Ron Anthony wrote:

>Do you have any suggestions how to preserve the flashability of the part
>through our bootloader while still protecting the chip from code copying and
>downloading, etc?
>
Nope.  I'd say you are in quite a pickle.
You have a few options:
1) Give up on the idea of upgrading the part in the field/by the customer
2) Give up on the idea of having complete code protection
3) Redesign your project to work with a part that, in your estimation,
is not 'broken'
4) Seperate the project into
   a) Important, copy protected and non-upgradable bits
   b) Less Important, non-protected, upgradeable bits
   and redesign the project to use two chips, one protected and one not
5) Be up front with the customer and tell them you gambled and lost, and
that they'll have to distribute upgrade chips and tools until the better
chip comes out
6) Give us more of an idea as to what your project/product is/does (in a
broad sense) so we may be able to suggest a better workaround, or at
least tell us why you must have both copy protection and field upgrade
capability, so we can suggest a possible work around.

>Thank for any insight you can provide, it is truly appreciated, from a coder
>in a jam!!!
>
Glad to be of assistance - good luck!  Sound like you've hit the
immutable law of three - choose two: Upgradeable, Cheap, Protected.
 Hopefully a compromise or kluge can be found.

-Adam

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.