Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site amdcad.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!ihnp4!amdcad!phil
From: phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: net.analog,net.audio,net.ham-radio
Subject: Re: Electronics wearing out
Message-ID: <1746@amdcad.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 22-Jun-85 01:20:10 EDT
Article-I.D.: amdcad.1746
Posted: Sat Jun 22 01:20:10 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 23-Jun-85 04:24:48 EDT
References: <2663@decwrl.UUCP> <508@edison.UUCP> <1005@pitt.UUCP>
Reply-To: phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai)
Organization: AMD, Sunnyvale, California
Lines: 18
Xref: watmath net.analog:339 net.audio:5166 net.ham-radio:2866

In article <1005@pitt.UUCP> hoffman@pitt.UUCP (Bob Hoffman) writes:
>  What's being objected to here is the use
>of a battery-powered CMOS RAM _i_n_ _p_l_a_c_e_ _o_f a ROM for storing
>the "permanent" part of the controller's memory.

This sounds very strange to me. Even if you are afraid of making a mistake
and want to avoid using ROMs, EPROMs are dirt cheap ($2). The battery and
CMOS RAM are probably more than this. So what reason could there be for
using RAM?

By the way, please don't be so clever with your ^H_s.
-- 
 Offensive pickup line follows:
"Hi there, want to be my boy toy?"

 Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720
 UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amdcad!phil
 ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.ARPA