - is the MPLAB-ICE the same unit as the ICEPIC made by RF

No, it's not. It's the PICMaster, made by Microchip. It has a bus
card interface.

--
Clyde Smith-Stubbs               |            HI-TECH Software
Email: @spam@clydeSTOPspamspamhtsoft.com          |          Phone            Fax
WWW:   http://www.htsoft.com/    | USA: (408) 490 2885  (408) 490 2885
PGP:   finger TakeThisOuTclydeTakeThisOuTspamRemoveMEhtsoft.com   | AUS: +61 7 3354 2411 +61 7 3354 2422
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANSI C for the PIC! Now shipping! See http://www.htsoft.com for more info.

1997\10\16@091601 by Clyde Smith-Stubbs

flavicon
face
On Thu, Oct 16, 1997 at 11:10:54PM +1000, I wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 16, 1997 at 09:51:59PM +0930, Mike Smith wrote:
>
> > Clarification - is the MPLAB-ICE the same unit as the ICEPIC made by RF
>
> No, it's not. It's the PICMaster, made by Microchip. It has a bus
> card interface.

But I am probably talking through my hat. I didn't read Mike's
message carefully enough, and in fact I don't know the answer
to his question.

Sorry.

1997\10\16@100803 by Andy Kunz

flavicon
face
>Just to be fair, if you own or plan to buy an emulator and intend to
>run it under Windows 3.x or Windows 95 rather than Windows NT, send
>me a PRIVATE email with the word "survey" in the subject line and
>the word "no" in the message body.

ALL mfg's need to smarten up about this issue, not just Microchip and
Parallax.

MS plans to discontinue Win 9x support (and DOS I/O compatibility) soon
after the next version comes out.  After that, all Win cores will be based
upon NT.  That means no parallel port comms, unless you have a device
driver to support it.  It means NT-style serial comms.  It means 32-bit apps.

That is their plan for both HOME & OFFICE versions of the OS's.

If you are smart, move to NT asap, and keep another machine around to run
DOS-like stuff on.

The future is coming.  Finally!

Andy

==================================================================
Andy Kunz - Montana Design - 409 S 6th St - Phillipsburg, NJ 08865
         Hardware & Software for Industry & R/C Hobbies
       "Go fast, turn right, and keep the wet side down!"
==================================================================

1997\10\16@155224 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
Mike Smith <spam_OUTmikesmith_ozspamspam.....relaymail.net> wrote:

> Clarification - is the MPLAB-ICE the same unit as the ICEPIC made by
> RF Solutions?

Mike:

No; MPLAB-ICE is a new emulator with all the features of the
PIC-Master and more.  Microchip expects to introduce it by the
middle of '98.

-Andy

=== Andrew Warren - fastfwd.....spam@spam@ix.netcom.com
=== Fast Forward Engineering - Vista, California
=== http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2499

'Update -- Microchip Emulator Support for Windows N'
1997\10\17@055722 by fastfwd

face
flavicon
face
Dudes:

After almost exactly 24 hours, I've received 32 responses to my
survey.  The sample size is still pretty small, but for what
it's worth, "yes" votes are leading "no" votes by a 3-to-1 margin.

If you haven't already responded, and if you own a Microchip
emulator or plan to buy one within the next year, please take a
moment to do one of the following:

   If you're running Windows NT or plan to upgrade to it within a
   year, send a private email to me with "survey" in the subject
   line and "yes" in the body.

   If you would prefer to run your emulator under Windows 3.11 or
   Windows 95, send a private email to me with "survey" in the
   subject line and "no" in the body.

Keep in mind that Microchip won't drop Win3.x/Win95 compatibility if
they add NT compatibility, so if you're planning to move your
emulator between NT machines and 3.x/95 machines, you can safely
answer "yes".

I'll tabulate the responses and send the final results to Microchip
on Wednesday, 23 October.

Remember... Please DON'T send your responses to the PICLIST; send
them directly to me in PRIVATE e-mail at:

   spamBeGonefastfwdspamspam_OUTix.netcom.com

Thanks.

-Andy

P.S.  I'll probably post one more survey update/reminder between now
     and next Wednesday... Sorry for boring those of you who aren't
     interested, but I think this is an important issue.

=== Andrew Warren - EraseMEfastfwd.....spamix.netcom.com
=== Fast Forward Engineering - Vista, California
=== http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2499


'Fancy enclosures with LCD window'
1997\11\04@023259 by wterreb
flavicon
face
I think the perfect product for someone to manufacture right now,
would be a set of fancy enclosures with provision for the standard
set of dot matrix type LCD's, a membrane keypard, an on/off switch
and a battery compartment.  There must be many other people out
there like me who want to manufacture a low quantity product that
still looks proffesional, but can not afford to spend the enormous
amounts of money to have their own one made by means of  injection
molding.

I have looked everywhere for such a box, and even though I did find
some that made provision for a display window.... the window was
usually a very odd size that no LCD could fit into.  What I am really
looking for is a small handheld box that can accomodate 4 x 20 line
LCD display and a membrane keypad.

Maybe there is someone on this list who knows where to buy just such
a box?  If so I (and I'm sure a whole lot of other Piclisters also) would
be very happy if you could share this source with the rest of us.
Otherwise, I hope that somewhere, someone with a sense of making lots
of money will recognise this shortcoming in the electronics industry
and start making us some nice proffesional looking boxes.  I'm so
desparate for something like this now that I wouldn't even mind quite a
hefty price for a suitable box.

Rgds
Werner
--
Werner Terreblanche     users.iafrica.com/w/we/wernerte/index.htm
spamwterrebKILLspamspam@spam@plessey.co.za (work)  OR  wernertespamspamTakeThisOuTiafrica.com  (home)
Plessey SA, PO Box 30451,Tokai 7966, Cape Town, South Africa
or at home : Suite 251, PostNet X5061, Stellenbosch, 7599
Tel +27 21 7102251  Fax +27 21 7102886  Home +27 21 8872196
------------------------------------------------------------

1997\11\04@173649 by TONY NIXON 54964

flavicon
picon face
Just a quick look in a Farnell catalog, I found boxes that accomodate
LCD displays, with keypad and battery compartment. Seems to be made
by a company called OKW.

Regards

Tony


Just when I thought I knew it all,
I learned that I didn't.

1997\11\04@213332 by Dave Celsnak

flavicon
face
How do I get a Farnell catalog?
Do they have a website?
How about the 'ole teley number?
Or the snail mail address.

Thank you,
Dave Celsnak

On Wed, 5 Nov 1997, TONY NIXON 54964 wrote:

{Quote hidden}

1997\11\04@214926 by TONY NIXON 54964

flavicon
picon face
> How do I get a Farnell catalog?
Ask Farnell
> Do they have a website?
http://www.farnell.com
> How about the 'ole teley number?
NSW - 02 9644 7722
> Or the snail mail address.
72 Ferndell St. Chester Hill NSW 2162
>
Cat No.774-741 ( as usual the price is too high  )
$68.18 + Tax
> Thank you,
No worries

Tony


Just when I thought I knew it all,
I learned that I didn't.


