Searching \ for 'the' 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=
Search entire site for: 'the'.

No exact or substring matches. trying for part
PICList Thread
'other local pic user from bbs '
1994\01\17@174850 by jory

face picon face
Date: Thursday, August 5, 1993  6:08pm                             /APPLICN
From: Kenmun                                                     Msg#: 7755
 To: ** ALL **
 Re: Help for SHAWN                                              (1 reply)

Shawn Dienhart, are you out there?
I could give you some pointers on assembly language programming.  I'm
not an expert, but I could offer some caveats that could help you out.
Call me if you need to  1-413-684-3155  EST.

Or write:
      Kenneth Pergola
              122 Hemlock Hill
              Dalton, MA  01226-1732


KENMUN          P.S.   Hang in there buddy; it gets easier!


'The unused 40pin socket on the PIC Start programme'
1994\06\15@072115 by IDH
flavicon
face
Could 40 pin PIC variants be programmed by PIC Start if a Socket is
placed in the unused 40 pin placement?.

                                   Ian H.
                                   

'The unused 40 pin pickstart socket.'
1994\06\15@073342 by IDH

flavicon
face
Can the unused 40 pin pickstart socket be used forprogramming 40 pin
PIC chips?.
                       Ian H.
                       

1994\06\15@074540 by byron

face picon face
>
> Can the unused 40 pin pickstart socket be used forprogramming 40 pin
> PIC chips?.

Don't know. What revision do you have? I have the 16B. No 40pin
socket at all.

Both of the 40 pin offerings can be programmer serially. Maybe it's
possible to create the 5 pin interface necessary to do that on a
daughterboard?

BTW can someone make the MPSTART.EXE software (V3.04) available to me?
I went to the Microchip seminar yesterday and got a PICSTART 16B but
I don't have a 1.44 3.5" floppy at home and of course the software is
on a disk of that format. Bummer. The BBS has the assembler and the simulator
but not the MPSTART software. I can get it ftp or you can mail it to me
in most any format. THe former would be preferable.

Thanks,

BAJ

1994\06\15@080137 by rca
flavicon
face

> spam_OUTbyronTakeThisOuTspamcc.gatech.edu (Byron A Jeff)
>
>>BTW can someone make the MPSTART.EXE software (V3.04) available to me?
>
>You can ftp it from ftp.sics.se in the pub/mchipsoft/picstrt16 directory or
similar.
>
>Hope that helps.
>
>Rafe
>

----------------------------------------------------------------
Rafe Aldridge - .....rcaKILLspamspam@spam@sirius.tn.rl.ac.uk
R65, Rutherford Appleton Lab,                      wwWWww
Chilton, Oxon, OX11 OQX, UK.                        o  o
------------------------------------------------ooO--(__)--Ooo--


1994\06\15@091502 by IDH

flavicon
face
> >
> > Can the unused 40 pin pickstart socket be used forprogramming 40 pin
> > PIC chips?.
>
> Don't know. What revision do you have? I have the 16B. No 40pin
> socket at all.
>
> Both of the 40 pin offerings can be programmer serially. Maybe it's
> possible to create the 5 pin interface necessary to do that on a
> daughterboard?

My board is marked 04-01315 rev2.  The Firmware chip is marked
Picstart-16B firmware rev 1.4.  The copyright is  1992.  The location
of the 40pin socket is market u8.  Can serial programming be done
using the Picstart Board as the programmer?. (Perhaps this is
refrasing your last question).

                           Ian H.

'The unused 40 pin pickstart socket. '
1994\06\15@175723 by eric

flavicon
face
> Can the unused 40 pin pickstart socket be used forprogramming 40 pin
> PIC chips?.

Based on partially tracing the connections, it appears that the extra 40 pin
footprint on the PICSTART-16B was intended for use in programming the 17C42.
The firmware on the board probably doesn't support it, and the MPSTART program
on the PC certainly doesn't.  They probably planned to sell a board with the
40 pin socket as a PICSTART-17, but they haven't done so (yet).

The 40 pin pads would not work at all for programming the 16C64 and 16C74.
You might be able to wire an adapter to program these parts, and tell the
software that you're programming a 16C71.  You would only be able to use the
first 1K words of program though.

The PICSTART-16B1 doesn't have the extra 40 pin pads at all.

The PICSTART-16C will program the 16C64 and 16C74, and is rumored to program
the forthcoming 28-pin 16C63 and 16C73 as well.

By the way, the latest firmware for the PICSTART-16B and PICSTART-16B1 is
version 1.7.  If you use the 16C84 I would strongly recommend upgrading, and
if you use the 16C58A you _must_ upgrade.  The upgrade should be available
free from your Microchip representative.

Eric


'The CCS C Compiler (Milwaukee guy)'
1994\07\01@163455 by gorden
flavicon
face
Hi,

I bought the PIC C compiler from CCS (The guy in Milwaukee) thinking it
would make programming 16c5x's even easier.  (I also have the Parallax
PGM & EMU)  And reallly I can only say positive things about the compiler.

It is a simple TurboVision app, and truly easy to use and convenient.  So
I have a question for anyone who may also be using this compiler.  I am
using the serial library to do printf()'s getchar()'s etc, and of course
the code works fine when I use an RS232 chip, but I would like to take the
signal directly off the PICs pin.  The problem with this is that I need to
send the complement of each bit if I do it that way.  I could use a 7404,
but then I might as well use an RS232 chip.  Does anyone know how to change
how the serial library works so I can do it this way?

TIA

--Jason

'Networking the PIC and/or the BASIC STAMP...'
1994\07\06@005243 by Bob Armstrong

flavicon
face

 Has anyone networked several PICs (or STAMPs) together ?
Did you use RS-485 ?  How about simply wiring toegether several
open-drain outputs on different PICs ?  Are there any examples
of software for networking ?

Thanks,
Bob Armstrong
bobspamKILLspampoco-adagio.santa-clara.ca.us

1994\07\06@102756 by mbmoore

flavicon
face
Yes, we (Custom Hardware Engineering) have been networking the PIC for
home-automation products using our "RS232-BUS".  It's simple, easy to use,
and an open protocol.  We simply connect multiple PICs together on an RS232
line.  Their is a transmit and a recieve line (just like RS232).  The
transmit line connects to one of the data lines of multiple PICs through a
large resistor (1meg).  So, there isn't much drain on this line.  The
receive line is tied to -12V through a 2.2K resistor somewhere on the bus
and is tied to an opto-isolator which can pull the line to +12V by a normally
off pin on each PIC.  When the communication is only between a "host"
(normally a PC), and the other devices on the bus, the data protocol is
simply two bytes of address data followed by two bytes of command/data.  The
devices then return their address followed by two bytes of response data
(if needed).  It is possible for devices to speak to one another on the bus
but in this case, it is required that the device respond in some manner, so
the sender knows that a collision has not occured.  

For more specifics, feel free to write me back.  Also, a quicky - we are
offering a line of home-automation products that work over our RS232-BUS
protocol.  At present, we have a temperature sensor and a thermostat based
on the PIC and this protocol but we will have much more in the coming months.
We are also looking at offering kits if anyone is interested.  To get on our
mailing list, just respond to this note asking to be placed on it and I'll
add you.   We won't send out lots of mail - just notify you of new products
and any information you may want/need concerning out RS232-BUS devices.


*****************************************************************************
*  Paul Greenwood  ->  ->  ->  ->  ->  ->  ->  Custom Hardware Engineering  *
*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*  "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from MAGIC."  *
*                                 - Arthur C. Clarke                        *
*****************************************************************************

'Networking the PIC and/or the BASIC STAMP... '
1994\07\06@122105 by Edward Cheung

flavicon
face

>From: Mark <.....mbmooreKILLspamspam.....bga.com>
>and an open protocol.  We simply connect multiple PICs together on an RS232
>line.  Their is a transmit and a recieve line (just like RS232).  The

This sounds a little like RS485.  I am curious why you decided not to
take this route as this would make you more compatible with other products
(including the line of home automation modules from Circuit Cellar).

YOurs, Ed

+---------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
|          Edward Cheung, Ph.D.         |  The opinions expressed herein    |
|Satellite Servicing Robotics Laboratory|    do not necessarily reflect     |
|    NASA Goddard Space Flight Center   |       those of my employers'      |
|         Code 714.1, Bldg T11B         |                                   |
|          Greenbelt, MD 20771          |                                   |
|   301-286-1269(office) 286-1717(fax)  |  My next book:                    |
| Internet: EraseMEcheungspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTasylum.gsfc.nasa.gov | Statistics, Demos and Other Lies  |
+---------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+


'is there a known trap here.'
1994\07\14@181735 by eric

flavicon
face
> A secondary piece of code runs fine in the simulator, but nevers runs on
> the hardware (same hardware that runs a simplier but similar program).

If you ever use indirect addressing at all, make sure you set the FSR to zero
before you initialize any other memory.  The simulator probably starts with
zero in the FSR, but the chip doesn't.  Since two bits of the FSR determine
which register bank is directly accessible, if you don't initialize it your
direct RAM accesses will be to a random bank.  Then when you set the FSR
in preparation to use IND, you will lose all your data.

Then again, you might have an entirely different problem :-)

Cheers,
Eric

1994\07\14@182301 by Gary Gaskell

flavicon
picon face
Hi,

I have a PIC16c57.

An elementary program I wrote runs fine on it.

A secondary piece of code runs fine in the simulator, but nevers runs on
the hardware (same hardware that runs a simplier but similar program).

Is there any known traps that I particularly should watch when I goto the
hardware?  I have spent the last two weekends on this problem, so any
advice would be appreciate.  I am happy to send my code to anyone that
may help solve the problem.

regards

Gary Gaskell
DSTC
Cooperative Research Centre for Distributed Systems Technology
Queensland University of Technology
Ph    +61-7-864 1051            FAX +61-7-864 1282
                               Email gaskellspamspam_OUTdstc.qut.edu.au





1994\07\14@201554 by dthomas

flavicon
face
Pitfalls I have run into that may or may not be what you're up
against:

1. FSR in a 57 may be pointing to any register bank on startup.  The
simulator might assume bank 0 always.  Clear the FSR at the start of
all 57 code that cares about the bank switching ability.

2. I've found SLEEP to not work sometimes if it's in the second half
of a page.

3. You may have code that spills over a page boundary and uses jumps,
in which case it jumps to the wrong page.  My habit is to always
include org 0, org 100h, org 200h ... org 700h in every '57 program,
and put at least a nop at the top of each half page, so any time
anything spills over, the assembler will tell you.

4. Never compare RTCC directly with anything.  Move it to W first, or
the PIC will give erroneous results.  For instance, testing RTCC will
never set the Z bit, even though if you repeatedly move RTCC to W and
test W you'll see zero every 256 ticks.

5. Remember to reset page select registers after a call to a
subroutine not on the current page.  Otherwise, local jumps aren't ;^)

Good luck finding your problem.  I've discovered most of these by
putting checkpoints in where I flash LED's or whatever, until I figure
out what's wrong.

David


'Problem with RA4 on the '71, I only get 2Vs'
1994\08\03@174308 by johnsonj
flavicon
face
I have RA4 on a 4.7K pullup.  When I drive the pin high I only get a voltage
of 2 volts maybe 2.1.  4.7K!!!  Anyway It hangs around .68mV when I am
not driving it low.  I really need help with this.  I fall below ttl
level from time to time and its killing me.  It works fine if I put a
680Ohm pullup on it but then my lower voltage is horrendus(sp).  I know
about the screwed up tristate reg on it and I only move an image of RA
into the ra reg(not the tristate I leave it alone).
Help please....
later
       John

_____________________________________________________________________________
John Johnson                   |If it's not OS/2.|@spam@johnsonjKILLspamspamccwf.cc.utexas.edu
                              |It's crap!       |KILLspamjohnsonjKILLspamspamghostwheel.bga.com
OOOO SSSS    /2222  2222    11 |                 |
O  O S      /    2     2     1 |"We need breath- |"Bite me." Tom Servo
O  O SSSS  /  2222  2222     1 |-ing room!"      |
O  O    S /   2     2    ..  1 |     Bill Gates  |"I want to decide who lives
OOOO SSSS/    2222  2222 .. 111|                 |and who dies" Crow T. Robot
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


'Programming the 17C42 '
1994\08\08@103138 by Ulrich Hoffmann

flavicon
face
I wonder if there is a cheap way to program 17C42 chips?

Microchip once sold a bare bone device (don't remember its name) to
do the trick. (Kind of self programming via external EPROMS)

I've seen a programmer published in ELECTOR magazine, but the circuit
contradicts the programming notices for the 17C42.

Are there two ways to program these beasts?

What programmers do you use?

Ulrich

Ulrich Hoffmann, Uni Kiel        WWW: http://www.informatik.uni-kiel.de/~uho/
Institut f. Informatik,                     email: RemoveMEuhoTakeThisOuTspaminformatik.uni-kiel.de
Preusserstr 1-9, D-24105 Kiel, Germany      Tel: +49 431 560426   Fax: 566143
  The only man who finished all his work by Friday was Robinson Crusoe.

1994\08\08@134955 by Don Lekei

picon face
I use the Baradine Microburner for all PIC programming. It is relatively
inexpensive (a few hundres $CDN) and it uses a standard ASCII interface so
it will work with any computer.

I have also written a command-line interface which is available on the
microchip BBS (3rdparty file area) and a few ftp sites as BURN.ZIP.

Adapters are available for all *EXISTING* PICs (16c64 is comming), I have
them all, It works much better than PICSTART (I have one of them) and
Promaster (have one of those too).

-Don


'Demo of the MPC C compiler available'
1994\08\08@173228 by Leonard Norrgard

flavicon
face
I've made the demo version of the MPC C compiler for the PIC from
Bytecraft available on ftp.funet.fi:/pub/microprocs/PIC/mpc/*

Total size is around 520Kb, ie. it easily fits on one disk.

Enjoy,

-- vinsci


'Programming the 17C42'
1994\08\09@120621 by Don Lekei

picon face
On Aug 8, 1994, Alex Freed wrote:

>Could you please explain what do you mean by "It works much better than
>PICSTART"? I have PICSTART and it works. What would be "much better" than
>that? No irony, I'm just wondering.

(What follows is a peeve, so the tone may sound a bit harsh...)

It's just that I find  Picstart programmer is annoyingly slow. The Picstart
and Promaster share the same front-end shell which is all manually driven,
messes with the video mode, and does not provide usable error return codes.
They both communicate with proprietary, un-published protocols, so people
with other computers (mac, unix, etc.), or who use safer developement
practices like makefiles, rcs etc. are left in the lurch.

They work great as toys (to play with settings, etc.) but I'm to
absent-minded to remember to manually set the fuses right each time!

- Don

1994\08\09@214814 by ssmith

flavicon
picon face
Don Lekei wrote:

{Quote hidden}

I must agree with Don's comments. Having to set the fuses every time is
annoying. In my opinion, a major improvement would be for it to simply
remember the last settings when it starts up.

I have experienced other problems using PICSTART. I find that often
(with 16C71s, at least) it takes 2 or 3 goes to program properly: verification
fails initially, but it will eventually succeed. Is this a problem that others
have found? Something to do with firmare perhaps? (Mine is PICSTART-16B,
Firmware V1.7).

Another point to consider: the programming specs (eg. DS30153D) say that the
devices should be verified at VDD min as well as VDD max, yet I see no
evidence that PICSTART does this. Does anyone know what goes on here? The
PICSTART user's guide is silent on such issues. Seems to me that you could
easily program a device that verifies at 5V, but fails at 3V.

Stewart Smith  (spamBeGonessmithspamBeGonespamcsuvax1.murdoch.edu.au)
Environmental Science, Murdoch University, Western Australia.

1994\08\10@010627 by Don Lekei

picon face
Stewart Smith wrote:

>...Having to set the fuses every time is
>annoying. In my opinion, a major improvement would be for it to simply
>remember the last settings when it starts up.

The various spec sheets define addresses for all fuses. ASPIC supports
setting these in the source files, and I prefer to use programmers which
also do.

>Another point to consider: the programming specs (eg. DS30153D) say that
the
>devices should be verified at VDD min as well as VDD max, yet I see no
>evidence that PICSTART does this. Does anyone know what goes on here?

Microchip has pointed out many times (at least on their BBS) that PICSTART
is NOT considered a "production" programmer, however, we only use Baradine
Microburners,
which I don't believe program VDD (I may be wrong).  Getting the fuses
wrong and the
accumulated labour of manually going through all of those menus on
Promaster are more
of a concern than the small chance that a product which passes all other
tests will fail under low voltage (which will reset anyway)!

- Don


1994\08\10@051930 by n0axv%burnmoor

picon face

> I must agree with Don's comments. Having to set the fuses every time is
> annoying. In my opinion, a major improvement would be for it to simply
> remember the last settings when it starts up.
>

If you hit "Read device" before loading in your object code, the fuses are
automatically set to how the current device was last programmed.  Only works
for the EE part (16C84), though. :-)

> I have experienced other problems using PICSTART. I find that often
> (with 16C71s, at least) it takes 2 or 3 goes to program properly: verification
> fails initially, but it will eventually succeed. Is this a problem that others
> have found? Something to do with firmare perhaps? (Mine is PICSTART-16B,
> Firmware V1.7).

I have found that every once in a while our PICSTART refuses to program
properly, but I put it down to the ZIF socket - devices placed centrally
do not program properly but ones placed at the left side program OK.

> Another point to consider: the programming specs (eg. DS30153D) say that the
> devices should be verified at VDD min as well as VDD max, yet I see no
> evidence that PICSTART does this. Does anyone know what goes on here? The
> PICSTART user's guide is silent on such issues. Seems to me that you could
> easily program a device that verifies at 5V, but fails at 3V.

PICSTART is classed as a DEVELOPMENT programmer, and the programming spec.
states that only PRODUCTION class programmers need to have the variable
voltage capability. I suppose it's how they get away with such crappy drive
software as well.

> Stewart Smith  (TakeThisOuTssmithEraseMEspamspam_OUTcsuvax1.murdoch.edu.au)
> Environmental Science, Murdoch University, Western Australia.
>

Simon
--
******************************************************************************
* Simon Harrison,  University of Newcastle U. Tyne    *                      *
* RemoveMES.J.HarrisonspamTakeThisOuTuk.ac.newcastle                        *   Oook               *
* Fax: 091-222-8180, Attn: S.Harrison                 *        - Librarian   *
* Telex (Preferred): 53654 UNINEW G, mark 1st line:   *                      *
* "TO:  S.J.HARRISON (DEPT. OF ELEC. ENG.)"           *                      *
******************************************************************************

'Superstitions (was: Programming the 17C42)'
1994\08\10@122031 by haggis

picon face
n0axv%burnmoorEraseMEspam.....newcastle.ac.uk (Simon Harrison) writes:

>I have found that every once in a while our PICSTART refuses to program
>properly, but I put it down to the ZIF socket - devices placed centrally
>do not program properly but ones placed at the left side program OK.

Hmmm...

I've used the PICStart 16B since version 1.4 (keep getting upgrades, like
candy), and it's always been flakey.  I have one at work and another at
home.  Both the same.

I've never even tried shifting the part in the ZIF socket.  Sometimes it
programs first time, usually it takes three attempts.  Without shifting the
chip at all.  I chalk it up to flakey timing and bad exception handling.

Which is also pure conjecture...  My $0.02

I'm interested in that "Unix" code the other guy has.

- JohnR

--
John R. Haggis            EraseMEhaggisspamnetcom.com
Millennium Research
(408) 269-1814 vox
(408) 269-9323 fax


'Better BASIC STAMP for Pic . (the size)'
1994\08\29@084637 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
Hi everybody,

I am looking either for the internal software of the interpreter
pic chip of the BASIC STAMP, or better for an upgraded version (>1.4)
that would accept more than 256 bytes of code (many more please...)
Please answer me about the availability of a new basic with PIC chips.
Yours faithfuly,

.............---
.......__.../...\
......|..|_/.....\
..____|..........*\
.|......Strasbourg/
..\............../
...\............|
....\.(France)..|
..../............\
....|......__.....|
....|...../..\___/
....|.....|
....\_____|

~A
Herve GALMICHE
ALCATEL BUSINESS SYSTEMS
CC 696
1 rte du Docteur Albert Schweitzer
F- 67408 ILLKIRCH Cedex FRANCE
Phone +33 88677700 ask for 78004
e-mail RemoveMEgalmicheEraseMEspamEraseMEsxb.bsf.alcatel.fr

Yours Faithfully,
H.GALMICHE

'The CCS C Compiler (Milwaukee guy)'
1994\08\31@052721 by alex

flavicon
picon face
Jason, can you forward me any details on this - it's not one we've seen in
the UK at all (even the CCS guy in Milwaulkee who yuo got it from)?
Tks in advance
--
Alex R. Baker                 Phone: +44 628 851077  Car: +44 831 494921
Field Applications Engineer   Fax:   +44 628 850259  Email: RemoveMEalexspam_OUTspamKILLspammicrochp.demon
Arizona Microchip Technology                                              .co.uk


'ANOTHER PROGRAMMER (Was Re: Parallax or Picstart?)'
1994\09\01@215433 by -Kellogg High School
flavicon
face
I have the PGM16 from Advanced Transdata Corporation.  Having never seen
a picstart or paralax programmer, it might be an OEM or clone of one of
them, but in my sample of 2 parallel ports to connect it to (clone
DX-2/66 and Zeos sub-notebook) it runs great.

I regularly travel with the Zeos & programmer.  Very convenient.  Their
real time ICE also runs well on the Contenda - I can't imagine tucking my
desktop system in the back seat of the plane to take my development
system on the road.  AS it is, an old briefcase serves as a complete real
time ICE / programmer capable system.

If anyone knows if this PGM16 critter is a clone of one of the other
programmers please let me know.

/s/ Bill

'other microcontrollers' lists'
1994\09\08@175855 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
The following is info I have on a 68HC11 mailing list:

Welcome to the MC68HC11 mailing list. (last modified 15 March 1993)

This list is dedicated to discussions concerning the MC68HC11
single-chip microcontroller, its support chips, and the popular
EVB system.

Also, for the time being, discussions on the hc16 dsp chip
are welcome until such time as another forum is created, or
the volume of traffic dictates a split.

This is a semi-moderated group.  Requests to subscribe,
unsubscribe, or other administrivia is handled on a case by
case basis.

Please help keep the clutter in the group down. If you want
to subscribe, de-subscribe, or have other requests to make
about the mailing list, please send that sort of mail to
RemoveMEmc68hc11-requestTakeThisOuTspamspamhipp.etsu.edu rather than the submission address,
EraseMEmc68hc11spamspamspamBeGonehipp.etsu.edu. In order to avoid generating
endless mail loops (messages bouncing back and forth between
mindless mailers) some heuristics are applied to messages to
screen out those which appear to be errors or requests to be
added / deleted - if your message is less than 25 words or
longer than 5000 words, or contains "suspect" phrases
(such as subscribe) it will be routed to me and not sent
to the list.  If necessary, I'll post it manually when I have
a chance to look at it.

Additionally, please read the FAQ list below before posting.
Your question might be answered before you get your first
article!

Incidentally, hipp stands for the "Historic Image Processing
Project" - the main use of the storage on this PC.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

0. "Who are you?"

       Nick Sayer orginated the list, but found it growing very
       rapidly and straining the connectivity resources of his machine.
       I voluenteered to take the list over since I've been using the HC11
       EVB in my classes for several years.  There are now about 300
       subscribers on the list located in 13 different countries.

The list is originated at the Department of Computer and Information
Sciences of East Texas State University, located in Commerce, Texas
about 60 miles east of Dallas.  It was previously located in Flagstaff
Arizona, but was moved from there due to the lack of support for the
list and the fact that the administratior was laid off due to budget
cutbacks in higher education in Arizona.

Perhaps of some interest is that the list is being run on a 386 based
PC using the GNU copyleft 386BSD unix system, a terrific piece of
software for the price (free).

        ---Bob Wier,
              list admin (RemoveMEwierKILLspamspamhipp.etsu.edu or wierSTOPspamspamspam_OUTmerlin.etsu.edu)

1. "What is the MC68HC11?"

It is a group of single-chip microcontrollers made by Motorola
based on the 6800 CPU. Unlike many such chips, however, the
chip can boot into an extended mode which replaces two of
the parallel ports with a complete address and data bus.
The very same chip, therefore, can be used for prototype AND
for the final product. This is truly a terrific chip!

The base model is the MC68HC11A8. It has the 6800 CPU, 8K of
factory programmed ROM, 512 bytes of EEPROM, 256 bytes of RAM,
1 serial port, 8 A/D converters, a timer/counter unit, a serial
communications channel (NOT an asynchronous serial port),
and 5 parallel ports. The A1 is used in the EVB, and is the same
thing without the ROM.

2. "What is the EVB or MC68HC11EVB?"

It is a circuit board containing a MC68HC11A1, a PRU (port
replacement unit - replaces the two ports taken up by the address
bus), 8K of external ROM - which contains a powerful monitor, and
two RS-232 ports.

You can plug one end of a cable into the EVB and the other end
into a socket in a product that would take a MC68HC11 and use
the monitor to debug the prototype hardware, or plug that cable
into a big storage scope and debug the software.... the mind
boggles.

3. "How and/or where can I purchase an EVB?"

       For the past several years, Motorola has run a "student design
       contest" which has encouraged the use of the hc11/evb in
       university courses.  Thus universitys are frequently in a
 position to order the EVB (or you may find them available off
       the shelf at the U bookstore).

       A number of "standard" electronics and component suppliers also
       carry the board.

       The EVB actually comes in three flavors -

       The original EVB - which is what the moderator has used for several
       years in design courses - a terrific deal for students at the
original
       price of $68.11 (cute...).  Instead of having them buy a text
       (which would probably cost that anyway), they just bought an EVB
       and got to take the computer with them at the end of the semester.
       The course(s) was taught from the technical manuals included with
       the kit.

       The EVB requires a dumb ascii terminal or better (Mac or PC
       recommended) and a power supply with +5, and +/- 12 v (to run the
       RS232 interface).

       Unfortunately the current production status of the EVB is unknown.

       In the fall of 1991 Motorola introduced two new products, the EVBII
and
       the EVBU:

       The EVBII is a redesign of the EVB using "modern" technology, such
       as a charge pump chip to develop the RS232 voltages. It also has
       available a subsidary logic analyzer board.  I've not had time
       to look at this extensively yet.  Also, the price range is up around
       $150, making it too expensive for an individual student purchase
       plan (at least at state supported universities).

