Jump to content

Photo

Why do EPROM dies?


39 replies to this topic

#26 supercat OFFLINE  

supercat

    Quadrunner

  • 6,399 posts

Posted Sat Jan 6, 2007 12:45 AM

Companies will pay the price merely because it might be cheaper to buy even a dozen or so rather than develop their own for in-house use. (Though at those prices, it would be really close!)


For many years, my company used PIC programmers that I developed in-house. For some applications they still use them. Once Microchip started varying the programming algorithms for different PICs it became too much of a hassle to keep updating my programmers, though I will admit in some ways I miss them.

To my mind there's something very nice about a piece of software that can be configured entirely through the command line. Unfortunately, all the "modern" programmers I've worked with are much more cumbersome to set up. Worse, the configuration files are specific to particular software versions, so upgrading the programmer to use new parts will break existing configuration files. Grrrr......

#27 Albert ONLINE  

Albert

    Greetings, Avatar!

  • 30,334 posts
  • Location:Sosaria

Posted Sat Jan 6, 2007 12:54 AM

Do you still have the EMP-10 and would you like to sell it?

I have an EMP-10 that I no longer use that I'd be willing to part with. Unfortunately it's packed up as I'm moving soon so I won't be able to track it down for a few weeks.

And is there any technical reason nowadays for USB ones to be as expensive as they are?

I have a USB programmer and I'm glad I bought it as I'm able to use it connected to my Mac while running the programming software in Windows through Parallels. :) So for me, the extra expense of a USB programmer was well worth it.

..Al

#28 CPUWIZ OFFLINE  

CPUWIZ

    Sheriff

  • 28,255 posts
  • Cartridge Recycler
  • Location:SoCal

Posted Sat Jan 6, 2007 12:59 AM


Do you still have the EMP-10 and would you like to sell it?

I have an EMP-10 that I no longer use that I'd be willing to part with. Unfortunately it's packed up as I'm moving soon so I won't be able to track it down for a few weeks.


Fool, I bet your new programmer can't program 2532's. But then again, you probably could care less.

#29 ijor OFFLINE  

ijor

    Stargunner

  • 1,444 posts

Posted Sat Jan 6, 2007 7:51 AM

I agree the market is smaller, i.e. maybe 10,000 units are sold, but I still balk at the price. I mean, the entry-level USB units I looked at were around $1000 each, and the top end models were running upwards of $4000, and the hardware is still quite simple - consisting of a USB controller chip and some glue logic, and some simple software drivers.


For some time I considered developing and marketing USB debug cables. The hardware and software is not as simple as you describe, but the margin rate is indeed still ridiculous.

But it would be very difficult to compete with companies like Green Hills that market complete developing systems. You would need to sell them at much lower prices, with a rather small margin. This usually doesn't work too well in small markets as this one.

#30 Albert ONLINE  

Albert

    Greetings, Avatar!

  • 30,334 posts
  • Location:Sosaria

Posted Sat Jan 6, 2007 8:33 AM



Do you still have the EMP-10 and would you like to sell it?

I have an EMP-10 that I no longer use that I'd be willing to part with. Unfortunately it's packed up as I'm moving soon so I won't be able to track it down for a few weeks.


Fool, I bet your new programmer can't program 2532's. But then again, you probably could care less.

Yes, it can program 2532's (just checked) but I've never had a reason to. The EMP-10 can't program PLDs and PICs, which I do need to program on a routine basis. :)

..Al

#31 Bruce Tomlin OFFLINE  

Bruce Tomlin

    River Patroller

  • 3,571 posts
  • CD C9 01
  • Location:Austin, TX

Posted Sat Jan 6, 2007 12:19 PM

I have a USB programmer and I'm glad I bought it as I'm able to use it connected to my Mac while running the programming software in Windows through Parallels. :) So for me, the extra expense of a USB programmer was well worth it.