'Windows NT4 and PICStart Plus?'
1997\12\05@002417 by CCSystems
picon face
Any ideas how to get this combo working or should I just forget it?  I have
the latest firmware and MPLAB 3.31 with the updated driver.  I manually set
up the serial port(s) like the readme says.  I consistently get "Command
(8D) not echoed properly (AB)" and then the program hangs requiring me to
end the task.

Andrew Gerald
Custom Communications Systems

***

This e-mail address is a 'facsimile receiver' as defined
by Title 47 USC. Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail
to this address is a violation of US Federal Law.

1997\12\05@134206 by Bob Shaver

flavicon
face
part 0 690 bytes
----------
From:   CCSystems
Sent:   Thursday, December 04, 1997 11:04 PM
To:     RemoveMEPICLISTRemoveMEspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject:        Windows NT4 and PICStart Plus?

Any ideas how to get this combo working or should I just forget it?  I have
the latest firmware and MPLAB 3.31 with the updated driver.  I manually set
up the serial port(s) like the readme says.  I consistently get "Command
(8D) not echoed properly (AB)" and then the program hangs requiring me to
end the task.

Andrew Gerald
Custom Communications Systems

***

This e-mail address is a 'facsimile receiver' as defined
by Title 47 USC. Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail
to this address is a violation of US Federal Law.

'Windows Programming Position'
1997\12\31@082646 by Andy Kunz

flavicon
face
If you are a _experienced_ Windows 95 programmer with top C++ skills and
are interested in relocating to eastern NJ (near NYC) give me a holler
PRIVATE at TakeThisOuTmtdesign@spam@spam@spam@fast.net

FWIW, I live on the other side of NJ and it takes an hour to drive or 1 1/4
by train (+ $8.25) but it's worth it.

Thanks!

Andy

==================================================================
Andy Kunz - Statistical Research, Inc. - Westfield, New Jersey USA
==================================================================


'programming via windows'
1998\01\07@015302 by larz
flavicon
picon face
Is there a windows program out there for programming PICs using the ITU
Tech. PIC-1a programmer?

It's starting to get annoying having to boot to native dos every time I
want to use it. Besides, I can't get it to work with my new mobo and I'm
looking at several ways of getting it to work (aside from getting another
parallel card).

Adios,
LarZ

------------------- TAMA - The Strongest Name in Drums --------------------

'Windows PIC programming s/w'
1998\01\10@022116 by larz

flavicon
picon face
Anyone know if there's a windows 95/nt PIC programming program that would work
with the ITU PIC-1a unit? Thanks.

Adios,
LarZ

------------------- TAMA - The Strongest Name in Drums --------------------

1998\01\10@091758 by hansen

flavicon
face
Tony Antoniou wrote:
>
> Anyone know if there's a windows 95/nt PIC programming program that would work
>  with the ITU PIC-1a unit? Thanks.
>
> Adios,
> LarZ
>
> ------------------- TAMA - The Strongest Name in Drums --------------------

One program that works quite well with windows (though it is technically
not a windows program is PIX)-  It is available from:

http://home5.swipnet.se/~w-53783/

It runs automatically in a dos window, but it is much faster
than the software ITU distributes with the programmer.  It reads,
writes, erases, verifies.  It also shows you the hex code you
are working on and disassembles it for you.  It's a nice
implementation.  To use it with the ITU programmer, you must
specify the programmer type as: TAIT06T.

In fact, any programmer that will work with the Tait programmer
that users te 7406 amd transistors rather than the 4066 will work
with the ITU programmer as well.  I'm using PP in conjunction with
a C compiler and it is fast.  I can compile and load a program
to a 16F84 with this combination as fast or faster than I can
load to a basic stamp.

John Hansen

'Windows 95/NT PIC16x8x Programmer Software'
1998\01\26@150812 by Don McKenzie

flavicon
face
Updated 27-Jan-98
Cheap Parallel port programmers.

Windows 95/NT PIC16x8x Programmer Software by Nigel Goodwin. Windows 32
bit version for use under Windows
NT, or Windows 95, was ported by Andrew Jarman.

So now there is DOS, Windows, and NT drivers for the C84/F84 users and
parallel port programmers.

You can get all of this free software from:
Don's Download Dungeon http://www.dontronics.com/download.html

Don McKenzie  TakeThisOuTdonspamspamdontronics.com   http://www.dontronics.com

DonTronics Logo Design Contest http://www.dontronics.com/logo.html
For more details, send a blank message to KILLspaminfoKILLspamspamspamBeGonedontronics.com
or spamBeGonesimstickKILLspamspamdontronics.com or basics@spam@spamKILLspamdontronics.com

1998\01\26@230528 by larz

flavicon
picon face
Is there anything available for programming 12C508's in NT4?

Adios,
LarZ

----------------------------- Artstar Technologies
------------------------------
       Setting the standard for Australian products and support
     http://psxpro.home.ml.org


------------------- TAMA - The Strongest Name in Drums --------------------




{Original Message removed}


'Ludi-software, working from Windows'
1998\02\02@183758 by Jens.Madsen
flavicon
face
My utilities for Ludi, and own programmers, is now updated to work from
Windows Dos Prompt. It allow multitasking, sound in background using
PC-speaker, etc. It works with programming more PIC's at same time using
two comports with background running active. The software has been
designed for Pentium and other fast processors too.

The software is at

  http://www.ebar.dtu.dk/~c888600/pgm84v28.zip

It is with source. The orginal versions in :
  http://www.ebar.dtu.dk/~c888600/files

It is allowed to be used with any programmer software.

Best regards,
Jens Dyekjfr Madsen

'Weather station Re wind cal'
1998\02\14@105139 by Youngjs

picon face
For low speed wind sensor calibration try mounting the sensor on a car pulled
by a winch in a borrowed hallway.
Use a stepper motor driven by a stamp or a pic or a pc for controlled pull
speeds.
Build the car out of a piece of wood big enough to hold the sensor and its
signal conditioners.
Use either radio, light, or sound (ultrasonics), or even a trailed wire to get
the signal to the calibrator.
Use a hallway long enough to ramp the speed up to the stable calibration
speed, read the value for that speed, then ramp the speed down to stop.
Run a string from the car, to the winch at one end of the hall, back to a
pulley at the the other end of the hall, to the back of the car so that the
car may be easily reset for multiple calibration runs.
Borrow a hallway in a highschool (befriend the physics teacher) or your church
or lodge/ VFW etc.
This is paraphrased from Dr. Shawn Carlson of Scientific American Amateur
Scientist.