       To fill the gap left by the EVB, there is the EVBU (university
       model) which is available at the original EVB price of $68.11.
       (The last I heard, the EVB was available at $88, but hasn't been
       confirmed recently).  The EVBU is a usable microcontroller, but
       is limited in such respects as memeory supplied.  It does have
       a wire wrap area (and in fact one student group here this spring
       used and EVBU in a project and wire wrapped in a subsidiary
       EPROM chip - not a big deal). It also includes a Real Time
       Clock chip (although a number of boards received here early in
       the production run were missing it).

       Using a Mac or a PC with the EVB / EVBU / EVBII gives you a
       complete development system at a VERY reasonable cost (assuming
       you already have the computer).  Freeware / Shareware is
       available (cross - compilers, monitors, simple C compilers)
       either at the ftp site here or elsewhere.

       There was also an EVM (evaluation module) which was a higher
       level product than the EVB.  I'm not sure if it's still in
       production or what it might cost.

The address and phone number for Motorola University Support is:

       Motorola SPS
       University Support 56-106
       P.O. Box 52073
       Phoenix, Az 85072
       602-952-3855
       602-952-3621 (FAX)

There is an excellent introductory article in June 1991 issue of
Computer Craft (formerly Modern Electronics) on M68HC11 micro-
controller and the EVB along with the above mentioned pricing
and availability infromation. Circuit Cellar also publishes
       articles from time to time on the HC11.

       HC11 information has also appeared in Circida's Circuit Cellar Ink,
       (he also had a column in BYTE magazine for a number of years)
       and Midnight Engineering magazine (strong on micro controller
content).
       Also, if you qualify, Embedded Systems magazine is very worthwhile
       (a "controlled circulation" magazine).

I strongly recommend that anyone interested in buying the EVB should
call the University Support to confirm availability and price, before
sending in any money.

Disclaimer: I am not connected with Motorola or Computer Craft in any
way other than being a happy customer.

4. "How can I get in touch with Motorola to get technical info?"

As far as I can tell, Motorola University support (as they like to
call themselves) is headed by Fritz Wilson.

His office is in the Semiconductor Products Sector in
Phoenix, Arizona.

Fritz: 602-952-3855

They can help you with pretty much anything, but beware, it's
usually pretty hard to get in touch with them, and they have
a real annoying voice mail system. ;)

All requests to them must be in writing.  Students should include
a copy of their ID along with their written request.
FAX requests are accepted at the FAX number: 602-952-3621.

Otherwise, they give the address of:

P.O. BOX 52073
Phoenix, AZ 85072-2073

But, on another card I received, there is also listed the following:

3102 North 56th Street
Phoenix, AZ 85018-6606

When paying for something, they hold onto personal checks
until they clear the bank, so you may want to send a cashiers
check.  If you can get your university to pay for it, you
can just send them the purchase order, and they will bill you.

5. "Where can I get support software?"

Right Here! Just anonymous ftp into pub/hc11 on hipp.etsu.edu
       and you will find hc11 support software, mirroring the
       Motorola freeware bulletin board (see below).  Motorola
       has given permission to make this available to encourge
       wider distribution of hc11 tools via the Internet.
       I plan on reorganizing this when I get a chance to make it
       more logical. Honest.

       You can call the Motorola "Freeware BBS" at 512-891-FREE (3733)
(1200/2400 bps). They have cross assemblers, sources for
the BUFFALO monitors, etc.

       Other likely sites: here is an ARCHIE listing (as of 24 Apr 1992):

      LOCATION (anonymous ftp via Internet) (many of these require BINARY
                file transfer!)

      aix370.rrz.uni-koeln.de /programming
      bode.ee.ualberta.ca /pub/DOS/motorola/68hc11
      sugrfx.acs.syr.edu /pub/vr/powerglove/hc11
      ee.utah.edu /admin
      karazm.math.uh.edu
      calvin.stanford.edu /motorola/68hc11
      calvin.stanford.edu /new_uploads
      hpcsos.col.hp.com /misc/motorola/68hc11
      lth.se /pub/languages/assembler
      munnari.oz.au /pub
      nic.funet.fi /pub/msdos/interfaces/emulators
      plaza.aarnet.edu.au /micros/pc/oak/emulators
      rigel.acs.oakland.edu /pub/msdos
      sun0.urz.uni-heidelberg.de /pub/msdos/simtel/emulators
      wuarchive.wustl.edu /mirrors/msdos/emulators

      The OLD archive/mailing site was rainbow.cse.nau.edu or alternately,
      red.cs.tcu.edu. These should NOT be used since they have been
      superceeded by the etsu site.

       If you find anything really neat at these sites, I'd appreciate
       a note so I can put it in here.

6.      What is the PowerGlove HC11 machine?

The powerglove is a device originally manufactured for video game usage,'
but which has been adapted as a general position sensitive input device.
It's of interest here because one of the major interfaces was developed
using the hc11 - doing an ARCHIE search turns up the following sites for
more information.

Host compute1.cc.ncsu.edu   (152.1.10.46)
Last updated 02:47 15 Mar 1993

   Location:
/mirrors/wustl/graphics/graphics/mirrors/sugrfx.acs.syr.edu/powerg
love
     DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x       512  Dec  5 18:23   hc11

Host ftp.nau.edu   (134.114.64.70)
Last updated 02:41 15 Mar 1993

   Location: /
      DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x       512  Dec  5 04:30   hc11

Host frosch.cosy.sbg.ac.at   (141.201.2.16)
Last updated 16:33 14 Mar 1993

   Location: /pub/mirror/vr/powerglove
     DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x      1024  Feb 13 15:17   hc11

Host wuarchive.wustl.edu   (128.252.135.4)
Last updated 19:12  5 Mar 1993

   Location: /graphics/graphics/mirrors/sugrfx.acs.syr.edu/powerglove
     DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x       512  Dec  5 17:23   hc11

Host sunsite.unc.edu   (152.2.22.81)
Last updated 01:00  3 Mar 1993

   Location: /pub/academic/computer-science/virtual-reality/powerglove
     DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x       512  Dec  3 07:22   hc11

Host plaza.aarnet.edu.au   (139.130.4.6)
Last updated 06:43 27 Feb 1993

   Location: /graphics/graphics/mirrors/sugrfx.acs.syr.edu/powerglove
     DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x       512  Feb  1 00:59   hc11

  -    Bob Wier, keeper of the list

1994\09\14@081332 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
>>Why on earth would you want to go and use an 8051, when you could use a
>>perfectly good PIC to do the job?
>>Rgds
>
>Although I prefere PICs I was "forced" to use 8032 in my last project
>and only because I COULDN'T GET WANTED PART :((
>Supplyers in Germany are not very eager to sell stuff by mail, and
>local shops doesn't even bother to order some PICs, but Intel is
>represented on their shelves quite well...
>So, please if you know any supplyers near Croatia (lets say in Austria or
>Italy ) let me know of them.
>
>Tibor
>
>( spamBeGonetiborSTOPspamspamEraseMEmvsrce.srce.hr )

Hi,
I don't know if this is considered as unwanted commercial advertising, but
I think will be told :-), and besides, I don't work for them - just happen
to have their catalog lying next to me:
RS Components have a reasonable (?) set of PIC processors and development sets
(PICStart 16B, 17A and 16C, PICMaster 16B, Promaster, PIC
16C54/55/56/57/64/84, 17C42).

According to my catalog, their telephone number for Austria is 02852 - 505,
for Germany 061 05 401 234, for Italy 02 27 425 1.

Their prices are generally not very low, but they promise to send any
amount of parts - down to a single resistor.

In addition, I still have a few postcards for catalog requests. So if you
just send me your address, I could mail them for you.

Bye
 Markus  (KILLspambd24spamBeGonespamrz.uni-karlsruhe.de)


'What is the PIC61? and 73?'
1994\10\10@170440 by Alex
flavicon
picon face
In article: <EraseME9410022354.aa09087spamEraseMEpost.demon.co.uk> @spam@johnsonj@spam@spamspam_OUTutdallas.edu writes:
>
> I have seen some talk about these two chips? i know they are in proto now
> but what features do they have?

16C61 = 16C71 with no ADC (or a 16C56 with interrupts if you prefer to
       look at it that way)
16C73 = 16C74 in a 28 pin package - misses off the parallel slave port.

Full d/s available from a disti near you for the 16C61, and also a
flyer for the 16C73 from the same source.

Best regards

Alex R. Baker - Field Apps Engineer Ph: +44 628 851077  Car: +44 831 494921
Arizona Microchip Technology        Fx: +44 628 850259  Email: spamBeGonealexspamKILLspammicrochp.dem
on.co.uk
ANY VIEWS EXPRESSED HERE ARE MINE AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT THOSE OF MY E
MPLOYER

'how to post to the pic list'
1994\10\29@031937 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
charles writes:

>Jory,
>
>May I suggest that somebody (you?? or some automated mechanism) post a
>how-to-post type article.
>
>While I read what flies past, I never seem to be able to find the how-to-post
>info when I need it.


in case this detail is keeping people from jumping into the fray:

there are basically two ways to post to the pic list:

1. you can send email addressed to .....picspam_OUTspammitvma.mit.edu

2. you can "reply" with your mailer software to a message which was sent to
thepic list.

note that if you simply reply to a message someone sent to the pic list,
your response will go to the list, and not to the individual who sent the
message.
in order to send to the original poster, you must manually supply their
email address (which is notes in their original mail to the list).

also note that adding or deliting yourself from the list is done by sending
email to TakeThisOuTlistserv.....spamTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu, not to the list address itself.

hope this helps,

jory


'What is the PIC61? and 73?'
1994\11\01@203948 by crocontroller discussion list
flavicon
face
There are several new PICs on the way.  The '63 and '73 were listed in some
marketing literature given out at the seminar earlier this year.  The '61 and
'65 are mentioned in various files included with the PICSTART-16C.  I asked a
Microchip employee about them, and he was very surprised to find out that the
PICSTART referred to these parts; he said they weren't supposed to be talking
about them yet.

PIC16C61: a 16C71 without the A/D converter (lower cost)

PIC16C63: a 16C64 in a 28-pin package

PIC16C65: a 16C74 without the A/D converter (lower cost)

PIC16C73: a 16C74 in a 28-pin package

Some of the marketing literature from the seminar also described a 17C44,
which is a 17C42 with more memory.

Last year I didn't think the 17C4x was very cost effective, since the prices
were comparable to the 68HC11, although admittedly the 17C42 runs faster.
Since Motorola is unable to keep up with demand and 68HC11 prices have gone
up considerably, the 17C42 is looking very attractive.

The Mitsubishi 377xx family also is good for high performance low power
embedded applications, but I can't actually recommend Mitsubishi because they
are very hard to deal with and tend to screw small companies royally.

Eric

1994\11\02@103937 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
I'll second Eric's comments on Mitsubishi (being hard to deal with).
When I was considering design ideas for a widget we eventually built
11,000 of, I called Mitsubishi to ask about a 'perfect for the task'
4-bit CPU that they had. I had a terrible time getting through, only
to find that they wouldn't even *talk* to me unless I could promise
an initial production run of 100,000+ pieces. Paid up front. (!)

Microchip sent me free samples and an apps engineer. Easy, huh?

TakeThisOuTforbesmKILLspamspamspamcsos.orst.edu
Mark G. Forbes

'What is the RT pin in parallel programming of 6X/7'
1994\11\02@135933 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
I have been looking over the docs on how to preform parallel programming
of a pic.  The 6/7/8 all program similar.  However they all reference a
"RT"pin.  Which pin is this?  I assume that on the 18 pin devices that it
is the RTCC pin(as all of the others are used).  however on the 40 pin
devices I am not sure.  could it be/is it the timer0 pin???? Any help
would be nice.  BTW if you wonder why I am using parallel its because
1)its a personal project and 2)Its 10X faster.

later
       John
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Johnson  Team OS/2 member | .....johnsonjspamRemoveMEbga.com | RemoveMEjohnsonjspamspamBeGoneutdallas.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
And the Seventh version of OS/2 raised into the air its bow of blue steel and
cried," It. Is. Done."  Around him lay Bill Gates and Microsoft apps.  Their
evil in this world at an end.
                                       Revelations of InfoWorld, Oct 11 1994

'your mail (futile removal requests to the list)'
1994\11\15@045013 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
>>
>> Please remove my name from the mailing list.
>> spamBeGonejim.knox@spam@spamspam_OUTum.cc.umich.edu       Thanks.
>Me too. This list is far to productive. What about a news conference..?
>
>
>--
>Roger (Sysop RaumaMBBS #1 +47 712 54774 (300-21600+HST))
>      (                #2 +47 712 56759 (300-9600 +HST))
>PolarNet: Roger Storvik@RBS --- Internet Email: TakeThisOuTRoger.StorvikspamspamhiMolde.no


While I generally ignore administrative matters sent directly to the list
(negative reinforcement) I'd like to make a little clarification.

The only way to be removed from the pic list is to send a message to the
listserv address (listservEraseMEspammitvma.mit.edu) with the body text of:

UNSUBscribe PIC

You must send the email from the account from which you originally subscribed.

Please note that it is considered rude to post unsubscribe requests
directly to the list (this holds true for most mailing lists!). In addition
to being rude, it does not tend to get you unsubscribed from the list.

In the *unusual* circumstance that you genuinely need assistance getting
off the list (not just because you don't feel like dealing with a listserv)
you can send me email directly (RemoveMEjoryEraseMEspamspam_OUTmit.edu), and we can discuss your
problems. I try to deal with real issues in a helpful manner.

In terms of going over to usenet (the contentful part of the quoted
post)... I am alway open to new ideas. Are people desirous of such a move?

Another possible solution I could see would be to split the group between
hardware and software (or some such thing).

To put things in perspective (mine that is):
I filter all the PIC list mail with Eudora into appropriate mailboxes... so
I don't yet have a problem with the volume (even my net access is
presently: TCP/IP via SLIP via TIA via Telnet via Dialup ;)

later,
jory bell
@spam@joryRemoveMEspamEraseMEmit.edu
pic list maintainer


'How old is the PIC architecture?'
1994\12\09@181026 by crocontroller discussion list
flavicon
face
Hi Pic People,

The other day I was looking through some old Scientific American magazines.
The September 1977 issue (special issue on Microelectronics) has a full-page
ad from General Instrument Corporation advertising a range of microcontrollers
including several PICs. This confirmed what I had been told by others - that
Arizona Microchip acquired the PIC design from GI.

Does anyone know the full story? How old is the PIC architecture? What happened
to GI?

Microcontrollers featured in the ad include:
PIC1655  "For music" with a picture of a record-player
PIC1650  "For applicances" with picture of a microwave oven
PIC1670  "For 'anything'" with picture of digital scales & cash register

Just curious....

Stewart Smith

1994\12\10@010757 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
I've got a 1982 GI databook that describes the PIC1655, of course at that
time you could only get them with Masked ROMs (no EPROM and definitely
no EEPROM).

--Chuck

'Crossing the Commercial Line '
1994\12\19@173200 by lwalley

flavicon
face
{Quote hidden}

What?  I can't believe that you think I have any interest whatsoever in selling
programmers.  Actually, of course, I do.  Which makes me a bit nervous about
what I say.  Obviously, people are going to take what I say with a grain of
salt.  Since I profit from selling products, I'm certainly biased.  However,
I do try to write as someone who simply knows a little about PICs.

I do hope we raise interest in our programmer, and I hope I didn't go too far.
My comment about "a friend to a friend" was perhaps silly.  However, please
understand that I'm a business nerd of sorts, and the new Hobbyist Pack is one
of our latest ideas (we saw growing interest for a cheaper programmer).  As
such, I'm excited to see how people respond.  If the programmer sells well, then
we did our job to satisfy their need.  That's exciting!

By the way, I've noticed that some people leave the previous one or two messages
with their reply, so the reader can see a short history.  Some people only send
their reply.  It seems nice to at least include the message you're responding
to.  What's considered normal?


------------------------  Lance Walley  ---------------------------
                         President
                         Parallax, Inc.



1994\12\19@190550 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
It seems I may have crossed the line in mentioning our Hobbyist Pack PIC
Programmer.  We just got hooked to Internet a couple of weeks ago, and I
apologize if I violated any rules.  I know that the Internet is not for
commercial purposes, so I purposely kept the message short and left out such
facts as the price and how to order.  I hoped to keep the message much like a
friend telling another friend about our product.

Several hours after posting the programmer message, we received five or ten
inquiries.  The "SysOp" (for lack of the proper term) feels that me message
is a good example of something that may or may not be in violation.  If it is
found to be in violation (or just in really bad taste), we will refrain from
any further such postings.  We would, of course, be happy to answer PIC
questions.

In closing, please accept my apology if I erred...


------------------------  Lance Walley  ---------------------------
                         President
                         Parallax, Inc.

1994\12\19@201001 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
Lance,

As I said in my post, it is a rough call, and I was not trying to rail on
you or your company. Also, my roll as PIC list "sysop" is fairly limited
and I didn't mean to preach from that podium (the IMHO at the start of the
post meant "In My Humble Opinion")

For the record, the Internet *is* generally for commercial purposes. Very
little of the physical infrastructure of the net is non-commercial, and the
old rules of use are gone. However, certain mailing lists and newsgroups
have their own rules, which are usually "enforced" by general common sense
and previous net experience.

As more people/companies come on the net, common sense might (hopefully)
still prevail (for example, you seem quite reasonable, and I appreciate
your coherent reply) but the experience with the net may be lacking. That
is why I was asking whether we should have a more explicit policy for the
list which all PIC list members would automatically receive when they
joined, so people would know where they stood from the outset.

Again, I am personally interested in solutions which keep the folks from
Microchip, Parallax, et. al. (and Don Lekei ;) as active PIC list
contributors without filling subscribers (i.e. my own) mailboxes with
promotional junk email (especially when Parallax doesn't offer anything I
can use with my MAC or UNIX machines ;)

I find when members of the industry answer questions on the net from their
postions (presumably) as experts, it makes me respect them and their
products more than any press-release/blurb.

So Lance, I would urge you to actively participate in the PIC list when you
know something about the topic, and don't worry too much about offending
anyone. On the other hand, remember that a lot of people join the PIC list
for the technical discussion, and appreciate postings in that vein. Also,
in my case at least, your attempt to keep the posting kind of "like a
friend telling another friend about [y]our product" was less
appealing/successful than if you had just acknowledged your desire (however
well intentioned) to push your own programmer (I mean, you *are* president
of the company! and it would be kind of implausible to think that you just
*happened* to suggest the Parallax product to a friend).

jory bell
@spam@joryspam_OUTspam.....mit.edu

{Quote hidden}

1994\12\19@203534 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
I think your adds are ok. I  personaly don't have any problems with adds
that releate to the list and arn't too frequent.
Gordon

                           Gordon Couger
                           Biosystems & Agricultural Engineering
                           Oklahoma State University
                           114 Ag Hall, Stillwater, OK  74074
spamBeGonegcougerEraseMEspamolesun.agen.okstate.edu 405-744-9763 day 624-2855 evenings
   I do not speak for my employer

1994\12\19@224315 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
I think your reply was tastefully done and appropriate for this forum.
Mind you, I'm just a subscriber to the list and what I say doesn't
carry much (any?) weight!

To you and any other vendors be they hardware, software, etc. I would
personally welcome you. As a developer it's nice to have all the
resources possibly when doing our jobs. Also, it seems like it can
only benefit _us_ for the people who supply our tools to hear the
kind of things we want and know the type of real-world issues we
face.

Tim McDonough -- timmedspamBeGonespamcencom.net

1994\12\20@022225 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
Jory:

I believe that the ambiguities with commercial announcements on the net
arise because advertisements serve two distinct purposes:  they
announce the existence of a product, and they attempt to induce people
to purchase it.  On the net, the former is desirable, the latter less
so.

I propose that our policy be to permit representatives of commercial
interests to announce the existence of their products, but not to push
them.  So, "Our Product X does what you want" is acceptable, while "It
costs $x" or "Our competitor's Product Y doesn't cut it" is not
because it constitutes an overt inducement.

I also propose that we err on the side of the group's interests.  Thus,
"Our Product X is priced for the hobbiest market" might be acceptable
because it helps a significant portion of the group membership find
something that could improve their lives.

Finally, to address your concern about keeping the valuable expertise
of vendor's representatives in our group, simply insist that when they
post in their official capacity, they so state.

                               Paul Milazzo <RemoveMEmilazzo@spam@spamspamBeGonebbn.com>
                               BBN Systems and Technologies
                               Cambridge, MA

1994\12\20@085808 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
I saw no problem with this posting as it was definitely within the
subject matter of this list (green card lotteries are not) and, as
you mentioned it was short and fairly innocuous.

On the other hand, it did strike me as somewhat unprofessional, especially
since this particular product was mentioned a few days earlier by a list
participant who has no affiliation to Parallax.

I hope that you don't get too much flack over this.

{Quote hidden}

'Commercialism on the PIC email list '
1994\12\20@105120 by don.wills

flavicon
face
Dear Jory,

My 2 cents - I think that the commercial message sent by Lance Walley was
just fine for this mailing list.  I would like to see all vendors of PIC
products respond when a person asks a question about what is available (if
they have a relevant product).

Don Wills



'Commercials on the mail list'
1994\12\21@113022 by narch.central.sun.com (Jon Poland SE Sun St Louis)n/a

flavicon
face
Jory,

I am responding to you privately regarding the commercials on the PIC list
because:

- I think enough has been said that I don't think I can add significantly to
       justify the bandwidth.
- Some people might missuse the following comments.

I think the Paralax thing was appropriate - especially with it being a new
product which is of general interest to the entire group.

The follow-on posting apologizing for the quality of the documentation was
NOT appropriate for a general posting IMHO because it was directed to a
specific individual about a specific problem with no solution offered - all
it did was advertise Parallax's email address, that they have a hobby pack,
that quality might not be there - but documentation being fixed, AND new
products are on the way.  To me this was an advertisement.

BUT HERE IS THE KICKER - we know that this was from a commercial company,
however you cannot say that about unsolicited endorsements from others - they
may be "selling" for their company.  For example:  if you saw a posting such
as ".....jon.poland@spam@spamEraseMEcentral.sun.com writes:  I just bought Sun's new widget - it
works great and only costs $99 plus the service was great."  Everyone would
be extremely suspicious.  But if you saw the same posting from me from my
*other* email address:  .....polandRemoveMEspammichelob.wustl.edu, you would have no idea
that I was hawking my employer's product.

The best I think you can do as moderator of this group is to say thank you
to Parallax, tell them that this will now be put in the FAQ, and please
refer future quieries to the FAQ.

Good luck!

Jon Poland
Sun Microsystems Inc.
St. Louis, MO
(314) 569-4716
.....jon.polandSTOPspamspam@spam@central.sun.com

'Crossing the Commercial Line'
1994\12\22@031413 by bruce

flavicon
face
I think that the "Product Announcement" style of commercial posting is
very acceptable. I find it very useful to hear of new products or product
upgrades by any means whatsoever and so allowing them on this listing
would get my vote.

I share the abhorrence of allowing full blown advertising though.

Bruce Coward

1994\12\22@033736 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
I would like to propose a moderate positon which would allow some level
of advertising while allowing people to ignore it if they don't want to
see it. Personally, I would like to know if something is an ad before
I spend time to look at it. The current subject line gives no clue. But,
we could stipulate that anyone posting an advert to the list to place
ADVERT: at the beginning of the subject line.

Futhermore, the listserv software coule be modified to filter out any
messages that have ADVERT in the subject. People not wanting advertising
could send a message to listserv to hold ADVERT messages.

Like everything else on the Net, compliance is optional. Given the nature
of this list, I think it could work. Personally, it would make it easier
for me to look at the ads which are of interest to me.

cheers,
eric

1994\12\22@082658 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
On Dec 22,  8:10am, Bruce Coward wrote:
|Subject: Re: Crossing the Commercial Line
| I think that the "Product Announcement" style of commercial posting is
| very acceptable. I find it very useful to hear of new products or product
| upgrades by any means whatsoever and so allowing them on this listing
| would get my vote.
|
| I share the abhorrence of allowing full blown advertising though.
|
| Bruce Coward
|-- End of excerpt from Bruce Coward

This is my feeling also. I think the recent example that sparked this
thread was handled well. Common sense is the best approach - too bad
it is not more common.

*Reg Neale=nealeEraseMEspam@spam@ee.rochester.edu ....standard disclaimer applies...*
*...Ignorance is a renewable resource."....P.J. O'Rourke............*

'Ethernet with a PIC'
1994\12\22@150532 by crocontroller discussion list

flavicon
face
Anyone ever used a PIC to decode ethernet packets?  Say, you are looking for
a single opcode within the packet that when decoded, allowed the controller
to do something - i.e., the ethernet packet would be decoded to trigger the
controller.

HCooper
RemoveMEhcooperspamspamBeGonees.com

'Crossing the Commercial Line'
1994\12\23@012141 by tom

flavicon
picon face
> Date:          Thu, 22 Dec 1994 00:36:46 PST
> From:          "Eric T. Brewer" <spamBeGoneEricKILLspamspam@spam@cup.portal.com>

> I would like to propose a moderate positon which would allow some level
> of advertising while allowing people to ignore it if they don't want to
> see it. Personally, I would like to know if something is an ad before
> I spend time to look at it.

Unfortunately, by the time I see the header, I've already paid to download it.
Now I'm not claiming that this causes intolerable hardship or anything serious,
but paying to receive junk mail puts a wire brush up my er, , nose. :)

How about, , Anyone wishing to advertise something put the words "Advert
Available" in the .sig area. Then whoever wishes to read it can send private
e-mail for it.

__
  TAK

'How old is the PIC architecture?'
1994\12\23@072124 by Alex

flavicon
picon face
In article: <9412100210.aa18243spam_OUTspam@spam@punt.demon.co.uk> spamBeGonessmith@spam@spamcsuvax1.murdoch.edu.au
writes:
> The other day I was looking through some old Scientific American magazines.
> The September 1977 issue (special issue on Microelectronics) has a full-page
> ad from General Instrument Corporation advertising a range of microcontrollers
> including several PICs. This confirmed what I had been told by others - that
> Arizona Microchip acquired the PIC design from GI.

This is more tha just a story...see below.

>
> Does anyone know the full story? How old is the PIC architecture? What happene
d
> to GI?
>

Back in 1965, GI formed a Microelectronics Division, and indeed used
this division to generate some of the earliest viable EPROM and EEPROM
memory architectures. As you may be aware, the GI Microelectronucs
Division were also responsible for a wide variety of digital and analog
functions, in the AY3-xxxx and AY5-xxxx families.

