Denial

MCes wrote:Repeat a FAKE never made it TRUE

Look buddy, I'm tired of you... all you do is show ignorance...

You ASSUME it's okay to sell carts with a HASL edge connector because you never saw any problems with it. Wrong, the board will get grinded and the female connector will get coated in junk.

You ASSUME since all components in a C64 are powered with 0-5V that they also communicate at that voltage. Wrong, they use TTL level signaling. It doesn't matter anyways, PLAnkton runs at 3.6V specifically to ensure 5V CMOS logic level compatibility.

You ASSUME you can just grab any components you can buy on eBay (XC9536) put them in a product and sell it without possible consequences. Wrong, most of them are not RoHS compliant.

You ASSUME an XC9536XL will turn into a time bomb if it is powered with slightly more than 3.6V. Wrong, they can take up to 4.0V, I even tested some at 4.3V.

You assume if PLAnkton is powered with more than 5V, the increase will be linear at the CPLD's Vdd pins. Wrong, the power consumed by the module will increase in a non-linear manner for reasons clearly explained.

Finally, that specific quoted statement above is clearly reminiscent of the tweets of Donald Trump... you stick to falsehoods with tooth and nail.

It's not my job to give you a course in digital circuits... unless you pay me.

Added edit:
If I follow your logic, the 1541 Ultimate I, II and II+ are total crap because the buffers used on these cartridges (74CBT16211) lowers the incoming signals voltage to match the FPGA's voltage (3.3V) but it does NOT increase the outgoing signals voltage.

Just like me, Gideon Zweijtzer considers 3.3V signals to be TTL level compatible and so does TI:

My friend,
you have to understand that you aren't the pivot where the world is spinning....

In Italy we had Mr. Berlusconi Silvio as boss of the italian governances, he has (and have) an economical empire, the majors newspapers, the totality of private (and statal) TV network.....
I (with a lot of people) use "Repeat a FAKE never made it TRUE" since 25 yars!!!!!!!!!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi

wonderful!!!! my first hater!!!!
The king is naked....
But are you so many scared that I could be a your market competitor?
Don't worry, I never had this target!
A proof? I love put on little pieces of paper some ideas, for C64 and VIC 20 also, and a lot of them I chose to don't develop in large quantity, as a "PLAY 104" that store 104 games in half memory used by your cartridge (the pics is of prototipe made hacking a game PCB), so I can produce in large quantity a multigame cart anthology (selectable via software) that, in same memory of your one, can store less or more 230 games (using 16 k only for 2-block games).
I made it befor my iscription at this forum.....
Have you never seen your market bitted from "PLAY 104" (or "PLAY 230")?
NO: I preferred develop other projects! Have you never seen my PLA surrogate?
PLAbiGAL has pass any test, mine and of 2 people that stressed it in every possible way.... but I preferred a "personal use" for me e for my friends becouse on the market somebody else, like me, are showing (and selling) theyr project.
I call it "technical respect". About PLA: I'm selling only CHIPs, generic PLA (PLS100/82S100/ec...) programmed for be fittet in Commodore machines, not any surrogates!

@MCes
You have some sort of self esteem problem ?

Hey guys,
I'm interested in point of view of somebody else!
come on, not be shy!

Sometimes people have to agree to disagree. And maybe start using "In my opinion" a little more instead of absolutes.

eslapion wrote:@MCes
You have some sort of self esteem problem ?

Maybe, but I suppose that I haven't.

I had learn a lot from my errors, so I haven't scary to see them in faces because they represent one of my way to become better, I don't feel me scared by possibility of make an error ( if know that I made honestly the possible for having a good result ).

Have you never tryed to see in face an your error before?
try, I can guarantee that it's possible to find the essence of the people that are surronding you and sensations of quite and freedom never felt before.

i hate you. i ran out of popcorn

MCes wrote:

eslapion wrote:@MCes
You have some sort of self esteem problem ?

Maybe, but I suppose that I haven't.

I had learn a lot from my errors, so I haven't scary to see them in faces because they represent one of my way to become better, I don't feel me scared by possibility of make an error ( if know that I made honestly the possible for having a good result ).

Have you never tryed to see in face an your error before?
try, I can guarantee that it's possible to find the essence of the people that are surronding you and sensations of quite and freedom never felt before.