John

1998\02\14@133809 by M Walter

flavicon
face
There was a technique for measuring wind speed in Scientific American about
10-15 years back. It involved a ping pong ball on a string. The angle of
the deflection is used as a measure of the wind speed. Since ping pong
balls are very uniform in size and weight, the author was able to give
calibration constants for the system. You might be able to use this as a
tranfer standard to calibrate you PIC wind speed system. 'Couse you need a
day where the wind is constant. E-Mail me if you want more details, and
I'll see if I can find the article.
Mark Walter

1998\02\14@204720 by Steve Baldwin

flavicon
face
> For low speed wind sensor calibration try mounting the sensor on a car
pulled
> by a winch in a borrowed hallway.
> Use a stepper motor driven by a stamp or a pic or a pc for controlled
pull
> speeds.
> Use either radio, light, or sound (ultrasonics), or even a trailed wire
to get
> the signal to the calibrator.

What happened to the KISS principle ?
While a car speedo isn't much use at low speeds, a rev counter is. Keep a
constant RPM in a low gear and time how long between two points.

Steve.

======================================================
 Very funny Scotty.  Now beam down my clothes.
======================================================
Steve Baldwin                Electronic Product Design
TLA Microsystems Ltd         Microcontroller Specialists
PO Box 15-680                email: EraseMEstevebRemoveMEspam@spam@kcbbs.gen.nz
New Lynn, Auckland           ph  +64 9 820-2221
New Zealand                  fax +64 9 820-1929
======================================================

1998\02\15@101134 by Youngjs

picon face
In a message dated 98-02-14 20:48:12 EST, you write:

<< What happened to the KISS principle ?
While a car speedo isn't much use at low speeds, a rev counter is. Keep a
constant RPM in a low gear and time how long between two points.
 >>
It all depends on how much precision/repeatability you desire.  Even your
method ( a rev counter on a car) violates the KISS principle.  A more KISS
method might use the Beaufort scale which then would not even require the use
of an automobile.
John

1998\02\15@135324 by John Griessen

flavicon
face
Using a car is right in line with KISS.  A car is a platform that is
infinitely more thoroughly tested and reliable for its normal purpose.
Using it for a smooth riding constant speed physical platform is the
essence of KISS.  to me, KISS means getting to where you are going by smart
simplifying as well as keeping it crude if that will do.

>It all depends on how much precision/repeatability you desire.  Even your
>method ( a rev counter on a car) violates the KISS principle.  A more KISS
>method might use the Beaufort scale which then would not even require the use
>of an automobile.
>John
>

1998\02\17@094458 by Claudio Rachiele IW0DZG

flavicon
face
If the article is few pages, pls fax it to me. My fax is +39.6.596.65444. TIA

                      Claudio Rachiele IW0DZG

'High speed on Windows'
1998\02\23@085710 by WF AUTOMACAO

flavicon
face
Does someone have experience and got high speed to write a value
at parallel port on WINDOWS 95? Like us (Microseconds)! (A square wave on
parallel port)!
       I have tried the directx, but without success!

       Miguel.

1998\02\23@135303 by Kursat Guler

flavicon
face
I have a dll file for direct write and read from parallel port or any other
address. But I didn't test its speed. If you want I can send you the dll file
and some using instructions.

Kursat Guler


WF AUTOMACAO wrote:

> Does someone have experience and got high speed to write a value
> at parallel port on WINDOWS 95? Like us (Microseconds)! (A square wave on
> parallel port)!
>         I have tried the directx, but without success!
>
>         Miguel.

1998\02\24@145454 by Alex Torres

flavicon
face
----------
> From: Kursat Guler <RemoveMEkursatgspamspamEraseMEPERA.COM.TR>
>
> I have a dll file for direct write and read from parallel port or any
other
> address. But I didn't test its speed. If you want I can send you the dll
file
> and some using instructions.
>
> Kursat Guler
>
>
> WF AUTOMACAO wrote:
>
> > Does someone have experience and got high speed to write a value
> > at parallel port on WINDOWS 95? Like us (Microseconds)! (A square wave
on
> > parallel port)!
> >         I have tried the directx, but without success!
> >
> >         Miguel.

Look at this :
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------
TVicHW32 2.0

1.As component for Delphi 2.x, Delphi 3.x and C++Builder
2.As DLL for any programming language

Allows reading/writing to I/O ports, physical memory access
and hardware interrupts handling under Windows 95 and Windows NT.

June, 1997.
Author : Victor Ishikeev
e-mail : STOPspamvictor.....spamivi.ugatu.ac.ru
        spamBeGonetoolsRemoveMEspamRemoveMEentechtaiwan.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Torres, Kharkov, Ukraine (exUSSR)
@spam@altorspamBeGonespamchat.ru
2:461/28@FidoNet
http:\\www.geocities.com\SiliconValley\Lab\6311

1998\02\24@184654 by Alex Torres

flavicon
face
> > From: Kursat Guler <spam_OUTkursatgspamspamPERA.COM.TR>
> >
> > I have a dll file for direct write and read from parallel port or any
> other
> > address. But I didn't test its speed. If you want I can send you the
dll
> file
> > and some using instructions.
> >
> > Kursat Guler
> >
> >
> > WF AUTOMACAO wrote:
> >
> > Does someone have experience and got high speed to write a value
> > at parallel port on WINDOWS 95? Like us (Microseconds)! (A square wave
on
> > parallel port)!
> >         I have tried the directx, but without success!
> >
> >         Miguel.

Look at this :
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TVicHW32 2.0

1.As component for Delphi 2.x, Delphi 3.x and C++Builder
2.As DLL for any programming language

Allows reading/writing to I/O ports, physical memory access
and hardware interrupts handling under Windows 95 and Windows NT.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Torres, Kharkov, Ukraine (exUSSR)
spamaltorspamspamspamchat.ru
2:461/28@FidoNet
http:\\www.geocities.com\SiliconValley\Lab\6311


'12C508 cal value on window version'
1998\03\02@201511 by David Sprenkle
flavicon
face
Anyone out there have a 12c508 window.  What is the preset internal osc
value.  I know that it is dependent on processing factors I just wanted
a starting point.

--
David Sprenkle

1998\03\02@203618 by Mauro, Chuck

flavicon
face
I have several.  The 4 bit OSCCAL field is nominally set at 8.  A value
of 8 is the center point for the oscillator, so it might not be uncommon
to see a 7 or 9.  My values from the windowed parts were 9 for the two
parts I looked at several months ago.

Chuck Mauro


{Quote hidden}

1998\03\03@152306 by wwl

picon face
On Mon, 2 Mar 1998 19:08:47 -0800, you wrote:

>Anyone out there have a 12c508 window.  What is the preset internal osc
>value.  I know that it is dependent on processing factors I just wanted
>a starting point.
AFAIK. It is set by the factory the same as for OTP's, so you should
read out the value from a new chip and write it on the chip for when
you erase it.
I have 2 early ones which need OSCCALS of 4 and 5 (determined by
testing - I forgot to read them!)
    ____                                                           ____
  _/ L_/  Mike Harrison / White Wing Logic / spamBeGonewwlspamnetcomuk.co.uk  _/ L_/
_/ W_/  Hardware & Software design / PCB Design / Consultancy  _/ W_/
/_W_/  Industrial / Computer Peripherals / Hazardous Area      /_W_/

1998\03\03@160519 by ken

flavicon
picon face
In article <EraseME34FB743E.C4F76A7BEraseMEspambusprod.com>, David Sprenkle
<spamBeGonesprenklespam_OUTspam.....BUSPROD.COM> writes
>Anyone out there have a 12c508 window.  What is the preset internal osc
>value.  I know that it is dependent on processing factors I just wanted
>a starting point.
>

I purchased a couple of JW parts a few weeks ago and I decided to make a
note of the osc cal value before I used them, but when I read them in my
PICSTART plus the location read 00. Anyone any ideas why, if I look at
the OTP parts they read the same.

