| ??? 03/06/06 15:57 Read: times |
#111384 - worse programmer? Responding to: ???'s previous message |
The programmer which sits in my office is used for everyday production programming for 5+ years and it's ZIF is twice or thrice over it's lifetime (the software notified so we got the repacement which since then safely lies in the shelf, as I had no time nor reason to change it). Not a single occurence of bad signature on Atmel, Microchip, Intel and a handful of other manufacturer's chips.
Maybe it was not expensive enough? :-))) Jan Waclawek PS. The point probably lies in that the programmer is able to do insertion check on every pin before it attempts to start the programming cycle. It happens quite often it says "no connection on pin xxx", repositioning of the chip into ZIF always helps. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| AT89S52 signature | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Throw away... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| naah | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| worse programmer? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| different messages, nothing else | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the original problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| i tried to explain the whole situatuion | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| do you have an oscilloscope? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| that would be a stupid chip design | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Make that sense? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Is it you, Erik Malund? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| it seems possible | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why not using a fresh ZIF? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the generation using these micros use so | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Sockets, or how I lost the precision... | 01/01/70 00:00 |