This got me interested enough to drag out my Tech Ref copy, says: Aug 1981 first edition (would not have expected first edition in '81?) refers to INS8250... so we all predate the PC, the AppleII, the IMSA.... ho hum... D Rob Hamerling wrote: > > Hello Aza, > > Aza D. Oberman wrote: > >> . . . . . . . We spent quite a bit of time before >> figuring out that the NS1645 UART on the original IBM serial and >> serial/parallel port adapter card was wired in such a way that one >> could not >> use software to turn off all the handshaking requirements for reading >> RS-232. It *had* to "see" a device out there before it would receive >> anything. > > > As far as I know the IBM-PC and later the PC-XT were standard delivered > with a monochrome display/printer adapter. An 'Asynchronous > Communications Adapter' was an option. This adapter was equiped with an > NS8250 and a 25-pin subD connector (IBM Tech Ref April 1984). > > The combined asyn/printer adapter came with the PC/AT, and this adapter > was equiped with an NS16450 and a 9-pin subD connector (IBM Tech Ref for > the PC/AT, September 1985). This is probably the one you are referring > to? I have still such an adapter in use on an old Pentium I use for > experiments. Maybe it is a later version, but I have never experienced > problems with flow control lines. > > >> Three wire (RX, TX, & Common) RS-232 is certainly convenient, but I still >> question if it is a good practice to not at least strap the handshaking >> lines when designing a RS-232 device. > > > I agree. When I build a PIC-based device with UART I either implement > CTS/RTS handshaking or use loop-backs with a current limiting resistor. > > [Ironically, I believe the "RS" in > >> "RS-232" stands for "Recommended Standard" -- makes one wonder what the >> official one is...] > > > Isn't it an EIA or IEEE standard today? > > Regards, Rob. > -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist