| ??? 07/11/03 08:46 Read: times |
#50475 - RE: 89C51 and 80F51? Responding to: ???'s previous message |
After a very long guesswork it seems, the Atmel parts AT89C51 and AT80F51 are meant.
Why to the hell everybody pick up only some letters and numbers of a whole name to start such an unproductive guesswork ? I suggest to all to answer no longer on such clearly incomplete questions. Peter |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? real numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? real numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? real numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
DO NOT USE -> EVER | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| With respect to Atmel... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: With respect to Atmel... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: 89C51 and 80F51? | 01/01/70 00:00 |