What's the bare minimum of stuff needed to program existing code onto an Atmel AT89C2051-24PU IC?
One of the filenames ends in .HEX and there's no C or other source so I'm fairly sure it's all compiled ready. I'm hoping that as with the PicKit2 widget, there's a tiny DOS-window based tool to control the doings, I want to avoid any large developer environment system, as I run W98 (long story, don't ask, my reasons are good enough for me), and compatibility is almost certain to be poor now. The simpler the system I need to program that chip, the better. :)
Well, the datasheet contains the complete programming algorithm, so the cheapest may be to build your own from the stuff on your workbench. ;-)
Unfortunately, this is an older device that needs parallel programming and the world has moved on the in-system serial programming in its various guises.
You'll probably need to dig up one of the "universal programmers." I'm still hanging on to my old Needham's EMP-11 and I'd recommend that if they were still in business. Sadly, they're not.
All is not lost! The Microcontroller Shop lists several universal programmers, some even for reasonable prices. For example
lists the AT89C2051 as a supported device and it's pretty inexpensive, as these things go. I haven't used it, so no opinion on it other than to note that the "device supported" list was at least updated this year.
Alternately, as you're still on W98, you might still have a real parallel port on a slow machine? There is also this one
which I have at least heard of. It's more in tune with older hardware.
Rich Webb wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
Nice. That could work, it will let me learn the Psion WorkAbout for parallel port handling while I'm at it too. Apart from the tortured pin-numbering scheme, all seems straightforward enough.
Is true, but at the price those IC#s are going on eBay, they look like a good choice. I'm using code made for them anyway, it's just a black box to me. :) Very nice tidy 20 pin black box too. Cute.
Those costs are SCARY. :) I'm saving for solar panels, and that's where that kind of loot is destined. I can see why the coder is asking 25 bucks for preprogrammed chips, but by far by best shot is to make this work using a Psion machine, because I get so much more out than I'll have to put in.
Avrdude should be able to program it, if I remember correctly. There should be tons of homebrew programmer circuits on the net for that particular software.
Cem Uzunoglu wrote in news:4cc40786$0$2049$ snipped-for-privacy@usenet-news.net:
Thankyou. Any recommendations for a C compiler that runs on W98 and generates these hex files? A cheap processor like that has to be worth exploring deeper. Might even goad me to learn C. (I tried once, then found the teaching I was meant to trust was based on tools that couldn't get a timer right. I aborted at chapter 4, thorughly dicouraged, and never went back to C because lots of other things called for the kind of time C would have taken. But these IC's are interesting. It might work for me.
is free and supports the MCS-51 (a.k.a. 8051) processor family.
I've no clue whether the Windows build will run under Win98 but it doesn't cost anything to find out. Plus, the sources are available so compiling with Win98 dependencies wouldn't be out of the question.
Or bite the bullet and set up a small Linux partition. ;-)
I'm not at all familiar with windows only tools. I recommended avrdude because it is (to my knowledge) crossplatform. You might want to consider setting up a small partition on your harddrive (or even a 2-4 gb usb stick) for linux if you want to get your hand on C programming on microcontrollers. May I suggest ubuntu? It is easy to install (also on a usb drive) and rich on microcontroller programming tools right on the repository. So all you have to do is search the ubuntu software center for the tool you want, click install, and off you go.
I'm not at all familiar with windows only tools. I recommended avrdude because it is (to my knowledge) crossplatform. You might want to consider setting up a small partition on your harddrive (or even a 2-4 gb usb stick) for linux if you want to get your hand on C programming on microcontrollers. May I suggest ubuntu? It is easy to install (also on a usb drive) and rich on microcontroller programming tools right on the repository. So all you have to do is search the ubuntu software center for the tool you want, click install, and off you go.
Rich Webb wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
Thankyou (and Cem Uzunoglu too). SDCC seems to run on W98, barring a use of stderr instead of stdout for default reporting, so capture of any console report longer than 50 lines is all but impossible on W98. Basically it means that if everything else works, I'll be lucky, but they did compile on a non- Windows system which is actually good for Windows. It means there's a greater chance of full Win32 compatibility. If they'd used any recent native Windows compiler it almost certainly would NOT be fully Win32 compatible. It would only be WXP which is bad because (if what I've often read is true) after W98 was dropped, Microsoft chose to deprive users of direct hardware accesses, leaving people fighting with the OS for control.
I never liked Linux enough to stay. I wish Psion had gone on to produce a major OS for i386... They'd likely have been neither broken, OR actively resistant to direct hardware accesses, because they favoured that all the way. If there was ever a compiler for PIC and Atmel MCU's built to run on the earlier Psion machines, specifcally Series 3, WorkAbout, and Series 5, please name it if you know of it. And if you got this far, thanks for reading it all.
If a lack of horsepower is *not* your issue, both of these contain SDCC out of the box:
formatting link
formatting link
...and there's nothing that says that if you think a particular Linux desktop environment / window manager sucks that you can't get/install/have another that you like better
JeffM wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@30g2000yqm.googlegroups.com:
I like it: 'old anemic iron' :) Mine's not that bad, I use Mini-ITX 1.2 GHz boards. I'm fussy though, once I make my home in a system I settle in deeply, and few systems work that way for me. W9X is one, Psion Organisers and WorkAbout machines are another... With Linux (and all *nix based OS's), I found my ideas of best file placement always conflict with the file system design. I like a program's files to live in one directory. DOS worked that way, mostly, Windows inherited it. Unix and BSD and Linux like to place files according to how they'll be used, and I found that trying to make it do things it doesn't like was counterproductive. So I stayed with the OS that most often did things the way I wanted them.
That small Linux is interesting though, if it's small enough, I can treat it an an entirely self-contained entity in its own right. Ideally I'd like to use such a variant inside Windows, a kind of inverse of what Wine does. :) I'm not sure than anyone ever did that for W9X though.
I came across QVWM (?) once. W95 shell emulator. I'm not sure whether things changed much but when I tried it I quickly found that the resemblance was not deep. W95's GUI shell is actually rather awesome. :) I still use it now, on W98, instead of the bloated and virtually broken W98 and IE shell we were meant to use on that OS. (98-Lite is a very nice thing for W98).
I guess I just don't want to change. It took so much work to get this far, I could die before I ever get that comfortable with another system on this scale. All I really need to do is keep it going for as long as I can keep going. And a lean, fast small OS like a stripped down W98 is a LOT of fun on a fast machine. All that new speed gets to process stuff I want to do, instead of run a bigger, slower, newer OS. I tried WXP several times, and always ended up rejecting it. Linux seems like even harder work to me..
...and as these things usually mention, an underlying OS that is always running as root is a horrible idea.
formatting link
98.2FME.3F
I haven't investigated in depth but I'm pretty sure they all need an NT base.
This is the one I usually think of in that context:
formatting link
Like the old boy says: If you need Windoze, get Windoze.
Never owned that. I jumped from DOS 6 to Win98SE.
...if you are wise enough to not use any apps which are hard-coded to call Internet Exploder to render HTML e.g. nuking IE cripples the Win98 Help system.
I wish there was more honesty like that from the trolls who post in comp.os.linux.advocacy.
JeffM wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@g25g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:
It is, but logic does that. It's the assumptions it's found on that matter. :) I wouldn't trust W98 long term unattended online, but it's behind a secure router (separate from the ISP's modem) and an efficient software firewall/antitrojan, never left on unattended for long, and rarely at that. It also has several core parts lacking, networking is as minimal as possible, most standard exploits aren't there, whole chunks of standard W98 arrangements aren't there. Even if someone got in, they might spend so long just looking around trying to figure out where stuff is, that they won't do much before I do. For most ports it would be hard to spot on the net even if it wasn't behind the router. I have more risk of the infamous BSOD, except that mine's green on black now...
Ah well, all good things... But I know it happens. The best tools I have, I don't force upgrade anyway, the whole machine IS the tool. Its parts work well together now, and that's all I ask of it. It's already gone well beyond standard capability, with a bit of help from Rudolph Loew's 48 bit LBA driver patch and a few other things added, and a lot of unwanted stuff removed.
I like the idea. :) Ok, perverse, I know, but it's the same argument as locking a toolbox. So long as I keep it with me, or secured in a room or vehicle, I don't want to encumber my own access with a lock on the box too.
Yep, that's thw one. I seem to have a knack of misremembering its name.
Precisely. :) Totally works for me.
Did it hurt? My transition was an odd one. I'd had a DOS box with a green/orange/white EGA screen running WordStar, and it died in a cupboard some time after I gave up on it because then, that was all I knew to do with it.. (At the time I didn't know enough to realise the battery had left the CMOS memory scrambled rather than dead, so it didn' wake up as new). Next, when I realised a decent computer cost something I could afford, was a 486 second hand with W31 on it. Vile, someone had left the install in a messy state, with broken irremovabkle drivers. But it had a nice SVGA screen. I borrowed a W95 disk and started fresh, and it was awesome. It was the single most liberating system I'd ever encountered, and the most beautiful. M$ went downhill all the way since, I think. >:)
Well, there are two subsets worth having, one is a small and removable hack involving the 'cryptographic components' which allow installation of DirectX v9c. After which I remove those components. There is also a minimum core for compiled HTML files, (CHM), that W98-Lite takes care of. I could opt to leave it out, but I find it useful, those files are a lot nicer to use as references (such as wxWidgets refs) than PDF or the native help files. All the real bulk of IE, and the 'active desktop' horripilations, are totally gone.
Most programs I run only rely on the basic C, C++, and at worst, MFC support. I don't touch Java, .net, or visual basic. Given the quality of so many programs I collected over the uyears, I don't have to. If it's not clean, if it does anything it wants to do without clear reason, it's out, and I find another. I watch the registry like a hawk every time I test stuff.
:) Yep, I never attack anyone's choice of OS, I stay strictly in defence of my own choices. I think W9X is worthy of defence. I just wish that M$ would release the source and let lots of people get on with it. Whether it would have a noble renaissance if this happened is anyone's guess though.
Got to stop there. This is fun but I don't want to overdo it. I think I already just did that..
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.