Ken.

+-----------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
|      Ken Hewitt  G8PWC      |        Email spamkenspamwelwyn.demon.co.uk        |
|      /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/      |  Homepage   http://www.welwyn.demon.co.uk  |
+-----------------------------+--------------------------------------------+

1998\03\03@192052 by Mike Keitz

picon face
On Tue, 3 Mar 1998 18:52:35 +0000 ken <RemoveMEkenKILLspamspamKILLspamWELWYN.DEMON.CO.UK> writes:
>I purchased a couple of JW parts a few weeks ago and I decided to make
>a
>note of the osc cal value before I used them, but when I read them in
>my
>PICSTART plus the location read 00. Anyone any ideas why, if I look at
>the OTP parts they read the same.

You may need to open the "Calibration Data" window to see the value.  In
the program memory window, the last location which holds the movlw with
the calibration value is (incorrectly) shown as 000.  Later versions of
MPLAB (3.3 or so) do show it correctly in the program memory window as
well.

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

1998\03\03@202637 by J Nagy

flavicon
face
       I have two 508JWs - one has an osccal value of 5, the other is 10
(decimal). I believe the power-on reset value is 7, not 8.
       If you need a starting point to determine what osccal should be,
you might consider a simple loop that continually toggles an output bit,
and varies osccal on the fly every time an input pin is (manually) pulsed.
By measuring the frequency at this output pin, you can tell what the
internal oscillator is really running at. The remaining four unused pins
would be available for outputting the value of osccal for you to read (only
the upper nibble is used by osccal so 4 bits are fine). I think there was
some talk on this topic posted a while ago - you may want to check the
archives for more info.

       Jim

{Quote hidden}

'PROTEL FOR WINDOWS PCB FOR SPECCTRA 7.1 AUTOROUTER'
1998\03\05@141416 by WF AUTOMACAO

flavicon
face
Does someone know where can i find this translator?

       I have some projects did with PIC, using the PROTEL and i would
like to reroute for Specctra!

       Miguel.

1998\03\05@163934 by davewave

flavicon
face
WF AUTOMACAO wrote:

> Does someone know where can i find this translator?
>
>         I have some projects did with PIC, using the PROTEL and i would
> like to reroute for Specctra!
>
>         Miguel.

Miguel,

I use both Protel (2.x and 3.x) and Specctra (7.x), and the translator
utility is available from Cooper & Chyan.

I have only needed Specctra for a couple very dense boards (12 layers, 5mil
trace and spaces, some BGA components, etc.). The translation is not 100%
perfect. I had to do a bit of editing before the Protel->Specctra
translation, and some more editing in Protel after autoroute in Specctra
(and of course the Specctra->Protel translation). Lots of work, but was
necessary on a board with over 1000 nets, surface mount parts on both
sides, and full testpoint coverage. I would much prefer routing even these
dense boards manually, however that would take weeks.

Dave Sorlien
dsorlienspam_OUTspamspamgeocities.com
davewavespamspam@spam@minn.net
www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Haven/9004/

1998\03\06@130537 by dparker

flavicon
face
I have the SPECCTRA tool set and use it with multiple CAD tools (Mentor
Graphics & OrCAD)  the file that is written out of these tools is an ascii DSN
file.  This file format was released to public domain by CCT at last years PCB
Design Conference. I think CCT hopes that this file format will become an
industry standard much like AutoCAD's DXF.  Translators are available from
either CCT or PROTEL for your system.  The amount of rules that you add to our
design will determine the which translator is better.  Most likely it will be
the CCT.  These translators are not bi-directional in that the footprint data
is translated into the DSN format but only routing and placement  data is
translated back.  Most loss of data occurs when the units between the two
systems don't match up and there is a loss of precision.  Also,  you should be
careful with area fills.  The SPECCTRA router's modeling routine doesn't
support these well.

CCT was purchased last year by CADENCE.  So information on thier products will
be found at CADENCE's web site.

Dale Parker
Printed Circuit Design Services
spamBeGonedparker.....spammc.net

David Sorlien wrote:

{Quote hidden}

'Erasetime of Window PICs'
1998\03\07@125253 by Wolfgang SchŠdle

flavicon
face
Hello !

How many minutes have I to erase an window PIC ?

                           schaedleRemoveMEspamswol.de
 \ olle /                spamschaedlespamusa.net
   \/\/olfgang       DB6TE @ DB0CZ

'Wildly [OT] but; How to exterminate Windoze passwo'
1998\03\09@021519 by paulb

flavicon
face
OK, I've declared it! The only relevance to PICs is that I *need*
these machines working to be able to program PICs and the network is
a tool to use my time sufficiently efficiently to do so!

 I used to use a DOS-based network to do this, but WIN95's support of
DOS-level drivers is (better than WIN3.1 but) too poor to allow this to
work reliably.  So I installed TCP/IP but Microsoft Networks can't
properly use this as a substrate, so I had to install NETBEUI as well.

 I now have two machines (and soon more) that won't auto-boot (which I
need to run my packet radio, my FAX etc...) because of these two
parasitic screens which pop up asking for a password (even though I've
never given one) and then glibly informing me it can't find a DNS to
look up the non-existent password.

 Does this strike a chord with you?  More so, have you successfully
fixed it?  Please tell?  I saw a recent comment *somewhere* about a WIN
process launcher which zaps nasty question pop-ups but where would you
insert it anyway?

 Some might say RTFM but ... this is Microslop!  I thus pray to excuse
such a "newbie of newbies" enquiry.  I'll try not to do it again...

 In anticipation...
       Paul B.

1998\03\09@080809 by Ian Havercroft

flavicon
Anytime you install a network client for Windows 95 you will get the login
name and password screen, delete the networking config and it will go away.
If you need the networking client then go to the MS website and download
the Powertoys for Windows 95, one of the powertoysis caled TweakUI and
contains an option which will enter the password for you.

Good Luck,

Ian
ihspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTey.bm





spam_OUTpaulb@spam@spamRemoveMEMIDCOAST.COM.AU on 08/03/98 17:47:15

Please respond to spampaulbspamspammidcoast.com.au

To:   @spam@PICLISTspam_OUTspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
cc:    (bcc: Ian Havercroft/IT/ErnstYoung/BM)
Subject:  Wildly [OT] but; How to exterminate Windoze passwords?




