> Maybe not a 16F648A, but wouldn't it be useful to switch to a
> PIC which
> could support a bootloader (16F819?), so that the firmware could be
> updated without having to do the dance with a second chip?

Maybe. But the self-programming chips cost more, especially when you
consider that the bootloader part must be write-protected so it is
essentially 'lost'.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products

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