|
|
| Author |
Message |
pdubinsky
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
Posts: 66
Location: South Carolina
|
|
Posted: 08 January 2006, 12:47 PM Post subject: Wish List |
|
|
I haven't had the need for the additional I/O so I haven't expressed an opionion on the 40 pin DIP format other than to say that I also have been real estate bound so I would at least want the 24 pin format to be maintained if an additional 40 pin device is ever offered. Actually, I'm just happy frolicking in the world of 1k RAM!
I would suggest, however, that the leads on the ZX-24 be beefed up to the square pins that are used on the BX-24. The current round pins are a bit on the dainty side especially for those of us old guys with big fingers. I've folded a pin or two on extrcation and broken one (easily replaced, though) trying to straighten it.
Otherwise a tremendous device and a big improvement over the BX24(p). It's great to see a product that comes from a company that listened to what the users were saying needed improvement.
Bravo and thanks,
Paul |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dkinzer Site Admin
Joined: 03 Sep 2005
Posts: 2499
Location: Portland, OR
|
|
Posted: 08 January 2006, 19:10 PM Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | ... I would at least want the 24 pin format to be maintained ... |
The 24-pin format is important as an entry point for hobbyists and experiments as well as for commercial prototypes. Having it provides an upgrade path for those using the Basic Stamp and other compatible products.
If you are creating or upgrading a commercial product, the ZX-40 or ZX-44 offer significant advantages that should be considered.
| Quote: | | I would suggest, however, that the leads on the ZX-24 be beefed up to the square pins that are used on the BX-24. |
The round pins currently being used were selected for their size so that the device can be installed in a machine pin socket (e.g. Digi-Key A408-ND). We are aware that the pins are easily bent and we're looking at alternatives. We are awaiting the arrival of some pin samples that are said to be stiffer.
We have not been able to locate a source for pins like those used on the BX-24 or those used on the Basic Stamp. Leads to sources of alternate pins would be welcomed.
[Edited to correct the Digi-Key socket number.]
Last edited by dkinzer on 09 January 2006, 3:16 AM; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
pdubinsky
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
Posts: 66
Location: South Carolina
|
|
Posted: 08 January 2006, 20:09 PM Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The round pins currently being used were selected for their size so that the device can be installed in a machine pin socket (e.g. Digi-Key A405-ND). We are aware that the pins are easily bent and we're looking at alternatives. We are awaiting the arrival of some pin samples that are said to be stiffer. |
It really is only a problem if you have to repeatedly seat and remove the device which would not be the case in commercial product. Prototype or experimental work is a different matter and not everyone would be comfortable replacing pins.
It's not a big issue and it's encouraging to know that you're aware of the problem and that you're working on it.
Paul |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dkinzer Site Admin
Joined: 03 Sep 2005
Posts: 2499
Location: Portland, OR
|
|
Posted: 09 January 2006, 1:15 AM Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | It really is only a problem if you have to repeatedly seat and remove the device... |
For a relatively expensive chip in such circumstances it is common to mount the device in a good quality socket (like the Digi-Key A408-ND). Then, if a pin breaks off you re-mount it in a new socket.
[Edited to correct the Digi-Key socket number.]
Last edited by dkinzer on 09 January 2006, 3:16 AM; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
DH* Guest
|
|
Posted: 09 January 2006, 1:26 AM Post subject: |
|
|
| Like the A408-ND - the A405-ND is 0.300" width. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dkinzer Site Admin
Joined: 03 Sep 2005
Posts: 2499
Location: Portland, OR
|
|
Posted: 09 January 2006, 3:15 AM Post subject: |
|
|
You are correct. I edited the original post to avoid confusion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|