Recently Groepaz did prove me in error. Yes, the CPU of a 1541 runs at 1MHz, not 16/(13 to 16).

You have not. All you did is prove you can shove forward all the typical misconceptions I see all the time. The same stuff was debated with Jim Drew last year on Melon64, other qualified people got in and just bulldozed him. I find it boring to have to repeat the same stuff.

Added edit:
If I am the one who has something to learn, then tell me this: On GandALF, I have used 2 different ICs even though every logic functions could fit in the XC9572XL which is at it's center. Why is it I have used an external 74HCT74 for 2 flip-flops and only this specific chip or a 74LS74 could have performed the job properly?

(Other people who think they know the answer can PM me to check)

You had to study/resolve a problem: original PLA (or LS chips on 1540 schema) work partially in analogical net on Qout pin 25 (the resistive net and capacitor around XOR are time-tuned on targhet delay/levels...) so the output voltage levels on this pin have to match the original levels that can't be the CPLD level, because it was supplied at 3,3V ( I HOPE! ).

The original levels is performed by LS TTL chips on 1540 schema and by PLA(CMOS?) on 1541 shortboard schema, if I see well: without modification (in shape and values) on r-c net.

My first analisys tell me that for this pin you can't use the CPLD output, but you have to use LS (as 1540 do) or HCT (as1541 do).

Now I have a question for you:
look the pics below. For example.... 3.7V is:

A) inside "Recommended Operation Conditions"
B) beyond the "Recommended Operation Conditions"
C) inside "Absolute Maximum Ratings"
D) beyond "Absolute Maximum Ratings"

More than 1 answer could be right.

try too with:
Vcc= -0,2V
Vcc= 3,3V
Vcc= 3,55V
Vcc= 3,65V

MCes wrote:You had to study/resolve a problem: original PLA (or LS chips on 1540 schema) work partially in analogical net on Qout pin 25 (the resistive net and capacitor around XOR are time-tuned on targhet delay/levels...) so the output voltage levels on this pin have to match the original levels that can't be the CPLD level, because it was supplied at 3,3V ( I HOPE! ).

Nope. In fact, the 74LS74 outputs at almost exactly the same voltage as a CPLD powered at 3.3V. You're making the same mistake as with PLAnkton and when you learn you don't make the same mistake twice.

But you're not too far. This is something related to levels. Clue: you're only one pin away from the answer.

Lesson to learn: 74LS logic chips output a logic 1 between 2.4V and 4V so the CPLD at 3.3V is within that range. The 74HCT74 I use on GandALF outputs a logic 1 at almost 5V.

Added edit:
Answer to your question; PLAnkton usually operates at 3.65V on the CPLD which is above the recommended voltage but well below the AMR - B and C.

sorry, but the mistake isn't mine: the Vcc was undefined and assumend at 3,3V.

The long board work with LS ttl, it was planned for this, if on shortboard aren't any circhuit variation around the PLA then the long board had to work with LS output, if original PLA is a CMOS (COMPLEMENTARY mos) then the surrogate can be HC too.


PLAnkton usually operates at 3.65V on the CPLD which is above the recommended voltage but well below the AMR.

ERROR: 3.65V is not below AMR(you use "below" to give idea of "not inside"....) but it is INSIDE AMR: AMR is from -0.5 to 4.0V. (AMR is defined as an interval, not a point)
3,65 is out of "Recommended Operation Conditions"

3.3v is inside "Recommended Operation Conditions" and obviously inside AMR too...

MCes wrote:sorry, but the mistake isn't mine: the Vcc was undefined and assumend at 3,3V.

It doesn't change the answer and you didn't find it.

Whether GandALF runs at 3.0, 3.3, 3.5 or even 3.7V... the answer is the same. You don't find it because you assume TTL logic ICs and CMOS logic ICs have the same input and output characteristics. They don't.

When you find the difference between 74HC logic ICs and 74HCT logic ICs, you will find the answer.

ERROR: 3.65V is not below AMR(you use "below" to give idea of "not inside"....) but it is INSIDE AMR: AMR is from -0.5 to 4.0V. (AMR is an interval, not a point)

I should have said 3.65V is below the maximum AMR.

And you are wrong

it's inside, not below so the note N2 of datas are valid....
"Exposure to Absolute Maximum Ratings conditions for extended periods of time may affect device reliability."

I have problem with english, but you with the intellectual honesty!