Toshiba TV29C90 problem; Image fades to black...

In sci.electronics.repair Frank <some1not@microsoft.com> wrote:

top posting are made by logical people,
I have no idea what Karl said, I am not wearing my mouse out and wasteing
all day to look through a lot of shit to see a few line somewhere hidden in
the message, you are lucky I can read your reply without scrolling down.

Then your news-client is broken. Cutting irrelevant parts does help,
too.

---
Met vriendelijke groet,

Maarten Bakker.

 

[John Fields]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 01:16:04 GMT, "Karl Uppiano"
<karl.uppiano@verizon.net> wrote:

"Frank" <some1not@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:42e176a5@clear.net.nz...
No I was just asking?
Motorola came up with a good range of micro, I went to a few of there
seminars, back in the 70's


John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:4852e1h6j3u97fvp443n5jg4vt92p6gh04@4ax.com...
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 01:52:00 +1200, "Frank" <some1not@microsoft.com
wrote:

By the way who makes the 6802, is Motorola still around?

---
Motorola spun off their ľC product line to Freescale Semiconductor,
but I don't think you're going to find much 6802 around, since it's
been obsolete for a while.

Freescale suggests Rochester Electronics as a possible source, and
Google will give you lots of hits. If what you're doing is new, why
do you want to use a 6802 anyway?

Sometimes a good 8-bit 1 MHz processor is all you need.

---
Yes, but that's not the point, which is that the 6802 is obsolete and
only available from "surplus" dealers.

For a desperate one-off, that might be OK, but going through the
expense and hassle of stepping back in time when _many_ good 8 bit ľC
are available for cheap in the present hardly makes the exercise seem
worth while.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Pooh Bear]

Frank wrote:

top posting are made by logical people,

I beg to differ. Everything appears out of context.

I have no idea what Karl said, I am not wearing my mouse out and wasteing
all day to look through a lot of shit to see a few line somewhere hidden in
the message,

That attitude is likely to cost you many a response. So you won't see some
'useful shit' since many ppl won't bother replying to an arrogant top-poster.

you are lucky I can read your reply without scrolling down.

Do you not turn your head to listed to ppl too ? Maybe you only see and hear
what you want to ?

Graham

p.s. note the way I responded individually to each item. You can't do that with
top-posting.

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 08:59:29 -0500, John Fields wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 01:16:04 GMT, "Karl Uppiano"
"Frank" <some1not@microsoft.com> wrote in message
No I was just asking?
Motorola came up with a good range of micro, I went to a few of there
seminars, back in the 70's

John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
01:52:00 +1200, "Frank" <some1not@microsoft.com> wrote:

By the way who makes the 6802, is Motorola still around?

Motorola spun off their ľC product line to Freescale Semiconductor,
but I don't think you're going to find much 6802 around, since it's
been obsolete for a while.

Freescale suggests Rochester Electronics as a possible source, and
Google will give you lots of hits. If what you're doing is new, why do
you want to use a 6802 anyway?

Sometimes a good 8-bit 1 MHz processor is all you need.

Yes, but that's not the point, which is that the 6802 is obsolete and only
available from "surplus" dealers.

For a desperate one-off, that might be OK, but going through the expense
and hassle of stepping back in time when _many_ good 8 bit ľC are
available for cheap in the present hardly makes the exercise seem worth
while.

John is absolutely right. For the effort it would take to track down
data sheets and crap on that old of a part simply doesn't make any
sense. I did a quick google on "6802 data sheet", without the quotes,
and out of thousands of answers, none of them was about the old Moto
micro. Heck, I saw a Basic Stamp Development Kit in Fry's not too
long ago, for about a hundred and twenty-five bucks.

What country are you in?

Good Luck!
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 15:36:16 +0100, Pooh Bear wrote:
....

p.s. note the way I responded individually to each item. You can't do
that with top-posting.

And, as usual, the middle ground gets lost in the noise of the battle.

It's not about "top posting" or "bottome posting". If you're responding
to a certain item, snip all of the irrelevant crap, but put your answer
underneath the question. What's so hard about that?

I used to be a top-poster, and I made all of the arguments in favor
of top-posting, like, "But my comment is the most recent!" "But my
comment is the most important!!!" that sort of thing.

