Re: MISC-d Digest V99 #18

["GARY B. LAWRENCE" <garyl@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

MISC-d-request@pisa.rockefeller.edu wrote:
> 
> Subject:
> 
> MISC-d Digest                           Volume 99 : Issue 18
> 
> Today's Topics:
>          f21 pcb or computer at UT
>          Playing with inner interpreters
>          Re: Playing with inner interpreters
>          Re: f21 pcb or computer at UT
> 
>     ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Subject: f21 pcb or computer at UT
> Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 18:58:35 -0400 (EST)
> From: jfox@UltraTechnology.com (Jeff Fox)
> To: MISC
> 
> Dear MISC readers:
> 
> Is there anyone in the list with experience at and ability to
> get PCB for testing F21?
> 
> Three people volunteered to make boards.  However they didn't want to
> design test boards.  They always did their boards the same way and
> they knew the application that they wanted.  Their boards would
> work if all the things on the chip worked and all the firmware
> for the F21 and all the peripheral PIC chips all worked together
> perfectly the first time.  Unless everything was perfect and you
> made no mistakes in the design or firmware programming the boards
> would work the first time.  They would be useless for
> incremental testing step by step which had never been done.
> 
> I was also concerned that not only would none of these designs for
> finished application level products work the first time on untested
> chips, but even if they did they would limit testing to the tiniest
> percentage of what needed to be tested.
> 
> I could not understand why people would want to tie up or 10 multi-
> megahertz general purpose I/O lines to talk to a PIC to do 9600 baud.
> I could not understand why no one wanted to test any of the F21's
> capability but rather design products to use 10% of it that could
> only work if everything was perfect.  I just assumed that they felt
> it would be less work if we just skipped the testing phase and
> went right into their application.
> 
> I did however eventually just say, ok, ignore the stuff I have
> published about what I want in a test board, ignore the diagrams
> that I posted and the outlines in html and pdf and do the board
> you want.  (when it doesn't work I can still cut the traces to
> all the application circuitry on the board and test the chips.)
> But I never heard back from anyone about any progress on their
> boards.
> 
> Chuck says that wire wrapping is about a 1 day job.  All you need
> is some sockets, some components, memories, wire, tools, etc.
> Sounds simple except when you are waiting to sell the first chip
> to be able to buy a meal.
> 
> It appears that I will soon have sold a chip and can now afford to
> have a pcb done.  My idea of a test board is small, simple and
> good for testing.  Small size, short traces, clean, and jumpers
> for optional stuff and headers.  I layed one out and stared wire
> wrapping but ran out of wire, solder, gas money, food, phone etc.
> 
> I liked the idea of a small clean board with a P21 socket inside
> of the surface mount f21 socket so either chip could be used.  I
> wanted it two sided, surface mount and simple.
> 
> some people wanted a 1Mx32 simm socket to use 1Mx20 the way Dr. Ting
> did.  some people wanted sockets or pad for 5x 1Mx4.  some wanted
> 2x 1Mx16, or a 1Mx16 and a 1Mx4 with matching page sizes and speeds.
> 
> I should now be able to contribute money towards that project. Who
> in this list is familiar with such things.  I was programming manager
> at iTV not board designer.  there are plenty of examples published
> of the information needed to lay out a board and it might be good
> to let other people review the design for errors or whatever before
> sending it out to produce pcb.
> 
> Minimally we need a 2 layer 1.5" x 2" board.  That might be a little
> too minimalistic.  I don't like going to 4x6 however.
> 
> I do see a new problem today.  I thought we might lose the last
> link to the outside world for the last couple of weeks, the ISP
> account, web site and email.  But the next best thing will be
> happening.  I think tommorow we lose the computer on this end.
> Maybe I should buy a computer instead of having pcb designed.
> What do people think can be done?  It is a tough call.
> 
> Jeff Fox
> -------------
> 
  Tuesday night about 9pm Denver time I sent 6 vacation units - $60.00
by mail in a money order  to Ultra technology. I would urge anyone else
who wishes to see this
 technology not disappear make a similar reponse. I also would consider
doing a wire 
 wrap prototype board if I could find the right sockets. My experiance
in wirewrap
 is mostly from the early eighties - working with 6502 chips. I would
need a schematic
 and would need to study the chip pinout and recieve email for Jeff Fox
on what pins need to be brought out for testing. I have a friend who
does pcb board layout - but I 
 donot think he would be interested. I would suggest someone close by
who has more current experience, but if no one else is available email
me. I very much regret not
 sending money any sooner but I had to wait for a monthly check.
    I very much hope to see the F21 fully developed and hope the future
is much brighter
 for Jeff Fox . 
			Best regards Gary Lawrence