On Sun, Jan 29, 2006 at 08:03:21PM -0800, James Newton, Host wrote: > > To ride your hobby horse: I think programming a bootloader or > > the firmware of an intelligent progger is one of the places > > where LVP is appropriate. > > > > Wouter van Ooijen > > Ok then, how about an LVP programmer that uses only non-programmed > components and takes a stream from a serial port like Tony's ASCII > programmer. Perhaps the clock signal could be developed without RC circuits. The clock isn't too very critical. It's just a one shot triggered by the edge of the start bit. A 555 with a cap and a pot can be easily tuned to give the proper timing with just a small bit of trimming. ` > Again, the point is to not require any programming software, but rather use > a data file that loads a bootloader or like that. The data file only needs > to be developed once, but having server based software for turning a hex > file into such a datafile would be very cool as well. After hearing Wouter's arguments I'm more inclined to agree with him. There is already a vast amount of programming software that would only need be fitted with a driver. > It really seems to me that it would be nice to have a very simple > programming circuit that could load at least one or two types of blank PIC > chip. And it isn't like these chips stop being made. You can still buy > 16F84's and you can still use a 16F84 to make a programmer that will program > just about anything else. Right? > > True. But if it can program a 16F84, you can program a lot of other parts using the same hardware interface. So why not integrate with some programming software that can take advantage of that fact? BAJ -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist