Actually, it was a silicon cost tradeoff that the I2C is slave only.
     Royalties are due whenever I2C is implemented in silicon.

     Some of the newer devices, such as 17C756, have master mode I2C.  The
     master mode requires substantilly more logic as well as a baud rate
     generator to be added to the device, so expect to pay a little more.

     Rgds, Brian.


______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
Subject: Re: I2C Master possible for PICs?
Author:  Byron A Jeff <byron@CC.GATECH.EDU> at Internet_Exchange
Date:    3/3/97 9:10 AM


>
> --=====================_857409978==_
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> At 09:46 PM 3/2/97 -0500, you wrote:
> >Who here is using a PIC as a I2C master (controller)?
> >I'm investigating the PIC as a controller, particularly the 16C73, for I2C
> >video chips (such as the closed-caption decoders from Philips and Zilog).
> >
> >I've got the I2C docs from Philips and Microchip's I2C app notes.  But I'd
> >like to hear from people using the PIC as the master device.
>
> You have to bit-bop them from software.  For some reason Microchip only
> implemented the I2C slave side in hardware.

Reason is that you must pay Philips a royalty on masters implemented in
hardware. Can anyone confirm that. I read it somewhere on the net.

BAJ