GI also generated a 16 bit microprocessor, called the CP1600, in the
early 70s. This was a reasonable microprocessor, but not particularly
good at handling i/os. For some very specific applications where good
i/o handling was needed, GI designed a Peripheral Interface Controller
(or PIC for short), in around 1975. It was designed to be very fast,
since it was i/o handling for a 16 bit machine, but didn't need a huge
amount of functionality, so its microcoded instruction set was small.
Hopefully, you can see what's coming....yes, the architecture designed
in '75 is substantially the PIC16C5x architecure today. Granted, the
1975 version was manufactured in NMOS, and was only available in masked
ROM versions, but still a good little uC. The market, however, didn't
particularly think so, and the PIC remained designed in at a handful of
large customers only.

During the early 80s, GI took a long hard look at their business, and
restructured, leaving them to concentrate on their core activities,
which is essentially power semiconductors. Indeed they are still doing
this very successfully now. GI Microelectronics Division became GI
Microelectronics Inc (a wholly owned subsidiary), which in 85 was
finally sold to venture capital investors, including the fab in
Chandler, Arizona.  The venture capital people
took a long hard look at the products in the business, and got rid of
most of it - all the AY3- and AY5- parts and a whole bunch of other
stuff, leaving the core business of the PIC and the serial and parallel
EEPROMs and the parallel EPROMs. A decision was taken to restart the
new company, named Arizona Microchip Technology, with embedded control
as its differentiator from the rest of the pack.

As part of this strategy, the PIC165x NMOS family was redesigned to use
one of the other things that the fledgling company was good at, i.e.
EPROM - the concept of the CMOS based, OTP and eraseable EPROM program
memory PIC16C5x family was born.

Does this answer your questions?

Alex R. Baker - Field Apps Engineer Ph: +44 628 851077  Car: +44 831 494921
Arizona Microchip Technology        Fx: +44 628 850259  Email: RemoveMEalexEraseMEspamKILLspammicrochp.dem
on.co.uk
ANY VIEWS EXPRESSED HERE ARE MINE AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT THOSE OF MY E
MPLOYER


'Are you there.'
1995\01\25@084302 by holster
flavicon
face
Is anybody there?  I stopped getting mail from the list a few days ago.  Hello,
is there anybody home???

1995\01\25@094104 by Derrick Early

flavicon
picon face
>
> Is anybody there?  I stopped getting mail from the list a few days ago.  Hello
,
> is there anybody home???
>
Yes, I'm listening, but no one is talking.

--
Derrick Early
spamBeGoneearlyspam_OUTspamRemoveMEfinite.nrl.navy.mil

1995\01\25@100629 by Arley Carter

flavicon
face
Hello:
I am having bizarro experiences with this list as well.
I got your mail, but I haven't got any mail from the list since ~ Jan 20.
I sent e-amil to jory bell yesterday but haven't gotten a response yet:
Huh?!!!!

e-mail me if you get this message.
My sig says it all! ;-)

-arc
Arley Carter
.....arcspamRemoveMEarchp.pdial.interpath.net
|| Technology is great, when it works! ||
On Wed, 25 Jan 1995, holster wrote:

> Is anybody there?  I stopped getting mail from the list a few days ago.  Hello
,
> is there anybody home???
>

1995\01\25@104854 by Lou Sortman

flavicon
face
>> e-mail me if you get this message.
> My sig says it all! ;-)
>
> -arc
> Arley Carter
> arcspam@spam@archp.pdial.interpath.net
> || Technology is great, when it works! ||

1995\01\25@111220 by Conny Andersson

picon face
Yes, we are here, where are you?

It would be interesting to know where all of you PIC-fans live, in what
country, what town ...

Why not make a document where all members of the PICLIST tell something
about themselves, and then distribute the document to all who wants to know
about all the others?

Conny Andersson / Sweden
EraseMEy93conanRemoveMEspamSTOPspamisy.liu.se

1995\01\25@121358 by Coats Jack

flavicon
face
things do seem a bit quiet...

1995\01\25@122641 by Coats Jack

flavicon
face
----- Begin Included Message -----


It would be interesting to know where all of you PIC-fans live, in what
country, what town ...

Why not make a document where all members of the PICLIST tell something
about themselves, and then distribute the document to all who wants to know
about all the others?

Conny Andersson / Sweden
RemoveMEy93conanKILLspamspamTakeThisOuTisy.liu.se


----- End Included Message -----

Ok, I'll do a little bit...

I am Jack Coats, work for Amoco (an oil company), in Houston, TX USA

I find the PIC interesting, but have no particular use for them other
than wanting to learn.  If anyone has a few ideas for some simi-useful
gadgets to build using them, I'd like to know.

I would like to build something to measure how much and for how long
an appliance has been on by monitoring the AC current.  But not being
one with a good electrical background (I'm a computer jock by training
and nature) I feel a bit hampered.

... JC

1995\01\25@124802 by Alexander Akulin

flavicon
face
Conny Andersson wrote:
       It would be interesting to know where all of you PIC-fans live, in what
       country, what town ...

       Why not make a document where all members of the PICLIST tell something
       about themselves, and then distribute the document to all who wants to k
now
       about all the others?

Well, there is a thing that can help in this good affair...
LISTSERV has a command 'REVIEW PICLIST' that can send you the
list of all subscribers. Unfortunately, when I tried it now, it
answered: 'you are not autorised...'. Why? Well, we ca ask Jory Bell,
as I understand.. hope he IS authorised :)

Now about piclist archieves:
If I right, all our mails are stored in a listserv, so we can
list them with 'INDEX PICLIST' and then get with 'GET PICLIST LOGxxxx'.

Regards,
Alexander Akulin

1995\01\25@133240 by AyM

flavicon
face
Ohh. I forgot to say that I'm from Prague. If anyone know this city.


                                       (AyM)

1995\01\25@133243 by AyM

flavicon
face
Well. I think that I'm of of the users which use PIC 's quite offten.
I'm from Czech Republic which means that I'm in europe.
Actualy post comunistic country. :(((! :-)
I own programer based on David Tait's programer and I own even profesional
programer which is called PREPROM 2. Which has all features for all microchips
and for all series of PICs and Intels and NECs and ... so on.
Now I'm working on my PhD project.
I'm sorry if I makes any mistakes in english but english is not my native
language.
Anyway you can find me on IRC quite offten under nick AyM.

                               (AyM)

PS: this is reply on mail:th topic where are you from??

'Just in case this one got lost in the shuffle...'
1995\01\25@144511 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
Dudes:

Here's a message that I wrote and sent right around the 20th.  If it
made it through the list-server "glitch", please ignore it this time:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: spamBeGonefastfwdspam@spam@ix.netcom.com (Andrew Warren)
Subject: Re: AD/DA's and memory
To:  pic microcontroller discussion list
<PICLIST%RemoveMEMITVMA.BITNETspam_OUTspamuga.cc.uga.edu>

Tracy Reed (treedspamspamucssun1.sdsu.edu) wrote:

>Without external address/data buses, where will I store the data
>recorded in flight?

       Use a serial EEPROM or two (or eight).  Microchip makes a
       24C65 that's perfect for your application.  Eight of them
       will hold 64K bytes of data, and they'll only require two
       PIC I/O pins total.


>Would the external memory really complicate things that much?

       Yes.  To build a PIC17C42-based circuit with an external bus,
       you'd need an EPROM, a RAM, a parallel EEPROM or two, a few
       8-bit latches, a bunch of address-decoding chips, a multi-layer
       PCB designed by a good layout person, a really good scope, a
       logic analyzer, and enough money to go through a few board revs.

       If you were really on the ball, you could replace the latches,
       ROM, RAM, and address-decoding chips with one of those WSI
       chips, but then you'd have to learn to use their compiler
       (almost as much work as just building the circuit out of
       discrete components).

>Why would I want an OTP? I thought EEPROM would be just fine.

       You'd want OTP (as opposed to masked ROM) for production.  For
       development, you'd want the erasable equivalent (EPROM).  EEPROM
       program memory is available only on the 16C84, which has no A/Ds
       and much less memory than the 16C74.

>I clearly need to read some books and learn a bit more before I will
>really be able to choose what micro is best for the job.

       Yeah... I'm sure you'll have a much better idea of what you're
       doing after you get and read the Data Book and Embedded Control
       Handbook.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

-Andy



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

'Are you there.'
1995\01\26@011109 by Lance Walley

flavicon
face
On Jan. 25, "AyM" wrote:

>Ohh. I forgot to say that I'm from Prague. If anyone know this city.


Of course, we know of Prague (Praha)!  I saw your city for just one day
last year, to meet a possible distributor.  My visit was very short, but
what I saw looked quite beautiful.

Are there many PIC users in the Czech Republic?  I think you are one of the
only PIC people I've heard of.


------------------------  Lance Walley  ---------------------------
                         Parallax, Inc.

'Where are you! (was: Are you there)'
1995\01\26@072223 by Conny Andersson

picon face
Since I started this "introduction series" (again?) I will tell you a bit
about my interest in PIC:s.

I'm a student at Linkoping University (LiTH) in the middle-south-east of Sweden.
I study Applied Physics and Electrical Engineering (third year) and my
interest in electronics started when I was about 10-12 years old (I think).

As my studying occupies most of my time, I have only built two "major"
PIC-based gadgets, an RPM-counter for cars and a "magic wand"
(presented in Everyday with Practical Electronics recently) but MY wand is
better ...

Conny Andersson / Sweden

'Are you there'
1995\01\26@083235 by Fernando Frances Lanca

flavicon
face

Hi, my name is Fernando Lanca.
I'm Portugese and I live in Portugal near the city of Lisbon.
I work at INESC in the CAD center, and in my spare time i like to play with
electronics, I do not have much experience with assembler and I think that
PIC's are a good place to start, what do you think about this ?

If you had done any kind of projects with PIC's could you share that project
with me (and with list of course), I think that would bee a great way for me
and for other people to start.

Com cumprimentos,
Fernando Lanca

'Who is on the list....'
1995\01\26@084309 by Paul Greenwood

flavicon
face
Hello - here is my intro:

I am a EE, working at IBM developing AIX/UNIX workstations.  I work with the
PICs in my spare time in an attempt to create the ultimate home-automation
system for myself.

Oh yeah, I live in Austin, TX, USA.  I'm 27, 5'11", 166lbs, (oh, this isn't a
personal ad, huh?).

Is there anyone else in Austin on the list?

--

           -- Paul Greenwood --  (pablospam_OUTspamaustin.ibm.com)

First Rule of History:
       History doesn't repeat itself -- historians merely repeat each
       other.

1995\01\26@102520 by John M. Johnson

flavicon
face
On Thu, 26 Jan 1995, Paul Greenwood wrote:
> Oh yeah, I live in Austin, TX, USA.  I'm 27, 5'11", 166lbs, (oh, this isn't a
> personal ad, huh?).
Hmm when I traded you that PIC i would guess you were a little shorter
and a little heavier :) just joking
>
> Is there anyone else in Austin on the list?
yup, but only in summers,spring break and cmas brake.

I am a EE&CS student at the University of Texas at Dallas.  I am an ex UT
Austin student(left to come here for a telecom specialization.)  Creeping
along my 3rd year of both CS and EE(EE is more fun btw).
       I started using PICs to make aviation test equipment(tach pusle
generator) and quite my job there before i was finished because the bozo
didnt pay me.  Went to work for a company in Austin and my first
finalized project was a braking simulator for Canada rail(used 3 pics and
two Xlinx and a whole lot of f**king analog stuff[yes i hate analog]).
       On more to the point.  Every hardware project I do i use a pic in
some way.  They are totally easy and all my profs are impressed because
they have never heard of it and think its neat(i now share my programmer
with 2 of my profs at school who also tinker w/ pics).

later
       John
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Johnson  Team OS/2 member | RemoveMEjohnsonjKILLspamspam@spam@bga.com | johnsonjspamBeGonespam.....utdallas.edu
                  C&H Technologies VXI Plug N' Play member
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
And the Seventh version of OS/2 raised into the air its bow of blue steel and
cried," It. Is. Done."  Around him lay Bill Gates and Microsoft apps.  Their
evil in this world at an end.
                                       Revelations of InfoWorld, Oct 11 1994

'Another Intro'
1995\01\26@123710 by Errington A

flavicon
face
Hi

Since we are all introducing ourselves I would like to say hello.  I
subscribed to the list last week, and although it went a bit quiet I am
interested in what is going back and forth now.

My name is Andrew Errington and I work as a PC consultant at Lancaster
University (UK).  My interest in PICs came about after building a project
with a BASIC Stamp last year and deciding I could do more if I controlled
the processor directly.  I bought Microchip's Embedded Control Handbook,
which is _full_ of cool ideas, and I built the 16C84 development programmer
detailed in there.  I modified David Tait's controller software so I now
have a development environment that cost me about ?20 (or $30).

The PIC84 is excellent for development as it's EEPROM memory allows you to
recode and reprogram with no effort.  I have a project underway (in my spare
time (ha ha!)), and I will probably be looking at the other PIC's with extra
features for later projects.

[This is my third attempt at getting something onto the list.  I hope that
the other two are not marauding somewhere else...]

Andrew M. Errington
PC Consultant
Lancaster University
KILLspama.erringtonspam.....lancaster.ac.uk
Tel: +44 1524 592678
Fax: +44 1524 844011

1995\01\26@133854 by Pic User

flavicon
face
Hi my Name is James Kelly. I work in computer services for the University
of Kansas. I am an Old timmer with Robotics (since 81) and of all the
things I've seen come and go the PIC has contributed a good balance to
help bring the next generation of Robotics in to the 90's.

 Hi to all you fine folks. Looking forward to Learning with you all.
James K.
"Wisdom is more valuable than Gold or Silver."

'Are you there.'
1995\01\26@151648 by Tracy R. Reed

flavicon
face
On Thu, 26 Jan 1995, Jon Poland SE Sun St Louis wrote:

> I do think it would be interesting to put a microprocessor into a model
> rocket but haven't found a good application that justifies this method over
> other telemetry methods.

Other telemetry methods? What other telemetry methods? I suppose you can
measure the angle of ascension and do the trig to find altitude, but that
never seems to be very accurate. You can also measure it's time of
flight, but this is only as accurate as the person doing the timing and
gives you the average. A microprocessor (and appropriate pressure sensors)
could give you accurate altitude, airspeeds, acceleration profile, etc.

'Another PIC user introduction'
1995\01\26@184928 by Tracy R. Reed

flavicon
face
On Thu, 26 Jan 1995, Paul Haas wrote:

> For your entertainment the hottub is at:
>   http://hamjudo.com/cgi-bin/hottub
> The refrigerator is at:
>   http://hamjudo.com/cgi-bin/refrigerator

Hahahahahahahaha!!!! That's great! Sorry to hear about the rubber duckie,
I know it must have been quite a blow. What a gratuitous use of
electronics. :) Perhaps I will be able to set up something like this
someday. Your setup ranks right up there with the coke machine at MIT and
the coffee pot in some guys office at some place I cannot remember at the
moment. I'm gonna add a link to your appliances from my homepage. :)
There's only one thing missing...a camera on the hottub to show us what
(or who) is going on there! :)

1995\01\26@185756 by Robert Dale Bourque

picon face
Hello everone,

My name is Robert Bourque, and I am a senior EE student at the
University of Maryland.  My introduction to PIC's was through my
senior project, which is to design a 50 MHz digital scope.
We (there are 5 in the group) used a PIC for the PC-scope communication
and to setup the various components on the board prior to each
memory-capture period (which is controlled by a MACH).

My main responsibility in the project has been the PIC programming,
as well as some of the CAD layout.

I have co-op'ed with General Dynamics and also with TeleDanmark, the
Danish telecomm.  I am now taking my last class at night, and finishing
the scope project in my spare time.  I still have my student job on
campus (office gopher) but am really interested in finding a full-time
engineering job doing hardware/software related to realtime control, etc.

I am quite interested in the robotics applications of PIC's too.

1995\01\31@130633 by holster

flavicon
face
I tried sending this last week, but it didn't get out.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gee, I guess there was somebody home after all!  Now to let you know who
I am.

My name is Dan Houlton.  I got my BA in CS from UofM a little over a year
ago and have since been working as a Software Engineer for General Dynamics
in the Detroit, MI area.  Some of my interests are motorcycling and flying RC
airplanes.  I've only recently become aware of PIC controllers and thought
it would be pretty fun to play around with, and since I like flying (not
repairing) RC, I thought I'd tinker with a wing leveler or autopilot.  It
seems to be a pretty tall order though, the more I research it.  The basic
idea is to use a PIC, a gyro (probably from a model helicopter), and maybe
an altimiter to control attitude and (maybe) altitude.

I got copies of Microchip's Data and Embedded Controller Handbooks to help
me decide what to use and was thinking of getting the PICStart package they
have.  I know Motorola 68030 assembly and I'm sure I could pic up PIC, but
I'm a C programmer at heart, so if anybody knows of any good cross compilers,
please let me know.

I think I'll get the the book "The PIC Source Book" mentioned in the FAQ, but
I'd really like to get "A Beginners Guide to the Microchip PIC".   This is
the one printed in the UK, and I haven't been able to find it here in the US.

So that's me.  I noticed some others were dealing with RC as well.  If any-
one has any advice about what to use, how to use it, or where to look for
more info please let me know.  I'd really like some US sources for the book
I mentioned above.  Who knows?  I might actually get to the point where I'm
saving more airplanes than I crash (that's a nasty habit of mine 8-(  ).


--Dan


'Advertisements on the PICLIST'
1995\02\04@234153 by jory bell
face
flavicon
face
Andrew Warren sent me email asking:

>Was I out of line sending that message about Lance Walley's "Surplus.txt
>as promised" message?  Please clarify the list's policy regarding this
>type of "SALE!!  THIS MONTH ONLY!!!" advertising.

I responded as follows:

{Quote hidden}

1995\02\05@005442 by Brian Lane

flavicon
face
On Sat, 4 Feb 1995, jory bell wrote:

> Andrew Warren sent me email asking:
>
> >Was I out of line sending that message about Lance Walley's "Surplus.txt
> >as promised" message?  Please clarify the list's policy regarding this
> >type of "SALE!!  THIS MONTH ONLY!!!" advertising.
>

  [chop... chop....]

 Well I guess I'll wade in here. First an introduction. I am currently
employed as a microprocessor programmer for a consultant in Washington
State, up near Mt. Rainier. We mostly do controllers for Ship to Shore HF
radios, and handheld VHF radios using Motorola 68HCxx parts. I use PICs
in my home projects(built a distinctive ring switcher). I am also working
on a B.S. EET degree at the local community college, and preparing to set
up a limited Internet Provider/BBS with my Linux box.

OK, as to commercialism on the list I think it has a place when it is
in response to someone's question. BUT just posting announcements of
commercial products 'Really Bugs Me' I personally don't use any of
Parallax's products, and am not interested in them. I see their ads in
CCI and I believe that's all the exposure I want.

If Lance got requests for information from list subscribers, he should
be emailing them directly instead of thru the list. In my opinion the
list should be for the discussion of the technical aspects of using the
PIC processors, not as a target for marketing types(not that I am
accusing Lance of 'targeting' the list).

    Brian

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Everyone is a prisoner holding their own key." | Chaos Labs (360)569-2911
 http://nyx10.cs.du.edu:8001/~blane/home.html   |   Electronics/uP files
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1995\02\05@090701 by tom

flavicon
picon face
Brian Lane <spam_OUTblanespamKILLspamnyx10.cs.du.edu> Wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Feb 1995, jory bell wrote:
> > Andrew Warren sent me email asking:
> >
> > >Was I out of line sending that message about Lance Walley's "Surplus.txt
> > >as promised" message?  Please clarify the list's policy regarding this
> > >type of "SALE!!  THIS MONTH ONLY!!!" advertising.
> >
>
>    [chop... chop....]
>
>Hack<

>  If Lance got requests for information from list subscribers, he should
> be emailing them directly instead of thru the list.

I hold no brief for Lance, but in fairness it looked like a cock-up to me.:)

The list-address was left in by accident ?

> In my opinion the list should be for the discussion of the technical aspects
> of using the PIC processors, not as a target for marketing types(not that I
> am accusing Lance of 'targeting' the list).
Fine dividing line to tread here IMO.

I'll wait to see Lance's grovelling apology :) :) :)
__
  TAK

1995\02\05@094507 by Timothy McDonough DIAL UP1

flavicon
face
FWIW, I think the message in question from Lance should have been to the
effect that they had decided to have a sale on the discontinued tools and
people should ftp the file from Parallax if interested.

Posting it only once would have been good too, although I suspect the
multiple posts were a technical glitch and not intentional.

Tim McDonough -- RemoveMEtimmedRemoveMEspamEraseMEcencom.net

On Sat, 4 Feb 1995, jory bell wrote:

> Andrew Warren sent me email asking:
>
> >Was I out of line sending that message about Lance Walley's "Surplus.txt
> >as promised" message?  Please clarify the list's policy regarding this
> >type of "SALE!!  THIS MONTH ONLY!!!" advertising.
>
[snip]

> >
> >Were you around when Lance first came on the list a couple months ago? He
> >posted some (in my opinion) spam, and I called him on it in an exchange
> >posted to the list (which I would be happy to forward to you). He promptly
> >apologized for his possible misdeeds, but many members of the list were
> >fairly supportive of his posting and a relatively high degree of general
> >commercialism (much to my chagrin).

'What is wrong with the Stamp II's ?'
1995\02\05@164537 by Lance Walley

flavicon
face
On February 4th, George Risch wrote:

>Thanks for keeping us posted on the situation with the Stamp II 's. Just
>from a curiousity point of view, what has been the major problems in
>producing the software for these packages? Is it that you are trying to use
>another PIC?


George,

There haven't been any problems, per se, but the creator of the Stamp is
grossly unable to estimate project completion times (just like the rest of
us, including myself when I work on projects).

Indeed, we are using a different PIC, which does pose problems not seen on
the original Stamp.  We're also trying to add new functions.


------------------------  Lance Walley  ---------------------------
                         Parallax, Inc.

'Advertisements on the PICLIST'
1995\02\06@082809 by Ran Talbott

flavicon
face
>FWIW, I think the message in question from Lance should have been to the
>effect that they had decided to have a sale on the discontinued tools and
>people should ftp the file from Parallax if interested.

I agree.  Tim's comments are along the lines of the ones I made a while back
on sci.electronics when someone from National Semi was asking how vendors
should use the net.  The philosophy I suggested then was to broadcast only
"invitations to contact" (e.g.,  announcements of WWW or ftp site openings),
not the information itself.

In addition to Tim's recommendation,  I'd suggest three other criteria for
"commercial" postings to the list:

  1. That they be *directly* PIC-related.  I.e.,  it's okay to annouce a new
     PIC cross-assembler,  but not a "hot deal" on hard disks on the grounds
     that "PIC developers use machines with hard disks for compiling".
  2. That the info not be readily-available in the press.  E.g.,  Parallax
     announcing a sale on surplus equipment would be okay,  but not
     using the list to advertise their "hobbyist special" programmer,
     because that's part of their regular advertising.
  3. The information has to be "incomplete":  no snail mail addresses,
     no phone numbers,  no exact prices.  That would tend to (though not
     always,  of course) require email contact to make any sales,  which
     would discourage people from trying to use the list as an ad medium.

I think this makes a fairly good compromise that benefits all concerned,
while minimizing annoyance and noise.

Ran


'Yet another PIC programmer'
1995\05\01@153250 by David Tait
flavicon
face
A reference to interest UK hobbyists:

Robin Abbott, "PIC Programmer", Electronics Today International,
Vol 24, No. 6, pp 52-56, June 1995.

This article (to be continued next month) describes a simple PIC
programmer which connects to the serial port of a PC.  It uses two
voltage regulators, three transistors, a MAX232 and a pre-programmed
16C57 to provide a programmer capable of programming the PIC16C54, 55,
56, 57, 58 and any serial mode PIC including the PIC16C64, 71, 74 and
84.  The serial mode devices may also be programmed in-circuit using a
4-wire interface.  Cost: UKP 35 (around $55) including software. The
PCB pattern is reproduced 1-1 in the mag.

I guess ETI should be available in the USA.  If you can't find it
contact:

Wise Owl Worldwide Publications,
4314 West 238th Street,
Torrance,
CA 90505.

Tel: (310) 375 6258
Fax: (310) 375 0548

David
--
KILLspamdavid.taitspamspamBeGoneman.ac.uk

'Real-Time Clock and other problems...'
1995\05\18@054526 by divanov

flavicon
face
Dan says:

... snip snip ...
> ... So, the latest vote is Philips is not a plug-n-play solution.  If not,
> does anyone have any sources for I2C routines or a better way to do this?
... snip snip ...

Look at Microchip application notes AN541 and specifically AN554 (I2C
master mode implementation). I could mail you another master mode
implementation using the Parallax assembly code, if you'd like me to...

Can someone help me sort my PCLATH problem. I'm trying to access two look-up
tables, each about 200 bytes long, in a 16C84. The first table is located in
the fist 256 bytes of the prog memory and works OK, but the second one is a
real bugger to access. I tried shifting the table around and modifying PCLATH,
but don't seem to get it right. Please assist.

Regards,

Richard Ivanov, Cape Town <-- new politically correct sig

1995\05\18@111056 by KG Systems

flavicon
face
Thank you all for your responses regarding a RTC for 16C84... Sorry if I
sounded like I was snip...snip...snipping.

Between all of your contributions ... the most recent of which included:

- Jordanis H.'s  ... use a Dallas DS1494 TIC (Time-in-a-can) chip
- Aaron S.'s ....... '54 source code for I2C
- R. Ivanov's ...... referral to AN541 & AN554 for I2C info and offer of
                    source code for I2C driver.
                    (which would be gratefully accepted if it is handy)


I think I've got plenty to work with!  I hope to be contributing answers
instead of questions in the near future.


Best Regards,

Dan Garlen


Kg Systems, Inc.    12 Prospect Street Bloomfield, NJ   07003  |
                   PHONE: 201-429-9300  /  FAX: 201-429-2298  |
                   EMAIL: kgsysspamspaminteractive.net ______________|

'How much can they take????'
1995\05\28@153929 by Otmar Ebenhoech

picon face
>This thread could turn out like that letters page in the HP Journal
>about printers in fires and driving the wife's car over a 'scope.
>

       Just yesterday I put a scope probe in the wrong place, (a bad thing
to do when there's 2000 amps of short circuit current availiable)
       After the PCB trace vaporised the controll circuit saw 40 Volts
negative, It blew out 4 power mosfets, 18 signal transistors, a few diodes
and two voltage regulators. (just about everything on the board)
       The PIC 16C73JW still works fine!  It's a good thing too, since I
only have two and the protoype is due in two months. :-)

-Otmar-

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  Otmar Ebenhoech                        Electric Vehicle Components Ltd.
    "I wish I die sleeping like my grandfather,
                           not screaming in terror like his passengers."
  RemoveMEtessspamBeGonespamRemoveMEnetcom.com                                         (415) 494-9255
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------


'Motor control on-the-cheap'
1995\06\17@024652 by Mark G. Forbes
flavicon
face
>I'm interested in controlling a 90-volt, 2.4 amp DC motor with a PIC
>using PWM. This is not a servo application, just simple but precise
>speed control in one direction with braking.

