> > > Again, the point is to not require any programming software, > > > > But why? > > I'm not sure why James thinks this is useful. By using > traditional programming software, such a circuit could > potentially program any PIC. Mostly I see an educational / hacker benefit. I've explained the hacker part more in a prior post. But I just had another idea that might be more.... Reasonable and easy to understand. How about if the output of the programming software did not need to immediately go to the programmer? If it could be saved in a file and then simply copied out the serial port at a later date? This could be very useful for - Remote updates, (especially on chips that don't support bootloading) - Bootstrapping simple devices where the same datafile could be used again and again without need of the programming software except for the first time. - Educational interest (see the actual signal being sent to the PIC without expensive test equipment) study the timing of at least one simple case so you understand what is going on in general. - Extreme cross platform support (server based programming software). You could program PICs from your PDA, Mainframe, AS400, serial print server, anything with a serial port. - Cool Hacker factor (maybe I'm the only one who sees that ) And it would still allow normal operation when that intermediate transport was not needed. The programming software could be directly connected to the programmer, or separated from it, either way. Does that make any more sense? --- James. -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist