Matt Pobursky wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2002 08:02:44 -0700, John Dammeyer wrote:
>
>>I use a six pin SIP type header where I don't have the room for
>>the RJ connector.  The pinout remains the same and I have a
>>small converter I wired up that has an RJ socket on one end and
>>a 6 pin square post header on the other.  I make the circuit
>>board pins just small enough so the header is a friction fit
>>into the board.  I then dangle my PIC ICD programmer into the
>>project, program it or single step debug it.
>>
>>My PIC16F877  CAN Activity board uses the RJ connector.
>
>
> I hate RJ type connectors. They take up a ton of PC board space
> for so few connections. Cables (good ones at least) for them are
> kind of a pain to obtain/make too, unless you want to use
> Cat3/Cat5 cable and tools.

But premade Cat5 cables are so readily available in various lengths and
colors. And they're cheap. Why would you want to make them?

Yes, they do take up some board space. But so will anything else that's
suitable for connections to the outside world. Yes, there are some
smaller alternatives, such as the connectors for USB, but those
connectors aren't easy to find yet.

I think Microchip's choice of modular connectors is partly motivated by
that. The idea is that you may want to retain ICSP capability in a
finished product, not just at the breadboard stage, so you need a
connector that's appropriate to expose to the outside world. SIP headers
and the like won't fill that need.

(Disclaimer: I'm working on a project that will use Cat5 cables to
connect the various pieces together, largely because the cables are so
easy to get. I want the thing to be easily reproduced by others, and
taking fiddly cable building out of the picture is one way to do that.)

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads