I shall convert [uC to uP]

[mstechca]

What I want to do, because the AT89C2051 is not easy and flexible, is go to a microprocessor instead, simply because then if anything decides to burn more often, it would be the ROM chip.

Also, some ROM chips accepts 5V as programming input so I don't need to worry about 12V.

And I find this better than ANY microcontroller, because I can set the memory, or at least I think so.

I do have an 8088 chip lying around as well as a 128KB ROM which can be programmed with 5V.

if anyone has any tips for me, I would appreciate it, because this is the first time I am going to connect memory to a processor and build myself a miniature computer :lol:

 

[DirtyLude]

You're crazy man.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

You're crazy man.

True! - considering building an 8088 computer because he think's a micro-controller isn't 'easy and flexible' - it's the (so called) 'super-regen' all over again :lol:

 

[evandude]

True! - considering building an 8088 computer because he think's a micro-controller isn't 'easy and flexible' - it's the (so called) 'super-regen' all over again :lol:

Really! :lol: How could building a computer using multiple chips possibly be any simpler than having everything you need in one package? there's always a learning curve to any device, such as microcontrollers, it sounds like instead of spending a little time figuring it out, you'd rather move to something more complicated, thinking that somehow it's going to be easier :lol: I really don't see what you find so appealing about external ROM... it takes just as much effort to program an external ROM chip as it does to program a microcontroller...

 

[mstechca]

How could building a computer using multiple chips possibly be any simpler than having everything you need in one package?

It is simpler sending data to a FLASH ROM than it is sending it to the AT89C2051, especially when I want as much through hardware as possible. After all, I/O through hardware is faster than I/O through a disk.

there's always a learning curve to any device, such as microcontrollers, it sounds like instead of spending a little time figuring it out, you'd rather move to something more complicated, thinking that somehow it's going to be easier

ah no. I went through 5 AT89C2051's and they have all failed. I tried making various programmers for them but those chips will not co-operate, plus the flexibility is low.

I really don't see what you find so appealing about external ROM... it takes just as much effort to program an external ROM chip as it does to program a microcontroller...

I personally think programming a ROM is much easier. Also, I like external roms because If I decide to buy several ROMS loaded with code, I can easily insert one and load code on the fly.

But for now, I will experiment with one ROM and one 8051 microprocessor.

You're crazy man.

Yes and no.
Yes, because I learn electronics a lot more differently than the majority of the people. I learn through direct experimentation without ANYONE next to me in person helping me. I also learn that wrong actions generate burnt parts.
and No, because in real life, I'm not crazy. I'm just an ordinary guy.

considering building an 8088 computer because he think's a micro-controller isn't 'easy and flexible'

It is to a point. If I use 2 chips, I can debug easier, and determine which component is faulty if any chip heats up.

- it's the (so called) 'super-regen' all over again

LMAO :lol:
Have you seen my circuit of my transmitter posted here about a couple of months ago? One user reported that (s)he can achieve 100 feet with it :wink:

 

[theinfamousbob]

I was going to base a robot on a 286 from a laptop I picked up at the local second-hand store for $4 US...

I have plenty of cache RAM from those old 486 boards....(at least 512k) and a couple EEPROMs, although I was looking for a flash chip.

I was planning on tying in 74LS138s to block off I/O areas....

Too bad I can't find the 286...

-Infamous

 

[DirtyLude]

ah no. I went through 5 AT89C2051's and they have all failed. I tried making various programmers for them but those chips will not co-operate, plus the flexibility is low.

What can you not do with the Atmel chip that the 8088 can do, because I can tell you at least 5 or 6 things off the top of my head the other way around.

Yes, because I learn electronics a lot more differently than the majority of the people. I learn through direct experimentation without ANYONE next to me in person helping me. I also learn that wrong actions generate burnt parts.
and No, because in real life, I'm not crazy. I'm just an ordinary guy.

I have never taken a course in electronics... I've never had anyone teach me anything about electronics in person... Everything I have learned has been through the internet. I've burned out 0 microcontrollers since I have been using them (though I have burned out a few supporting chips). Perhaps, instead of random experimentation, learn before hand what the right way of doing it is, and do it that way. These microcontrollers are very robust devices, and if you are toasting them on a regular bases, you are doing something seriously wrong.