>Unfortunately, all of the books I have seen on power supplies seem to
>assume that any application over about 24 volts only requires current
>in the milliamps range. Can anyone suggest a good AC to DC conversion
>circuit, preferably without a transformer?

I'm working on something similar, but at 12 volts. *However*, the
technique may still be applicable.

I'm using an audio power op-amp, made by SGS Thomson. TDA2040....I think.
It's a 5-lead TO-220 package, grounded tab, good for about 3 amps
continuous. They sell these things in a variety of current and voltage
ratings. Hang an RC integrator on the front end and you've got a
PWM-to-DC driver. It sources, it sinks, it's bulletproof and it's cheap!

90 volts is a little higher than I'd go with the 2040, but you might
add a couple of power transistors on the output to beef up the voltage
capability. Or, they make higher-voltage parts, though I'm not sure
how *much* higher. Or, call Apex Microtechnology...they make POWER opamps
up to kilovolts/kilowatts. Serious oomph, serious dollars.

You may want to actively drive both leads, even though you want only
one-direction rotation. Ya know how fast you can *stop* a motor by
reversing the drive current? Yow! I've got sheared keys to prove it.
KILLspamforbesmspamBeGonespampeak.org
Mark G. Forbes
"Never ascribe to malice that which can be blamed on the engineer."

'Another IRDA source'
1995\06\21@134408 by Doug Smith

flavicon
face
Another possible way to do IRDA is with the CS8130 chip from Crystal
Simicondutor.  They faxed over specs and sent a data book and it looks
pretty good.  The chip will do IRDA and a few other IR protocols.  There
is an evaluation board available but I haven't ordered mine yet.  I'll
let you know more about it after I get one to play with.  Here is the
contact person who sent me the information...

>   Brent Wilson
>   Infrared Applications Engineer
>   Crystal Semiconductor Corp.
>   email: @spam@bwwSTOPspamspam@spam@crystal.cirrus.com
>   Tel: 512 912 3554
>   Fax: 512 445 2831
>   t/f: 800 888 5016 ext 3554

--
Doug Smith, SGA * Loves Park, IL * dougs%sgaspamBeGonespamspamBeGonewheaton.wheaton.edu
AppleLink: G0231 * CompuServe: 72727,3532


'Configuration words and other confusion'
1995\07\04@095835 by Albert J. Fahey
flavicon
picon face
In my attempt to use in system serial programming I decided
to write my own code to program PICs via the PC parallel port.

I'm using David Tait's code and the AN589 code to guide me, but I'm
trying to make the code versatile enough to program any of the
PICs that support issp.

I've encountered discrepencies (or my own inability to understand
something) while reading the Microchip literature.  One of them
follows ... perhaps someone knows the answer.

1) When programming the configuration memory the Programming
Specification never tells you what data to send with the "Load
Configuration" command.  The spec. implies that you program the
configuration memory with a programming cycle at location 0x2007
in the configuration memory.  David Tait sends the fuse data for
both commands!  Apparently this works ... but what is going on
here?

                                       Albert

1995\07\04@104102 by David Tait

flavicon
face
Hi Albert,

> In my attempt to use in system serial programming I decided
> to write my own code to program PICs via the PC parallel port.

Good luck.

> 1) When programming the configuration memory the Programming
> Specification never tells you what data to send with the "Load
> Configuration" command.  The spec. implies that you program the
> configuration memory with a programming cycle at location 0x2007
> in the configuration memory.

This was discussed recently on the list.  Here is the answer
according to Brian Boles of Microchip:

: The "load configuration" and "load data for program memory" commands
: are both actually commands that load data for program memory. The
: only difference is that the "load config" command will also set the
: address pointer to 02000h i.e. near the configuration register
: (actually 2000 is the start of our test memory area).

: So the answer to the question "What is in the 16 bit field?" is that
: normally you will place your data for the bits in the configuration
: register here with the "load config" command, and then do 7 increment
: commands to point the address to 2007 then do a program command.

So there.  The only problem for me was that the spec said you should
do the increments and then perform a program cycle (i.e. load data,
begin prog, wait 10ms) but perhaps Brian is implying you can get away
without the load data part of the program cycle.  As you say, what I do
works, but maybe it wasn't what was intended according to the spec.

David
--
spamBeGonedavid.taitspamman.ac.uk

'A description of the sony ir format'
1995\07\06@140141 by Edward Cheung

flavicon
face
Here is a document a buddy and I wrote on the sony format.  I hope
this is appropriate here.  There has been some traffic on ir formats
lately.....



Sony SIRCS Protocol Specifications


Scott Coleman and Edward Cheung


  The following is a reference guide to using a microcomputer to
control Sony equipment via the SIRCS protocol.  This can occur either
via an infrared interface, or with a Control-S port. It is being
released in the hope that it will be useful to some of you. Apparently
there is no documentation on the protocol available from Sony (at least,
that's what their publications office said). Thus, the following
information is a synthesis of bits and pieces obtained from many
sources, including the Sony Service Manual for the RMT-124 IR
controller, some net.friends, and by connecting an oscilloscope across
the LED in a Sony IR remote controller and observing the signals sent as
various buttons on the controller were pressed, and writing computer
programs to try various codes. The timings given may not be exactly
those used by the Sony products, but these timings have been used
successfully in controlling a Sony SL-HF900 VCR and a SL-HF400 VCR via
their Control-S ports, and a XBR32 TV and SL-V585HF VCR via infrared, so
we figure they're pretty close. We make no guarantees of accuracy for
any of the information contained in this document, although we'd
appreciate hearing from you if you find any errors contained herein.
Also, the names used here may not correspond to any "official" Sony
names used for the various aspects of the protocol. We have made up some
reasonably descriptive names for various things, since there is no
official reference information (that we are aware of) which would tell
me the official names.


Acknowledgment

  We'd like to acknowledge the assistance of Paul Milazzo
(spam_OUTmilazzoSTOPspamspambbn.com) for providing valuable pointers in the right direction
when Scott first began to research this topic. Without his response to Scott's
usenet post, He might never have figured all this stuff out and gotten Scott's
controller program working.



       Protocol Description


  The wired Control-S protocol used by various Sony video products is
simply a TTL-level baseband version of the signals sent by the Sony
remote controllers (such as the RMT-124). The Control-S command word is
12 or 15 bits long, and consists of a 5 or 8-bit device ID code followed
by a 7-bit button code. The control-S data packet is preceded by a 2.4
millisecond TTL logic-1 pulse (start bit) followed by 0.4 ms of logic-0.
Each 1 bit in the control word is represented by a 1.2 ms logic-1 level
followed by a 0.4 ms logic-0 level, and each 0 bit is 0.8 ms high, 0.4
ms low. The end of the control packet is always a TTL logic-0 level, and
the total length of each packet usually fixed at 45 ms in length. The
bits in each control word are sent in increasing bit position order
(i.e. low order bit first, high order bit last). As an example, let's
look at the command to toggle the power on a SL-HF900. The device ID for
the VCR is 00010, and the button code for the power switch is 0010101.
Thus, the entire control word is 000100010101. To send this command to
the VCR, we first send out a 2.4 ms start bit, and then send the bits in
reverse order (i.e. 101010001000). We then hold the Control-S port to
logic-0 level to make the total packet time (i.e. the time since the
rising edge of the start pulse) equal 45 ms.

  As mentioned above, command words are usually 12 bits long.  However,
some commands are 15 bit long, the device code in that case is 8 bits
long.  For example to command a Sony XBR32 TV to turn off Picture-in-
Picture, you send command 110 (decimal) to device 164 (decimal).  Note
that the 12-bit command can be distinguished from a 15-bit command
becuase it is three bits shorter.  Since both (0 and 1) logic levels
cause the transmission of hi and low transitions, one can tell the
length of the bit stream.



       Interfacing


       To send commands to a VCR equipped with a Control-S port, your
computer will need a TTL-level binary output port. A standard IBM-PC
parallel printer port works well, as does a data acquisition and control
adapter (IBM DACA board). As long as the port can send a TTL-level
signal (0VDC = logic-0, 5VDC = logic-1) you should be OK. Connect the
output line from the port to a 1/8" mini phone plug, with the tip
carrying the TTL signal and the ring grounded. A simple software routine
can then be written to toggle the status of a bit in the output port
corresponding to the output line. Setting the corresponding bit in the
output port will cause the line to go high, clearing the bit will cause
the line to go low. By controlling the pattern and timing of these high
and low signals, the commands may be sent to the VCR.

Instead of a hard wired connection, you can also emulate a pushbutton
remote and flash an Infra Red LED to the appliance(s) to be controlled.
One way is to set up a 40 kHz LED flasher which is gated by the
computerUs TTL output line mentioned above.

The following pseudocode outlines a routine to send a command through a
port setup such as that described above:


begin

/* send the start bit */

raise Ctrl-S line to TTL logic-1

wait 2.4 ms

lower Ctrl-S line to logic-0

wait 0.4 ms


for current_bit = low_order_bit to high_order_bit do begin

   raise Ctrl-S line to logic-1

   if (current_bit is a 1)

       wait 1.2 ms

   else

       wait 0.8 ms

   lower Ctrl-S line to logic-0

   wait 0.4ms

   end


wait a sufficient time to make the total message duration 45 ms (see
paragraph below).

end


We derived our SIRCS information independently from each other.  Because
of that there are slight differences in our findings.  Among the results
gathered by Ed is that the above packet needs to be sent twice (with a
small gap of a few msec. in between) in order for the device to respond;
he also did not observe the need to have the packet take a full 45 msec.
This was not the case with ScottUs findings.  In addition, Ed observed
slightly different timing on the high and low duration of the stream.
The 0.8 msec and 0.4 msec times are both 0.6 msec.
One possible reason for this difference is that Ed used an Infra Red
interface, while Scott used the wired interface.  We suspect that there
is sufficient tolerance built into the receivers to allow a wide range
of timing.




Example Device and Command codes


  The following are some  of the  codes we've  discovered while
experimenting with the protocol. Note that not all of these commands
work with all VCR or TV models.  For example, button code 22 causes the
SL-HF900 to eject a tape, but the SL-HF400 ignores that command. If you
come across any codes which are not listed here, we'd appreciate it if
you'd send us a list of the codes you discover.



Note: All numbers in the following table are base 10.


Device ID Codes

         1   TV

         2   VTR1

         4   VTR2

         6   laserdisk

         7   VTR2

         11  VTR3

         12  Surround Sound Processor

         18  Equalizer

         16  Cassette Deck and Tuner

         17  CD Player

        164  TV digital effects (note 8 bit device code)

  Note that Ed found VTR2 to be Device code 7, while Scott found it to
be 2.  Some devices can be contained in the same box.  For example, the
Surround Sound Processor, Equalizer, and Tuner are in one box, and the
TV digital effects is combined with the TV.


Button Codes for VCR

         000     1 button

         001     2 button

         002     3 button

         003     4 button

         004     5 button

         005     6 button

         006     7 button

         007     8 button

         008     9 button

         009     10 button/0 button

         010     11 button

         011     12 button

         012     13 button

         013     14 button

         020     X 2 play w/sound

         021     power

         022     eject

         023     L-CH/R-CH/Stereo

         024     stop

         025     pause

         026     play

         027     rewind

         028     FF

         029     record

         032     pause engage

         035     X 1/5 play

         040     reverse visual scan

         041     forward visual scan

         042     TV/VTR

         045     VTR from TV

         047     power off

         048     single frame reverse/slow reverse play

         049     single frame advance/slow forward play

         060     aux

         070     counter reset

         078     TV/VTR

         083     index (scan)

         106     edit play

         107     mark


Button Codes for TV

         000     1 button

         001     2 button

         002     3 button

         003     4 button

         004     5 button

         005     6 button

         006     7 button

         007     8 button

         008     9 button

         009     10 button/0 button

         011     Enter

         016     channel up

         017     channel down

         018     volume up

         019     volume down

         020     Mute

         021     Power

         022     Reset TV

         023     Audio Mode:Mono/SAP/Stereo

         024     Picture up

         025     Picture down

         026     Color up

         027     Color down

         030     Brightness up

         031     Brightness down

         032     Hue up

         033     Hue down

         034     Sharpness up

         035     Sharpness down

         036     Select TV tuner

         038     Balance Left

         039     Balance Right

         041     Surround on/off

         042     Aux/Ant

         047     Power off

         048     Time display

         054     Sleep Timer

         058     Channel Display

         059     Channel jump

         064     Select Input Video1

         065     Select Input Video2

         066     Select Input Video3

         074     Noise Reduction on/off

         078     Cable/Broadcast

         079     Notch Filter on/off

         088     PIP channel up

         089     PIP channel down

         091     PIP on

         092     Freeze screen

         094     PIP position

         095     PIP swap

         095     Guide

         097     Video setup

         098     Audio setup

         099     Exit setup

         107     Auto Program

         112     Treble up

         113     Treble down

         114     Bass up

         115     Bass down

         116     + key

         117     - key

         120     Add channel

         121     Delete channel

         125     Trinitone on/off

         127     Displays a red RtestS on the screen


Button Codes for TV digital effects

         110     PIP off


         115     replay last 15 seconds

         116     channel preview

         117     Split screen


If you have any questions, or would like to share some new device/button
codes, we can be reached at the following addresses:


Scott Coleman:  RemoveMEtmkkspamspamuiuc.edu

Edward Cheung:  TakeThisOuToadebcspamspamRemoveMErobots.gsfc.nasa.gov


+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|          Edward Cheung, Ph.D.         |  The opinions expressed herein    |
|    NASA Goddard Space Flight Center   |    do not necessarily reflect     |
|         Code 714.1, Bldg T11B         |       those of my employers'      |
|          Greenbelt, MD 20771          |                                   |
|   301-286-1269(office) 286-1717(fax)  |  My next book:                    |
| Internet: KILLspamebc714spamspamspam_OUTrs710.gsfc.nasa.gov  | Statistics, Demos and Other Lies  |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+

'The 10 pm problem, now 11:30 odd....'
1995\07\14@072313 by stephnss

flavicon
face
> As it turns out, it looks like the crystal was dodgy.  I applied an
>external oscillator and the PIC happily started running.  So I'll buy a
>new crystal in the morning and 'touch wood it might even work... :-) :-)

If your new crystal doesn't work, and your using a prototyping board, it may
be that you have a problem with groundplanes. Once I had a problem with a
16C54 that only worked when the protoboard it was on was lifted an inch off
my metal desktop.

'Making OTP work the same as EPROM'
1995\07\27@222310 by Dave Kingma

flavicon
face
I have been talking to Microchip and posting questions
on newsgroups about the problem I am having with a
PIC16C57 program that works in the EPROM part but doesn't
work in the OTP part.  I have had numerous responses,
but so far, I haven't gotten it fixed and am reluctant
to burn many more OTP parts to find the solution.  Microchip
and others recommend that the FSR and status registers
be cleared just after the ORG statement.  I have done
that as follows:

********************************************
TITLE " Test Program "
LIST P=16C57, R=HEX, C=132, N=82

include "somethin.h"

ORG 0x700
DT " Some text goes here "

ORG 0

  CLRF FSR
  CLRF STATUS

  Rest of main code goes here

  include "prog1.asm"

END
***********************************************

Now, someone was nice enough to send me some code written
by Fast Forward Engineering that was entitled "ZERO THE
16C57 RAM", however, in the code comments, they say "prepare
to zero all registers except the processor status, pc, rtcc,
and fsr registers."  Why wouldn't you want to clear the FSR
and STATUS?  Is the best solution to include the "zero ram"
code just after the ORG 0 statement and just before the CLRF FSR
statement in the listing above?  Or, do I just leave out the
two CLRF statements all together?  Should this ram clearing
procedure be included in all code just in case someone wants
to go to OTP parts?

Thanks from a newbie,
Dave

dkingmaRemoveMEspambev.net

1995\07\27@234352 by Brian Read

flavicon
face
The reason to clear RAM is so that you don't use (and act on unknown contents)
any file without knowing what is in it. This just covers for poor programing lat
er.
The BIG problem that newbies repeat until they know better is: The windowed
parts can have files cleared by light and the OTPs can't. So sloppy code
will work differently in windowed parts with the window uncovered and OTP
parts or covered erasable parts.

THE RULE: Always cover your windowed parts _EXCEPT_ when erasing.

I don't KNOW that this is your problem but it has been repeated
time and again on this group and the Mchip BBS and I have
not noticed it mentioned in this thread (much to my suprise).

To sum up:
1. Always init your files before use (one way is to use Andy's code)
2. Always keep your windows covered. (write protect labels from 5 1/4" floppies
  work GREAT especially the foil ones)

Good luck,
Brian

1995\07\28@030554 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
You wrote:

>I am having [a problem] with a PIC16C57 program that works in the
>EPROM part but doesn't work in the OTP part. .... Microchip
>and others recommend that the FSR and status registers
>be cleared just after the ORG statement.
> ....
>Now, someone was nice enough to send me some code written
>by Fast Forward Engineering that was entitled "ZERO THE
>16C57 RAM", however, in the code comments, they say "prepare
>to zero all registers except the processor status, pc, rtcc,
>and fsr registers."  Why wouldn't you want to clear the FSR
>and STATUS?  Is the best solution to include the "zero ram"
>code just after the ORG 0 statement and just before the CLRF FSR
>statement in the listing above?  Or, do I just leave out the
>two CLRF statements all together?  Should this ram clearing
>procedure be included in all code just in case someone wants
>to go to OTP parts?

Dave:

The STATUS bits that select the Code-Space page are cleared for you by
the RESET hardware in the PIC (which is why the GOTO at the 16C57's
Reset Vector [0x7FF] must point to an address on page 0, by the way).

The FSR bits that select the Data-Space (Register) bank are also
cleared by the RESET hardware, and, if you look closely at my "Clear
the 16C57 RAM" code, you'll see that it leaves them cleared.

I don't understand why Microchip would recommend that you manually
clear these bits, especially since the "PICs are afraid of the light"
problem is so well-known.

If you haven't heard of this before, it's simple:  When light impinges
on the silicon die in a windowed PIC, it usually clears the registers
to 00 on RESET.  On the other hand, if the window is covered (or the
PIC is a non-windowed OTP device), the registers come up in undefined
states.

The fact that your code works only when the window's uncovered means
that you're reading from registers before you write to them.  This may
be what you intended, or it may mean that there are errors in your
code.  Either way, you should add a manual "Clear RAM" routine to your
program.

This is a bit tricky to do on a 16C57; that's why I posted my routine
here.  Put it early in your code, before you read from any
general-purpose registers.

There is no need for the CLRF FSR and CLRF STATUS instructions; aside
from being pointless, this makes it impossible to tell whether your
last reset was due to Power-On, MCLR, or Watchdog Timeout.  Remove them
from your code and tell the Microchip guy who suggested them to get a
fucking clue.

-Andy

P.S.  You don't have to use those exact words.

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

1995\07\29@112420 by Dave Kingma

flavicon
face
Andrew Warren wrote:

> The STATUS bits that select the Code-Space page are cleared for you by
> the RESET hardware in the PIC (which is why the GOTO at the 16C57's
> Reset Vector [0x7FF] must point to an address on page 0, by the way).

Hmm.. I previously had the following code in my program:

ORG 0x7FF
GOTO INIT

where INIT was at ORG 0.  A person at Microchip said that this was not
necessary and told me to take it out.  Is it necessary?

Also, I noticed a couple of labels in Andrew's "ZERO THE 16C57 RAM"
routine that were not defined in the .INC files that came with MPASM.
Particularly, BIT4 and USEFSR were not defined.  I guess BIT4 would
equate to 0x03 but need to be sure.  Does anyone know what these
equates should be?  Is there an include file that I'm missing?

Thanks a lot for your help!

Dave Kingma
spam_OUTdkingmaRemoveMEspamEraseMEbev.net

1995\07\29@133551 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
Dave Kingma (TakeThisOuTdkingmaRemoveMEspam@spam@bev.net) wrote:

>I previously had the following code in my program:
>
>ORG 0x7FF
>GOTO INIT
>
>where INIT was at ORG 0.  A person at Microchip said that this was not
>necessary and told me to take it out.  Is it necessary?

   Dave:

   It's not strictly necessary, so long as the start of your main
   program remains at address 0.  Soon, however, you'll writa a
   relatively-large program that uses subroutines.  Because
   subroutines must start on the lower half of each page, you will
   want to put them at address 0, and your main routine at some other
   address.  At that point, you'll need the GOTO at the reset vector.

   Ignore the stupid advice you're being given by this "person at
   Microchip" (he's 0-for-2 so far) and use the reset vector... That's
   what it's there for.

>Also, I noticed a couple of labels in Andrew's "ZERO THE 16C57 RAM"
>routine that were not defined in the .INC files that came with MPASM.
>Particularly, BIT4 and USEFSR were not defined.  I guess BIT4 would
>equate to 0x03 but need to be sure.  Does anyone know what these
>equates should be?  Is there an include file that I'm missing?

   Sorry about that... When I first posted the routine, I included
   equates for both symbols; they've apparently been lost in the
   translation.

   BIT4 is simply equated to 4.  USEFSR is my name for the register
   that Microchip now calls INDF; it should be equated to 0.

   -Andy

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


'Your removal from the PICLIST list'
1995\08\02@150613 by Jory Bell prichard
face
flavicon
face
Lee (et al),

Lee: you are welcome to resubscribe to the piclist.

Your removal was accidental, although (inadvertently) related to your
(imo) unpleasant posting concerning the most recent spammage on the piclist.

I just completed a mass deletion of ~30 problemmatic addresses (bounces, &c).
These were compiled from a list of bounce messages I had stored
in a particular mailbox of piclist administrative matters.

Your email was in with these, as I was intending to write to you
with my opinions concerning the appropriateness of commercial spam
products being posted to the piclist (or commercial posts at all) and
your defense of aforementioned messages.

You are correct in that we must "cope" with greed-inspired commercial
spammage which besets virtually all forms of communication. However,
this coping does not have to be the passive acceptance of whatever
is foisted upon us. I am personally in favor of aggressive measures
to keep spammage and blatant commercialism off the piclist, while
accomodating responsible postings from organisations with something
relevant to the list topic (such as useful information from Microchip,
Parallax, etc).

At times, there are judgements calls to be made as to the appropriateness
of a particular post. I encourage those in doubt about a particular email
they wish to send to consult with me. However, this A-bomb scammer/spammer
and his drivel crearly fall outside of the realm of pic-related material
(commercial or otherwise). It clearly has no place on the piclist.

I hope soon to be able to restrict list postings to members of the list.
This will allow us to avoid the random spam, and to avoid even more
determined spam-efforts, by having the list subscription process entail
an agreement to certain reasonable terms of posting, etc (see my previous
spam warnings). Until that time, I send nasty email to every spammer, as
well as their service provider (and their provider's provider), and those
listed by the nic as responsible for the domain name used, etc. I also
forward all spammage info to various blacklists, etc.

[unmount soapbox]

-jory bell

{Quote hidden}

1995\08\02@174314 by Jory Bell prichard

face
flavicon
face
Rereading what I wrote, I realised it might not be clear that I had
accidentally unsubscribed Lee, as his mail was mixed in with admin
deletions. I had intended to just send him a note, but accidentally
added him to the list of bad addresses. Hope that's clear.

I have never removed a user due to content, and hopefully never will.

-jory bell

:Your email was in with these, as I was intending to write to you
:with my opinions concerning the appropriateness of commercial spam
:products being posted to the piclist (or commercial posts at all) and
:your defense of aforementioned messages.

'PICs and the FCC.....'
1995\08\03@133746 by stle.cudenver.edu>

flavicon
face
> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 09:28:49 -0600
> From: Paul Greenwood <pablospam_OUTspam@spam@AUSTIN.IBM.COM>
> Subject: PICs and the FCC.....
>
> I was wondering if anyone on this list has ever tried to get a product that
> uses a PIC FCC registered, certified, or whatever.  What troubles did you
> have?  How much did it end up costing you?  Any other helpful hints!
> Thanks in advance!!!
> This is non-IBM related....
>             -- Paul Greenwood --  (.....pablospamspam.....austin.ibm.com)
> Newton's Fourth Law:  Every action has an equal and opposite satisfaction.

We have produced a couple models of contactless smartcard read/write units
which have gone through some FCC compliance checks.  We employed an
independent agency, a contracted laboratory, which offered a few
recommendations regarding conducted radiation through power-supply lines,
etc.  Among other things, we added some ferrite beads and changed the PIC
oscillator caps.

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

1995\08\03@225200 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
Paul Greenwood <EraseMEpablo@spam@spam@spam@AUSTIN.IBM.COM> wrote:

>I was wondering if anyone on this list has ever tried to get a product that
>uses a PIC FCC registered, certified, or whatever.  What troubles did you
>have?  How much did it end up costing you?  Any other helpful hints!

Paul:

PICs are among the quietest microcontrollers on the market... 6805s are a
little better, by the way, and 8051s are A LOT worse.  You shouldn't have
any problems.

Sorry I can't give you any estimates of cost; all my PIC designs were
certified on our company's own FCC-approved test range.

-Andy

P.S.  There's an appnote in the Embedded Control Handbook called "16C54
     EMI Results" or something... Check it out.

--
Andrew Warren - @spam@fastfwdspamspamKILLspamix.netcom.com
Fast Forward Engineering, Vista, California

1995\08\06@193253 by First Last

flavicon
face
Paul writes:
PA>I was wondering if anyone on this list has ever tried to get a product that
PA>uses a PIC FCC registered, certified, or whatever.  What troubles did you
PA>have?  How much did it end up costing you?  Any other helpful hints!

I took a product of mine thru the FCC hoops last year:
small PCB, 2 sided, FR4.  I put ground copper under PIC whever there
was free space.
PIC was C55 using a 4MHz AVX ceramic resonator with built in caps.
Battery powered.
None of the port pins were driven at any high frequency.

The guy at the testing lab has to find all peak radiation levels from
30MHz to 1GHz and make sure that
they are less than the FCC allows for your type of device.  Then he has
to go back and look at the
highest 6 points, maximizing each one by moving the product around,
moving antenna around,
changing orientation of the antenna, whatever else he can come up with.

