23 May
2006
23 May
'06
6:15 a.m.
I have acquired an old DATA I/O series 22 porm programmer. I have some
Signetics N82S141F chips that will not read at the recommended family and
pinout codes of 10/15. In fact, the programmer will not even allow me to
enter the 10 as the family. Help???!!!! Ed
23 May
23 May
11:22 p.m.
ed_sipols at goodyear.com wrote:
I have acquired an old DATA I/O series 22 porm
programmer. I have some
Signetics N82S141F chips that will not read at the recommended family and
pinout codes of 10/15. In fact, the programmer will not even allow me to
enter the 10 as the family. Help???!!!! Ed
if you have the data I/O poster or docs you are taking the data from,
you may not
have the same rom revision in your programmer. I don't recall how to
verify what
matched what anymore, but where I was at one time had a Data I/O
subscription,
and got quarterly updates. A lot of parts could be supported w/o
adapter or base
unit rom updates, but eventually we'd get parts on the newer posters
that would not
work till we finally did the update of the base unit.
This still applies even when you have a model that has a bunch of
sockets, since
they just combined the equivlent to a unipack or multi headed unit into
a more
compact model but used the same roms internally.
BTW I am speaking of the 29A 29B units, not the eprom units. Those were
more specialized to doing eproms, and did not do bipolar parts, and also
could
program a lot of parts in parallel. The Eprom units, near as I could
tell used a
different code for setting up the programmer.
I don't know of any resource that details what units were capable of what
to direct you to, sad to say. Data I/O was never too forthcomming about
the information even when we paid for it, and for a long time there was not
alternative.
Sort of like Microsoft is now. Anyone would use an alternative if they
could,
assuming that they are not tied to Microsoft for reasons not relevent to
this
list. I know a lot of people in the late 70's and 80's that would have
used
another programmer, but Data I/O had insides at the manufacturers that other
prom programmer makers could not equal. I was amazed to find out that
finally there were parts that were totally unwarranted by their
manufacturers
if other than Data I/O programmed them. We used different parts in that
case, needless to say.
sorry if ths didn t answer your question, hope it helped though.
Jim
10 Jun
10 Jun
6:35 p.m.
Hi, gang,
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 23-May-06 at 23:22 jim stephens wrote:
ed_sipols at goodyear.com wrote:
<snippety>
An accurate statement indeed. Family/Pinout codes could change during the lifetime of a
device, although I will say that Data I/O tried to keep them consistent (one of the few
points in their favor).
I have acquired an old DATA I/O series 22 porm
programmer. I have some
Signetics N82S141F chips that will not read at the recommended family
and
pinout codes of 10/15. In fact, the programmer
will not even allow me to
enter the 10 as the family. Help???!!!! Ed
if you have the data I/O poster or docs you are taking the data from,
you may not
have the same rom revision in your programmer. I don't know of any resource that details what
units were capable of what
to direct you to, sad to say. Data I/O was never too forthcomming about
the information even when we paid for it, and for a long time there was not
alternative.
Sort of like Microsoft is now. Anyone would use an alternative if they
could,
<snippety>
Oh, believe you me, there are PLENTY of alternatives to Data I/O! There's a company
called Advin, based out of Sunnyvale. Their stuff, in terms of functionality and
electronics, is just as good as anything Data I/O ever turned out, and it's a lot less
expensive to own.
You are correct, though, in saying that DIO is hardly forthcoming about how to deal with
the inner secrets of their programmers. Heck, they stopped selling service manuals in
2005. Don't even get me started on their absurd prices for spare parts ($82 for a
strip of plastic?!)
assuming that they are not tied to Microsoft for
reasons not relevent to
this list. I know a lot of people in the late 70's and 80's that would have
used another programmer, but Data I/O had insides at the manufacturers that
other prom programmer makers could not equal.
Advin has similar contacts. That's one of the reasons their stuff works so well.
In any case... I did a device search, and programming of the 82S141's is supported
on the Unisite. If you end up not being able to program the beasties, send 'em my way
and I'll be happy to do them for you at no cost other than return postage.
Happy tweaking.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Bruce Lane, Owner & Head Hardware Heavy,
Blue Feather Technologies -- http://www.bluefeathertech.com
kyrrin (at) bluefeathertech do/t c=o=m
"If Salvador Dali had owned a computer, would it have been equipped with surreal
ports?"
13 Jun
13 Jun
7:58 p.m.
On Saturday 10 June 2006 09:35 pm, Bruce Lane wrote:
In any case... I did a device search, and
programming of the 82S141's is
supported on the Unisite. If you end up not being able to program the
beasties, send 'em my way and I'll be happy to do them for you at no cost
other than return postage.
I'm not real familiar with those devices, so maybe you can address something
that I've been curious about for a while...?
We used to do a LOT of c64 repairs way back when, and every one of those
beasts had a "906114" PLA in it that as I understand it was an 82S100 part.
And it was a very common failure item, resulting more often than not in a
blank screen or perhaps some bizarre display. Any idea as to why that should
fail so often?
The rest of the machine wasn't anything particularly unusual, 6500-series
parts and LSTTL and RAM would about cover it.
--
Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of space, a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed. --Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James
M Dakin
15 Jun
15 Jun
6:59 p.m.
On 6/14/06, Roy J. Tellason <rtellason at verizon.net> wrote:
We used to do a LOT of c64 repairs way back when, and
every one of those
beasts had a "906114" PLA in it that as I understand it was an 82S100 part.
And it was a very common failure item, resulting more often than not in a
blank screen or perhaps some bizarre display.
Right... it's the address bus manager, among other things. When it
fails, the CPU can't get to RAM or ROM or the VIC-II, typically.
Any idea as to why that should fail so often?
Thermal death? It's a bi-polar part, not *MOS, and it does run hotter
than the rest of the components.
-ethan
8:11 p.m.
On Thursday 15 June 2006 09:59 pm, Ethan Dicks wrote:
Somewhere, probably buried pretty good in my storage unit, are a whole mess
of heatsinks. I'd bought them figuring that it might be good to add them to
some of the chips in those machines, but the idea never went anywhere.
These are the kind that slip over (and under!) the chip, and would probably
do a better job than the silly metal shield that they put over some of those
boards, which was still better than the cardboard that some of them used.
Even when they punched holes in that cardboard for ventilation they still
couldn't get it right as what little ventilation there was in the bottom of
the case couldn't get past the cardboard, and the bits that were punched out
were sometimes not removed, but would instead fall on the board and short
things out.
--
Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of space, a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed. --Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James
M Dakin
Any idea as to
why that should fail so often?
Thermal death? It's a bi-polar part, not *MOS, and it does run hotter
than the rest of the components. 
24 May
24 May
12:09 a.m.
On 5/23/2006 at 8:15 AM ed_sipols at goodyear.com wrote:
"I have acquired an old DATA I/O series 22 porm programmer."
Programming porm is one of the biggest moneymakers on the web, I
understand! :)
Cheers,
Chuck
5:32 p.m.
On 5/23/06, ed_sipols at goodyear.com <ed_sipols at goodyear.com> wrote:
I have acquired an old DATA I/O series 22 porm
programmer. I have some
Is "porm programmer" a developer which works for an adult website? :-)
6531
days inactive
6555
days old
7 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
cclist＠sydex.com -
ed_sipols＠goodyear.com -
ethan.dicks＠gmail.com -
jwstephens＠msm.umr.edu -
kyrrin＠bluefeathertech.com -
rtellason＠verizon.net -
waisun.chia＠gmail.com