OK, I've declared it! The only relevance to PICs is that I *need*
these machines working to be able to program PICs and the network is
a tool to use my time sufficiently efficiently to do so!

 I used to use a DOS-based network to do this, but WIN95's support of
DOS-level drivers is (better than WIN3.1 but) too poor to allow this to
work reliably.  So I installed TCP/IP but Microsoft Networks can't
properly use this as a substrate, so I had to install NETBEUI as well.

 I now have two machines (and soon more) that won't auto-boot (which I
need to run my packet radio, my FAX etc...) because of these two
parasitic screens which pop up asking for a password (even though I've
never given one) and then glibly informing me it can't find a DNS to
look up the non-existent password.

 Does this strike a chord with you?  More so, have you successfully
fixed it?  Please tell?  I saw a recent comment *somewhere* about a WIN
process launcher which zaps nasty question pop-ups but where would you
insert it anyway?

 Some might say RTFM but ... this is Microslop!  I thus pray to excuse
such a "newbie of newbies" enquiry.  I'll try not to do it again...

 In anticipation...
       Paul B.

1998\03\09@115157 by Bob Shaver

flavicon
face
Here is how we get our print server to auto logon.  First, remove TCP
unless you need it for other things (like WEB access).  Microsoft only
needs NETBEUI for networking.  Then go into Start->Settings->ControlPanel
then double-click the NETWORK icon.  Under the "configuration" tab make
sure the "Primary Network Logon" is set to "Windows Login", *not* "Client
for Microsoft Network".  Then set the password to blank (which you already
have done).  Setting for "Windows Login" prevents it from requiring a
password, since it does not by default go out and try to log on to a server
somewhere.  You can still access the network via Explorer or MyComputer and
other PCs can access this one.

On Sunday, March 08, 1998 4:47 PM, Paul B. Webster VK2BZC
[SMTP:.....paulbspam.....MIDCOAST.COM.AU] wrote:
{Quote hidden}

1998\03\09@183743 by Sheikh, Shahid, Mr., IMCEN

flavicon
face
I haven't used 95 in some time now so I dont remember exactly how it worked
but my machine had IP and NetBEUI loaded and didn't prompt me for a password
at boot time.

I think after you install networking, if you leave the password prompt empty
and just enter a userid, it shouldn't prompt you for the password next time
when you boot. I think it even says at that window that if you leave the
password field empty, you won't be prompted for a password again. You may
want to delete *.pwl files from your windows directory, reboot and try to
just enter the userid and leave the password blank and then see what happens
in subsequent logons.

The other solution I can think of is to get rid of Windows Logon completely
by removing Microsoft Networking completely. Just install the nic card and
the protocols. That should give you standard TCPIP connectivity but wont
give you any microsoft networking capability. Although from your post, I
think having microsoft networking is a must.

Hope this helps.

Shahid

> {Original Message removed}

'[OT] sortof 4-20mA window detector'
1998\03\25@183305 by Harrison Cooper

flavicon
face
Isn't it nice when a client says...and use THIS sensor (none other), to turn on
and off
your stuff (i.e., an inhibit TTL signal).  Well, as it happens to be, the output
of
this particular level sensor is 4-20mA.  When it reaches a certain level in a
tank, the
output is in that form (low level is 4mA, high level is 20mA).  So, at 20mA, we
are supposed
to inhibit our stuff from running. Simple..done it before, but either with a PLC
or a hard
contact.  Sorry to bore you all with this....

SO...rather than reinvent the world, has anyone built a circuit, doesn't have to
be PIC based
exactly, to monitor a 4-20mA loop and just switch a TTL signal when it reaches
20mA? Yea, I
could build a window detector, or use a ADC and PIC, but time is a problem so
just need a simple
and inexpensive solution.  Otherwise, I can use a couple LM311's and such...

Private mail is fine to save on bandwidth.  spamhcooperKILLspamspames.com

1998\03\26@003826 by Chris Eddy

flavicon
face
Harrison;
Easiest way that I know is to drop the 4-20mA across a 250 ohm resistor, then
run
the 1-5VDC signal to the base of an NPN transistor THROUGH a 3.3V zener diode
and
resistor in series.  The series reistor limits current in the on position and
allows
you to limit leak current to an off level in the non-zener-on-position.  The
emitter
goes to ground.  The collector, via pullup, goes to the input pin on the pic.
If
you skip the zener, and try high values for the base resistor, you may get it to
work today, and the next batch of NPN's that you get with a beta that is off by
a
factor of three don't work for shit in your circuit.

Harrison Cooper wrote:

> Isn't it nice when a client says...and use THIS sensor (none other), to turn
on
>  and off
> your stuff (i.e., an inhibit TTL signal).  Well, as it happens to be, the
output
>  of
> this particular level sensor is 4-20mA.  When it reaches a certain level in a
>  tank, the
> output is in that form (low level is 4mA, high level is 20mA).  So, at 20mA,
we
>  are supposed
> to inhibit our stuff from running. Simple..done it before, but either with a
PLC
>  or a hard
> contact.  Sorry to bore you all with this....
>
> SO...rather than reinvent the world, has anyone built a circuit, doesn't have
to
>  be PIC based
> exactly, to monitor a 4-20mA loop and just switch a TTL signal when it reaches
>  20mA? Yea, I
> could build a window detector, or use a ADC and PIC, but time is a problem so
>  just need a simple
> and inexpensive solution.  Otherwise, I can use a couple LM311's and such...
>
> Private mail is fine to save on bandwidth.  RemoveMEhcooperRemoveMEspames.com

'Window's C++ Compiler's.'
1998\03\31@122956 by John Bellini

flavicon
face
Does anyone know of C++ compiler's for the PIC's that run under windows
'95?
If so, can they be integrated and used under MPLAB?

Thank you,
John Bellini
KILLspamjbellini.....spamKILLspamstatpower.com">http://jbellinispam_OUTspamspam_OUTstatpower.com

1998\03\31@133447 by Tore Bergvill

picon face
I use my C-compiler ,CC5x with MPLAB.
This is a DOS application, but I use the "run DOS command"-option,
and run a batch file containing the CC5x parameters.
I then have to load the result file into MPLAB memory and copy it
to the chip programmer.
It works fine, and enables me to combine the exellent CC5x code efficiency and
MPLAB environment.

Check out:  http://www.riksnett.no/cc5x
for a trial version of CC5x.

Best regards, Tore Bergvill, Oslo, Norway
Email address:
KILLspambergvillspam@spam@online.no

*********** REPLY PARTITION ***********

On 31.03.98, at 09:25, John Bellini wrote:

>Does anyone know of C++ compiler's for the PIC's that run under windows
>'95?
>If so, can they be integrated and used under MPLAB?
>
>Thank you,
>John Bellini
>@spam@jbelliniRemoveMEspamstatpower.com">http://jbellini@spam@spamEraseMEstatpower.com
>

1998\03\31@135028 by John Bellini

flavicon
face
I can get DOS compiler's to run no problem.  You can add and modify
compilers under the 'PROJECT" menu item and have the compiler compile
and have MPLAB do everything for you.  I am doing this now with the Byte
Craft C compiler and it works great.

