Searching \ for '16C84 as I2C Slave' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: techref.massmind.org/techref/i2cs.htm?key=i2c
Search entire site for: '16C84 as I2C Slave'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'16C84 as I2C Slave'
1997\03\25@074231 by Elvin Slavik

picon face
Hi,
Has anyone much success in using a '84 as an I2C slave. I know
other PIC micros have hardware to support I2C, but I'd like to
stick with the '84.

A pointer to any '84 i2c slave source would be great.

Regards.Elvin

1997\03\25@094308 by Antti Lukats

flavicon
face
Hi Elvin,

we have made a I2C extenders using 16C84 source code made

public soon, can do write now as I am not at home loc,
antti

On Tue, 25 Mar 1997, Elvin Slavik wrote:

> Hi,
> Has anyone much success in using a '84 as an I2C slave. I know
> other PIC micros have hardware to support I2C, but I'd like to
> stick with the '84.
>
> A pointer to any '84 i2c slave source would be great.
>
> Regards.Elvin
>

1997\03\25@204822 by John Payson

picon face
> Has anyone much success in using a '84 as an I2C slave. I know
> other PIC micros have hardware to support I2C, but I'd like to
> stick with the '84.
>
> A pointer to any '84 i2c slave source would be great.

You will need to add external hardware if you want to support I2C; you will
also need to ensure that there is at least one licensed I2C component in the
system.  How much hardware is needed will depend upon many factors, but the
primary consideration is that unless you add hardware support there is no way
a PIC can keep up with a master that's running at full speed and be able to
do anything else practical.

1997\03\26@012124 by Todd Peterson

picon face
At 07:32 PM 3/25/97 -0600, you wrote:
>> Has anyone much success in using a '84 as an I2C slave.

>You will need to add external hardware if you want to support I2C; you will
>also need to ensure that there is at least one licensed I2C component in the
>system.

This brings me back to a question I had a while ago; what is the final word
on the status of Microchip's I2C license?  The Philips lawyer told me in no
uncertain terms that their license was in great jeopardy and that I should
have something in writing that they would back me if a problem developed
legally, and even went on to tell me that Microchip would deny this and say
that they had a perfectly legitimate license.  I immediatly called MCHIP,
and they completly fulfilled this prophecy.

So where does this leave someone?  I's be interested in a serious answer
from MCHIP as to why Phillips is singling ONLY THEM out in saying there is a
license problem; I asked about a great deal of other microcontroller
manufacturers and Phillips said they were all O.K. but one other.  What's
the word?  Does using a PIC that has I2C hardware count as having at least
one I2C device?  How about implementing it in software on a PIC without the
hardware?

-Todd Peterson
 E-Lab Digital Engineering, Inc.

http://www.netins.net/showcase/elab

1997\03\26@120250 by Mike Smith

flavicon
face
> So where does this leave someone?  I's be interested in a serious answer
> from MCHIP as to why Phillips is singling ONLY THEM out in saying there
is a
> license problem; I asked about a great deal of other microcontroller
> manufacturers and Phillips said they were all O.K. but one other.  What's
> the word?  Does using a PIC that has I2C hardware count as having at
least
> one I2C device?  How about implementing it in software on a PIC without
the
> hardware?

Or using, say, a C compiler like CCS which uses either s/w or h/w
implementations of I2C, depending on which pin numbers you select, and
which device.  Would CCS need the license?  Or you?
I'd suppose most ppl would be communicating with a 3rd party IC if they
were using I2C, given a choice, I'd use faster protocols...

Oh, which is the one other microcontroller manufacturer  BTW?

MikeS

1997\03\26@193346 by Mike Smith

flavicon
face
> So where does this leave someone?  I's be interested in a serious answer
> from MCHIP as to why Phillips is singling ONLY THEM out in saying there
is a
> license problem; I asked about a great deal of other microcontroller
> manufacturers and Phillips said they were all O.K. but one other.  What's
> the word?  Does using a PIC that has I2C hardware count as having at
least
> one I2C device?  How about implementing it in software on a PIC without
the
> hardware?

Or using, say, a C compiler like CCS which uses either s/w or h/w
implementations of I2C, depending on which pin numbers you select, and
which device.  Would CCS need the license?  Or you?
I'd suppose most ppl would be communicating with a 3rd party IC if they
were using I2C, given a choice, I'd use faster protocols...

Oh, which is the one other microcontroller manufacturer  BTW?

MikeS

Sorry if this is a duplicate

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1997 , 1998 only
- Today
- New search...