My crazy comment was really just kidding around, but seriously, every post you make, makes me wonder what you are smoking. Is this for your project thats both radio modem and web server? cuz your questions in that thread really show you don't have any grasp of the software side of what you are trying to do or what hardware would be needed to make that odd project reality.

If you seriously want external ROM/RAM program addressable memory, you might want to look at the ARM chips. They are pretty popular now. JTAG programmable, 32 bit with external memory busses, and far more powerful than an 8088 and they don't require all those support chips to actually do anything.

http://www.open-research.org.uk/ARMuC/
http://www.atmel.com/dyn/products/param_table.asp?family_id=605&OrderBy=part_no&Direction=ASC

I wouldn't mind moving to the ARM platform, but I just can't think of a project that I would like to do that requires that kind of processing power.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

Have you seen my circuit of my transmitter posted here about a couple of months ago? One user reported that (s)he can achieve 100 feet with it :wink:

You can do 100 feet with two bean cans and a ball of string! 8)

As for your 'faulty' AT89C2051's I suspect it's more likely that you have either destroyed them by attempting to program them incorrectly, or haven't programmed them successfully at all?. I see no reason to think you will do any better with EEPROM's, in light of your bizarre programming ideas and 'blind luck' design techniques.

 

[mstechca]

You can do 100 feet with two bean cans and a ball of string! 8)

Uhh Nigel, this is 2006, not 1906! :lol:

I see no reason to think you will do any better with EEPROM's, in light of your bizarre programming ideas and 'blind luck' design techniques.

blind luck eh?

Perhaps I have some electronics talent that no one (not even me) has discovered yet 8)

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

You can do 100 feet with two bean cans and a ball of string! 8)

Uhh Nigel, this is 2006, not 1906! :lol:

That's what we keep telling you! - but you seem to want to use a dark-ages micro-processor rather than a modern micro-controller :lol:

 

[inaPICle]

I have to admit I'm building a single board Z80 using the bare CPU and the helper chips rather than one of the later more integrated Z80s (let alone the Z8 series microcontrollers).

I tried it once before about 20 years ago, and failed through lack of knowledge at the time.

I recently found all the books I used, although the hardware has long since vanished, and this reminded me I had a ghost I needed to lay to rest. So I started the project up again. Only now I can run it at 10MHz instead of 2MHz!

I do have a plan to use it to drive an automated dome on the astronomical observatory I'm building. This is being done dispite the fact a decent PIC 18F series would do it with fewer parts and less effort.

Some things you do for no other reason than you just want to do it that way. Even if it is harder! If I wanted it easy I'd just grab a six pack, put my feet up and watch the game!

 

[evandude]

You never cease to amaze and confound me.

It is simpler sending data to a FLASH ROM than it is sending it to the AT89C2051, especially when I want as much through hardware as possible. After all, I/O through hardware is faster than I/O through a disk.

That doesn't even make sense. The only real difference in programming is that with the microcontroller it's programmed serially, with some control lines, instead of parallel. It still involves hardware signals, and if you're programming from a computer EITHER ONE involves copying the program off your hard disk...

ah no. I went through 5 AT89C2051's and they have all failed. I tried making various programmers for them but those chips will not co-operate, plus the flexibility is low.

You make it sound like the failure was the fault of the chips... when in fact MANY people use microcontrollers without any problems, so it's pretty obvious that YOU are just programming them improperly. And what exactly do you even mean by "the flexibility is low"?

I personally think programming a ROM is much easier. Also, I like external roms because If I decide to buy several ROMS loaded with code, I can easily insert one and load code on the fly.

I won't disagree that programming a ROM may be easier when you start from scratch... however, with a microcontroller, once you spend a little bit of time making a proper programmer, you don't have to deal with it again, and programming is as simple as plugging it in and clicking "program" in the PC software. Or are you planning to program your ROM chip manually using switches? :lol:

It is to a point. If I use 2 chips, I can debug easier, and determine which component is faulty if any chip heats up.

