Need help, and I screwed up with my post

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Fri Nov 26 16:28:43 1999

There are other part numbers which should teach us to be specific. There's
a Motorola MC4024, which is a dual VCO not unlike the 74S124. The CD4024 is
a 7-bit counter. There's a Motorola MC4044 which is a
phase-detector/amplifier intended for use with their MC4024 as parts of a
PLL. OTOH there's the TI TMS 4044 4kx1 SRAM, and the CD 4044 which (?) is a
quad RS flipflop. With NEC numbers, the uPD414 won't do much good if you
need a uPC414.

You can probably imagine how I learned some of these details. The fact that
I still remember them may shed some light as well.

Dick

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
Date: Friday, November 26, 1999 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: Need help, and I screwed up with my post


>The use of the entire part number might avoid confusion as well. Intel has
>never made a CD4040, have they?
>
>Dick
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dave McGuire <mcguire_at_neurotica.com>
>To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
><classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
>Date: Friday, November 26, 1999 2:28 PM
>Subject: Re: Need help, and I screwed up with my post
>
>
>>On Fri, 26 Nov 1999, Tony Duell wrote:
>>>Yes, there are some numbers that were used for 2 or more totally
>>>different chips. The other well-know confusing one is '4040' which is
>>>either a CMOS 12 bit ripple counter (and is very common) or the second
>>>Intel microprocessor (and is much rarer).
>>
>> Ahh, but the 4040 microprocessor is a 24-pin DIP...making it difficult
to
>>confuse them "in person"...
>>
>> -Dave McGuire
>
Received on Fri Nov 26 1999 - 16:28:43 GMT