Well, I've personally settled on, "When in Rome, do as the Romans
do."

Although, in a multidimensional thread, intermediate posting can
facilitate the discussion, but that's apparently WAY too advanced
of a concept for the majority of people to grasp. Sigh.

Thanks!
Rich

 

[James Sweet]

---
Yes, but that's not the point, which is that the 6802 is obsolete and
only available from "surplus" dealers.

For a desperate one-off, that might be OK, but going through the
expense and hassle of stepping back in time when _many_ good 8 bit ľC
are available for cheap in the present hardly makes the exercise seem
worth while.

Quite a few people build things using obsolete microcontrollers just because
they can, I agree that if this is a production device then there's better
choices, but if just fooling around or making something nostalgic then go
for it.

 

[James Sweet]

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:42E255E0.B95466A2@hotmail.com...

Frank wrote:

top posting are made by logical people,

I beg to differ. Everything appears out of context.

Is it really that hard to follow either way? I get much more annoyed by the
bickering by anal retentive people who'd rather bitch about it than just
read the post or ignore it. Top post, bottom post, I don't care, it's just
not that hard to follow either way.

 

[Karl Uppiano]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:9ki4e1ddl3jcklrf84i220hdlecosqdr1p@4ax.com...

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 01:16:04 GMT, "Karl Uppiano"
karl.uppiano@verizon.net> wrote:


"Frank" <some1not@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:42e176a5@clear.net.nz...
No I was just asking?
Motorola came up with a good range of micro, I went to a few of there
seminars, back in the 70's


John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:4852e1h6j3u97fvp443n5jg4vt92p6gh04@4ax.com...
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 01:52:00 +1200, "Frank" <some1not@microsoft.com
wrote:

By the way who makes the 6802, is Motorola still around?

---
Motorola spun off their ľC product line to Freescale Semiconductor,
but I don't think you're going to find much 6802 around, since it's
been obsolete for a while.

Freescale suggests Rochester Electronics as a possible source, and
Google will give you lots of hits. If what you're doing is new, why
do you want to use a 6802 anyway?

Sometimes a good 8-bit 1 MHz processor is all you need.

---
Yes, but that's not the point, which is that the 6802 is obsolete and
only available from "surplus" dealers.

For a desperate one-off, that might be OK, but going through the
expense and hassle of stepping back in time when _many_ good 8 bit ľC
are available for cheap in the present hardly makes the exercise seem
worth while.

I have brand new stuff in my junk box that has been obsolete for decades. If
I have it, I'll use it, if only out of a sense of frugality. If I were
building a commercial product, then availability would definitely be a
primary consideration.

 

[Jim Adney]

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:51:42 -0500 John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

If you choose to reply, it's considered, in this group, to be
courteous if you bottom post.

Gee, John, just being difficult, or trying to start a war?

-
-----------------------------------------------
Jim Adney jadney@vwtype3.org
Madison, WI 53711 USA
-----------------------------------------------

 

[lionslair at consolidated]

Gunner wrote:

On 24 Jun 2005 13:01:09 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
too_many_tools@yahoo.com> wrote:


I am crossposting this question since I think it will be of general
interest...sorry if that offends someone.

Now to the questions....what kinds of electronic and mechanical "trash"
is WORTH disassembling and keeping for parts to build other projects?

What did you keep that you should have thrown long ago?

What did you throw that you still kick yourself for tossing?

I look forward to your suggestions, experiences and jokes. ;&lt

TMT



Bring in an inventory crew and we can discuss mine.
Bus broke down so the Industrial sized crew can't make it.

Martin

Gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

--
Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lion's Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

 

[Gunner]

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 21:52:12 -0500, "lionslair at consolidated dot
net" <"lionslair at consolidated dot net"> wrote:

Bring in an inventory crew and we can discuss mine.
Bus broke down so the Industrial sized crew can't make it.
Martin

I filled 3 full sized dumpsters this weekend, tossing Stuff out. Next
weekend I have to move the machines out of the warehouse. Sigh

Then I get to start cutting all of the pallets up and disposing of
them too.

107F today...so it wasnt all that bad....(right..wimper....)

