Funny Story:

Around 1990, I worked for a small computer manufacturer doing computer 
assembly. I remember putting together a brand new (at the time) 486-50, 
the fastest x86 yet. There were very high hopes for it's performance. 

These motherboards had the same kind of oscillator, and it was socketed so 
you can change cpu speeds. 

I installed the oscillator and the CPU, and powered the machine on....

Nothing happened. 

If you put the OSC in backwards, it tends to get really hot! I knew this, 
but I had always in the past been careful, so I never experienced it. 

I was pondering why the PC wouldn't post, and I thought I would check the 
temperature of the OSC, so I slapped my thumb on it. 

YEEOOW!

That sucker was searing! I pulled my thumb away, shook it, swore, and 
looked at it.

On my thumb was printed 000.05 - My 50 Mhz red badge of stupidity. 

Important lesson. 

On 01/11/06 02:12 +0100, Sean Schouten wrote:
> On 10/31/06, Mark Rages <markrages@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > What do you mean by "oscillator block"?
> >
> >
> I was in fact referring to the CMOS oscillator modules as such:
> http://www.viewcom.force9.co.uk/images/xosc16p.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great to hear that it is not unheard for CMOS oscillators to be warmer than
> ambient... I was scared that it might be some telltale sign of it starting
> to malfunction! This is one of the things they don't tend to teach you in
> school... lol.
> 
> Thanks.
> -- 
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist