That's right, same silicon inside. Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: Quitt, Walter To: Sent: Friday, May 12, 2000 4:14 PM Subject: Re: Erasing PIC's > Does that mean if you "pry" the top off an OTP, > you'd see a uv part in the middle? Not that all > the wirebonds would hold, but you'd see the UV > EPROM, right? > > -W > > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Warren [mailto:fastfwd@IX.NETCOM.COM] > Sent: Friday, May 12, 2000 3:57 PM > To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU > Subject: Re: Erasing PIC's > > > johan strombom wrote: > > > Why is that, why will the pic become useless after code protection, > > who would like to do such a thing with a uv erasable pic? I can't > > see anything positive with that, if you program it and by an > > accident enables the code protection then your expensive pic is > > lost... Did Microchip plan that when they constructed the chip? > > Johan: > > Yes, Microchip planned it that way. In their older PICs, the copy- > protect bit was erasable, which allowed unscrupulous people to defeat > the code-protection. The newer PICs shield the code-protection > memory cells from UV in order to prevent that. > > Windowed and non-windowed PICs contain the same silicon, so Microchip > can't make "development" versions of the PICs that don't contain that > copy-protection feature. > > -Andy > > > === Andrew Warren - fastfwd@ix.netcom.com > === Fast Forward Engineering - San Diego, California > === http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2499