| ??? 04/15/05 12:33 Read: times |
#91634 - Licence Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Jez Smith said:
I was going to publish a very nice i2c master which I wrote for use in a cpld but philips want a licence fee for any hardware implementation. Surely you only have to pay that if you want to actually call it "I2C" Why don't you do like so many others and just call it "JTW" (Jez's Two-Wire) or something, and just drop subtle hints that it might happen to work with "true" I2C parts...? http://www.8052.com/forum/read.phtml?id=74858 |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Bit Bang i2c | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You should | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Errr | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| a slight problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I was | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Licence | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| call it SMB | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| maybe different | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Maybe! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Correction! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| SETB SDA | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| misunderstanding? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| re: | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Thanks to Atmel | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 'Stub' resistors missing? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Pull ups ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Not those... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Rp | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| IIC is owned by philips why not go there | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You're right! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Set port as input - NO SUCH THING! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| oh yes there is | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yes, but not here? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| nowhere in the documentation | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| one more reason not to rely on testing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| one more reason not to rely on testing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Catch 'em young ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Yes | 01/01/70 00:00 |