Did you have to use the latest version of Parallels? I have an EMP-31 and it won't work with the current release version as of last month (build 1970), and it is my understanding they're not making the one with working USB 2.0 command support a free upgrade for people with older versions. I have a beta which is supposed to have the support, but I haven't had time to try it out. If it works and I have to upgrade, then I will, but not until I get it working just once first.

#32 Albert ONLINE  

Albert

    Greetings, Avatar!

  • 30,334 posts
  • Location:Sosaria

Posted Sat Jan 6, 2007 12:34 PM

I have a USB programmer and I'm glad I bought it as I'm able to use it connected to my Mac while running the programming software in Windows through Parallels. :) So for me, the extra expense of a USB programmer was well worth it.

Did you have to use the latest version of Parallels? I have an EMP-31 and it won't work with the current release version as of last month (build 1970), and it is my understanding they're not making the one with working USB 2.0 command support a free upgrade for people with older versions. I have a beta which is supposed to have the support, but I haven't had time to try it out. If it works and I have to upgrade, then I will, but not until I get it working just once first.

It was hit and miss with earlier versions of Parallels, including 1970. However, it works fine with the latest betas, and the latest betas have some significant improvements so you should try them out. You can grab the latest here:

http://forums.parall...thread7110.html

The latest is Build 3106 which is what I'm running on a Mac Mini. One of the coolest new features is "Coherence" mode, which lets you display Windows apps directly on your Mac desktop without the Windows desktop visible. You can even have Windows apps show up as icons in the OS X Dock. :)

..Al

#33 CPUWIZ OFFLINE  

CPUWIZ

    Sheriff

  • 28,255 posts
  • Cartridge Recycler
  • Location:SoCal

Posted Sat Jan 6, 2007 1:25 PM




Do you still have the EMP-10 and would you like to sell it?

I have an EMP-10 that I no longer use that I'd be willing to part with. Unfortunately it's packed up as I'm moving soon so I won't be able to track it down for a few weeks.


Fool, I bet your new programmer can't program 2532's. But then again, you probably could care less.

Yes, it can program 2532's (just checked) but I've never had a reason to. The EMP-10 can't program PLDs and PICs, which I do need to program on a routine basis. :)

..Al


That's cool, most newer programmers don't support 2532's. They are widely used in arcade machines and are also pin-compatible with 2332's (2600 mask ROM's), they only need to have the CE line inverted, unlike 2732's.

I hear you on the PLD's and PIC's, I use my Xeltek Superpro LX for those, in fact, I mostly only use the EMP-10 for 2532's these days.

#34 Albert ONLINE  

Albert

    Greetings, Avatar!

  • 30,334 posts
  • Location:Sosaria

Posted Sat Jan 6, 2007 1:28 PM

That's cool, most newer programmers don't support 2532's. They are widely used in arcade machines and are also pin-compatible with 2332's (2600 mask ROM's), they only need to have the CE line inverted, unlike 2732's.

I hear you on the PLD's and PIC's, I use my Xeltek Superpro LX for those, in fact, I mostly only use the EMP-10 for 2532's these days.

I'm using a Xeltek Superpro 280U:

http://xeltek.com/pr...productid=16221

..Al

#35 batari OFFLINE  

batari

    )66]U('=I;B$*

  • 6,501 posts
  • begin 644 contest

Posted Sat Jan 6, 2007 9:35 PM


I agree the market is smaller, i.e. maybe 10,000 units are sold, but I still balk at the price. I mean, the entry-level USB units I looked at were around $1000 each, and the top end models were running upwards of $4000, and the hardware is still quite simple - consisting of a USB controller chip and some glue logic, and some simple software drivers.


For some time I considered developing and marketing USB debug cables. The hardware and software is not as simple as you describe, but the margin rate is indeed still ridiculous.

But it would be very difficult to compete with companies like Green Hills that market complete developing systems. You would need to sell them at much lower prices, with a rather small margin. This usually doesn't work too well in small markets as this one.