> {Original Message removed}

1998\03\31@153023 by Richard Nowak

picon face
You might want to download Microchip's manual for MPLAB-C which was
originally written by Byte craft.  In one of the appendices is an article
written by Walter Banks, President of Byte craft, and Derek P. Carlson of
Microchip which talks about the application of C to small embedded control
applications.

Don't forget that whatever compiler you buy that it must produce the code
required to run on a PIC.

I believe that there are just too many restrictions that using a C++
compiler is not justified for PIC firmware development, assuming that it is
even possible.

Rich


At 09:25 AM 3/31/98 -0800, you wrote:
>Does anyone know of C++ compiler's for the PIC's that run under windows
>'95?
>If so, can they be integrated and used under MPLAB?
>
>Thank you,
>John Bellini
>spam_OUTjbellinispam_OUTspamRemoveMEstatpower.com">http://RemoveMEjbellinispam.....statpower.com
>
>

=========================================
= Abolish the Income Tax! Fire the IRS! =
= http://www.nrst.org/                  =
=========================================
=========================================
= Here's a site that wants your views   =
= http://www.not4irs.org/               =
=========================================


'MPLAB under Windows 95'
1998\04\30@202143 by bowman
flavicon
face
i finally got MPLAB 3.4 to work. it definitely is much slicker than using
the raw DOS MPASM and MPSIM. the quirk i encountered may be something in
the way my system is setup, or may be a general Win95 problem.

after installing MPLAB, i could follow along with the single source example
in TUTOR.PDF up to the point of building the project. at that time, all the
window title bars would gray out. 30 seconds later, a message box appears,
"Application timed out. Continue waiting". choose 'yes' and you'll wait
forever, choose 'no' and the compiler results window will report "unable to
find output file sample.hex"

seems MPLAB spawns MPASM in an iconized DOS window, passes the command line
parameters, and waits for it to return. you never will see this window
unless you bring up the system tray. at this time, you cannot switch to
other windows. after the message box appears, click on the MS_DOS icon, and
the window will come up. as soon as it has focus, it closes. then choosing
'yes' in the message box immediately displays a successful compilation in
the build status window.

if you run MPASM as a standalone in a DOS window, it does its thing,
displays the results, and then says "hit any key to continue". i assume the
iconized DOS window is waiting for this keystroke, while MPLAB is waiting
for the DOS window to close, deadlocking the whole system until it times
out.

an awkward work-around, but i think the extra 30 seconds is worth it to be
able to use the full power of the IDE.

also, there are two possible issues i haven't tested thoroughly. as i was
thrashing around trying to get it to run it seemed:

a. MPLAB is only happy if installed in the default c:\Win\Program
Files\Mplab\
b. i think the language tool needs to be explicitly loaded, even though it
appears MPLAB initializes pointed to MPASM.

i wouldn't bet the farm on either of these statements, but if you have a
problem they would be worth doing.

1998\04\30@222154 by Craig Lee

flavicon
face
I had the same problem when getting it working with HiTech C, where MPLAB
had
to spawn picc.exe.

What I did was try to change the preferences on the dos box.  When I did
this from
the _default dos pif, it didn't work.  Then I tried modifying the PIF file
in my bin
directory, this didn't work either.

What I had to do was wait for the MPLAB timout message to come up, switch to
the dos box and quickly hit pause.  This suspended the dos box.  Then I set
it's
properties so that it didn't suspend the background, and I set the idle to
high.

>From then on, it worked properly.

I've seen the same thing when trying to include DOS tools under Borland C.
Perhaps
it's a Borland library issue.......


Craig

{Original Message removed}


'MPLAB under Windows 95'
1998\05\01@131418 by Craig Lee
flavicon
face
Your right it will probably spoil you.  I tried my luck with the HC11
development tools
before this, and threw up my hands in disgust.  After countless hours
talking to
blank faced Motorola engineers ( who probably have it out for me), I
switched the
whole project to Microchip, and started from scratch.

It turns out the development environment is, press F10 and voila!... and
since I am
using an ANSI C compiler, all the stuff I learned in the last 8 years
writing test
software is not lost in this new frontier.

MPLAB was a bit quirky at first, but after solving these minor issues, I'm
quite happy.
I'm glad you find it to your liking too.

Craig


{Original Message removed}

1998\05\01@163012 by Morgan Olsson

picon face
At 18:13 1998-04-30 -0600, bowman <spambowman@spam@spamMONTANA.COM> wrote:
>i finally got MPLAB 3.4 to work.
Congratulations ;)

>after installing MPLAB, i could follow along with the single source example
>in TUTOR.PDF up to the point of building the project.

Mee too.  But my problem was that it could not find MPASM as it is not
included in MPLAB 3.40 !!
I installed 3.40 in a new directory (C:\MPLAB34_) to not interfere with the
working 3.31.
So, I changed MPLAB3.40 (using Project\Install Language Tool...) to use
MPASMWIN, instead (was included).

The thing now happening is that MPLAB starts MPASMWIN, and immedietely
displaying
"MPLAB is unable to find output file "SAMPLE.HEX"."
*long before* MPASMWIN finished!!  Stupid.
Anyone kow to run MPASMWIN correctly?  It would be nice, because it has a
progress bar...

I tried to let MPLAB call a .batch file, which called MPASMWIN.
Then MPLAB waits until it times out, then I can tell it not to wait
anymore, and it is then all compiled OK.

Seem like MPLAB no way nows when MPASMWIN is ready.

Also tried elder MPASMWIN.

Then I changed to use the MPASM from MPLAB 3.31 package, and it worked
fine, so i fetched latest MPASM from Mchip and it worked too, but I still
see no progress bar...

>seems MPLAB spawns MPASM in an iconized DOS window, passes the command line
>parameters, and waits for it to return.

Strange. seem to work for me.  (Win95, upgraded some parts to Build 1111)

>a. MPLAB is only happy if installed in the default c:\Win\Program
>Files\Mplab\

c:\MPLAB34_\ works for me.

...

/Morgan
/  Morgan Olsson, MORGANS REGLERTEKNIK, SE-277 35 KIVIK, Sweden \
\  mrtTakeThisOuTspaminame.com, ph: +46 (0)414 70741; fax +46 (0)414 70331    /

1998\05\01@165418 by David VanHorn

flavicon
face
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Lee <.....craigleespamTakeThisOuTtelusplanet.net>

>MPLAB was a bit quirky at first, but after solving these minor issues, I'm
>quite happy.
>I'm glad you find it to your liking too.
>>

I'm well pleased with it. I was able to finish an F84 project in a month on
it, from never having written anything for that box before. The stopwatch is
great, and the I/O simulation is very good. I think maybe the number of
steps is a bit limited, but that's not a huge deal.  I'd like to see the
ability to breakpoint on modification of a location (If it's in there, I
missed it)  That's something I miss from emulator-land.

I've got the PicMaster, but no '84 pod for it. :(

Can an 84 expert tell me, what the PCLATH is good for on the '84?  It seemed
to get in my way a bit, and looking at it, it didn't seem to perform a
useful function. My assumption is that it's an "appendix" left over from
some other flavour of device that has more ram or something..  No flames
please, I've only ever written for the one pic, and time dosen't permit much
"exploration". I pretty much get a project, and learn the platform as I go.

1998\05\01@211338 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
David VanHorn <EraseMEPICLISTspamKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU> wrote:

> I'd like to see the ability to breakpoint on modification of a
> location

   David:

   The PIC-Master doesn't support that, but the upcoming MPLAB-ICE
   emulator will.

> Can an 84 expert tell me, what the PCLATH is good for on the '84?
> It seemed to get in my way a bit, and looking at it, it didn't seem
> to perform a useful function. My assumption is that it's an
> "appendix" left over from some other flavour of device that has more
> ram or something.

   On the 16x84, PCLATH isn't necessary for CALLs and GOTOs, since
   the entire destination address will fit in the CALL or GOTO
   opcode.

   It IS, however, useful when you're doing a computed GOTO (e.g.,
   for a table lookup) where you modify PCL directly.  Since the
   result of an operation on PCL (like, say, "MOVLW 3 / ADDWF PCL")
   is only 8 bits wide, PCLATH must be preset if your
   PCL-modification will cross a page boundary or whatever.

   Details are in the Microchip appnote that deals with table
   lookups (sorry, don't remember the number), and somewhere in the
   "Answers" section of the Fast Forward Engineering web page at:

       http://www.netcom.com/~fastfwd

   -Andy

=== Andrew Warren - fastfwdEraseMEspamix.netcom.com
=== Fast Forward Engineering - Vista, California
=== http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2499 (personal)
=== http://www.netcom.com/~fastfwd (business)

'windows terminal- output?'
1998\05\03@190726 by Bill Kennedy

flavicon
face
Piclist,
   Anyone know what windows 3.1 terminal program actually sends out the
serial port?  I am trying to send data characters 0-9, but don't quite
recognize what I see on the scope.  I've set up communications setting to
7-n-1.
Any input or pointers to info websites would be much appreciated.

Thanks,
Bill Kennedy

1998\05\03@193527 by Mike Keitz

picon face
On Sun, 3 May 1998 17:46:45 -0400 Bill Kennedy <EraseMEhuespamspamBeGoneFRONTIERNET.NET>
writes:
>Piclist,
>    Anyone know what windows 3.1 terminal program actually sends out
>the
>serial port?

Unless it is very strangely configured, it sends ASCII characters.  The
ASCII code for '0' is 0x30 and the ASCII code for '9' is 0x39.

I am trying to send data characters 0-9, but don't quite
>recognize what I see on the scope.  I've set up communications setting
>to
>7-n-1.

On a RS-232 line, zero bits are + voltage (typically 5 to 12V) and one
bits are -voltage (typically -5 to -12V).  Each bit stays at the
designated voltage for the duration of 1/baud rate, then the next bit is
sent immediately.  When no data is being sent, the line idles at -
voltage.  Before each character of data is sent, a 'start bit' of one bit
duration of + voltage is sent.  The data comes out LSB first.  After the
last bit, the line stays at - voltage for at least one bit time (the
'stop bit').

So if you type '1', which is ASCII 0x31 or 0110001 binary, the RS-232
signal would be:
+-+++--+-
S1000110K
time -->
which would look like -_---__-_ on an oscilloscope (with no gaps).  Set
the scope to trigger on a rising edge and it should catch the start of
the start bit.

S = start bit, K = stop bit.  After the sequence, the line may stay at -
voltage if there is nothing more to send, or a new start bit and
character may immediately follow.


_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

1998\05\03@210529 by Bill Kennedy

flavicon
face
Thanks for the help!!  It was much needed and appreciated!
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Keitz <TakeThisOuTmkeitzspamTakeThisOuTjuno.com>
To: PICLISTspamspam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU <spamPICLIST@spam@spamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: Sunday, May 03, 1998 7:35 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] windows terminal- output?


{Quote hidden}

1998\05\03@213706 by smg

flavicon
face
I need to write math using word.  I need to write integrals and
differential equations and the normal math stuff.  But I do not know how to
find the symbol set in word.  Does anyone know how to get into the format
for writing the equations?

----------
{Quote hidden}

1998\05\03@235720 by Ron Kreymborg

flavicon
face
Click on Insert, then Object, then from the Create New tab select
"Microsoft Equation 3.0". You are now in the equation editor and can build
the equation. You need to have selected equation editing when you
installed Word.

Ron

On Sun, 3 May 1998, Rich Graziano wrote:

> I need to write math using word.  I need to write integrals and
> differential equations and the normal math stuff.  But I do not know how to
> find the symbol set in word.  Does anyone know how to get into the format
> for writing the equations?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ron Kreymborg                   Computer Systems Manager
Monash University               CRC for Southern Hemisphere Meteorology
Wellington Road
Clayton, VIC 3168               Phone     : 061-3-9905-9671
Australia                       Fax       : 061-3-9905-9689
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1998\05\06@154906 by myke predko

flavicon
face
Hi Bill,

>Piclist,
>    Anyone know what windows 3.1 terminal program actually sends out the
>serial port?  I am trying to send data characters 0-9, but don't quite
>recognize what I see on the scope.  I've set up communications setting to
>7-n-1.
>Any input or pointers to info websites would be much appreciated.

This has been out for a few days and nobody's responded yet, so, I'll give
it a shot.

Data sent from the PC's RS-232 Serial Port is sent in the following format:

--------+    +----+----+      +----+----+----+------------    "1"
       |    |    |    |      |    |    |    |
       | SB | D0 | D1 |  ... | Dn | PB | TB |
       |    |    |    |      |    |    |    |
       +----+----+----+      +----+----+----+                "0"

Where:

"SB"        - Start Bit (Always Present)
"D0"..."Dn" - Data Bits (Typically 8)
"PB"        - (Optional) Parity Bit
"TB"        - Stop Bit (1 or 2)

But, at RS-232 levels, a "1" is at -12V and a "0" is at +12V
(approximately).  So "A", being sent via RS-232, on an oscilloscope will
look like:

        +----+    +----+----+----+----+----+    +----+             +12V
        |    |    |                        |    |    |
        |    |    |                        |    |    |
        |    |    |                        |    |    |
---------+    +----+                        +----+    +----+------- -12V

         SB=0 D0=1 D1=0 D2=0 D3=0 D4=0 D5=0 D6=1 D7=0 TB=1

I suspect this is what you are seeing and you can't make heads or tails of
it (hopefully this will give you a better idea).

OR...