Gunner

"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown

 

[John Fields]

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 11:10:12 -0500, Jim Adney <jadney@vwtype3.org>
wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:51:42 -0500 John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

If you choose to reply, it's considered, in this group, to be
courteous if you bottom post.

Gee, John, just being difficult, or trying to start a war?

---
Who, me?^)

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[james]

A 6802 is essentially a MC6800, MC6875 and a MC6810 integrated into
one IC. The MC6802 intruction set is the same as the MC6800.

The MC6801/3 has increased instructions.

IF you really want a kicked up 6800, try opencores.org. There is a
6800 core that will drop into a Spartan 2 FPGA and runs at a E clock
frequency of 12.5 MHz.

Today there are a few of the older 8 bit micros that have FPGA open
source cores that can run at higher speeds than the originals. There
is even a Z80 core that runs at 35Mhz.

james

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 15:55:18 GMT, Rich Grise <richgrise@example.net>
wrote:

+<On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 08:59:29 -0500, John Fields wrote:
+<> On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 01:16:04 GMT, "Karl Uppiano"
+<>>"Frank" <some1not@microsoft.com> wrote in message
+<>>> No I was just asking?
+<>>> Motorola came up with a good range of micro, I went to a few of there
+<>>> seminars, back in the 70's
+
+<>>> John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
+<>>> 01:52:00 +1200, "Frank" <some1not@microsoft.com> wrote:
+
+<>>>>By the way who makes the 6802, is Motorola still around?
+
+<>>> Motorola spun off their ľC product line to Freescale Semiconductor,
+<>>> but I don't think you're going to find much 6802 around, since it's
+<>>> been obsolete for a while.
+
+<>>> Freescale suggests Rochester Electronics as a possible source, and
+<>>> Google will give you lots of hits. If what you're doing is new, why do
+<>>> you want to use a 6802 anyway?
+
+<>>Sometimes a good 8-bit 1 MHz processor is all you need.
+
+<> Yes, but that's not the point, which is that the 6802 is obsolete and only
+<> available from "surplus" dealers.
+
+<> For a desperate one-off, that might be OK, but going through the expense
+<> and hassle of stepping back in time when _many_ good 8 bit ľC are
+<> available for cheap in the present hardly makes the exercise seem worth
+<> while.
+
+<John is absolutely right. For the effort it would take to track down
+<data sheets and crap on that old of a part simply doesn't make any
+<sense. I did a quick google on "6802 data sheet", without the quotes,
+<and out of thousands of answers, none of them was about the old Moto
+<micro. Heck, I saw a Basic Stamp Development Kit in Fry's not too
+<long ago, for about a hundred and twenty-five bucks.
+
+<What country are you in?
+
+<Good Luck!
+<Rich

 

[A1Web]

I also have this unit, Pioneer PD-T505, and have had it since new in
approx 1988, although it has not been used extensively ... maybe alot
for 2-3 years, but then under 100 hours a year.

It has just started to skip ... what happens is that I put a CD into
either tray, and it will "spin" the CD for a bit, which is rather
noisy, but it will not play.

I opened the unit, and through trial and error found out that if I
apply some pressure to the top arm that drops down the top center
magnet, the unit plays perfect, and even the noisy spinning stops ...


I noticed a metal crossmember across above this plastic arm, and was
wondering if there was some kind of spring mechanism that might be
missing? I turned the unit upside down and gently shook it, and
found no evidence of any loose parts or springs ...

This unit is old, but it worked PERFECT up until this point, as well
as being the FIRST CD player I saved and bought myself while in
highschool, so if I can extend it's life, it would be awesome!

Hoping for good news ..

Paul
www.a1websolutions.com

 

[Tam/WB2TT]

Here is a reasonable man.

Tam
"Frank" <some1not@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:42e23870$1@clear.net.nz...

top posting are made by logical people,
I have no idea what Karl said, I am not wearing my mouse out and wasteing
all day to look through a lot of shit to see a few line somewhere hidden
in
the message, you are lucky I can read your reply without scrolling down.


Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:42E1A52C.920C7811@hotmail.com...

Frank wrote:

No I was just asking?
Motorola came up with a good range of micro, I went to a few of there
seminars, back in the 70's

You just 'top posted' btw !

