On (20 Jan 95) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote... > Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 12:56:35 +0100
> On Fri, 20 Jan 1995 09:45:43 +0100 (MET), Frode Tennebo said: >>> FYI:- from the 1993 TexasInstruments HC Data book... > [pin layouts deleted. BTW whether it's correct or not, that version of 574 > looks more convenient...] Yep the 374 looks like it suited a bus which was inline with the chip and the 574 suites a bus that arrives one side and exits out the other... I couldn't find any other listing for the 574 other than HC(T) book, it's not listed in the (L)S data book! >> This is not what MY data book claims. I'm really sure that >> the lines were the same, BUT the 574 was active low. I'll check >> again, but...... > Does every data book claim a different thing? ;-) How are we supposed to > know what it _actually_ does? Has someone got one to test? >From the pinout Frode posted a little later it looks like his data book says the same as mine;-) And Si's right, for technical accuracy Maplin are CRAP, Farnell's better and offers FREE complete data sheets for all chips they sell! Johnathan. PS I'm not wasting any more time on this thread as I think it's safe to say that Maplins were simply wrong and that is that, if you want technically acurate pin-outs and device specs the get the official manuals or data sheets :-) Oh and that disclaimer guff at the bottom is nothing to do with me, it's standard form genterated by my hosts Fidonet<>Internet gateway software and is not configurable (at least I've NEVER seen a disclaimer generated by the same software used by other hosts around the world say anything different. And I do dislike it's wording as it's not entirely true as some people do share my idea's and opinions, not many but enough to allow some non-argumentative discussion, present company excepted Ian;-) ... Everyone is entitled to my opinion. -- |Fidonet: Johnathan Taylor 2:2501/307.9 |Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
