26 Jan
1999
26 Jan
'99
4:10 a.m.
Dave Dameron <ddameron(a)earthlink.net> wrote:
At 11:10 PM 1/25/99 +0000, Tony wrote:
The 1702's had 10% of the program duty cycle of the 1702A, so took 10x
longer to
program. The voltages were the same. I don't know what actually was revised on
the chip, larger output/program transistors?
-Dave
Hi Dave
The 1702A's also required that the address be complemented before
the Vdd and Vgg were brought low. The 1702's didn't seem to need
this and Vdd and Vgg were left at there low states the entire time.
This also is a problem because the programmer I have doesn't
switch Vdd and Vgg.
Dwight
Hi I'm looking fro 1702's, not
1702A's which are quite common
but 1702's. You wouldn't happen to have any of these would
you. I'll trade you 1702A's for any you might have.
What's the real difference between a 1702 and a 1702A? I must admit that
I am not a great one for historical correctness, so I tend to use
'updated' parts if I happen to have them to hand