| ??? 03/07/06 04:14 Read: times |
#111468 - i tried to explain the whole situatuion Responding to: ???'s previous message |
The programmer i´m using it´s the one recomended by Atmel in a paper about ISP programming. The programmer is good quality, not a handmade one. The cable lenght it´s 30cm (12" ?)
Why not throw the micro? Because it´s working. The only problen is the signature, actually only the LSB. Besides that i can program, verify and after that use the micro wich does it´s job. Why not use a parallel programmer? I don´t have U$S 300 to U$S1000 to pay for it. About philips and Winbond, it´s very difficult to get other than Atmel here in Argentina. And if you get those you´ll pay U$S10 o more when you can get an Atmel for U$S2. But the original question was different. I´m sure that the first time i red the signature OK. After that i used a wrong algorithm to program again (AT89S8252 instead of S52). I don´t think you can "write" (burn?) the signature bits, but i don´t have any other explanation. Perhaps i´ll buy another and do the same, it would be self explanatory. |
| 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 |