Searching \ for 'Programming Atmel 89C2051 [OT]' 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/microchip/devprogs.htm?key=programming
Search entire site for: 'Programming Atmel 89C2051 [OT]'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'Programming Atmel 89C2051 [OT]'
1998\12\23@233751 by poida

flavicon
face
This list is a defacto Atmel list as well now so  -

We developed an Atmel programmer for the above 1051, 2051 & 4051. We
used chips with batch numbers 9719 9716 9631. They were OK.

We are now about to release the programmer but chips with batch number
9836 have a problem programming. Byte verification fails at a byte early
on. But if one verifies the complete burn then the verification is OK.
We have just found this problem. Can anyone suggest anything?

Many thanks,

peter crowcroft
spam_OUTpeterTakeThisOuTspamkitsrus.com
http://kitsrus.com.

1998\12\23@235245 by Tjaart van der Walt

flavicon
face
poida wrote:
>
> This list is a defacto Atmel list as well now so  -
Bullshit. The "PIC" in "PIClist" actually refers to the
discussion of *PIC*-related micro's. The few times that
ATMEL was discussed on this list, it was usually to
compare them to PICs.

There is a purpose for this. As it is, it is hard enough
to keep real PIClisters from falling into OT discussions.

> on. But if one verifies the complete burn then the verification is OK.
> We have just found this problem. Can anyone suggest anything?

Sure - try a *real* ATMEL list.

--
Regards                   /"\
                         \ /
Tjaart van der Walt        X  ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
.....tjaartKILLspamspam@spam@wasp.co.za  / \ AGAINST HTML MAIL

|--------------------------------------------------|
|                WASP International                |
|R&D Engineer : GSM peripheral services development|
|--------------------------------------------------|
|SMS tjaartspamKILLspamsms.wasp.co.za  (160 chars max)|
|     http://www.wasp.co.za/~tjaart/index.html     |
|Voice: +27-(0)11-622-8686  Fax: +27-(0)11-622-8973|
|          WGS-84 : 26¡10.52'S 28¡06.19'E          |
|--------------------------------------------------|

1998\12\24@013034 by evan

picon face
> peter crowcroft (poida? what's a poida?) wrote:
> This list is a defacto Atmel list as well now so  -

Uh, nope.  Please keep it to PICs.  This list is exploding with enough [OT]
junk as it is (the trouble is, some of it is actually quite interesting
...:).

-Ed V.
Agile Controls

1998\12\24@043745 by Mark Willis

flavicon
face
Atmel lists AFAIK at this time:

Atmel List: Send an e-mail,
 Subject: Join Atmel Mailing List
      To: .....atmel-requestKILLspamspam.....pic.co.za
 Text of message: Join

AVR List: Send an e-mail,
 Subject: subscribe
      To: EraseMEavr-subscribespam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTegroups.com
 Text of message: subscribe

 You may be able to minimize these posts more, I'm just looking at my
copies, which worked, from my search for AT45D041 and now AT45D081
serial Flash chips info, found a person who will help me reach Flash
Nirvana on those parts fortunately!

 Some day I'll maybe get an Atmel processor, no rush right now <G>

 Mark, mwillisspamspam_OUTnwlink.com

Ed VanderPloeg wrote:
{Quote hidden}

1998\12\24@065947 by poida

flavicon
face
  Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1998 06:58:03 +0200
  From:         Tjaart van der Walt <@spam@tjaartKILLspamspamWASP.CO.ZA>

>poida wrote:
>
> This list is a defacto Atmel list as well now so  -
Bullshit. The "PIC" in "PIClist" actually refers to the
discussion of *PIC*-related micro's. The few times that
ATMEL was discussed on this list, it was usually to
compare them to PICs.

There is a purpose for this. As it is, it is hard enough
to keep real PIClisters from falling into OT discussions.

> on. But if one verifies the complete burn then the verification is OK.

> We have just found this problem. Can anyone suggest anything?

Sure - try a *real* ATMEL list.
-----------------
1. I think the strength of this group are in fact the number of
"slightly" off-topic discussions which take place. I venture to suggest
that many PIC programmers also keep up-to-date with other uC's as well,
even though you, obviously, do not.

2. I had a look over the last 1 week of digests to see the truly OT
discussions which had taken place - transfer of money problems, Easter
Eggs (!), file conversion how to's; want me to go back another week? I
did not notice you raising any objections to any of them.

3. Lighten up - its Christmas.

peter crowcroft
KILLspampeterKILLspamspamkitsrus.com
http://kitsrus.com

1998\12\24@102833 by Donald Brown

picon face
I agree, LIGHTEN UP!

I use other micro's as well and benifit from dicussions on atmel as
well. Anyway if I do not want to read the message I don't have to. So
why not do the same and quit bitiching about it.




---poida <RemoveMEpoidaTakeThisOuTspamLABYRINTH.NET.AU> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

OK.
>
> > We have just found this problem. Can anyone suggest anything?
>
> Sure - try a *real* ATMEL list.
> -----------------
> 1. I think the strength of this group are in fact the number of
> "slightly" off-topic discussions which take place. I venture to
suggest
> that many PIC programmers also keep up-to-date with other uC's as
well,
{Quote hidden}

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

1998\12\24@144635 by Andy Stephenson

flavicon
face
Regardless of reading it or not, you still have to download it, and then
figure out if the thread is appropriate or not - you can't always tell from
the subject.

General issues / questions / topics etc fine, but specifics ......

Do you realise how much activity there is on this list? Open it up and it
becomes a nightmare!

So go and take it to the right place.

At 07:28 24/12/98 -0800, you wrote:
{Quote hidden}

1998\12\24@162411 by Bob Drzyzgula

flavicon
face
You know, I think that if the original post merely up and
asked an Atmel question, there wouldn't have been quite the
noise about it, and it probably would have been answered
just like most other OT stuff on this list. However, with
the claim that PICLIST is a "defacto Atmel list as well
now", the point needed to be made. If such a statement
were to go without comment, there would be little basis
for disputing it in the future and this *would* become an
Atmel list. That IMHO would be a bad thing, because as many
other people have pointed out, the traffic on the list is
quite high without full-blown Atmel disussion, and many
people would probably leave the list with a big jump in
traffic.

--Bob

On Thu, Dec 24, 1998 at 07:28:24AM -0800, Donald Brown wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
============================================================
Bob Drzyzgula                             It's not a problem
EraseMEbobspamspamspamBeGonedrzyzgula.org                until something bad happens
============================================================

1998\12\24@190312 by Mark Willis

flavicon
face
That's why I posted the addresses of the two other lists - No reason
we can't be helpful, lighten up, AND be FIRM as well, that the main
purpose of THIS list is PICs (I'd hope we help anyone using Atmel/Scenix
processor who was accessing a Microchip 24LC256, as well - widening it
from "Pics" to all microchip products, KeeLoq's too, really - as we seem
to get all this traffic about emulators as well <VBG>  (Pricey, those!))

 Actually I should throw those points in that Mini-Faq maybe, and post
it's latest rev. next week late, around the first <G>

 Mark, RemoveMEmwillisKILLspamspamnwlink.com

Bob Drzyzgula wrote:
{Quote hidden}

1998\12\25@034422 by paulb

flavicon
face
Bob Drzyzgula wrote:

> If such a statement were to go without comment, there would be little
> basis for disputing it in the future and this *would* become an Atmel
> list.

 Harrrummmph! ... <sounds of growling into beard> ... That would never
do!  Mustn't set a precedent.  Can't let those whipper-snappers run
riot!

 Ha Ha!

> as many other people have pointed out, the traffic on the list is
> quite high without full-blown Atmel disussion, and many people would
> probably leave the list with a big jump in traffic.

 Yes, what superb logic.  We keep hearing this proposal:  More general
discussion so people would leave.  Makes you wonder what those who would
leave are actually monitoring the list for at present?  It seems to me
that those who are actively designing are likely to be either presently
using a variety of MCU families, or keeping an eye on them, and open to
ideas.

 Actually, I know that the more active conversants *are* on those other
lists already, but the "quieter" ones aren't, which is presumably why
such questions are in fact asked on *this* list.  If there's a more
active microcontroller list with serious technical content, I'd be
surprised.  I'd be curious, but I doubt I'd feel the need to join it as
1} too much traffic already(!) and 2} this list is already so all-
encompassing.

 Put another way, if I were to advise someone which single list to join
to get *either* a basic or a deeper understanding, this would be it.
And that's about as close to a *compliment* as you will get from me just
now!
--
 Cheers,
       Paul B.

1998\12\25@054103 by g.daniel.invent.design

flavicon
face
Possibly the write process creates a local heat problem causing the
eronous readings, a longer pause before readback may allow cooling
sufficient to give correct reading.   Of course real Piclisters would
recheck readback address and compare data before calling the Atmel list
with any wild claims about defacto relationships(*Bonnerism*)

regards,
Graham Daniel

poida wrote:
> We are now about to release the programmer but chips with batch number
> 9836 have a problem programming. Byte verification fails at a byte >early on.
But if one verifies the complete burn then the verification >is OK.
> We have just found this problem. Can anyone suggest anything?

--
Steam engines may be out of fashion, but when you consider that an
internal combustion engine would require recovery of waste heat by
transfer just before top dead centre then fashion becomes rather
redundant, USE STRATIFIED HEAT EXCHANGERS ! and external combustion.

You heard it first from: Graham Daniel, managing director of Electronic
Product Enhancements.
Phone NZ 04 387 4347, Fax NZ 04 3874348, Cellular NZ 021 954 196.

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