My device was consumer, non-intentional radiator, not connected to a PC,
so I needed class B verification ( not certification )
Anyway he had a hard time finding 6 peaks that were worth maximizing.
The highest point was 17dB below the limit.

I used Intellistor OATS in Rollinsville CO  303-682-6600 (Patrick
Richardson)
and would not hesitate to recommend them.  Patrick sent me a nice
overview of the company
with some helpful recommedations on getting the part to pass.
They charge $160/hour with a 4 hour minimum - test report INCLUDED in
that fee.
Average test takes at least 3.5 hours, mine tool 4.2 hours.
I emphasize the report being included as most places that quoted me
said report was an extra $2-300.
The report shows all equipment used, results of all tests, and includes
pictures of the device under test
both apart and assembled.

What I learned from the process:
- If you can keep the oscillator below 1.706MHz, then you don't have to
test for radiated emmissions.
- If the product plugs into AC power, then you have to test for
conducted emmissions if the clock is above 9 KHz
(yes I said K Hz)  I don't know if you are exempt if you use a
certified wall wart (?)
- Look at the FCC rule book and see if your product is exempt, lots are!
- get several bids, there will be a wide spread in cost
- try to find a local site.  It is good if you can be there to answer
questions.
- The final complete product sold to the consumer is what must be
tested,
 if you are making a piece of a larger product, testing it by itself
means very little
 unless you are especially concerned about your piece.
 It is the responsibilty of the final seller to meet FCC.

There is a good article on this topic in the latest Circuit Cellar Ink
mag.
I pulled the following list off the CCI bbs last year when I started
this quest.
I got bids from the first 3:
       Retlif Testing Laboratories NY (516) 737-1500
       International Science & Technology Inc. NH (603) 736-8414
           (these guys have a nice free booklet on the topic)
       MET Laboratories MD (410) 354-3300
       Compliance Design MA (506) 264-4668
       Celect Testing Labs OH (513) 573-6800
       Certelecom NY (315) 393-6546
       Philips Consumer Electronics Company TN (615) 521-4720
       Radiation Sciences Inc. PA (215) 256-4133
       Radiometrics IL (708) 932-7262
       Wyle Laboratories AL (205) 837-4411

Hope this is of use,
drop me a line if you have more questions.
Gary Skinner,  Electronic Solutions Inc,  303-469-9322

1995\08\07@221212 by First Last

flavicon
face
Paul Asks:
PA>You said in your note about the FCC that if you kept the crystal down under
PA>1.7MHz, then you don't have to be tested for radiated emmissions.  What do
PA>you test for then?

My understanding is that if you are *battery powered*, unintentional
radiator,
then you are exempt from FCC verification.

reference: FCC 47 CFR edition 10-1-93  subpart B - unintentional
radiators -
section 15.103 (exempted items) item H - "Devices in which both the
highest frequency generated
and the highest frequency used are less than 1.705MHz and which do not
operate from the AC
power lines or contain provisions for operation while connected to the
AC power lines.  Digital devices
that include, ..., AC adaptors, ...,do not fall under this exemption."

Other exemptions include: anything for use in a motor vehicle or
airplane, devices used for industrial,
commercial, or medical test equipment.  devices used in appliances.
Devices consuming less than 6 nW of power.

But if you generate enough RF noise to mess up someone's TV or radio
reception
then the FCC will probably want to talk to you.
PA>Of course, I DO want to use a wall-wart to power my device,
PA>I MAY have to get that tested anyway.

I don't know what happens when you connect to a wall wart.  You will
have to ask
someone at the FCC.  My experience is that you need to ask several
testing labs to get a concensus.
I asked 5 labs, 2 said no radiated testing if clocked under 1.706MHz.
When I told the other three, they said they would get back to me,
Those that did
finally agreed.
So.. you will have to ask around to see what happens with a wart,
Please let us know the answer if you ever find it. (Statement above
seems to say it could be trouble)

PA>But, staying under 1.7MHz may save me
PA>bunch of bucks - right?

Again, my understanding is less than 1.7MHz - no radiated test
which saves at least $700.
But you may still need conducted emmisions test.
That is the part I am unsure of in the case of a wall wart.
Be sure to get several bids,  conducted test is less expensive, but you
may get hit with minimum charge.
Ask if they can fit you in on a time available basis, meaning they will
do it whenever they get a small vacancy at
their site.

Of course, NONE of this has to do with UL, CUL, VDE, ETL, .....
approval.
that is a whole 'nother deal.

Also if you connect to the phone network, that opens a bigger can of
worms.

Hope this helps,  Gary Skinner

A couple of more numbers:
FCC  301-725-1585 x229  Ed Givens

TUV labs,  Boulder CO  449-4165

'Effective Spamming on the NET FREE GUIDE'
1995\08\09@003307 by allen

flavicon
face
ATTENTION ALL BUSINESS AND MARKETING PROFESSIONALS!

This is an attempt to make the internet more commercially profitable.

The following is a guide to "effective marketing" VIA the use of SPAMMING.
BTW ... THIS IS  A SPAM!  However, I have done lots of research on this
subject. The following information is a VERY worthwhile read!

I've been dumped off a number of other servers for spamming activity.  It's
no big deal, I just change service providers as needed. There are 1000's of
service providers out there, so the possibilities are endless!  However, at
the same time, I have made lot of $$ dollars e-mailing to 100,000's of
thousands of mail list subscribers.

I pulled ALL possible LISTS from the "tele.net-listserv-List of Views"( the
below Lists are all the listed ones currently available as of 7/20/95. New
lists are constantly being added.) I sent out "just one e-mail" with bcc to
all ALL lists. Don't send a separate e-mail to each mailing list, that
takes to much time! Just copy and paste the e-mail address for each and
THEN send. You want ALL lists to be spammed at one time. You want to be
able to COLLECT as many responses back from the subscribers before your
service provider shuts you down.

My e-mail message went out to over 1,466,296 subscribers.  It could have
been MUCH more than these figures, for I didn't stop to count how many
subscribers per list!  (The subscribers also tend to forward your message
to others if you request they do so in your spam.)

A suggested time to send out your huge spam is on a Sunday night at 2:00
am. The server is not very busy. Furthermore, the Syops are usually not
real awake on Monday Morning and are dealing with 100's of posting to their
mail list from the weekend. It really pays to make your Subj. Header
something that is "very generic". Many Syops just look at the Subj. header
and NOT the content before posting. When that happens ... You're in
business!

Examples of a good header would be: FYI, Good Information, Reply to
message, Coffee anyone? You get the idea I am sure. Just be creative and
stay away from headers that sound commercial.

NEWS GROUPS can be used in a similar fashion. I simply PULL the e-mail
addresses off the News Group and then, blind carbon copy, (spam) everyone
with just one e-mail. You can also "post" your message to the News Groups.
This also works but lacks the personal appeal of a direct e-mail campaign
to a mailing list.

Anyway, be prepared for Flames and Mail Bombs to both you and your Service
Provider.  I have found that the so called "voices from the net" is much
overrated. Most people pay no attention if they have no interest. However,
your SERVICE PROVIDER WILL react due to even the smallest amount of mail
bombs it receives. WHY you ask? The Service Provider gets real UPSET due to
the fact that mail bombs can overload and shut down their Server. This cost
them money by temporarily depriving ALL their customers access. That tends
to make them a LITTLE TESTY!

I actually have two Service Providers. One Provider is used for "*personal
normal" activity. The second provider is the one that is always changing.
It is best to keep the two totally separate ...  *personal Vs business.

For General Announcements like this one, an "anonymous server" is great!
However, you can't count on getting all your important replies back.  Many
of them will get lost on the way back to you due to the security features!
( a good anonymous provider is  anon.penet.fi  Just send e-mail requesting
information to spamBeGonedaemonRemoveMEspamEraseMEanon.penet.fi )

AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy and Delphi, ETC., don't have that problem because
of their large size capacity and are much slower to respond to 'NEW BEES"
who don't "know any better" Generally speaking it takes about 3 warnings
about spamming from a Service Provider to finally shut you down. You can in
many cases, PLEAD ignorance ... Oh REALLY,  SOB ... SOB ... I am terribly
sorry! I am new and I didn't know I couldn't do that ... SOB ... please
don't shut me off ... sort of dribble. Be creative!  That usually will keep
your server off your back ONE WEEK TO TEN DAYS to collect your responses
from the spam.

Again, if your going to spam ... do it BIG!!!  Little or BIG spam, the end
result is the same. Your service provider will tire of receiving the mail
bombs and eventually give you the Old Heave Ho!

One last helpful hint ... you can make your spamming last much longer with
your service provider if you take the time to post a question to the Mail
List that fits their subject matter and then add a PS., ... BTW, Do you
wanta buy something ... information.  However, I found this very time
consuming to post individually to 1000's of lists and far EASIER to just
change service providers. Keep in mind that you ARE going to be eventually
dumped off anyway ... so what's the difference?

The Direct Marketing Association says that you should average 1 or 2 %
response from a U S POSTAL mailing program. I have found that average is
right on the money with e-mailing! Depending of course on the product you
are offering. However, even if your response is only a 1/2 of1%. from
1,466.296 e-mails, that still is 7,330 prospective customers for your
product!

Gee whiz,  one more thing ... your Mail-LIST will say to you
" The Internet GOD'S have spoken. You are FOREVER BANNED from ever using
our Mail-LIST again"! They will put a block on your net address preventing
you access.  HOWEVER, each time you change Service Providers ... guess
what?  You have a NEW E-Mail Address! The Mail-LIST computer site is kinda
stupid and doesn't recognize that you're the same person. This also works
if you change Mail programs to the "same Service Provider". Remember, just
a slight change in your mail program will do the trick!  Example, just
change from Eudora to News Reader And AWAY YOU GO AGAIN!   Spamming away to
your hearts content to Fame and $$ FORTUNE!

The Net is totally unregulated  and governed by something called
"Netiquette".  However, you can within reason, disregard Netiquette because
of the constantly changing self imposed rules and Hypocrisy of most of the
users. If you don't believe this, just monitor some news groups and you
will see. Keep in mind that the internet community will strongly support
explicit sexual immorality, while a small vocal minority will object and
violently oppose an innocent commercial message. ... GO FIGURE!!

Please let me know if you have any questions or comments regarding the
above. I am very interested in your feed back!

BEST REGARDS AND SUCCESS IN YOUR VENTURES!
//
Find "tele.net-listserv-List of Views" Use your search engine to access
this list. The default "100's of Subscribers" will give you the best
results. However the following is provided for your immediate use. Updated
7/20/95.
//
The following represents 1,466.296 of subscribers. ( Yes, I did say
MILLION!) Just copy and paste into your e-mail program and AWAY you GO!

Now here is the catch ... You can spend the next 2 weeks down loading each
address at 28.800 baud, or I can send the ENTIRE list to you for $50.00.
No kidding!  The process of down loading each "send to the Group address
took me 2 weeks or about 60 hours using a high speed modem.  The follow is
a sample for you to test.  If you want the rest of the list; send $50.00
for my time to:

Jeff Slaton
6808 Truchas Dr NE
Albq.,  NM  87109

       RemoveMEbrasaKILLspamspamRemoveMEunmvma.unm.edu    ,TakeThisOuTcics-lspamuga.cc.uga.edu
,spamBeGoneia-frsKILLspamspamTakeThisOuTvm.marist.edu   , imamedia%EraseMEumdd.bitnet.....spamKILLspamlistserv.net
,spamlitho-lspamunbvm1.csd.unb.ca      ,msumbaSTOPspamspammsu.edu ,ndt-lSTOPspamspamKILLspamuga.cc.uga.edu
,@spam@paleolim.....spamspamnervm.nerdc.ufl.edu   ,spamatp-emtp.....spam.....vm1.nodak.edu
,capes-l.....spamvm1.lcc.ufmg.br        ,KILLspamcufs-lspam_OUTspammiamiu.muohio.edu       ,
spam_OUTiaml-lspamTakeThisOuTfreeside.nrm.se        ,.....nat-1492.....spamRemoveMEtamvm1.tamu.edu
,spam_OUTsebselTakeThisOuTspamEraseMElistserv.arizona.edu    ,EraseMEsp1-lspamBeGonespamKILLspamuga.cc.uga.edu
,RemoveMEurantialspamBeGonespamspamuafsysb.uark.edu      ,@spam@audio-lspamspamitesmvf1.rzs.itesm.mx  ,
TakeThisOuTdentalibKILLspamspam@spam@vm.usc.edu   ,.....hotel-lRemoveMEspammizzou1.missouri.edu
,KILLspamhungaryspamTakeThisOuTgwuvm.gwu.edu  ,TakeThisOuTibm-netsspamspam_OUTbitnic.educom.edu
,RemoveMEpsylaw-lspamspamSTOPspamutepvm.ep.utexas.edu  ,.....mit1993EraseMEspammitvma.mit.edu
,rnptec-l%spamBeGonebrlncc.bitnetspamRemoveMElistserv.net    ,.....tuninfoEraseMEspampsuvm.psu.edu
,spamc14-lspam_OUTspam@spam@listserv.arizona.edu     ,spamdance-hc@spam@spamSTOPspamcunyvm.cuny.edu
,dblist%spamBeGoneumab.bitnetspamBeGonespam@spam@listserv.net        ,incinc94%RemoveMEumdd.bitnetRemoveMEspamRemoveMElistserv.net
,siin-lKILLspamspamspamunbvm1.csd.unb.ca       , spam_OUTalias-l@spam@spamuga.cc.uga.edu
,TakeThisOuTbevpub-lspam_OUTspamvtvm1.cc.vt.edu       ,KILLspamcj-l.....spamTakeThisOuTuacsc2.albany.edu
,TakeThisOuThwy61-lEraseMEspamRemoveMEubvm.cc.buffalo.edu    ,spam_OUTlrnasstRemoveMEspam.....listserv.arizona.edu
,spammagnet-lKILLspamspamKILLspamgumncc.earn.net       ,spamtxdxn-lspam_OUTspamuhupvm1.uh.edu ,
asta-l%STOPspamcmsuvmb.bitnetspam_OUTspamspamBeGonelistserv.net    ,spam_OUTmit1991spamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu
,EraseMEmol-diversityspamKILLspamlistserv.arizona.edu     ,EraseMEcasid-lRemoveMEspamvm1.mcgill.ca

'Effective Spamming on the NET FREE GUIDE (fwd)'
1995\08\09@140757 by Eric L. Singer

flavicon
face
This comes via another spammed list.  I suggest someone in New Mexico set
their fax modem to auto-dial him 24/7.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 1995 11:13:39 -0500
From: James McCartney <.....jamesspamspam_OUTASTRO.AS.UTEXAS.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list MAX <MAX%@spam@MCGILL1.BITNETEraseMEspamspamACFcluster.NYU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Effective Spamming on the NET FREE GUIDE

Jeff Slaton in Alb. New Mexico is listed with the phone number:
505-822-8919
Have fun!

 --- james mccartney           jamesTakeThisOuTspamKILLspamastro.as.utexas.edu

1995\08\09@165539 by PETE KLAMMER

flavicon
face
>
> This comes via another spammed list.  I suggest someone in New Mexico set
> their fax modem to auto-dial him 24/7.
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 1995 11:13:39 -0500
> From: James McCartney <RemoveMEjamesTakeThisOuTspamASTRO.AS.UTEXAS.EDU>
> To: Multiple recipients of list MAX <MAX%@spam@MCGILL1.BITNETSTOPspamspamACFcluster.NYU.EDU>
> Subject: Re: Effective Spamming on the NET FREE GUIDE
>
> Jeff Slaton in Alb. New Mexico is listed with the phone number:
> 505-822-8919
> Have fun!
>
>   --- james mccartney           TakeThisOuTjamesTakeThisOuTspamRemoveMEastro.as.utexas.edu

This takes only a little bit of your time, and no money: call that number
COLLECT, and if he takes the call, explain briefly and politely what an
annoyance SPAM can be.  I've done this before, and (surprise) one time they
took the call and apologetically explained that someone else had posted on
their behalf, lawyers were involved, etc.  I thanked them for letting me
explain my annoyance.  I haven't gotten through in this case yet.  As I say,
it costs nothing to try, and if enough of us load up his phone ...

1995\08\10@021020 by Clyde Smith-Stubbs

flavicon
face
> > Jeff Slaton in Alb. New Mexico is listed with the phone number:
> > 505-822-8919

Here's another way a devious person might spam his phone number - call
one (or more) of the many faxback services and give his number to
send the fax to. He'll get three calls on his answering machine
before it gives up. For example, Intel has a faxback service on
1-800-525-3019 (in the USA). Of course I'm not suggesting you do this -
I imagine it could be construed as misuse of the phone system.

1995\08\10@033515 by Lee Jones

flavicon
face
>>> Jeff Slaton, Alb. New Mexico, listed with the phone number: 505-822-8919
>
> Here's another way a devious person might spam his phone number - call
> one (or more) of the many faxback services and give [Jeff's] number...

If one were to do this, one might want to know that some of the more
sophisticated faxback services use caller ID -- IBM's is an example.
They insert the phone number of the _requester_ (person placing the
order) into the facsimile which such a system then trys to transmit.
It's useful for interoffice routing purposes.  But in this case, it
might be something you'd want to avoid.

I'm not suggesting, nor recommending, nor endorsing any specific
action...  just passing on some information.
                                               Lee Jones

1995\08\10@051922 by Clyde Smith-Stubbs

flavicon
face
> If one were to do this, one might want to know that some of the more
> sophisticated faxback services use caller ID -- IBM's is an example.
> They insert the phone number of the _requester_ (person placing the
> order) into the facsimile which such a system then trys to transmit.

I suspect this won't be a problem if the call is placed from overseas.

--
Clyde Smith-Stubbs       | HI-TECH Software,       | Voice: +61 7 3300 5011
spam_OUTclydespamspam.....hitech.com.au      | P.O. Box 103, Alderley, | Fax:   +61 7 3300 5246
                         | QLD, 4051, AUSTRALIA.   | BBS:   +61 7 3300 5235
                   HI-TECH C: Compiling the real world...

1995\08\10@100555 by Paul Christenson [N3EOP]

flavicon
face
Got some action on the recent spammer...  I sent three copies of his
spam; one to him (mailbox flood), postmaster at his site, and also
the administrative contact for his site.  This is easy enough to find;
whois can tell you.  (Try whois@site, if that doesn't work, telnet to
internic.net.)  The admin contact is who responded to me.

 - - The original note follows - -

From: eddie.....spam@spam@compute.com (Eddie Milstein -Compute Intensive)
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 13:56:17 -0700
To: "Paul Christenson [N3EOP]" <spamBeGonePJC130spamspam_OUTPSUVM.PSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Effective Spamming on the NET FREE GUIDE


His account is nuked and we are looking into
legal recourse since our contract is rather
firm on this issue..

Sorry and Thanks.

'whereis the serial programmer project?'
1995\08\16@032451 by Erik Hermann

flavicon
face
>Apologies to all for posting what is probably a FAQ, but where do I find
>the schematics for the serial programmer I have seen people asking about?

Here !

TxD -----*-------------------------I
         I                         I
         I                         I
        ---                       ---
        I I  2k2                  I I  10k
        I I                       I I
        ---                       ---
         I   I\I                   I
         *---I I----*--------I     I
         I   I/I    I        I     I
        ---\        I +      I     I
    5V6 / \        ---       I     I
        ---        --- 100u  I     I
         I          I        I 14  I 4
         I          I     I--I-----I---I
         I          I     I Vdd   Vpp  I
         I          I   5 I            I
GND ------*----------*-----I Gnd        I
                          I            I   PIC 16C84
       22k                I            I
       --              12 I            I
RTS ---I  I----------------I RB6        I
       --                 I            I
       --              13 I            I
DTR ---I  I---*------------I RB7        I
       --    I            I            I
       2k2   I            I------------I
             I
CTS ----------I



>Also, what kind of software do I need to run it?  A parallel one would be
>fine.

rasi.lr.ttu.ee/pub/sis/msdos/pgmtools/pip-02.zip
             /pub/sis/msdos/drivers/com84.zip


cu
 Erik

'Jeff "The Spammer" Slaton'
1995\08\17@202002 by David B. Thomas

flavicon
face
I'm in Albuquerque.  I'll happily cruise by his house and/or call the
numbers if you think I can do some good.  Actually I had thought about
making a video of me going to his door and offering to sell him some
spam, then putting it up on the web.

David
--
Unix is not your mother.

1995\08\17@221642 by au156

flavicon
face
David,

Your message to the piclist about videotaping your visit
to the spammer's door really gave me a good laugh.  New
England (and elsewhere east of Mississippi) is suffering
from unusually hot and *HUMID*
weather, so I enjoyed the humor.  Good idea, too!

Hank

1995\08\18@082902 by Bob Fisher

flavicon
face
         Try phoning him, letting it ring once and hanging up. If 20
         people do this at irregular intervals, I think he'll get the
         message.

'Stop the list, I wanna get off'
1995\08\21@111643 by Jorj Bauer

flavicon
face
Okay. I've sent a SIGNOFF PICLIST message to the listserv about a
half-dozen times now. The first time, I got a response that my address
didn't match; the other 5 times I've gotten nothing.

The listserv won't let me REVIEW PICLIST so that I can tell what address
it really wants, either. I've tried e-mailing the supposed owner of the
list, and have heard nothing.

Will someone *please* get me off of this list?

Thanks,
Jorj

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jorj Bauer                                  |   EraseMEgbauer.....spameniac.seas.upenn.edu
CETS Network Operations                     |         200 S. 33rd St.
School of Engineering and Applied Science   |   Moore Building, Room 166-A
University of Pennsylvania                  |     Philadelphia, PA 19104
http://binky.seas.upenn.edu/~gbauer         |         (215) 898-0575
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

'Jeff "The Spammer" Slaton'
1995\08\21@231809 by Paul Christenson [N3EOP]

flavicon
face
>I'm in Albuquerque.  I'll happily cruise by his house and/or call the
>numbers if you think I can do some good.  Actually I had thought about
>making a video of me going to his door and offering to sell him some
>spam, then putting it up on the web.

Go for it.  "There is nothing illegal" about selling SPAM door-to-door.
He should get the point.

1995\08\22@153727 by Benjamin Britt

picon face
The other thing to do is jot down his name and number and
whenever you pass by a pay phone try to call him collect.

'Pic`s The ------>>>>> Question'
1995\08\28@051237 by MARTHINUS VENTER

flavicon
face
Hi Markus Tinus Venter here.

I wonder A friend & I is starting to lear The Pic Language.

Need Assemblers .  Need Protocol Info`s
Need a Lot.

Can you help us to get started. ????

I have Only A Pic16c84 DAta Book and that is were it end.

Can you help us to get some program examples /????

and more.


Have only Written one program But that did not work at all


So Please help Me\??????


Tnxs..


Tinus Venter

1995\08\28@063330 by Markus Seim

flavicon
face
> Need Assemblers .  Need Protocol Info`s
> Need a Lot.

> Can you help us to get started. ????

Hi Tinus and friend!

I'am using the PICSTART 16B development system from Microchip. This contains all
you
need (assembler, simulator, programmer, programming board and chip samples
[16C57, 16C71]).
All this for less than 350DM (~ $250 US). The development system can be used for
the 16C54, 16C55, 16C57, 16C71 and 16C84 microcontrollers by Microchip.
The package also contains an Embedded Control Handbook with many application
samples
(source code, etc.) and a Microchip Data Book which describes all
microcontrollers
and related IC's sold by Microchip.
You can also get additional informations via many WWW sites and from the
Microchip BBS
which can be reached for example via Compuserve (therefore you don't have to be
member
of Compuserve!).


Markus




               ##############################################
               #                                            #
               #  Markus Seim          Panasonic R&D Center #
               #  +49 6103/766124      Monzastr. 4c         #
               #  spamsukramKILLspamspam@spam@panasonic.de  63225 Langen         #
               #                                            #
               ##############################################

'Pic`s The ------>>>>> Money'
1995\08\28@065444 by ERROL TERBLANCHE

flavicon
face
We are students on Tech in SA and we are on a VERY low buget!

'Pic`s The ------>>>>> Question'
1995\08\28@070105 by TINUS VENTER

flavicon
face
Date sent:      Mon, 28 Aug 95 12:29 MET DST
From:           sukramspamspamTakeThisOuTpanasonic.de (Markus Seim)
To:             RemoveMEX4130352RemoveMEspamElise.ee.techpta.ac.za
Copies to:      PICLIST%TakeThisOuTMITVMA.BITNET@spam@spam@spam@PSUVM.PSU.EDU
Subject:        Re: Pic`s The ------>>>>> Question

Hi Fello Programmer and friend!

I'am using the Home Brew Programmer development system from Hobby
Inc. This contains (assembler, programmer ).
All this for less than R100.00. The development system can be used for
the 16C54, 16C55, 16C57, and 16C84 microcontrollers by
Microchip.


Secondly I am a Student aND pOOR bROKE no oThER WhAY tO sAY bUT dAMM
bROKE


cAN`T aFFORD a PICSTART kIT.



                       *********************************
                       *  M. VENTER                    *
                       *  P.O. BOX 1276                *
                       *  POTGIETERSRUS                *
                       *  0600                         *
                       *  (012) 344 0981               *
                       *********************************

1995\08\28@072221 by Conny Andersson

picon face
M. VENTER wrote ...

> I'am using the Home Brew Programmer development system from Hobby
> Inc. This contains (assembler, programmer ).
> All this for less than R100.00. The development system can be used for
> the 16C54, 16C55, 16C57, and 16C84 microcontrollers by
> Microchip.

Oh, yeah! Ok, what about the '71, the one with built in A/D? and
what about support and upgrades when new processors are released?
(Just curious)

> Secondly I am a Student aND pOOR bROKE no oThER WhAY tO sAY bUT dAMM
> bROKE

Then don't throw yourself into this (expensive) hobby ...

> cAN`T aFFORD a PICSTART kIT.

Well, you can build David Tait's '84 programmer, check out the FAQ.
You have almost everything you need in the '84 including the convenient
EEPROM program memory.

... what was the question again?

---------------------------
Conny Andersson, LiTH

1995\08\28@074750 by TINUS VENTER

flavicon
face
Ok Sorry



I study Digital Tech. And it is req . to lear Pic Language.

So Without a Prog. One Can`t do mutch.

I have one it will prog Pic 16c84.

I think it is Enough.

If you are so Rich Why don`t you help me the.

HI
HI


TinTin

1995\08\28@075827 by ERROL TERBLANCHE

flavicon
face
Thanx. I have that plans.

But I need Literature #DS30189 :)

Thanx

1995\08\28@080655 by Conny Andersson

picon face
"TinTin" wrote ...

