At 18:36 12/02/99 -0000, you wrote:

David Tait wrote:
>
>
>P.S. I know you've just joined the PICLIST so you might think
>I'm always writing long defences of my programmer stuff there.
>You would be wrong - the recent messages I sent were the first
>for well over a year!

This reminds me of the time I had something to say about the
tait style programmers some years ago.

Below is a letter I sent to David Tait by way of explaination.
Be warned though, It seems I was so nice and contrite back then
it is sickening to read.

This may want to make you puke just as it did me.

__________________________________________________________


>Hi Jim,
     >
     >You asked about a circuit diagram for the COM84 cct:
     >
     >ftp://rasi.lr.ttu.ee/pub/sis/CAD/DIY/BITMAPS/com84.gif
     >
     >I'm surprised it works but it seems that a lot of people
     >are using it now.
     >
     >Cheers,
     >
     >David
     >



Thanks David, I take a look if I get the chance. I know that you were a
pioneer with these direct driven programmers. Of late I have been critical
of some aspects of them. I certainly don't want to be critical of anything
in as much as it proves to be genuinely useful. I do think the promotion of
them has became over blown. In the last two weeks I have replied to four
requests for help on the piclist.

I do not know who has done what, but some of the designs, and there are
many of them, seem under done. If people are going to use them they may as
well work. I would like to see some moves among their suppliers to ensure
REPEATABLE quality. Maybe they need a few extra components and a PCB
instead of trying to be "as cheap as."

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a 16C84 programmer along these lines
as the 16C84 is self timed. Other devices need an accurate timing source.
This can be achieved, in ball park terms, in DOS with good software but in
windows, out of the question.

It would be good to see a minimum standard that defined voltage regulation,
and DOS and/or windows compatability. Windows compatible direct drive
programmers would require an onboard timing source such as a 555 timer.
This could be calibrated in by the PC in purely DOS mode.

Documentation should also meet a minimum standard so that people have
details how to test and trouble shoot their programmer. The problem is
beginners are using them and these people are the ones who can least afford
to have problems.

     A current trend seems to be:

     1) Save dollars on a cheap programmer
     2) Throw dollars in the bin with damaged chips
     3) Ask someone on the piclist to help

What started out as a good idea now seems to be running of the rails. I am
dishearten that people don't seem to appreciate quality either in their own
work or someone elses.

Anyway, these are just my thoughts on the matter and I don't want to be
offending anyone but I am a sucker for robust, quality design. My point is
that maybe the time has come for a "cheap programmer benchmark" to protect
those just joining the PIC fraternity. I don't want to be seen as rubbishing
someone else's efforts and I hope you don't feel I am attacking you or even
acting out of my own commercial interests. In fact I'm thinking of giving
it away. It has not been a good last week.

Regards,

Jim

End of sickofantic email.

___________________________________________________________-


Jim

P.S. I'm off those pills now.

________________________________________
Jim Robertson
Email: newfound@pipeline.com.au
http://www.pipeline.com.au/users/newfound
MPLAB compatible PIC programmers and firmware
upgrades for many programmers.
________________________________________