I *think* that the ICD headers are covered by the life-time
free replacement of Microchip development tools.
But you'd better check directly with them...

Is hard to use it as a normalt chip becuse it's in the header.
But appart from that, I do not know of any other limitations.

Jan-Erik.

jana1972@centrum.cz wrote 2011-11-03 18:53:
> Thanks for the reply.
> And are there any rules I must follow so that I will not damage  the "PIC=
16F648A-IDC" chip
> e.g. by programming/debugging?
> Or can I use it like the normal chip?
>
> Thanks again
> L.
>
> And  are there any rules
>>   >  I can replace PIC16F648A supplied with the header, with any other
>>   >  PIC16F648A ?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> The processor in the header (this is so for debugging headers
>> for any "low-pin-count" processor) has extra pins for the debug
>> functions so that all standard pins are available for the app.
>> And these standard pins are connected to the DIP connector
>> that you connect to your target curcuit.
>>
>> I think the "PIC16F648A-IDC" chip has 4 or 6 more pins than the
>> standard PIC16F627A/628A/648A package.
>>
>> But this is clearly shown with pin-out pictures in the docs, not ?
>> Have you checked ?
>>
>> Jan-Erik.
>>
>> jana1972@centrum.cz wrote 2011-11-03 16:01:
>>> Jan-Erik Soderholm,
>>> Thank you for your reply.
>>> So, does it mean that PIC16F648A on the header is only  and only BLANK =
PIC16F648A (
>>> without any special program inside  that  makes debugging possible) ?
>>> In other words, I can replace PIC16F648A supplied with the header, with=
 any other
>>> PIC16F648A ?
>>> Thanks for the reply
>>> L.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> jana1972@centrum.cz wrote 2011-11-03 13:18:
>>>>> I am a newbie with ICD3 debugger and also with ICD header.
>>>>> As I needed to debug PIC16F628A I had to buy the header file with
>>>>> PIC16F648A.
>>>>> Does it mean that PIC16F648A was  programmed so that it consist of AL=
L functions of
>>>>> PIC16F628A ?
>>>>> In other words is it not nescessary to use, during the development,
>>>>> PIC16F628A in my
>>>>> design?
>>>>> But to use only the header file with PIC16F648A instead?
>>>>> And only after the code is without errors and debugged , I will progr=
am
>>>>> the code into
>>>>> PIC16F628A?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, as long as you do not use anything that the 628A doesn't have.
>>>> Mostly memory in the 2-4 kWord area.
>>>>
>>>> Note that the docs specificaly says that you can use that header
>>>> to debug code for 627A, 628A and 648A. Don't you trust the docs ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Or must I use, during development both PIC16F648A and PIC16F628A?
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> L.
>>>> --
>>>> 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
>
>
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.