You have "Hardware Handshaking" enabled on your PC and nothing is coming out
of the serial port except for the -12V on the Transmit line.  Disable
Hardware Handshaking in the Terminal Program or tie together DSR/DTR and
CTS/RTS at the PC's Serial Port Connector.  The problem in this case is the
PC's BIOS is expecting the handshaking lines at a specific state before data
can be sent.  By tying these bits together (or getting rid of the check) it
will be able to transmit without any problems.

For the PIC side, you will have to level shift the +/- 12V logic to 5/0V
CMOS logic using something like a Max2x2.

Good luck,

myke

"If people don't know what you're doing, they don't know what you're doing
wrong." - Sir Humphrey Appleby K.C.B

'=?windows-1250?Q?R:______I=B4m_new?='
1998\05\11@083605 by Leonardo De Palo

flavicon
face
Hi,

I have found a good book in EASY PIC'n from "Square 1" by David Benson.

You can contact him at the following.

Square 1 Electronics
>P.O. Box 501
>Kelseyville, CA 95451 USA
>Voice (707) 279-8881
>Fax (707) 279-8883
>E-mail sqoneTakeThisOuTspamspamBeGonepacific.net
>http://www.sq-1.com

also you can find a good PIC course on the WEB at the following URL:
http://www.picpoint.com


regards
Leonardo De Palo

spamleo.depaloTakeThisOuTspampometia.it



-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: Ricardo Ponte G <.....rniniverspamspamBeGoneCANTV.NET>
A: .....PICLISTTakeThisOuTspamEraseMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU <RemoveMEPICLISTspamspamKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Data: domenica 10 maggio 1998 23.50
Oggetto: I4m new


>
>       To somebody that can hear my call....
>
>
>       I4m new in the Pic4s business and i4d like to begin with the basics
> theory.... but i4m not living in U.S.A I live in Venezuela, so where can
i
> get good literature about the basic theory of the PIC.  If somebody know
> where can i get a good book to read and buy via world wide web, please
let
> me know.
>

'MPLAB under Windows NT 4.0'
1998\05\11@105751 by Peller Balazs Karoly

flavicon
face
I bought a Picstart Plus developer tool. It works on my computer under
Windows 3.1 perfectly, but I want use it under Windows NT 4.0. (with
Service Pack 3)
I installed the MPLAB 3.31 and 3.4 successfully under NT, but when I start
reading from a PIC, both of them produce the following error
message:

 Communication Error
 Command [8D] not echoed properly [AB].

Could you help me, what's going on here?

STOPspampellerbEraseMEspaminf.bme.hu

                                               Balazs Peller
                                                    TUB

1998\05\11@115518 by Najemy, Daniel

flavicon
face
I had some similar problems trying to run under NT, I had to drop back
to Windows 95...it works there...

> {Original Message removed}

1998\05\11@121121 by Eric Tailleur

flavicon
face
What's the procedure to unsubscribe ???

-----Message d'origine-----
De:     Peller Balazs Karoly [SMTP:pellerbspamBeGonespamINF.BME.HU]
Date:   11 mai, 1998 10:46
A:      PICLIST@spam@spamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
Objet:  MPLAB under Windows NT 4.0

I bought a Picstart Plus developer tool. It works on my computer under
Windows 3.1 perfectly, but I want use it under Windows NT 4.0. (with
Service Pack 3)
I installed the MPLAB 3.31 and 3.4 successfully under NT, but when I start
reading from a PIC, both of them produce the following error
message:

 Communication Error
 Command [8D] not echoed properly [AB].

Could you help me, what's going on here?

spam_OUTpellerbspamspaminf.bme.hu

                                               Balazs Peller
                                                    TUB

'=?Windows-1250?Q?RE:_I=B4m_new?='
1998\05\11@124731 by Ricardo Ponte G

flavicon
face
Muchas gracias, señor  Leonardo de Palo.

----------
{Quote hidden}

basics
> > theory.... but i4m not living in U.S.A I live in Venezuela, so where
can
> i
> > get good literature about the basic theory of the PIC.  If somebody
know
> > where can i get a good book to read and buy via world wide web, please
> let
> > me know.
> >

'MPLAB under Windows NT 4.0'
1998\05\11@130638 by Scott Dattalo

face
flavicon
face
Peller Balazs Karoly wrote:
>
> I bought a Picstart Plus developer tool. It works on my computer under
> Windows 3.1 perfectly, but I want use it under Windows NT 4.0. (with
> Service Pack 3)
> I installed the MPLAB 3.31 and 3.4 successfully under NT, but when I start
> reading from a PIC, both of them produce the following error
> message:
>
>   Communication Error
>   Command [8D] not echoed properly [AB].
>
> Could you help me, what's going on here?

This is the same thing I discovered a week and a half ago in the middle
of a REALLY BAD COMPUTER day. Simple answer: PICSTART does not work when
MPLAP 3.40 is installed under NT. Dammit! Oh, and to be complete, PIC
Master doesn't work either.

Scott

'[OT] =?windows-1250?Q?R:______I=B4m_new?='
1998\05\11@143517 by White Horse Design

flavicon
face
Great subject line, given the recent postings on spelling! :-))

Regards

Adrian

WWW    WWW   Adrian Gothard
WWW WW WWW   White Horse Design
WWWWWWWWWW   +44-385-970009 (Mobile/SMS), +44-118-962-8913/4 (voice/fax)
WWWW  WWWW   KILLspamwhdspamKILLspamzetnet.co.uk, http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/whd
---
Developers of GPS satellite-based tracking systems

'MPLAB under Windows NT 4.0'
1998\05\12@062746 by STEENKAMP [M.ING E&E]

flavicon
picon face
Hi,

> I bought a Picstart Plus developer tool. It works on my computer under
> Windows 3.1 perfectly, but I want use it under Windows NT 4.0. (with
> Service Pack 3)
> I installed the MPLAB 3.31 and 3.4 successfully under NT, but when I start
> reading from a PIC, both of them produce the following error
> message:
>
>   Communication Error
>   Command [8D] not echoed properly [AB].
>
> Could you help me, what's going on here?
>
The MPLAB environment functions perfectly under NT4.0 (I use it), BUT you
would not be able to use your programmer or ICE from within NT.  This is
because NT does not allow IO operations, except through a device driver.
And since Microchip does not support NT yet, they do not supply you with
such drivers.
<FLAMESUIT ON>
It's a pitty, since NT is *so* much more stable than 95.
MPLAB for Linux would be even better!
<FLAMESUIT OFF>

Niki

1998\05\13@140838 by arthur

flavicon
face
{Quote hidden}

The only solution I know is to get MPLab 3.09.10 and run that. It
works just fine, which proves that Microchip USED to know how to work
the PICStart under NT 4.0.  Doesn't support the latest chips, though.
I still can't believe the gall of MChip in ignoring NT users.

Blessings!

Arthur J. Doerksen, P.Eng.
A.D.Comtronics & Engineering - 604-533-4933
20783 - 51 B Avenue, Langley, B.C. CANADA  V3A 7T5
http://www.adcomtronics.com
"Amazing grace, how sweet the sound..."

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1998 , 1999 only
- Today
- New search...