Hi,

I have had a project using 16C84. I used the built-in EEPROM, too. As I
changed to 16F84, I was surprised because of the write for the EEPROM cell
#0 produced no result. Any other cells, etc. were ok. I used the correct
addressing scheme, no dirty bits.

Have anyone ever seen that?

Imre

On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, David Tait wrote:

> > >Does anyone know _ALL_ (maybe you, Jim ...) the differences between those
> > >two ?  I would like to know also ...
> >
> > You know them all now. 16F84 different "better" code protection, more ram,
> > reversed pwrte,  cheaper! (same technology.)
>
> There are few more differences described in Appendix E of the 16F84
> data sheet.
>
> David
>
>