question about microcontroler oscillator

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 23:46:55 -0400, the renowned "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

Jamie wrote:

You don't know the difference between shit and shanghola.


Neither do you. It's "You don't know Shit from Shinola"

http://www.pottymouth.org/humor/shinola.html

shanghola is the Chinese equivalent, made by Shanghai Household
Chemicals Factory #7.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[Pieter]

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 17:12:51 +0000, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

Pieter wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Pieter wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Pieter wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Pieter wrote:

The 8051 does not have an internal oscillator.

What do you mean ? It has an inverter stage designed for clock oscillator use
connected to pins xtal1 and xtal2.


No internal crystal. It has the inverter etc, but always needs an
external crystal. Of course you can also feed it with an external
oscillator.

Can you provide an example of any IC that has an internal crystal ?


I wrote that it does NOT have an internal crystal, like most other
parts. But the 8051 also has no internal RC oscillator. It needs
external parts.

It has the required internal active parts for either a crystal or ceramic resonator
clock oscillator. That's all that matters.

The OP has no interest in hypothetical RC oscillators that don't exist in standard
8051s. Stop talking rubbish.


Follow you own advice and stay away here. Go troll elsewhere.

Go screw yourself.

You have offered the sum total of ZERO useful advice in this thread.

You're a pontificating nitwit.

Graham

abuse has been sent

 

[John Fields]

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 17:14:11 +0000, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
John Fields wrote:

Pay no attention to the Donkey troll.

One of his favorite tricks is to try to derail a discussion by
focusing on irrelevant minutiae

Pieter is the one discussing irrelevancies such as the non-existent RC oscillator
in a standard 8051.

---
On the contrary, he made it very clear that he knew there's no
internal RC oscillator in an 8051:

Which is therefore utterly irrlevant to the OP's post and is merely idiotic
obfuscation.

---
I couldn't disagree more, since in an effort to nail down the OP's
problem it becomes mandatory to rule out those things which are
truly irrelevant. The fact that an 8051 has no on-board RC
oscillator is, of course, irrelevant, but that can't be known until
the fact that there is no on-board RC oscillator is stated, which
Pieter did.


--
JF

 

[Eeyore]

Pieter wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Pieter wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Pieter wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Pieter wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Pieter wrote:

The 8051 does not have an internal oscillator.

What do you mean ? It has an inverter stage designed for clock oscillator use
connected to pins xtal1 and xtal2.


No internal crystal. It has the inverter etc, but always needs an
external crystal. Of course you can also feed it with an external
oscillator.

Can you provide an example of any IC that has an internal crystal ?


I wrote that it does NOT have an internal crystal, like most other
parts. But the 8051 also has no internal RC oscillator. It needs
external parts.

It has the required internal active parts for either a crystal or ceramic resonator
clock oscillator. That's all that matters.

The OP has no interest in hypothetical RC oscillators that don't exist in standard
8051s. Stop talking rubbish.


Follow you own advice and stay away here. Go troll elsewhere.

Go screw yourself.

You have offered the sum total of ZERO useful advice in this thread.

You're a pontificating nitwit.

Graham

abuse has been sent

IDIOT !

 

[Eeyore]

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
John Fields wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
John Fields wrote:

Pay no attention to the Donkey troll.

One of his favorite tricks is to try to derail a discussion by
focusing on irrelevant minutiae

Pieter is the one discussing irrelevancies such as the non-existent RC oscillator
in a standard 8051.

---
On the contrary, he made it very clear that he knew there's no
internal RC oscillator in an 8051:

Which is therefore utterly irrlevant to the OP's post and is merely idiotic
obfuscation.

---
I couldn't disagree more, since in an effort to nail down the OP's
problem it becomes mandatory to rule out those things which are
truly irrelevant. The fact that an 8051 has no on-board RC
oscillator is, of course, irrelevant, but that can't be known until
the fact that there is no on-board RC oscillator is stated, which
Pieter did.

No, it was irrelevant from the very start since the OP indicated straight off that he had
a crystal connected to the 8051's internal clock oscillator.

RC oscillators never even entered the equation. Pieter was clealry just trying to 'show
off'.

Graham

 

[Jamie]

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Jamie wrote:

You don't know the difference between shit and shanghola.



Neither do you. It's "You don't know Shit from Shinola"

http://www.pottymouth.org/humor/shinola.html


You shows lack of getting out.

Is that all you got?