> I study Digital Tech. And it is req . to lear Pic Language.

Required?? What about all the other processors, 8051, 68705, 68HC11,
Texas, Hitachi, etc ... there are a lot of microcontrollers out there.

Personally, I think PIC:s are the BEST, they are fast, easy and (when you
know them) reliable.

> So Without a Prog. One Can`t do mutch.
>
> I have one it will prog Pic 16c84.
>
> I think it is Enough.

It's enough to start with, I agree completely.

I don't know how your school/university works but isn't it their
responsibility to supply with programmers, software etc?

> If you are so Rich Why don`t you help me the.
>
> HI
> HI
>

Ha, ha, to tell you the truth, I'm not that rich but I have
contacts instead ...
If you want, I can send you the 93' or the '94 Databook ...
(if you send me something in exchange of course)

Anyone else interested?
-----------------------
Conny Andersson, LiTH

1995\08\28@192835 by William D. McMillan

picon face
Well, MY dealer for MicroChip data sheets is J.L Montgomery Associates
Voice:(810-489-0099), Fax (810-489-0189)  (These are US #s, BTW).  I asked
them about the 16C84 serial programming spec sheet (not included in the
databook) and got it two days later.  They seem to have a strong helping
policy for students, and I like their attitude so far.  I live fairly close
to them, so I don't know if they have a distance limit.  But it can't hurt to
fax them with your request.

'The MIPI concept (was PIC programmers)'
1995\08\31@133853 by David Tait

flavicon
face
Hi Siegfried,

> That is another point to discuss. The data book says, MCLR must be at least
> 0.85*Vdd ...

Thanks for your critique of the circuit I posted.  As I said in private
e-mail to you, I should have read your demands more carefully - I assume
that VDD is 5V.  I agree that with a 10k pull-down I can't quite meet the
0.85*VDD spec of the 16C84 even with a 5V supply (I see the spec is
a little different for other 16CXX chips).  The solution is simply to
increase the value of the pull-down (or even leave it out altogether
I suppose, but my experience tells me it's a good thing).  Having said all
that, the circuit works just fine as it is with VDD = 5V.

> THREE outputs with RS232???
> I only know of RTS and DTR. Or do you abuse the TxD line like the Erik-
> Hermann-ultracheap-RS232-programmer?

Sorry for the confusion, but the circuit is driven by a _parallel_
port.  I derive the parallel signals from the RS232 port using a few
CMOS chips; I call this interface a MIPI (for Machine Independent
Parallel Interface).  The MIPI is designed to work with any computer
with an RS232 port.  It is my answer to the problem of bootstrapping a
PIC based universal PIC programmer without needing a PIC programmer in
the first place.  Perhaps you will forgive me if I use my reply to your
question to see if I can explain the idea to any members of the PICLIST
who are still reading (non hobbyists and owners of store bought
programmers will have skipped to the next message before they reached
here :-)

I would contend that Robin Abbott's ETI design is a machine independent
universal PIC programmer.  Universal in the sense that it can be used
to program all the PIC chips.  Machine independent in the sense that
it is connected to the host computer via the RS232 port and virtually every
computer has an RS232 port.  Provided you forgo a flashy graphical interface
it should be possible to write host software that is highly portable
between different platforms.  The only gripe is the one expressed by
Ray Bellis and others, that is, you need access to an existing PIC
programmer to make Robin's design (or have to pay Robin to get your
PIC programmed).

My aim is to design a machine independent (i.e. RS232 hosted) universal
PIC programmer without this chicken and egg problem.  The programmer
hardware will still use a PIC (one of the serial-programmable 16CXX
chips) for simplicity.  Then, if you have an IBM clone, there is no
problem in bootstrapping the project by building a simple programmer
and using the Silicon Studio software by Antti Lukats and his team.  In
fact, if you have an IBM clone this might be all you want anyway.  So
let's consider people without IBM clones but who do own computers with
an RS232 port.  That is, they could make use of the programmer if they
could build it, but they can't build it because they have no means of
burning the PIC used in the programmer (and they, like me, are too cheap
to have someone else program the PIC :-)

I guess some people could get Erik Hermann's RS232 based programmer going
on their non-IBM machine.  Here we stray into a grey area; Erik's programmer
makes unconventional use of the RS232 signals and though it should work well
with an IBM clone, it's not necessarily easy to fiddle with the modem lines
on all computers.  So, let's say the RS232 port has minimum functionality:
GND, TXD and RXD (that's all that Robin's programmer needs by the way).

With such a restriction we have no option but to throw some hardware at
the problem.  In fact the hardware is likely to be more complex than the
programmer we want to build.  It would seem like a waste to build a
complicated bit of kit that was going to be redundant after it has been
used just once.  Well, I thought an RS232 hosted parallel port might be
a nice toy to have: it could be used to hook up a simple PIC programmer
to bootstrap the PIC based version, but it would still be useful for other
projects.  That was the birth of the MIPI.

The MIPI consists of a few cheap CMOS chips and provides three parallel
outputs and four parallel inputs; a very modest amount of I/O I know,
but that's more than enough to bit-bang SPI/I2C protocols (albeit slowly)
using the RS232 port of any computer.  The outputs are available as
both true and inverted logic signals (5V CMOS) and also in open drain
form.  It is these signals that should be used to drive the in-circuit
programmer I described in the previous message.  The MIPI can be built
in two forms.  For maximum machine independence the RS232 interface is
built using a MAX232 and power is supplied externally.  If DTR/RTS are
available the MIPI can be powered from the RS232 port itself.

I have a document (still unfinished because of pressure of work) which gives
a full description of the MIPI design and implementation.  If anybody really
wants a copy just ask and I'll send you a draft (all the schematics are in
ASCII so you don't need any special facilities to view them; it took me
longer to draw these than to build the hardware!).  If you can wait a bit,
I should be able to complete the specification of the machine dependent
library routines needed to make MIPI applications machine independent (I'm
unhappy with the specification in the current draft and that's the reason
the document is still unfinished).  In any case you might be able to get a
good idea of what's involved by looking at the block diagram I've included
at the end of this message.

Back to my reply to Siggi.  Feel free to modify my software for your
own programmer design, but you might be more interested in further
modifying a version that was put together by Frederic Rible.  It's
called PP10.ZIP and it's on the Microchip BBS and also on the Silicon
Studio FTP site.  Or, as Don McKenzie has already said, just show Antti
your design and he will have a PC driver ready quicker than you can blink!

Sorry for the long waffle, but I hope some found it interesting enough
to make it all the way to here.

Cheers,

David
--
TakeThisOuTdavid.taitspamspamman.ac.uk


                   Machine Independent Parallel Interface
                   ======================================

                       Copyright (C) 1995 David Tait

                           +---------------------------+
                           |                           |
         +----------+      |    +--------+         +--------+
  TXD    |  RS232   | SIN  |    |  MONO  | /M2     | RESET  | RST
   >-----|   I/F    |------+----|  1/2   |---------| 1/2    |-------+
         |          |      |    |  4098  |         | 4013   |       |
  RXD    |  MAX232  | SOUT |    +--------+         +--------+       |
   <-----|    OR    |--+   |                                        |
         | DISCRETE |  |   |    +--------+         +-----------+    |
         +----------+  |   |    |  MONO  | /M1     | CLOCK GEN |    |
                       |   +----|  1/2   |---+-----|           |----+
DTR/RTS  +----------+  |   |    |  4098  |   |     |   4027    |
   >-----|  POWER   |  |   |    +--------+   |     +-----------+
         | 78L05 OR |  |   |                 |       |   |   |
   >-----| DISCRETE |  |   |   +-------------+  CLK2 |   |   |CLK0
  VIN    +----------+  |   |   |  +------------------+   |   |
              |        |   |   |  |  +---------------|---+   |
              | VDD    |   |   |  |  |        CLK1   |   |   |
              +-->     |   |   |  |  |               |   |   |
                     +-----------------+           +------------+
           DIN0 >----|    INPUT MUX    |           | DATA LATCH |---> DOUT0
           DIN1 >----|                 |           |   1-1/2    |---> DOUT1
           DIN2 >----|      4512       |           |   4013     |---> DOUT2
           DIN3 >----|                 |           +------------+
                     +-----------------+


      Parts: 4098 (or 4528), 4027, 2 X 4013, 4512, 3 X VN10KM.
             (plus either: MAX232, 78L05; or 2 X BC547, BC550, TL071.)


'The MIPI concept (was PIC programmers)'
1995\09\01@050432 by Erik Hermann
flavicon
face
>                    Machine Independent Parallel Interface
>                    ======================================

Looks interesting.
But too much parts. :-)

What about using a Basic Stamp for the serial interface ?
A single 16C56 with PBasic should be even cheaper than this graveyard of
CMOS chips. ;-)
(Nothing against Your design, it is interesting, though).

Ok, everyone should be able to get these parts.
That is the main advantage.

Regards
  Erik

1995\09\01@072232 by Byron A Jeff

flavicon
picon face
>
> >                    Machine Independent Parallel Interface
> >                    ======================================
>
> Looks interesting.
> But too much parts. :-)
>
> What about using a Basic Stamp for the serial interface ?
> A single 16C56 with PBasic should be even cheaper than this graveyard of
> CMOS chips. ;-)
> (Nothing against Your design, it is interesting, though).
>
> Ok, everyone should be able to get these parts.
> That is the main advantage.

No the main advantage is that it doesn't require $30 in parts plus
development system to use. You have to get PBasic on that 16C56.
You have to program that Stamp. If you're starting with nothing it
requires quite of bit of investment to do what you're proposing.
This design is especially geared to non PC machine because PC machines
have a parallel port. This is a synthetic parallel port.

David's key point is trying to break the chicken and egg cycle of having
to have something programmed (which both of your suggestions are) in
order to build the programmer across machine environments.

It does take a few parts. But you build it once and you have a couple
of controllable ports of IO that you can do stuff with. Like program
PICS, program seral EEPROMS, monitor a couple of bits of I/O in a circuit,
data logging among other things. And it's with cheap and available hardware.
And it works on any platform that has serial I/O - and every computer
known to man at least the size of a subnotebook has serial I/O.

A programmed PIC can do the job. I even have a set of routines that
theoretcally can do 38400 simplex using a 20 Mhz 16CXX PIC. But you
have to program it. If you don't have a PC available this becomes a
difficult proposisition. David's proposal makes it easier to make the
transistion from nothing to something without having to pay out the
nose for something already programmed.

I quote from the original message my comments in [brackets]:

I would contend that Robin Abbott's ETI design is a machine independent
universal PIC programmer....  The only gripe is the one expressed by
Ray Bellis and others, that is, you need access to an existing PIC
programmer to make Robin's design (or have to pay Robin to get your
PIC programmed).

My aim is to design a machine independent (i.e. RS232 hosted) universal
PIC programmer without this chicken and egg problem.
The programmer
hardware will still use a PIC (one of the serial-programmable 16CXX
chips) for simplicity.  Then, if you have an IBM clone, there is no
problem in bootstrapping the project by building a simple programmer
and using the Silicon Studio software by Antti Lukats and his team.  In
fact, if you have an IBM clone this might be all you want anyway.  So
let's consider people without IBM clones but who do own computers with
an RS232 port.  That is, they could make use of the programmer if they
could build it, but they can't build it because they have no means of
burning the PIC used in the programmer (and they, like me, are too cheap
to have someone else program the PIC :-)

I guess some people could get Erik Hermann's RS232 based programmer going
on their non-IBM machine.  Here we stray into a grey area; Erik's programmer
makes unconventional use of the RS232 signals and though it should work well
with an IBM clone, it's not necessarily easy to fiddle with the modem lines
on all computers.  So, let's say the RS232 port has minimum functionality:
GND, TXD and RXD (that's all that Robin's programmer needs by the way).

With such a restriction we have no option but to throw some hardware at
the problem.  In fact the hardware is likely to be more complex than the
programmer we want to build.  It would seem like a waste to build a
complicated bit of kit that was going to be redundant after it has been
used just once.  Well, I thought an RS232 hosted parallel port might be
a nice toy to have: it could be used to hook up a simple PIC programmer
to bootstrap the PIC based version, but it would still be useful for other
projects.  That was the birth of the MIPI.

--------

What I get from this explaination is that David is trying exactly to
avoid what you proposed. I thought that what I read the first time.

Simply put having a box that gives you a few inputs and output that can
be controlled from the serial like is a Good Thing (tm). And not requiring
a $130 development kit to do it is even better.

BAJ

1995\09\01@074342 by David Tait

flavicon
face
Hi Erik,

> Ok, everyone should be able to get these parts.
> That is the main advantage.

Yes, that's the whole point.  Given a PIC programmer here's how I'd do
it:


                     +----------+      +----------+
              TXD    |          |      |          |
               >-----|          |------|          |======>
                     |  RS232   |      |   PIC    |        Parallel
              RXD    |INTERFACE |      |          |          I/O
               <-----|          |------|          |<======
                     |          |      |          |
                     +----------+      +----------+


In fact there was a design for such a thing in a recent edition of
Electronics World and Wireless World.  The EW&WW article had the
inevitable "The author sells pre-programmed PICs for this project".

Of course, I _do_ have a PIC programmer so I could build something like
the above, but the aim was to make PIC programming accessible to all.
My yardstick is the Sun Sparcstation ELC I'm typing this on; I have used
the MIPI to program 16C84s on this machine, but it took ages.  I run the
serial link at 9600 bps for one thing (the MIPI will work to 115,200 bps
and beyond, but I wanted to get a feel for what's possible at low
speed); the real problem is that I do character at a time I/O.  I
couldn't believe how inefficient this is on the Sun.  Doing the same
thing on a PC using bios calls for I/O was many times quicker.  At
present I'm re-writing the low level MIPI driver to permit buffered
I/O but I want this to be invisible to MIPI application software.

Your idea of using a STAMP is good, but I doubt if it's cheaper than my
"CMOS graveyard".  As for parts count, I think I'm just a bit more
conservative than you.  Anyway, thanks for your interest, for that you
win a copy of my draft MIPI description :-)

Cheers,

David
--
KILLspamdavid.taitKILLspamspamspamBeGoneman.ac.uk

'Another PIC system with Basic Interpreter!'
1995\09\01@114400 by Don McKenzie

flavicon
face
This months issue of Silicon Chip (Australia) carries an advertisment for
yet another Basic Interpreter system.

I thought someone out there may know more about it or at least be
interested in its existance. The Ad. reads as follows:

FBASIC TICkit has 21 I/O

>From VersaTech PIC16C57 @ 20MHz, on a 65mm square board, has an on-board
interpreter, 16 GP I/O, plus 5 I/O for IRQ, IRQ ack RTC/Counter IIC buss,
handles SRAM and LCD too! Stores program in 8K EEPROM.

Don...

Don McKenzie                ~~   _--_|\    ~~   Email: spamBeGonedonmckKILLspamspamtbsa.com.au
29 Ellesmere Cres.,         ~~  /      `\  ~~   Phone:   + 61 3 9338 6286
Tullamarine 3043 Australia  ~~ (         ) ~~  Mobile:   + 61 019 939 799
(10 Miles from Melbourne)   ~~  \/~^~\_@/  ~~   Same address for 21 years
See my promo.zip disk at:   ~~         v   ~~
ftp://rasi.lr.ttu.ee/pub/sis/prod/microchip/3rd-Party/Don.McKenzie/

'The MIPI concept (was PIC programmers)'
1995\09\01@143020 by David Harmon

picon face
On Fri, 1 Sep 1995, Erik Hermann wrote:
> Let's start a competition. Build the cheapest and easiest RS232-to-parallel
> converter and win a free PICLIST membership ;-)

Many years ago, I saw an application specific IC for this job.  It was
called a "UART".  Maybe something similar still exists?  ;-)

1995\09\01@163140 by Henry Carl Ott

picon face
David Tait writes:
{Quote hidden}

David,

I can't help thinking that the above design is much simpler (from a
hardware viewpoint) than the discrete CMOS design. I can understand the
desire to support people without pic programmers, but I think a lot of us do
have the capacity.

Would it be possible to make the two circuits interchangeable? Write some
pic code to emulate the discrete implementation, then one would just build
whichever interface one had the capacity for. Also, I'm sure that most
people (at least on this list) would have little problem obtaining a
pre-programmed mipi chip for anything more then $3.00 (assuming a 16c54 and
a kind hearted list member).

I do know I would much rather lay out a circuit board for a pic/max232
design then the (admittedly) small handful of cmos chips in the discrete
mipi design.

Just my .02
carl

----------------------------------------
Henry Carl Ott      N2RVQ
carlott@spam@spamKILLspaminterport.net
http://www.interport.net/~carlott/
----------------------------------------

1995\09\01@171408 by David Tait

flavicon
face
>
> Many years ago, I saw an application specific IC for this job.  It was
> called a "UART".  Maybe something similar still exists?  ;-)
>
Thanks for that.  Of course you are absolutely right.  However about
the only non-MPU interface UART around these days is the 40-pin 6402.
Like all UARTs it needs a clock generator; and it also needs a bit of
glue logic to play the games I want it to.  All in all a UART based
design was marginally less attractive than a bunch of CMOS chips
which cost cents rather than dollars.  Thanks for the sanity check
all the same.

David
--
EraseMEdavid.taitRemoveMEspam@spam@man.ac.uk

1995\09\01@180509 by David Tait

flavicon
face
Carl Ott wrote:

>  I do know I would much rather lay out a circuit board for a pic/max232
> design then the (admittedly) small handful of cmos chips in the discrete
> mipi design.

Carl,

If you can get hold of the copies of ETI with Robin Abbott's PIC programmer
design you don't even need to lay-out the circuit board because it's been
done for you.  As I said in an earlier post, if you have access to a PIC
programmer then Robin's design is what you want (the Hex dump of the PIC
code is on the Silicon Studio site, and the required dialogue between host
software and programmer is published in ETI); forget all this MIPI rubbish,
it's not for you.

I must admit I'm talking to the wrong audience here on the PICLIST.  Perhaps
there is no audience at all, but I thought there might be some hobbyist
somewhere in the world who doesn't own an IBM clone (has a Mac say), and who
doesn't mind chucking a few CMOS chips on a bit of stripboard to get a
PIC programmer for his/her trouble.

Your idea of designing the PIC based programmer so that the PIC can be
emulated by the MIPI (and vice-versa) is definately worth considering.
Also bear in mind that the MIPI is only to bootstrap the programmer so
when (perhaps if) I get around to writing the PIC code for the final
project you will be able to use that code straight away if you already
have a PIC programmer (or have one at work or whatever).  Anyway, thank
you for your interest and comments.

Cheers,

David (also a ham by the way - G0JVY).
--
RemoveMEdavid.taitspamspamEraseMEman.ac.uk

1995\09\01@190016 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
   > Let's start a competition. Build the cheapest and easiest
   > RS232-to-parallel converter and win a free PICLIST membership ;-)

   Many years ago, I saw an application specific IC for this job.  It was
   called a "UART".  Maybe something similar still exists?  ;-)

Building a serial to parallel printer converter is trivial.  But things like
stamp programmers use the parallel port in random ways (ie stamp programmer
different than PIC programmer different than xxx) as an externally visible
bit array.  Creating a port capable of doing this in a general fashion,
while maintaining the ability to control timing of the bit-twiddling to
a very fine degree (which is probably why the parallel port was used in
the first place) is going to be a difficult task.  (How fine does the
timing need to be?  You can probably get down to about 1mS accuracy without
many problems, but getting to 10uS is likely impossible...)

BillW

1995\09\01@192611 by John Payson

flavicon
face
> My aim is to design a machine independent (i.e. RS232 hosted) universal
> PIC programmer without this chicken and egg problem.  The programmer
> hardware will still use a PIC (one of the serial-programmable 16CXX
> chips) for simplicity.  Then, if you have an IBM clone, there is no
> problem in bootstrapping the project by building a simple programmer
> and using the Silicon Studio software by Antti Lukats and his team.  In
> fact, if you have an IBM clone this might be all you want anyway.  So
> let's consider people without IBM clones but who do own computers with
> an RS232 port.  That is, they could make use of the programmer if they
> could build it, but they can't build it because they have no means of
> burning the PIC used in the programmer (and they, like me, are too cheap
> to have someone else program the PIC :-)

How's this for a design?  [Just sketched this on the "back of an envelope";
untested--does anyone think it will work?]

Components:
 RS232 plug [signals called RxD and TxD]
 Quad-NOR gate [signal pins called N1a, N1b, N1y, N2a, N2b, N2y, etc.]
 555 timer with R/C [wired as 50us monostable; signals called Trig and
   TOut]
 Input current-limitting resistor to prevent RS232 voltage from popping
   the quad-NOR gate; wires called R1a and R1b
 Another resistor to minimize contention with the PIC during read cycles.
   [R2a, R2b]
 The PIC [Pclk, Pdat]

Recipe:
 Power and grounds as "normal"
 RxD -> R1a
 R1b -> N1a, N1b
 N1y -> Trig, N2a, N2b, N4a
TOut -> Pclk, N3a
 N2y -> R2a
 R2b -> Pdat, N3b
 N3y -> N4b
 N4b -> TxD

Check the timer to ensure that it is JUST OVER one bit time at 19.2KBaud.
If the timeout is much over one bit time, or is under at all, the programmer
will fail.

Sending a single low bit [e.g. a start bit followed by an FF] will write a
0 bit to the pic; sending two [or more] will write a 1.  To read the PIC,
send two [or more] consecutive 0's: if only one comes back, the PIC is
reading a zero; if both come back, it's reading a one.

To be more specific about operation, a 0 bit will trigger the 555 and will
also appear on the PIC's serial data line.  If it only lasts a single bit
time, however, it will be gone by the time the 555 times out [giving the PIC
a falling edge on its clock line] whereas if it lasts longer, the clock line
will fall first.  For reading, each output pulse will be at most as long as
the input pulse, and if the PIC is reading a zero, it will only last the 555
time.

To get decent speed, each byte may be used to send 3 bits of data; to send
the bits a', b' and c' [inverted], for example, you should send "1a01 b01c"
[note: while data is written MSB first, it's sent LSB first, and preceded by
a start bit].  While the programming pulses resulting from this system may
be a little long they should still be okay.

Well, what do you think?  Do you understand it?

1995\09\02@133213 by David Harmon

picon face
I wrote: UART ;-)

David Tait wrote:
> about the only non-MPU interface UART around these days is the 40-pin
> 6402.  Like all UARTs it needs a clock generator; and it also needs a bit
> of glue logic to play the games I want it to.

I hope I'm not conflating two threads here: the serial port driven
programmer and the PIC expander.  I would not suggest a UART for the
latter, where you can use a data pin and clock pin and shift the bits out
in any format you want.  But for the general case of a serial port, you
may not have any extra pins to play with and you may not have close
control over the character timing.

If you really want to build a programmer that can be used on a generic
serial port with pins 2, 3, and 7, like say on a UNIX box, I think it has
to have a baud rate generator, the functionality of a UART, and plenty of
glue.  I would be delighted to learn that's not true.

William Chops Westfield wrote:
> Creating a port capable of doing this in a general fashion, while
> maintaining the ability to control timing of the bit-twiddling to a very
> fine degree (which is probably why the parallel port was used in the first
> place) is going to be a difficult task.

Yep.  I would expect that things like the timing of a program pulse would
have to be done with a one-shot or something.  And you might still need
the CMOS shift register on the UART outputs to expand to the number of
bits you need.  And yes, a non-MPU-buss UART is probably 40 pins.

Maybe this is all much more complicated than what you wanted to build.
If so, chalk it up to the ramblings of a software weenie.  BTW, I'm
perfectly happy with bit twiddling on a PC parallel port; it's just the
opposite of "universal" though.

1995\09\03@022642 by Kalle Pihlajasaari

flavicon
face
> Yep.  I would expect that things like the timing of a program pulse would
> have to be done with a one-shot or something.  And you might still need
> the CMOS shift register on the UART outputs to expand to the number of
> bits you need.  And yes, a non-MPU-buss UART is probably 40 pins.

Standard Microsystems Corporation (SMC) were selling a 20 PIN UART
that regrettably needs a processor, one data and handshake each way
with internal baud rate generator.

20 Pin PLCC and DIP

Part number COM81C17

They might have a small pin programmable UART one though.
Year old contact details, Hauppage NY, (516) 273-3100

Cheers
--
Kalle Pihlajasaari     STOPspamkalle.....spamdata.co.za        ( soon spamBeGonekalleRemoveMEspamRemoveMEip.co.za )
Interface Products     Box 15775, Doornfontein, 2028, South Africa
+27 (11) 402-7750      Fax: +27 (11) 402-7751  ( soon 402-7723 )

1995\09\04@052033 by David Tait

flavicon
face
John Payson wrote:

> How's this for a design?  [Just sketched this on the "back of an envelope";
> untested--does anyone think it will work?]

    ... [much deleted] ...

This sounds very similar to my original ideas on how to tackle the
problem.   I'm pretty sure that something along the lines you describe
will work just fine.  My design was a bit more complicated and in the
end I abandoned it in favour of the MIPI circuit; the argument being
that the MIPI would still be useful even after bootstrapping the PIC
programmer but dedicated bootstrapping hardware would probably be
redundant after it had served its purpose.  The argument would be less
persuasive if the hardware could be made very simple so I would like
to encourage you to work your ideas into a prototype and let us all
know the results.

David
--
@spam@david.taitspamBeGonespamman.ac.uk

1995\09\04@062707 by David Tait

flavicon
face
David Harmon wrote:
> If you really want to build a programmer that can be used on a generic
> serial port with pins 2, 3, and 7, like say on a UNIX box, I think it has
> to have a baud rate generator, the functionality of a UART, and plenty of
> glue.  I would be delighted to learn that's not true.

David,

Although I could argue about the need for a baud rate generator (I use
a monostable to recover timing) I don't think that I can really refute
what you say.  If I wanted an RS232 hosted 8-bit bi-directional parallel
port I would use a UART without question.  I didn't; I wanted a simple
interface to bit-bang SPI/I2C using the serial port.  That's enough
functionality to program the 16C84 at least.  I admit the circuit I came
up with is not so very simple, but it is probably no more complex than
a UART based design.  Furthermore it has the advantages of smaller size
(it doesn't use a 40-pin chip), lower cost and can be powered directly
from the RS232 port in many cases.  I also admit it could be done
better by a micro-controller but that defeats my main objective.
I will even admit that the name Machine Independent Parallel Interface
is probably over the top for such a modest thing.

If you (or anybody else for that matter) is interested I can e-mail a
copy of my circuit and description and you would then be in a better
position to judge if the idea has any merit at all.

You quoted William Chops Westfield:
> > Creating a port capable of doing this in a general fashion, while
> > maintaining the ability to control timing of the bit-twiddling to a very
> > fine degree (which is probably why the parallel port was used in the first
> > place) is going to be a difficult task.
and wrote:
> Yep.  I would expect that things like the timing of a program pulse would
> have to be done with a one-shot or something.

One of the things I really like about the PIC16C84 is the fact that the
programming operation is self-timed (though you have to make sure you
don't ask it to program another location until 10ms or so has elapsed).
So I see a 16C84 as being the heart of my universal PIC programmer.  The
downside is that the 16C84 doesn't have enough I/O to program the 16C5X
PICs without the addition of some glue.  I guess that I could get the
complexity of the final programmer down to a bare minimum by a two-step
boostrapping process: use MIPI to program 'C84; use 'C84 to program 'C64
(say); use 'C64 in final design.  I think this is taking things a bit
too far.

As I said in one of my (too frequent) recent posts, I don't see members of
the PICLIST as being the primary audience for this project, so perhaps
I should tout my wares elsewhere.  Thanks to you and everyone else who
has contributed to the discussion.

David
--
spam_OUTdavid.taitspamspamman.ac.uk

1995\09\04@102701 by Walter.Anderson

flavicon
face
> downside is that the 16C84 doesn't have enough I/O to program the 16C5X
With the  addition of the 16C61 and soon the 16C62 to the mid-range
line, there doesn''t seem to be much need for a 5X programmer.  The
61 is not much more expensive then a 54, but provides all of the
benefits of the midrange (interrupts, 8-level stack, etc).  In short,
just stick to serial programmed pics is not a real problem for the
probably target audience.

Walter
------------------------------------------------------------
Walter Anderson, CCP          email: spamwandrsonspamspamspamonramp.net
2500 Guerrero, #221           callsign: KD4KIL
Carrollton, Texas 75006       url: <in progress>
------------------------------------------------------------

1995\09\04@102905 by Roger Books

flavicon
face
Actually, if the MIPI stuff could be made simple enough to breadboard the
reusability arguement kind of goes away.  Most people who would be interested
in doing PIC projects own a breadboard.  So, I breadboard it, burn my initial
pic, take it apart, and build the real programmer.  So I have a few extra
parts left over at the end.

Roger

1995\09\04@130612 by David Tait

flavicon
face
OK.  Putting the ideas from Walter Anderson, Carl Ott and Roger Books
together we have a 16CXX-only programmer, that initially uses a circuit
to emulate the controller PIC, but a circuit which is simple enough to
be "breadboardable" and disposible.  If we follow this line of thought
for a bit we see that the RS232 interface and the few transistors that
are needed to control MCLR can be built as part of a skeleton final
programmer (let's not bother trying to switch VDD, though we can provide
+5V for programming PICs that are not already in circuit).  We get
something like this:

            +----------+      +----------+      +----------+
     TXD    |          |      |          |      |          |
      >-----|          |------|  EMPTY   |------|  THREE   |------> MCLR
            |  RS232   |      |  18-PIN  |      |TRANSISTOR|------> VDD
     RXD    |INTERFACE |      |  SOCKET  |------|   ISP    |------> RB6
      <-----|          |------|          |------| CIRCUIT  |------> RB7
            |          |      |          |      |          |
            +----------+      +----------+      +----------+

The "PIC emulator" (i.e. something like my MIPI circuit) is connected
to an 18-pin header and (perhaps using a special version of the
final host processor software) used to burn a 16C84.  The PIC
emulator is thrown in the bin and replaced by the 16C84 and we
have the final programmer (not universal anymore, but perhaps Walter's
argument has convinced you that the 16C5X series are not likely
to be used in new designs).

Fine, the MIPI circuit uses 5 CMOS chips and 3 VMOS transistors.  I
think I could reduce the count by 1 chip.  I guess somebody, Erik?
will be able to reduce the chip count even more.  Any takers?

David
--
spamBeGonedavid.taitKILLspamspamKILLspamman.ac.uk

1995\09\04@154523 by John Payson

flavicon
face
> Fine, the MIPI circuit uses 5 CMOS chips and 3 VMOS transistors.  I
> think I could reduce the count by 1 chip.  I guess somebody, Erik?
> will be able to reduce the chip count even more.  Any takers?

For doing "blind" programming of an '84 ["blind" meaning the host can't
tell anything about what the PIC is doing, or even its existence] I think
the simplest possible circuit is two resistors and a cap [plus the power
supplies].

R1 should be about 10K or so and should connect the PIC programming clock to
TxD.  R2 should be a 10K POT between the PIC programming data and TxD.  The
cap should be about 0.1uF or so and should connect the pgm data line to ground.
To send a "1" bit, send 00h; to send a "0" bit, send FFh.

How does that sound for simplicity?

1995\09\04@165525 by Kalle Pihlajasaari

flavicon
face
> > will be able to reduce the chip count even more.  Any takers?
>
> For doing "blind" programming of an '84 ["blind" meaning the host can't
> tell anything about what the PIC is doing, or even its existence] I think
> the simplest possible circuit is two resistors and a cap [plus the power
> supplies].
Radical design reduction, better than the 3 pin serial programmer for
one off designs.

> To send a "1" bit, send 00h; to send a "0" bit, send FFh.
At what baud rate ?-)

> How does that sound for simplicity?
Wonderful, if the program does not work the first time, just try again
until the test program communicats with the pc serial ports to test
the one wire programmer then do one more blind program to burn in the
programmer code.
--
Kalle Pihlajasaari     TakeThisOuTkallespamspamdata.co.za

1995\09\04@233629 by Roger Books

flavicon
face
One last thing, is the 16c84 the appropriate chip for this?  I realize the
EEPROM is nice, but it does add significantly to the cost of what should end
up being a one shot deal.  Of course, I guess if you socket the 16c84 then
you can burn an OTP and yank out the 84 if you feel it necessary.

Roger (Looking forward to trying this on my Sparc I, even though I do have a PC)

'Do your 16C84's draw more than they should sleepin'
1995\09\05@073732 by Scott Stephens

flavicon
face
After testing current drain at 3 volts in sleep with ports configured as
output with no loads and afterwards tristated, pull-ups disabled, my 16C84
is still drawing 25 uA. I haven't sampled a lot, but I noticed Microchip
does not guarantee, just state whats typical. I want to get the 'typical' 1 uA
so my battery will last months. Is my quick & dirty RS-232 programmer's -V
reverse bias putting leaks in my PIC? Has anyone seen ESD cause trouble like
this?

'Change crystal freq on the fly'
1995\09\05@073735 by Scott Stephens

flavicon
face
I need a 1% accuracy 500KHz ceramic resonator clock for serial data
transmission, and desire 50ppm stable (crystal) oscillator for time keeping.
I would like to conserve power by switching a low speed when not recieving
serial data & processing other tasks. And I want to conserve hardware, real
estate & cost too!

It would be nice if I could clock the RTCC with a 32KHz clock, prescale it
to generate an interrupt, waking up the 16C84 a few time/second to update
the clock and poll inputs. From what I gather from the data book, sync
circuit between the prescaler & RTCC will prevent the RTCC from clocking or
an interrupt from occurng. The WDT is no where near accurate enough.

Can I count on the prescaler to toggle through the TMR0/RA4 input when the
C84 is in sleep? Even if the RTCC won't toggle, maybe I could check the level?

Switching resistors with an RC oscillator is great. Too bad I need crystal
precision. As for switching crystals, I found I could switch the 500KHz
low-z ceramic across a 32 KHz high-z quartz. When switching up to 500KHz,
the clock amplitude at 32KHz decreases slowly, around 2 seconds. I also
tried jamming a 500KHz seperate bjt clock, enabled by a port, into the
osc-in pin, and once again obtained a slowly changing, composite signal. It
would be nice to sleep &
wakeup with the 500KHz clock, that would cost more chip's & time. Although
both methods worked, I worry about software crashing and I will miss serial
data, which is what causes the increased clock frequency.

I tried a 4011, using two nand-gates as gated oscillators, a gate to
complement the enables and one to combine the clocks. Worked great. Then I
measured the current. Turned out the 32KHz sucked 40uA, and the 500KHz
around 160uA, as much as the PIC! My bjt osc only draws 15uA. I tested
4011's from a couple different manufacterer's, & found they had different
characteristics. The best result I had was using a BJT 500KHz oscillator and
a NAND gate 32KHz oscillator & for switching, and got the current down to
60uA, not including the PIC. I still
worry about asynchronous signals causing glitches & crashes.

Has anyone compared current draws vs. clock speed by CMOS glue chips from
various manufacters?

What I'll try next is a 4060 14-stage divider/oscillator, & interrupt the
pic to test ports & update the time 8 or 16 times per second. My calc. show
at 32KHz It should draw around 30uA at 3v, and the 4060 is cheap :-)

Maybe someone has a great 20uA, single crystal, single chip solution under $1?

Maybe Microchip can put a programable clock prescaler. This would help
applications needing to shift gears to handle changing demands, & keep the
PIC away from the steep side of the Idd vs freq curve  :-)

'The MIPI concept (was PIC programmers)'
1995\09\05@075408 by Scott Stephens

flavicon
face
This is a challanging project. My solution would be to trade the price for
two C84's, which would both be programmed by the host serial port. One C84
would be the master, the other a slave port. Maybe a couple ports could be
used as charge pumps for a 13V programming source. They could handle serial
and paralled devices, bi-directional communication, tri-state leads (exept
for a bjt on MCLR.

'The MIPI concept (now MIPP concept)'
1995\09\05@094232 by Siegfried Grob

flavicon
face
Hi David, hi John, hi everyone interested in a bootstrappable MIPP
(MIPP = Machine Independent Pic Programmer)

David Tait said:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> OK.  Putting the ideas from Walter Anderson, Carl Ott and Roger Books
> together we have a 16CXX-only programmer, that initially uses a circuit
> to emulate the controller PIC, but a circuit which is simple enough to
> be "breadboardable" and disposible.  If we follow this line of thought
> for a bit we see that the RS232 interface and the few transistors that
> are needed to control MCLR can be built as part of a skeleton final
> programmer (let's not bother trying to switch VDD, though we can provide
> +5V for programming PICs that are not already in circuit).  We get
> something like this:

            +----------+      +----------+      +----------+
     TXD    |          |      |          |      |          |
      >-----|          |------|  EMPTY   |------|  THREE   |------> MCLR
            |  RS232   |      |  18-PIN  |      |TRANSISTOR|------> VDD
     RXD    |INTERFACE |      |  SOCKET  |------|   ISP    |------> RB6
      <-----|          |------|          |------| CIRCUIT  |------> RB7
            |          |      |          |      |          |
            +----------+      +----------+      +----------+




> The "PIC emulator" (i.e. something like my MIPI circuit) is connected
> to an 18-pin header and (perhaps using a special version of the
> final host processor software) used to burn a 16C84.  The PIC
> emulator is thrown in the bin and replaced by the 16C84 and we
> have the final programmer (not universal anymore, but perhaps Walter's
> argument has convinced you that the 16C5X series are not likely
> to be used in new designs).



John Payson said:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

For doing "blind" programming of an '84 ["blind" meaning the host can't
tell anything about what the PIC is doing, or even its existence] I think
the simplest possible circuit is two resistors and a cap [plus the power
supplies].

R1 should be about 10K or so and should connect the PIC programming clock to
TxD.  R2 should be a 10K POT between the PIC programming data and TxD.  The
cap should be about 0.1uF or so and should connect the pgm data line to ground.
To send a "1" bit, send 00h; to send a "0" bit, send FFh.