Graham

 

[Rich Grise]

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 12:03:38 +0000, Gunner wrote:

Then I get to start cutting all of the pallets up and disposing of
them too.

For Heaven's sakes, don't cut up and toss pallets! Those things
are worth real money! Around here, we have to lock them up in the
shop at night or they disappear.

Good Luck!
Rich

 

[Aaron]

Normally made of hardwood and very dry, they are very good for
firewood. I can remember many camping trips with a few broken down
pallets warming my marshmellows.

-Aaron

 

[Tam/WB2TT]

"Lee K. Gleason" <lgleason@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:9VVDe.11159$gL1.10218@tornado.texas.rr.com...

I'm building a simple 6802 single board system. I want to drive the CPU
with an external oscillator, rather than using a crystal (got lots of 4
pin
oscillators, not so many crystals). When using a crystal, the frequency of
the crystal gets divided down by 4 by an internal part of the processor
(so
you use a 4 MHz crystal for a 1MHz clock).

When using an external oscillator, like I want to do, does the same
divide
by 4 occur? That is, should I use a 4 MHz external oscillator, or a 1 MHz
oscillator for a 1 MHz system clock?

Lee K. Gleason N5ZMR
Control-G Consultants
lgleason@houston.rr.com


You might want to check out one of the 6805 variants. They may still be in

production. BTW, if you want to do it on the cheap, use a ~3.58MHz color
burst crystal.

Tam

 

[Pooh Bear]

Tam/WB2TT wrote:

"Lee K. Gleason" <lgleason@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:9VVDe.11159$gL1.10218@tornado.texas.rr.com...
I'm building a simple 6802 single board system. I want to drive the CPU
with an external oscillator, rather than using a crystal (got lots of 4
pin
oscillators, not so many crystals). When using a crystal, the frequency of
the crystal gets divided down by 4 by an internal part of the processor
(so
you use a 4 MHz crystal for a 1MHz clock).

When using an external oscillator, like I want to do, does the same
divide
by 4 occur? That is, should I use a 4 MHz external oscillator, or a 1 MHz
oscillator for a 1 MHz system clock?

Lee K. Gleason N5ZMR
Control-G Consultants
lgleason@houston.rr.com


You might want to check out one of the 6805 variants. They may still be in
production. BTW, if you want to do it on the cheap, use a ~3.58MHz color
burst crystal.

Using a 3.58MHz crystal used to be the smart way to get a cheap one, but I don't
think TVs use them anymore.

I find resonators to be the optimum cost effective choice.

Graham

 

[Lee K. Gleason]

"> >>> Freescale suggests Rochester Electronics as a possible source, and

Google will give you lots of hits. If what you're doing is new, why
do
you want to use a 6802 anyway?

Sometimes a good 8-bit 1 MHz processor is all you need.

Yes, but that's not the point, which is that the 6802 is obsolete and
only
available from "surplus" dealers.

For a desperate one-off, that might be OK, but going through the expense
and hassle of stepping back in time when _many_ good 8 bit ľC are
available for cheap in the present hardly makes the exercise seem worth
while.

John is absolutely right. For the effort it would take to track down
data sheets and crap on that old of a part simply doesn't make any
sense. I did a quick google on "6802 data sheet", without the quotes,
and out of thousands of answers, none of them was about the old Moto
micro. Heck, I saw a Basic Stamp Development Kit in Fry's not too
long ago, for about a hundred and twenty-five bucks.

What country are you in?

Good Luck!
Rich

It's just for fun - I've got a few of them, and I always wanted to make a
small system out of a 6800 family processor, ever since they were new. The
6802 means I can use the on board memory for the stack and not have any
RAM - makes the minimalist retro system one chip smaller...when I get this
one going, I'm gonna do a Z80 and maybe a TI 9900 - I've got plenty of chips
from that era due to diligent scavenging, and now I've got a little free
time to experiment...it's just for, you know...kicks...

Thanks all for the answer - I'm soldering in a 4 MHz can oscillator
tonight...the LEDs will be blinking soon...

Lee K. Gleason N5ZMR
Control-G Consultants
lgleason@houston.rr.com