The USB cable I cracked open did look simple, or at least it just contained a USB chip and CPLD and some various passive components. The software drivers probably wouldn't have been all that bad if an off-the-shelf USB controller chip was used, because the company making the chip would likely provide a driver skeleton.

Of course one can't realistically write their own proprietary Windows-based IDE, but one could be competitive if one used the GNU toolset.

When I was dealing with all this a few years ago, we were using a proprietary Windows IDE (which cost $2k per seat despite the fact that it was buggy as hell), and it took nearly a year to make the transition to GNU tools. At first we were stuck with Linux but eventually we got everything working under Cygwin, which made a lot of people happy.

I even offered to build a dozen debug cables (based on the easier parallel port design) but that didn't fly.

#36 ijor OFFLINE  

ijor

    Stargunner

  • 1,444 posts

Posted Sun Jan 7, 2007 1:23 AM

Of course one can't realistically write their own proprietary Windows-based IDE, but one could be competitive if one used the GNU toolset.


That wasn't a big concern for me. You can use your own cable with already available IDE developing systems.

Most debuggers have a standard interface with the OCD driver. Sometimes the debugger API is published by the debugger vendor. Sometimes by the chip vendor. So you only need to code the low level driver. And of course you can use GNU tools.

One problem is that not all chip vendors make the OCD specs publicly available. Some require you to sign an NDA. Some force you to buy some sort of expensive SDK.

#37 batari OFFLINE  

batari

    )66]U('=I;B$*

  • 6,501 posts
  • begin 644 contest

Posted Sun Jan 7, 2007 4:08 AM


Of course one can't realistically write their own proprietary Windows-based IDE, but one could be competitive if one used the GNU toolset.


That wasn't a big concern for me. You can use your own cable with already available IDE developing systems.

Unfortunately that wasn't true with the IDE we had at the time. They sold their own cables and did not provide any specs, source or SDK, and an NDA would get you nothing. Suffice it to say, we were happy to quit using their products...

#38 ijor OFFLINE  

ijor

    Stargunner

  • 1,444 posts

Posted Sun Jan 7, 2007 10:26 AM

Hi batari,

Unfortunately that wasn't true with the IDE we had at the time...


I probably didn't express myself correctly. When I was talking about NDA I was talking about chip vendors, not about tools vendors. Some chips vendors don't publish JTAG/OCD/DEBUG specifications. So even developing your own IDE tools or using GNU ones won't be enough, you still can't talk to the chip without going through NDA.

Regarding tools and debuggers. Some vendors indeed do not provide any info whatsoever no matter what. Others do. It also depends on the chip. Some chip manufacturers established a target/debugger standard API, such as RDI for ARM.

So in most cases you can use at least one already available commertial IDE with your own cable/probe.

#39 Moondoggie1968 OFFLINE  

Moondoggie1968

    Star Raider

  • 52 posts

Posted Sat May 12, 2007 9:04 AM

My burner has an ISA card interface, I use it on a 486 with a dos program to write them.

Never a problem.

Does anyone know if I can use my burner to burn an eprom from my 88 trans am?

#40 gdement OFFLINE  

gdement

    Stargunner

  • 1,766 posts
  • Location:Northern CA

Posted Wed May 16, 2007 9:20 PM

My burner has an ISA card interface, I use it on a 486 with a dos program to write them.

Never a problem.

Does anyone know if I can use my burner to burn an eprom from my 88 trans am?

Probably. You'd just need to see what kind of EPROM it uses, and check if it's supported by the software.
I was looking at a list of GM eproms recently, and noticed my car (1984 Fiero) uses a 2532. The models after that were listed as 2732's, but I wasn't looking at Firebirds.

[edit: here's the site I was looking at:
http://www.tunercat....sc/ecm_sup.html
looks like yours might be either a 2732A or a 27C128. Best thing is probably to check it directly.]

Edited by gdement, Wed May 16, 2007 9:25 PM.





0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users