| ??? 07/17/07 14:57 Modified: 07/17/07 15:15 Read: times |
#141974 - the old errors... Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Tom,
While I see why you were disappointed by the 'V51Rx2 as a replacement for the 'C51Rx2, IMHO, the 'V' is superior to the 'C' in that respect, that the bootloader is in FLASH and could be modified easily for any need, including interrupts fully running during ISP/IAP, and the SoftICE tool. If I would be the person who decides on the new chip, I would try to merge the good from both. Apparently, this did not happen - or we are again fooled by incomplete information. JW PS. ... I see the stream of bootvector loss complaints to start to churn in again... |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| P89CV51Rx2 XRAM bug? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| @Ri or @dptr? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| @dptr | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| P89v51 <--> P89C51 differences | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Oh sorry I mis-read | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| What is the full part No of the C51RB2? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| P89C51RB2BA & internal XRAM | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| what is "the CV51 solution" ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| isp entry on /PSEN - as with the old \'C51Rx2 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| maybe, maybe not | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| P89V P89C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| CV51 solution | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the old errors... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| OK, I found the first error in the new datasheet.. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| whoever wrote that datasheet... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Jan is close! | 01/01/70 00:00 |