That also doesn't make any sense. If you use one chip, you automatically know what chip is bad, without having to test multiple ones :lol: You also have to understand... it is not at all normal to be heating up a microcontroller... in a few years of using them, it's only happened ONCE to me, and that's because I crossed the power wires. If you can screw up and heat up a microcontroller, what makes you think you can't screw up and heat up an 8088 and/or a ROM chip?

 

[DirtyLude]

Some things you do for no other reason than you just want to do it that way. Even if it is harder! If I wanted it easy I'd just grab a six pack, put my feet up and watch the game!

Yes, that's the case with hobbies, especially electronics now a days. I mean why build most of this stuff we build when you can buy them now for cheap. It's getting pretty hard to find projects that have practical uses that you can't get at a dollar store. I don't think anyone here would criticise projects that have no point other than the interest in building the project, but that's not the case here.

I also believe the original poster has this simplified and incorrect view of what it takes to get a 8088 up and running and able to do anything. That project itself is not simple.

 

[mstechca]

It is simpler sending data to a FLASH ROM than it is sending it to the AT89C2051, especially when I want as much through hardware as possible. After all, I/O through hardware is faster than I/O through a disk.

That doesn't even make sense.

The only real difference in programming is that with the microcontroller it's programmed serially,

You must be talking about PIC's. the AT89C2051 is programmed parallel style.

if you're programming from a computer EITHER ONE involves copying the program off your hard disk...

That I understand.

And what exactly do you even mean by "the flexibility is low"?

If I just keep on using the AT89C2051, it would be difficult to use additional memory with it, which makes it difficult to do anything, especially if it is code memory. The new plan is to use an 80C51, and external memory with it. Also, reading the code is much easier this way.
Also, the 80C51 has extra ports as well.

however, with a microcontroller, once you spend a little bit of time making a proper programmer, you don't have to deal with it again, and programming is as simple as plugging it in and clicking "program" in the PC software. Or are you planning to program your ROM chip manually using switches?

switches? LMAO! :lol:
and I am using the new 80C51 as a microprocessor. It just processes instructions from the external rom chip.

If you can screw up and heat up a microcontroller, what makes you think you can't screw up and heat up an 8088 and/or a ROM chip?

Anything can screw up, by anyone at anytime. In fact, when I bought my 25-pack NPN transistors, and later bought an 8-pack, the 8-pack worked great, and the 25-pack were complete garbage. I didn't realized the 25-pack failed until I tried each one of them all in the same circuit. I did the same with the 8-pack, and the 8-pack worked.

That's what we keep telling you! - but you seem to want to use a dark-ages micro-processor rather than a modern micro-controller

I suppose I have violated Nigel's silent law #1: "Thou shall not go obsolete" :lol:
But hey nigel, I select this path, and this is what I want to do. EXPERIMENT! and like my superregen, I will be getting somewhere.

Maybe I could make my TNC controller with this setup. :wink:

 

[evandude]

If I just keep on using the AT89C2051, it would be difficult to use additional memory with it, which makes it difficult to do anything, especially if it is code memory. The new plan is to use an 80C51, and external memory with it. Also, reading the code is much easier this way.
Also, the 80C51 has extra ports as well.

It sounds to me like the main area where we disagree is that you seem to think that you absolutely need to have the program on an external ROM which can be easily swapped. Of course it's all personal opinion so you're free to think that, but I think it's very odd to say that a microcontroller isn't "flexible" because of this, considering how little effort it takes to reprogram one (either in-circuit or removing it), which is comparable to how long it takes to swap out or reprogram an EEPROM...

 

[i_build_stuff]

I can't see the 8051 as being an unreasonable chip to want to experiment with. It's not an uncommon first uC (the first one I did anything with was a 68HC11, which is similar to an 8051).

If you want something a little more general-purpose, you could get one of the many ARM-based chips out there. They get pretty potent as far as microcontrollers go, and there are builds of Linux for them.

 

[inaPICle]

I also believe the original poster has this simplified and incorrect view of what it takes to get a 8088 up and running and able to do anything. That project itself is not simple.

Agreed!