Xref: utzoo sci.electronics:1875 comp.sys.ibm.pc:10508
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ucbvax!pasteur!trinity!max
From: max@trinity.uucp (Max Hauser)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: TTL Families
Summary: Different pinouts indeed
Message-ID: <241@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu>
Date: 19 Jan 88 05:09:11 GMT
References: <1552@mipos3.intel.com> <634@netxcom.UUCP> <7928@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU> <669@PT.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: news@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu
Reply-To: max@eros.UUCP (Max Hauser)
Distribution: na
Organization: UC Berkeley
Lines: 33

In article <669@PT.CS.CMU.EDU> phd@SPEECH1.CS.CMU.EDU (Paul Dietz) writes:
>In article <7928@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU> vizard@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU 
>(Todd Krein) writes in reference to TTL families:
>>As for pinouts, I think they're all mix'n match.... 

>Oh! I don't think so! I don't have my data books next to me,
>but I'm pretty sure that some of the 74L series had unusual
>pinouts. I'll go check, but in the interim, does anyone want to
>comment?

Who could turn down such an invitation!  (Not me, anyway)

They shore did have varying pinouts across the "compatible" 54/74 /L/H
series.

Also, the standardization of corner power on DIPs came after quite
a number of the basic 54/74 designs had been released. So you got
some later members of the family that were identical copies of
earlier members except with bonding pads laid out so they could
be bonded with corner power pins (74107 vs. 7473? That comes to mind,
but mind is sometimes faulty).

There must be other readers who can remember the days (late 60s -
early 70s) when the TI 54/74 family was competing for its eventual
preeminence against its rivals, like the Sylvania SUHL I/II and the
Fairchild 9000 "CCSL" series. (Who remembers what SUHL and CCSL
stand for?) I don't suppose many SUHL or CCSL TTL chips are still 
being specified, but they had their own clever ideas about power 
pins too ...

Max Hauser / max@eros.berkeley.edu / ...{!decvax}!ucbvax!eros!max

UCB EECS -- IC Design