My opinion:
~~~~~~~~~~~

Concatenating the thoughts of David and John, I would create a 16Cxx-programmer
based on the architecture that was drawn above by David.
In the 18pin socket is a 16C84 as the controller, unprogrammed at the very
start.
Insert John's 'blind programming' hardware between the 16C84 and the RS232-
interface so that the 16C84 can be in-programmer programmed in its own socket.
Afterwards the 16C84 acts as an intelligent programmer's controller. Later the
blind in-programmer method can be used to update the C84's firmware.
The advantage is obvious: there are no redundant parts or breadboards after
bootstrapping, with minimum amount of additional hardware. You don't need a
'PIC-emulator' as David described, because the PIC is programmed in its own
'controller socket', not in the later to use 'programming socket'.


The core of this universal 16Cxx-programmer looks like this:

(R1 is unnecessary with MAX232)

                                        |    Programmer's PIC 16C84
                             R1         |
TxD ----------------*----[10k]---------- |Clock/RB6
(maybe via MAX232)  |                    |
                   `----[10k]----*------|Data/RB7
                        R2       |      |
                                --- C   |
                                ---.1uF |
                                 |      |
                                ///     |
                                        |
RxD (via MAX232) ------------------------|for later communication with host
(or via OP-AMP for level shift)          |
                                        |
                     Vcc---O            |
                             \          |
          Switch: On/off/on    \O--*----|MCLR, switched to Vcc/Vpp manually,
                                   |    |  Vcc for normal operation later
                     Vpp---O     [10k]  |
                                   |    |
                                  ///   |
                                        |
Three transistor ISP ciruit =============|all necessary pins for serial
                                        |       programming other PICs
                                        |


Don't you think this is worth to be built?

Siggi


Siegfried Grob,                                   |
student of electrical engineering,                |
university of ulm, germany                        |
e-mail:  spamBeGonesiegfried.grobspamstudent.uni-ulm.de        |
tel&fax: +49 731 25148                            |
--------------------------------------------------'

'The MIPI concept (was PIC programmers)'
1995\09\05@101633 by Don McKenzie

flavicon
face
As Danny Da-Vitto says: OK-OK-OK-OK-OK-OK!!

I couldn't help myself. Everybody has a different idea. There are no
correct answers and possibly no prizes.

This is what I visualize as a possible answer to David's MIPI concept:

It is not a definitive design down to component level, it's a concept.

RS-232 to TTL conversion isn't used or required.

Power supply, I'll ignore at this stage only to fend off controversy,
however it should be noted that this device must program all devices in
the MicroChip "Serial" arsenal. It is assumed that only "Serial" devices
will be programmed with this unit.

INPUT:
DB-9 Connector. Any modern RS-232 port. (DB-9 or DB-25)

THE BOARD:
It's built on a PCB, 3.5" square. Don't they all come in that size?
There are 3 by 18 pin sockets.

Socket 1 is connected up so that an 84 can be programmed via the RS-232
signals only. A very simple circuit. This will be used only to get
the bootstap program into an 84.

Socket 2 has the 84 to be used for the RS-232 serial to parallel converter
micro that is used to program all other "Serial Family Members".

When the bootstap code is programmed into the 84 in socket 1, it is
removed and installed into socket 2.

OUTPUT:
Additional 18 pin devices can now be programmed using socket 3.

With the addition of a 4PDT switch and a 10 pin IDC header, In-Circuit
programming can be achieved easily for the 84 family.

A simple adapter PCB can be used to plug into socket 3 for conversion to
28 and 40 pin devices if required.

OK Guys, Start shooting!   :-))

Don...

Don McKenzie                ~~   _--_|\    ~~   Email: EraseMEdonmckEraseMEspamtbsa.com.au
29 Ellesmere Cres.,         ~~  /      `\  ~~   Phone:   + 61 3 9338 6286
Tullamarine 3043 Australia  ~~ (         ) ~~  Mobile:   + 61 019 939 799
(10 Miles from Melbourne)   ~~  \/~^~\_@/  ~~   Same address for 21 years
See my promo.zip disk at:   ~~         v   ~~
ftp://rasi.lr.ttu.ee/pub/sis/prod/microchip/3rd-Party/Don.McKenzie/

1995\09\06@134645 by John Payson

flavicon
face
> > For doing "blind" programming of an '84 ["blind" meaning the host can't
> > tell anything about what the PIC is doing, or even its existence] I think
> > the simplest possible circuit is two resistors and a cap [plus the power
> > supplies].
> Radical design reduction, better than the 3 pin serial programmer for
> one off designs.
>
> > To send a "1" bit, send 00h; to send a "0" bit, send FFh.
> At what baud rate ?-)
>
> > How does that sound for simplicity?
> Wonderful, if the program does not work the first time, just try again
> until the test program communicats with the pc serial ports to test
> the one wire programmer then do one more blind program to burn in the
> programmer code.

The baud rate would depend upon R2 [the adjustable one], C, and the design
of the serial port feeding the unit.  If you can manage NOT to send anything
between a 1 and a 0 bit for a byte time, then you should try to adjust the
RC so that the shmidt trigger will hit after 5 bit times; if you cannot do
so, then send $E0 instead of $00 for a 1 bit and adjust the shmidt trigger to
go after 3 bit times.  There's a pretty big margin of error in this commun-
ications approach, so while I've not tested it, it should probably not be too
hard to make it work.

E.g. if the transmitting computer's output is 12 volts with an equivalent
series resistance of 1K, then we want that 12-volt signal to pull the data
wire from 0 to 4 volts in 300us [assuming 9600 baud].  Thus, [calculator not
handy] the RC time constant should be about 600us [since that's how long it
would take to pull the line to about 8 volts if the clamp-diodes didn't
interfere] and with a 0.1uF cap you should have a 6K resistor.

'New PIC Hardware tips and tricks on the web'
1995\09\14@214805 by Eric Smith

flavicon
face
I've added a new "Hardware tips and tricks" to my PIC page, along with one
new PIC project description, the Automatic O.J. Muter.

There are only four hardware tips and tricks listed so far, but I have
several more items in progress.

The URL is currently
       http://www.telebit.com/~eric/pic/
although it is likely to change by the end of the month.

Eric

1995\09\14@235347 by John Payson

flavicon
face
> I've added a new "Hardware tips and tricks" to my PIC page, along with one
> new PIC project description, the Automatic O.J. Muter.
>
> There are only four hardware tips and tricks listed so far, but I have
> several more items in progress.
>
> The URL is currently
>         http://www.telebit.com/~eric/pic/
> although it is likely to change by the end of the month.

Your page was very interesting...

[1] PIC-PONG: I was thinking of doing this on the 87751 in response to
   Phillips' design contest, but decided it wasn't likely to win so I
   didn't bother; since then I thought of doing a high-quality PIC-based
   test pattern generator [REAL NTSC-format video].  I would have used
   a counter to divide the clock by 4, a few simple resistor-based DACs,
   and a 4051 driven by PB7 and the two counter bits.  This would thus
   allow 14.1818MHz resolution though most patterns would repeat rather
   a lot. :-)

[2] Caption decoder: I designed a caption encoder/decoder using two 22v10's,
   an 8751, 62256, 2102, 1881, 311, 4089, and a Max 454 [someone else did
   the analog part, but I did the digital].  I think in retrospect I maybe
   should have used more logic and less code since code maintenance was a
   real pain.  Your design sounds somewhat interesting.

[3] Lobotomouse: A friend of mine wanted to play Arkanoid on his Amiga, using
   real Paddle controllers; I wrote a VIC-20 program to translate pot moves
   into quadrature actions. :-)

[4] Whirlessgig: There was a toy entitled the Skywriter which did what you
   describe, including a directional switch.  One toy I was planning to
   produce as a magazine contest entry would be a mini LED display board
   [14x5 lights] using an 18-pin PIC and no other chips; don't know if the
   unit would be bright enough, but the chip count would be somewhat neat
   if it worked [can you figure out how to wire those? :-)]

[5] Sine/Cosine tricks: In many applications it's necessary to vary the
   amplitude of a sine wave.  Rather than multiplying the waveform values
   by the desired amplitude, it is sometimes more convenient to add two
   sinewaves phase-shifted by an amount depending upon the desired ampli-
   tude [e.g. 180 degrees for zero amplitude, 0 degrees for full aplitude].

'Ok, this is the last time... I promise.'
1995\09\21@224611 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
I don't believe it.. I somehow managed to screw up yet again.  The more
astute (or maybe just more critical) among you have already noticed
this, but in case you missed it...

The newly-posted "version 3" of my BCD-to-Binary converter is missing a
couple of characters; the "RLF TENS" (in about the sixth line of the
routine) should be an "RLF TENS,W".

The ",W" was in both previous versions; I don't know how I deleted it
from this one.

Anyway, this is the last public update I'll be making to the code...
Sorry (again) for wasting everyone's time with this stupid little
program.

-Andy

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

'The Circuit Cellar BBS FTPmail WWW page has moved'
1995\09\25@143636 by Lou Sortman

flavicon
face
Due to the fact that tfnet.ils.unc.edu is currently not reachable, I have
moved my WWW interface to the Circuit Cellar Ink BBS FTPmail server to the
following URL.

http://sunsite.unc.edu/lou-bin/CCBBS

As an added bonus, it is now automatically updated from the BBS three times per
week.


'Overclocking the '84'
1995\10\02@162239 by Robin Abbott
flavicon
face
Recently I blew up my last 10MHz 16C84 during development
of a project, when I connected the power in reverse.

As I needed it in short timescales I decided that to continue
development of the project I would try using a 4MHz version
clocked at 10MHz. To my surprise it worked perfectly, not only at
room temperature, but also down to -22'C, and at +50'C.

The application was reasonably severe using nearly all of the
program memory, a serial IIC i/f to a 24LC65 EEPROM, a serial
rs232 port, and driving 20cm of IDC cable to a LED display module.

I've heard of 486SX25's being overclocked reliably at 33MHz, but
to clock a 4MHz part at 10MHz seems a little excessive !

I suspect that MChip SOT all their parts at package time, and
probably put very strict conditions on power supply and internal
delays which are not likely to be ever met in practice.

I think this brief experiment shows that 4MHz parts can at least
be used for development work at 10MHz, and that possibly 4MHz
parts can be used at interim clock rates (say 6-8MHz ?) quite
reliably.

I'd be interested if anyone else has carried out similar
tests, it did occur to me that if a 4MHz part operates at
2 and 1/2 times its rated clock rate then a 10MHz part
should be capable of at least 12-15MHz in restricted
environmental and power supply conditions!

Robin Abbott, <spamrobin.abbottspamdial.pipex.com>

1995\10\02@170717 by Errington A

flavicon
face
Robin Abbott writes:
> Recently I blew up my last 10MHz 16C84 during development
> of a project, when I connected the power in reverse.

I connected an '84 with power reversed (well actually I put it into its
socket upside-down), and when I put it the right way round it worked
perfectly.  I am a firm believer in the robustness of PICs after this and
other stories I have read on the PICLIST.

Andy
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew M Errington                               Tel: +44 1524 593678
Microcomputer Consultant                         Fax: +44 1524 844011
Lancaster University                      RemoveMEa.erringtonKILLspamspamKILLspamlancaster.ac.uk
Lancaster LA1 4YW     www.lancs.ac.uk/people/cpaame/cpaame.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------

1995\10\02@171750 by Don McKenzie

flavicon
face
On Mon, 2 Oct 1995, Robin Abbott wrote:

> Recently I blew up my last 10MHz 16C84 during development
> of a project, when I connected the power in reverse.
>
> As I needed it in short timescales I decided that to continue
> development of the project I would try using a 4MHz version
> clocked at 10MHz. To my surprise it worked perfectly, not only at
> room temperature, but also down to -22'C, and at +50'C.
> I think this brief experiment shows that 4MHz parts can at least
> be used for development work at 10MHz, and that possibly 4MHz
> parts can be used at interim clock rates (say 6-8MHz ?) quite
> reliably.
> I'd be interested if anyone else has carried out similar
> tests, it did occur to me that if a 4MHz part operates at
> 2 and 1/2 times its rated clock rate then a 10MHz part
> should be capable of at least 12-15MHz in restricted
> environmental and power supply conditions!

I have been running an 84/04/P at 6.144Mhz for some time now. This is the
same part that I have programmed over 2000 times at it's working fine as
a development system.

Also mike@speed (Argentina) has been doing a similar thing with a TV set
crystal at 7.159090Mhz.

If it's not a life support system, or any task that won't kick back with
legal implications, (because of manufacturers stated specs.) sure why not?

I'd be interested in any other comments too!

Don...

 Low Cost DIY PCB's for PICs & COM1/LPT1 PC I/O Interface Kits    ;!
 Don McKenzie. 29 Ellesmere Cres., Tullamarine. 3043 Australia    ;@
 Tel +61 3 9338 6286 Mobile +61 019 939 799 EraseMEdonmckspamBeGonespamspamtbsa.com.au    ;#
 Check My Promo Disk at http://rasi.lr.ttu.ee/~sis/mirror/don/    ;$
 Type: 'finger KILLspamdonmckspamtbsa.com.au|more'  for more information.

1995\10\02@202858 by rry W. Ogletree

flavicon
face
>Robin Abbott writes:
>> Recently I blew up my last 10MHz 16C84 during development
>> of a project, when I connected the power in reverse.
>
>I connected an '84 with power reversed (well actually I put it into its

I have reversed the power connections on 16C57's and when corrected they
worked fine - they did get a little warm while reversed though! ;->
The PIC family seems real tough!

1995\10\03@102333 by Conny Andersson

picon face
Andy wrote ...

> Robin Abbott writes:
> > Recently I blew up my last 10MHz 16C84 during development
> > of a project, when I connected the power in reverse.
>
> I connected an '84 with power reversed (well actually I put it into its
> socket upside-down), and when I put it the right way round it worked
> perfectly.  I am a firm believer in the robustness of PICs after this and
> other stories I have read on the PICLIST.

I got to tell you about my experience on this matter ... (I have told you
all before but I think it's a rather extreme situation so I'll tell you again)

I put an '84 in reverse just like Andy did and connected a NICAD-pack
without current limitation (I'm selfconfident). After a few seconds I
noticed some smoke appearing from somewhere ... and it wasn't
the solder iron ... the '84 was actually on fire (but I couldn't see it
through the plastic). After cooling the '84 I tried it again and
it worked ... I guess I was lucky, but you never know ...  ;-)

-- Conny

1995\10\03@130917 by BBoles

flavicon
face
    While a 4MHz device will often run at higher clocking rates than
    specified, you cannot assume that the same will carry forward for a
    10MHz device.

    Hint, how many actually different pieces of silicon do you think are
    represented by all of those different part numbers?

    Rgds, Brian.


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Overclocking the '84
snip snip
> I think this brief experiment shows that 4MHz parts can at least
> be used for development work at 10MHz, and that possibly 4MHz
> parts can be used at interim clock rates (say 6-8MHz ?) quite
> reliably.
> I'd be interested if anyone else has carried out similar
> tests, it did occur to me that if a 4MHz part operates at
> 2 and 1/2 times its rated clock rate then a 10MHz part
> should be capable of at least 12-15MHz in restricted
> environmental and power supply conditions!

'Blowing the '84'
1995\10\03@134732 by Robin Abbott

flavicon
face
Andy writes:
============

>I connected an '84 with power reversed (well actually I put it into its
>socket upside-down), and when I put it the right way round it worked
>perfectly.  I am a firm believer in the robustness of PICs after this and
>other stories I have read on the PICLIST.

Robin replies:
==============

Sorry I should have said it was a reversed 12V supply which blew the
7805 on the board and applied a reverse 12V to the PIC, which then
refused to do anything, the 24LC65 EEPROM worked fine though...

In the past I have reversed supply to a '58 (the /JW unfortunately),
this actually blew an EPROM location to all 0's resulting  in a
verification error on the programmer. I erased it, reprogrammed it
successfully, used it OK, but then discovered that A0 and A1 stuck
at driving 2.5V, the rest of it seemed to work though.

Robin, <robin.abbottspam_OUTspamspamdial.pipex.com>

'Overclocking the '84'
1995\10\04@035015 by h%itacs.strath.ac.uk%UKACRL.bitnet

flavicon
face
Conny wrote:
> I put an '84 in reverse just like Andy did and connected a NICAD-pack
> without current limitation (I'm selfconfident). After a few seconds I
> noticed some smoke appearing from somewhere ...

I can't attribute the quote, but I read somewhere that all computing
power is contained in particles of smoke, and if that should ever escape....

Mungo Henning :-)

1995\10\04@145157 by Paul Picot

flavicon
face
On Wed, 4 Oct 1995, Mungo Henning wrote:

> I can't attribute the quote, but I read somewhere that all computing
> power is contained in particles of smoke, and if that should ever escape....

I can't attribute it either, but I first heard it with reference to the
Lucas ("Prince of Darkness") electrical systems found on British
automobiles...  It is apparently well known that these systems run on
smoke, and that if a small amount should leak out that it should be
considered normal, but if a large amount leaked out it wouldn't work any
more...

(To be fair to Lucas, my father's 1981 Triumph TR-8 has had no electrical
problems in over 150 000 km) (it has also had no mechanical problems
either, which is mildly astonishing)

(I know, I know... there isn't a PIC in a TR-8, so I'll quit here...)

-Paul

1995\10\04@182422 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
Paul Picot <ppicotspamspam@spam@IRUS.RRI.UWO.CA> wrote:

>(To be fair to Lucas, my father's 1981 Triumph TR-8 has had no electrical
>problems in over 150 000 km) (it has also had no mechanical problems
>either, which is mildly astonishing)

   Amazing.  Actually, the absence of mechanical problems isn't TOO
   surprising... The TR-8's engine wasn't built in England.

   -Andy

--
Andrew Warren - spamBeGonefastfwd.....spamix.netcom.com
Fast Forward Engineering, Vista, California

1995\10\04@230312 by Douglas Martin

flavicon
face
On Wed, 4 Oct 1995, Paul Picot wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Oct 1995, Mungo Henning wrote:
>
> > I can't attribute the quote, but I read somewhere that all computing
> > power is contained in particles of smoke, and if that should ever escape....
>
> I can't attribute it either, but I first heard it with reference to the
> Lucas ("Prince of Darkness") electrical systems found on British
> automobiles...  It is apparently well known that these systems run on
> smoke, and that if a small amount should leak out that it should be
> considered normal, but if a large amount leaked out it wouldn't work any
> more...

Where I work, we just say "All you have to do is cram the smoke back in
and its fixed."

  Doug

1995\10\05@103157 by Jim Scorse

picon face
>Where I work, we just say "All you have to do is cram the smoke back in
>and its fixed."

Generally I find that adding some little blue wires after I cram the smoke
back helps keep the somke contained.  At least on the second or third try 8-)

'ByteCraft vs. CCS C compiler vs. others?'
1995\10\06@135130 by John Loch

flavicon
face
I've searched the net high and low for PIC C compilers.  Can anyone comment
on these compilers?  Are there others that aren't listed below?  Thanks.

1.) Custom Computer Services (CCS) - $99
       Supports most PIC's with built-in special functions
       http://execpc.com/~ccs/picc.html

2.) Parallax ByteCraft C Compiler - $795
       Supports 16C5x, 16C6x, 16C7x, 16C8x, and 17C42.
       http://www.parallaxinc.com/pictools/c_compilers/

That's all I could find.  Is the ByteCraft compiler worth the extra $700???

- John Loch
.....johnloch@spam@spammtt.com

1995\10\06@235451 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
John Loch <@spam@johnlochspamMTT.COM> wrote:

>I've searched the net high and low for PIC C compilers.  Can anyone
>comment on these compilers?  Are there others that aren't listed
>below?  Thanks.
>
>1.) Custom Computer Services (CCS) - $99
>        Supports most PIC's with built-in special functions
>        http://execpc.com/~ccs/picc.html
>
>2.) Parallax ByteCraft C Compiler - $795
>        Supports 16C5x, 16C6x, 16C7x, 16C8x, and 17C42.
>        http://www.parallaxinc.com/pictools/c_compilers/
>
>That's all I could find.  Is the ByteCraft compiler worth the extra
>$700???

John:

I think so.  The Bytecraft compiler (by the way, it isn't a Parallax
product any more than the PIC microcontrollers are) is called MPC;
aside from being a better compiler, it's much more compatible with
Microchip's emulator (which can debug MPC programs at the source
level), and there are some new developments coming soon for MPC which
should make it even better.

-Andy

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

'Stop these postings: FREEE 1 yr etc...'
1995\10\08@174037 by Falstaff

picon face
I suggest that the list-server does a grep on articles received,
and does not automatically mail them out if certain conditions
are met.
This could be in operation within a matter of days, perhaps.

"It's justice, Jim, but not as we know it."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frank A. Vorstenbosch        +31-(70)-355 5241        spamfalstaffspamxs4all.nl

1995\10\09@045427 by Errington A

flavicon
face
I have had an apologetic message from abacusspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTabacus.com, who are attempting
to find who sent this stuff and used their address.

I think it is probably best to treat SPAMs like advertisments (commercials).
You can't stop them appearing, but you don't have to act on them.

I must say I got very angry with the recent SPAMs, but now I sympathise with
the sysops who get  100x more abuse than each list ever gets.

Andy
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew M Errington                               Tel: +44 1524 593678
Microcomputer Consultant                         Fax: +44 1524 844011
Lancaster University                      spam_OUTa.errington@spam@spamRemoveMElancaster.ac.uk
Lancaster LA1 4YW     www.lancs.ac.uk/people/cpaame/cpaame.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------

'ByteCraft vs. CCS C compiler vs. others?'
1995\10\09@104212 by Paul Greenwood

flavicon
face
I have the $99 one and I like it alot.  I haven't had any problems but I only
use it in a hobby fashion.....  I haven't stressed it much.

> I've searched the net high and low for PIC C compilers.  Can anyone comment
> on these compilers?  Are there others that aren't listed below?  Thanks.
>
> 1.) Custom Computer Services (CCS) - $99
>         Supports most PIC's with built-in special functions
>         http://execpc.com/~ccs/picc.html
>
> 2.) Parallax ByteCraft C Compiler - $795
>         Supports 16C5x, 16C6x, 16C7x, 16C8x, and 17C42.
>         http://www.parallaxinc.com/pictools/c_compilers/
>
> That's all I could find.  Is the ByteCraft compiler worth the extra $700???
>
> - John Loch
> spamjohnlochspamspammtt.com
>


--

           -- Paul Greenwood --  (@spam@pablospam_OUTspamaustin.ibm.com)

Ten years of rejection slips is nature's way of telling you to stop
writing.
               -- R. Geis

1995\10\09@124523 by John T

picon face
> I've searched the net high and low for PIC C compilers.  Can anyone comment
> on these compilers?  Are there others that aren't listed below?  Thanks.

There is another C-Complier coming from Avocet Systems. I've been told it will
ship in November. Demo disks are supposedly available.

Contact Avocet at 800 448-8500 or .....avocetspam.....midcoast.com

John Magrane
FAE Bell Industries
408 734-8570
spam72712.2347KILLspamspamcompuserve.com

'Stop these postings: FREEE 1 yr etc...'
1995\10\09@182458 by Scott Stephens

flavicon
face
>I have had an apologetic message from RemoveMEabacusRemoveMEspamabacus.com, who are attempting
>to find who sent this stuff and used their address.
>
>I think it is probably best to treat SPAMs like advertisments (commercials).
> You can't stop them appearing, but you don't have to act on them.
>
>I must say I got very angry with the recent SPAMs, but now I sympathise with
>the sysops who get  100x more abuse than each list ever gets.

True. And I also see it as part of the price we pay for freedom on the
internet. If we turn to a sensor to protect us from spammers, next it may be
other material some consider offensive: political, sexual or religous. I
choose to ignore it and spare others the time wasted reading messages like
this one. (sorry).

'ByteCraft vs. CCS C compiler vs. others?'
1995\10\11@142526 by Tim Braun

flavicon
face
> Date:         Fri, 6 Oct 1995 12:00:01 -0700
> From: John Loch <KILLspamjohnloch.....spamKILLspamMTT.COM>

> I've searched the net high and low for PIC C compilers.  Can anyone comment
> on these compilers?  Are there others that aren't listed below?  Thanks.

> 1.) Custom Computer Services (CCS) - $99
>         Supports most PIC's with built-in special functions
>         http://execpc.com/~ccs/picc.html

> 2.) Parallax ByteCraft C Compiler - $795
>         Supports 16C5x, 16C6x, 16C7x, 16C8x, and 17C42.
>         http://www.parallaxinc.com/pictools/c_compilers/

> That's all I could find.  Is the ByteCraft compiler worth the extra $700???

> - John Loch
> johnlochspam_OUTspamspam_OUTmtt.com

The PIC architecture doesn't lend itself to stack-based languages like C,
IMHO.  Those are the two compilers that I know of.  I bought them both,
guess in what order :).

I've heard of happy CCS customers, and I suppose for some PIC variants for
some projects their product is fine.  And then it's a good value.  I couldn't
use it for my project, as it was c57 based, and needed more than one page
of code.

The MPC compiler (I bought mine straight from ByteCraft) allowed me to complete
the project and deliver to the customer.  That was worth US$700 to me.

Tim Braun                             | Voice: 204-942-2992 ext 228
Continental Healthcare Systems Canada | FAX:   204-942-3001
1900-155 Carlton St                   | Email: KILLspamtimspam@spam@chs.mb.ca
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3C 3H8    | www: http://www.chs.mb.ca/~tim/home.html

'The RTCC Saga'
1995\10\19@055818 by Neil Gillies

flavicon
face
During the thread of this ongoing discussion, it seems that no-one has mentioned
the alternative approach to this problem - so here is my penny/dollar/ECU/francs
worth -

I had been working on a couple of projects which required ACCURATE timing and
encountered all these same problems - albeit with the ST6 series of controllers
- continual software overheads causing innacuracies in timing. Eventually I
decided to drop the idea completely and wired up a PXO (Programmable Xtal
Oscillator) chip to give me an interrupt on one of the port pins. Voila - no s/w
overheads, a clock the beats continually, hundreds of hours programming time
gained and a plus - if you wire up some spare i/o to the PXO, you can change the
frequency as well. Yes, I know it's cheating and it costs more - but for the
sake of one 16 pin chip - you know it makes sense :-)

'another request!'
1995\10\23@125701 by MARAMI%IREARN.bitnet

flavicon
face
Dear friends,
thanks for your reply to my first request.i found PIC assembler and
simulator in http://www.ultranet.com/biz/mchip but i could not
get them .because our INTERNET line in IRAN is very slow(9600 bps).
so i have a new request.may you treat me kindly and send me these programs
by e-mail? if you have in mind to do this kindness please use uuencode
to change  binary file to ascii for e-mail.
thanks for your kindness and cooperation.
A.Marami
ELECTRONICS engineer
e-mail: @spam@maramiRemoveMEspamrose.ipm.ac.ir

'FTP by mail. (was: another request!)'
1995\10\27@162336 by Sheldon Ward

picon face
At 08:18 PM 10/23/95 +0330, you wrote:

>simulator in http://www.ultranet.com/biz/mchip but i could not
>get them .because our INTERNET line in IRAN is very slow(9600 bps).
>so i have a new request.may you treat me kindly and send me these programs
>by e-mail? if you have in mind to do this kindness please use uuencode
>A.Marami

There are many computers around the world to do just that!  They're called
FTP by Mail servers.  One is at ftpmail@spam@spamEraseMESunSITE.Unc.EDU, but you should use
one that is close to you.  You tell it (via email) where the file is and it
will get the file and email it to you.  Easy to use.  Some sites have long
waiting lists but others are very quick.

Try it out!

Later,

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


'Spam-light mode for the list'
1995\11\04@131637 by Eric Brewer
flavicon
face
>Date:        Mon, 23 Oct 1995 20:50:55 +0100
>From: Eric Thomas <RemoveMEERICspam.....SEARN.SUNET.SE>
>Subject:     Re: Mail...
>To: Eric Brewer <spamEric@spam@spamEXCELLENT.COM>
>In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 23 Oct 1995 12:50:54 -0800 from Eric Brewer
>            <EricTakeThisOuTspamExcellent.com>
>
>Well if you're the list owner you can change it yourself. "Send= Private"
>in the list header.
>
>  Eric

Hi fellow PICers and Jory,

I sent E-Mail to Eric Thomas, the guy who wrote the listserv software, about
our problem. His repsonse is above. Basically, we can make the list private
so only those who are subcribed can post message to the list. While this does
not prevent someone from subscribing and then SPAMming, it does mean
they have to try a little harder.

I am all for it. If you agree, send a message to Jory Bell (the list
maintainer) and
if you want, a yes/no to me. I will keep a count of number ayes/naes if
anyone cares.

cheers,
eric

'Can you disable or reduce the 18ms delay when waki'
1995\11\04@155750 by NEIL B. GANDLER

flavicon
face
I am using the PIC for the first time. I am desigining a home automation
product for my graduate project. Is their a way to reduce or eliminate
the 18ms startup delay when awaking the PIC out of sleep. I am refering
to the 16C5X series. My circuit works by sensing passive infrared radiation
to detect human presence. A low pulse on the MCLR pin awakens the PIC
out of sleep mode and the program starts about 18ms or so later. The
problem... alot can happen in 18ms. I would think if I use an RC oscillator
instead of a crystal variant the PIC would'nt need this time. I
have searched the data book and have not been able to find
a way to reduce or eliminate this delay. I would appreciate any help.
Thanks.

By the way as a service to others, I am currently trying to start a PIC
newsgroup on USERNET and working on an archive of mailing list
posts to be integrated with a WWW page and search machine.

               Neil Gandler

'Calculating the exponent with PICs'
1995\11\04@162527 by Gerry Smith

flavicon
face
How can I calculate the exponent of a number?  (eg. 2^2=4)  Any help will
be greatly appreciated.  Thanks in advance.

'Spam-light mode for the list'
1995\11\04@200005 by Daniel Mahoney

picon face
>
> I am all for it. If you agree, send a message to Jory Bell (the list
> maintainer) and
> if you want, a yes/no to me. I will keep a count of number ayes/naes if
> anyone cares.
>

Absolutely yes!  I'm getting *really* tired of this magazine
subscription shit.  It's getting so old, I don't even bother
to mail-bomb the people involved any more.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Mahoney                                          Product Manager
.....dmahoneyspamTakeThisOuTnetcom.com                       Comarco Wireless Technologies
Riverside, CA                                                Irvine, CA
(909) 360-3647 (home)                                    (714) 450-4076

'Calculating the exponent with PICs'
1995\11\05@135001 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
Gerry Smith <EraseMELIUKBspamKILLspamKIRK.NORTHERNC.ON.CA> wrote:

>How can I calculate the exponent of a number?  (eg. 2^2=4)  Any help will
>be greatly appreciated.

Depends, Gerry... Will you always be squaring the number, or raising 2 to
some power, or do you need a way to do generalized x^y calculations?  What's
the range of your x's and y's?

-Andy

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

1995\11\05@145804 by Gerry Smith

flavicon
face
Well I would probably either square the number or cube it.  The range of the
x (in x^y) would probably be from 1-25 (guess I would need 16 bit math to do
this).  Any ideas?

1995\11\05@162302 by dfsnews

flavicon
face
*This message was sent using a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) UUCPGate*



On Sun, Nov 5, 1995, 6:47:12 PM GMT Andrew Warren wrote:


Try shifting the number, this works only for powers fo 2.

2^2 = 4
2<<1 = 4

2<<4 = 16




{Quote hidden}

1995\11\05@163959 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
dfsnews <dfsnewsspamspam_OUTEMBAY.COM> wrote:

>Try shifting the number, this works only for powers fo 2.
>
>2^2 = 4
>2<<1 = 4
>
>2<<4 = 16

   Uhh... That only works for MULTIPLYING BY powers of 2, not for
   raising arbitrary numbers to some power.

   -Andy

--
Andrew Warren - spamfastfwd@spam@spamix.netcom.com
Fast Forward Engineering, Vista, California

'Spam-light mode for the list'
1995\11\05@180036 by John Payson

flavicon
face
> I sent E-Mail to Eric Thomas, the guy who wrote the listserv software, about
> our problem. His repsonse is above. Basically, we can make the list private
> so only those who are subcribed can post message to the list. While this does
> not prevent someone from subscribing and then SPAMming, it does mean
> they have to try a little harder.
>
> I am all for it. If you agree, send a message to Jory Bell (the list
> maintainer) and
> if you want, a yes/no to me. I will keep a count of number ayes/naes if
> anyone cares.

[sorry this is going to the whole list]

I'm in favor of making the list private, provided that those who are not
on the list receive a "helpful" bounce message [i.e. they get a message which,
if they actually read it, will tell them how to subscribe].

1995\11\06@075123 by Eric Brewer

flavicon
face
>Date:        Mon, 23 Oct 1995 20:50:55 +0100
>From: Eric Thomas <spam_OUTERICTakeThisOuTspamKILLspamSEARN.SUNET.SE>
>Subject:     Re: Mail...
>To: Eric Brewer <RemoveMEEric@spam@spamspamEXCELLENT.COM>
>In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 23 Oct 1995 12:50:54 -0800 from Eric Brewer
>            <RemoveMEEricRemoveMEspamTakeThisOuTExcellent.com>
>
>Well if you're the list owner you can change it yourself. "Send= Private"
>in the list header.
>
>  Eric

Hi fellow PICers and Jory,

I sent E-Mail to Eric Thomas, the guy who wrote the listserv software, about
our problem. His repsonse is above. Basically, we can make the list private
so only those who are subcribed can post message to the list. While this does
not prevent someone from subscribing and then SPAMming, it does mean
they have to try a little harder.

I am all for it. If you agree, send a message to Jory Bell (the list
maintainer) and
if you want, a yes/no to me. I will keep a count of number ayes/naes if
anyone cares.

cheers,
eric

'Calculating the exponent with PICs'
1995\11\06@075909 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
Gerry Smith <LIUKBTakeThisOuTspam@spam@KIRK.NORTHERNC.ON.CA> wrote:

>Well I would probably either square the number or cube it.  The range of
>the x (in x^y) would probably be from 1-25 (guess I would need 16 bit math
>to do this).  Any ideas?

Gerry:

For powers of 2 or 3, just multiply x by itself once or twice.

For larger exponents, something like the following should work:

   Raise X to the Nth power:

       Step 1. Y = 1

       Step 2. N = INT (N/2)
               If N was even, goto Step 5

       Step 3. Y = Y * X

       Step 4. If N = 0, END

       Step 5. X = X * X
               GOTO Step 2

-Andy

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

'Spam-light mode for the list'
1995\11\06@145525 by adrian

flavicon
picon face
> >   I m wondering if there are any potential disadvantages to making the list
> >   private?
> >  I can t think of any. Does any one else have any ideas?
> >
> >
>
> But of course, do you post from multiple machines?  Most private lists
> I've seen only allow posts from the subscribed address.
>
> Roger (I know, the list knows me as spambooksTakeThisOuTspammis1.mainline.com when in actuality
>        I am .....booksspamspamBeGonertssec1.dms.state.fl.us, or even .....booksTakeThisOuTspamEraseMEmail.dms.state.fl.us,
>         both the same machine and I'm not sure the machine uses the same
>         one all the time.)
>

Err.. yes, I am on as RemoveMEmicrochipspamspamKILLspamrhanna.demon.co.uk, but I post
from STOPspamadrianEraseMEspamrhanna.demon.co.uk and would not want piclist email
going to my "adrian" address as it would clutter my mailbox.

I suspect private would therefore cause me a problem.

--
_
(_) _| _ . _  _   Tel +44 973 222257
( )(_|(  |(_|| )  Fax UK 0500 222258                    E&OE

'Calculating the exponent with PICs'
1995\11\08@223842 by David Knell

flavicon
face
>>Try shifting the number, this works only for powers fo 2.
>>
>>2^2 = 4
>>2<<1 = 4
>>
>>2<<4 = 16

Nope.  2<<4=32. n<<1 = 2n; this isn't quite what's required.

Dave

'Using the SCI on the 16C74'
1995\11\09@070958 by Glyn Davies 'Gryn'

flavicon
picon face
Hi piclist,

Does anyone have a piece of sample code on using the SCI module of the
16C7x.  I'm new to the PIC, and uControllers in general, so I'm looking
for just a straight forward piece :)

Anyone got any good starting points / source ?

Thanks

Glyn

--

Glyn D / http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~daviess / Computer Science 3rd year

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             "Whom computers must destroy, they must first drive mad."
                                                       -- fortune

                                    "What if everyone felt like that?"
                                                       -- Catch 22
------------------------------------------------------------------------

'Starting on the 16C74'
1995\11\10@060223 by Glyn Davies 'Gryn'

flavicon
picon face
Hi piclist!

I've also been struck by the amazing bouncing email server.

Does anyone have a piece of sample code on using the SCI module of the
16C7x.  I'm new to the PIC, and uControllers in general, so I'm looking
for just a straight forward piece :)

Anyone got any good starting points / source ?

Thanks

Glyn

--

Glyn D / http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~daviess / Computer Science 3rd year

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             "Whom computers must destroy, they must first drive mad."
                                                       -- fortune

                                    "What if everyone felt like that?"
                                                       -- Catch 22
------------------------------------------------------------------------

'Yes, the COM84 programmer works fine.'
1995\11\13@101623 by Rick Miller

flavicon
face
On Mon, 13 Nov 1995, John Safrit wrote:

> PS   Has anyone had any luck with the COM84 serial port PIC programmer???

That's what I'm using.  It works great now that I've tied signal ground to
chassis ground.  Downloads just fine.  I just programmed a PIC for the first
time on Saturday, and all went well.  It drove a unipolar stepper motor
just as expected.

I'm a happy camper.  :-)

Rick Miller, Design Engineer  (and local "Internet Guy")
Digalog Systems, Inc.         <rickspamBeGonespamdigalogsys.com>
3180 S. 166th St.             <Rick.Miller@spam@spamLinux.org>
New Berlin, WI  53151  USA    +1 414 797 8000 x-228

'Anyone used the PIC based C Compiler from CCS?'
1995\11\15@042018 by Declan O'Connor

flavicon
face
    I came across another C compiler for the PIC series of devices. So far
    the only information I can get is a specification given on web page:
    http://execpc.com/~ccs/picc.html run by a bunch calling themselves
    Custom Computer Services. It certainly sounds a comprehensive package
    but as it costs $99 I'd like to know if anyone can personally
    recommend it?

    Also, if anyone has a list of other such C compilers (other than John
    Favata's) why not post it to the piclist for all to see.

    Declan O'Connor                                 -  spam_OUTdoconnorspamspamgtech.com

'Yes, the COM84 programmer works fine.'
1995\11\15@060815 by Jan Henrik Kraagtorp

flavicon
face
> On Mon, 13 Nov 1995, John Safrit wrote:
>
> > PS   Has anyone had any luck with the COM84 serial port PIC programmer???
>
> That's what I'm using.  It works great now that I've tied signal ground to
> chassis ground.  Downloads just fine.  I just programmed a PIC for the first
> time on Saturday, and all went well.  It drove a unipolar stepper motor
> just as expected.
>
> I'm a happy camper.  :-)
>

Could you please send me the schematics and the complete component
list for this programmer?
(I assume it is the PicBlaster programmer, the small one that fits
inside a DB25 hood)

Thanks in advance....

JHK

email:janhkspam_OUTspamRemoveMEoleg.hiof.no & spamjhkspamBeGonespamstrutle.hiof.no & spamjanhkRemoveMEspamfrodo.hiof.no
talk: same as email

" 640 kB should be enough for everyone " - Bill Gates

'limits 16c84 ? Measure the 'age' of the chip?'
1995\11\16@013827 by Scott Stephens

picon face
>>Are the some limits on how many times you can prgaming a 16c84??
>>I have some problems wit some chips(I can use them,but not enabel to
>>progaming them)
>>Arne - norway

The data book, pg 2-585 specs 100 minimum and 1000 typical, with PRELIMINARY
stamped across it. Myself and others have burned C84's over 100 times with
no problems (yet).

I wonder what will happen when it gets near the end? If the programming
method specs testing and re-burning cells, maybe software could count the
number of times required to burn a cell, and give some type of indication
how much 'life' (charge carriers in the FAMOS or whatever) is left.
Something for those writing programming software to keep in mind.

'Is the list alive?'
1995\11\21@012435 by mauricio

flavicon
face
Hi!

I did not receive any mail form the piclist last 5 days.
I'm just asking, is the list alive, or is there something else
going on?

Max

1995\11\21@012435 by mauricio

flavicon
face
Hi!

I did not receive any mail form the piclist last 5 days.
I'm just asking, is the list alive, or is there something else
going on?

Max

1995\11\22@024202 by mauricio

flavicon
face
Thanx to all...
Max

''Latch up' in the EEprom cell'
1995\11\27@052621 by Preben Granberg

flavicon
face
Hi everybody

Have any of you seen this problem:

In the pic84,  I am programming some cell in the intern EEprom and I make a
power failure to the PIC.
In some cases the EEprom cell kind of 'latch up' it is impossible to program
the cell again after the power is on .
The only found way is to program the PIC again.
Has any of your tried this ?

Preben
  ___  ___   ___  ___  ___ .       ___    _    _ .  ___  ___   ___
 |    |___) |_   |___|  |  | \  / |_      |\  /| | |    |___) |   |
 |___ |   \ |___ |   |  |  |  \/  |___    | \/ | | |___ |   \ |___|

 Creative Micro   Hinbjerg 38   DK-2690 Karlslunde   Denmark
 Phone +45 4615 4655                     Fax   +45 4215 3977

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1995 , 1996 only
- Today
- New search...