--
"I'm never wrong, once i thought i was, but was mistaken"
Real Programmers Do things like this.
http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5

 

[Jamie]

Eeyore wrote:

Pieter wrote:


Eeyore wrote:


It has the required internal active parts for either a crystal or ceramic resonator
clock oscillator. That's all that matters.

The OP has no interest in hypothetical RC oscillators that don't exist in standard
8051s. Stop talking rubbish.


Follow you own advice and stay away here. Go troll elsewhere.


Go screw yourself.

You have offered the sum total of ZERO useful advice in this thread.

LOL, now that's a laugh..

Any thing that you have ever offered was just retakes of what was
already stated here by others. You have a way of slipping it in later
on. Any one that monitors this group on the regular bases knows what
i'm talking about.

You're a pontificating nitwit.

Hats off to you sir!

Graham

--
"I'm never wrong, once i thought i was, but was mistaken"
Real Programmers Do things like this.
http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5

 

[Eeyore]

Jamie wrote:

Any one that monitors this group on the regular bases knows what
i'm talking about.

They know you're an idiot who doesn't even know what a coupling cap is.

Graham

 

[John Fields]

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 23:37:58 +0000, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
John Fields wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
John Fields wrote:

Pay no attention to the Donkey troll.

One of his favorite tricks is to try to derail a discussion by
focusing on irrelevant minutiae

Pieter is the one discussing irrelevancies such as the non-existent RC oscillator
in a standard 8051.

---
On the contrary, he made it very clear that he knew there's no
internal RC oscillator in an 8051:

Which is therefore utterly irrlevant to the OP's post and is merely idiotic
obfuscation.

---
I couldn't disagree more, since in an effort to nail down the OP's
problem it becomes mandatory to rule out those things which are
truly irrelevant. The fact that an 8051 has no on-board RC
oscillator is, of course, irrelevant, but that can't be known until
the fact that there is no on-board RC oscillator is stated, which
Pieter did.

No, it was irrelevant from the very start since the OP indicated straight off that he had
a crystal connected to the 8051's internal clock oscillator.

---
That's _totally_ bogus. He made no mention whatever about a
crystal. As a matter of fact, you prompted him about that there was
probably a ceramic resonator in there. Pretty short memory, huh?
---

RC oscillators never even entered the equation. Pieter was clealry just trying to 'show
off'.

---
LOL, PKB!


--
JF

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Jamie wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Jamie wrote:

You don't know the difference between shit and shanghola.



Neither do you. It's "You don't know Shit from Shinola"

http://www.pottymouth.org/humor/shinola.html


You shows lack of getting out.

Getting out? Are you out of the closet or something?

Is that all you got?

No, but it's all that you deserve.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

John Fields wrote:

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 02:21:58 +0000, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

The OP made it clear he's talking about a crystal/resonator based clock oscilaltor
not an RC type.

Please THINK !

Why bother when there's hardly a need to when dealing with you?

John, you could out think the 'disgusting donkey' with all but one
neuron tied behind your back.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Eeyore wrote:

Jamie wrote:

Any one that monitors this group on the regular bases knows what
i'm talking about.

They know you're an idiot who doesn't even know what a coupling cap is.

Graham

They know that you're an anal retantive ass with a telephone pole
stuck up your ass to replace your backbone.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Jamie]

Eeyore wrote:

Jamie wrote:


Any one that monitors this group on the regular bases knows what
i'm talking about.


They know you're an idiot who doesn't even know what a coupling cap is.

Graham

As I said before.. In so many laymen terms.

"You don't know jack"

--
"I'm never wrong, once i thought i was, but was mistaken"
Real Programmers Do things like this.
http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5

 

[Eeyore]

Jamie wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Jamie wrote:

Any one that monitors this group on the regular bases knows what
i'm talking about.


They know you're an idiot who doesn't even know what a coupling cap is.


As I said before.. In so many laymen terms.
"You don't know jack"

Piss off, you ignorant twit.

 

[Jamie]

Eeyore wrote:

Jamie wrote:


Eeyore wrote:

Jamie wrote:


Any one that monitors this group on the regular bases knows what
i'm talking about.


They know you're an idiot who doesn't even know what a coupling cap is.


As I said before.. In so many laymen terms.
"You don't know jack"


Piss off, you ignorant twit.

Well, it's better to be pissed off than pissed on!

Or, Maybe you like that kinky stuff?



--
"I'm never wrong, once i thought i was, but was mistaken"
Real Programmers Do things like this.
http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5