Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[Robert G. Schaffrath]

Over a year ago I purchased three of the four-digit Chinese IN-12 clocks 
with the LED background lights. Of those, two of them were complete junk 
and AliExpress refunded my money so I only paid USD$20 for the one good 
clock (I offered to return the bad ones but they did not want them - 
surprise). One of the bad ones just stopped working (appears to be a CPU 
issue though one tube lights up so the tiny quarter sized HV power supply 
is good and salvageable) and the other loses around 10 minutes every few 
hours. It cannot keep accurate time at all. Unlike another Chinese board I 
have for IN-14's that is rock solid and does not lose any time at all over 
several weeks of operation. I figure the clock that cannot keep time can 
eventually be fixed by replacing the DS3231M chip. I picked one up on eBay 
for the day when I can find someone who has an SMD rework setup to that I 
can remove the old chip and install the new one. But this is definitely a 
case of a worthless DS3231M being used in products. I assume the 
manufacturer wound up with a bunch of counterfeit or salvaged DS3231M chips 
and just passed them off. Lucky for me, one of the chips does work properly.

On Friday, January 1, 2021 at 11:52:30 AM UTC-5 gregebert wrote:

> Happy New Year, everyone. If you built a new clock last year with a used 
> or cheap DS3231, check the date to make sure it's correct.
>
> I posted about this 2 years ago when I found another fake clock chip.
>
> On Friday, January 25, 2019 at 3:35:06 PM UTC-8 Tony Adams wrote:
>
>> There are indeed some strange 'counterfeits' around. Maybe they were a 
>> deliberate attempt to confuse reverse engineering of some product, but 
>> never used? or it could have been a simple mistake. 
>>
>> I have a few thousand MPSA92 which have been remarked from MPSA42, 
>> with the 4 and 9 superimposed. They work perfectly as PNP HV 
>> transistors so it's possible somebody just forgot to change the 
>> engraver text and the mistake wasn't noticed until they had a large 
>> pile of mismarked PNP MPSA42s. 
>>
>> Tony. 
>>
>> On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 22:38:43 +, you wrote: 
>>
>> >Hi Bill, 
>> > 
>> >Indeed, it seems bonkers. I assume it's because someone has a huge stash 
>> >of open collector output 74 series shift registers, and either thinks 
>> >they're the same, or that most people won't notice the difference. 
>> > 
>> >I bought two batches of 500 of them, from two different chinese 
>> suppliers, 
>> >and they are all exactly the same, having the same laser engraved batch 
>> >number even. To be fair, the prices were suspiciously good, but I wasn't 
>> >banking on fake shift register ICs 
>> > 
>> >They are badged as TI SN74HC595N, and batch GM1807FSF. 
>> > 
>> >I have some 'normal' SN74HC595N, and swapping these out for the real 
>> ones 
>> >generates the expected behaviour ( and yes, inv G is indeed pulled low). 
>> > 
>> >With the 'fake' ones, they will appear to work OK with a pull up 
>> resistor 
>> >present (as you'd expect with an open collector output), but are unable 
>> to 
>> >source any current. 
>> > 
>> >I thought it was just me, but then I googled GM1807FSF and found someone 
>> >else (in German) having the same problem! 
>> > 
>> >https://www.mikrocontroller.net/topic/463936 
>> > 
>> >David 
>> > 
>> >On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 at 22:24, Bill van Dijk  
>> wrote: 
>> > 
>> >> That is really weird. Please understand I am not questioning what you 
>> are 
>> >> saying, but perhaps there is another explanation. The 74LS596 (I have 
>> never 
>> >> seen an HC version) is indeed an open collector chip similar to the 
>> >> 74HC595, which is a tri-state device. On the 74HC595 the inv G (pin 
>> 13) 
>> >> should be held low for normal operation. If it goes high for any 
>> reason, 
>> >> the output will float in tri-state mode, similar to what an open 
>> collector 
>> >> would look like. As you say, I can’t for the life of me not figure why 
>> >> anyone would bother to rebadge those chips especially since there does 
>> not 
>> >> seem to be an economic one (which is usually the motivation). 
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> Bill 
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> *From:* neoni...@googlegroups.com [mailto:neoni...@googlegroups.com] 
>> *On 
>> >> Behalf Of *David Pye 
>> >> *Sent:* Friday, January 25, 2019 4:12 PM 

Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[gregebert]

Happy New Year, everyone. If you built a new clock last year with a used or 
cheap DS3231, check the date to make sure it's correct.

I posted about this 2 years ago when I found another fake clock chip.

On Friday, January 25, 2019 at 3:35:06 PM UTC-8 Tony Adams wrote:

> There are indeed some strange 'counterfeits' around. Maybe they were a
> deliberate attempt to confuse reverse engineering of some product, but
> never used? or it could have been a simple mistake.
>
> I have a few thousand MPSA92 which have been remarked from MPSA42,
> with the 4 and 9 superimposed. They work perfectly as PNP HV
> transistors so it's possible somebody just forgot to change the
> engraver text and the mistake wasn't noticed until they had a large
> pile of mismarked PNP MPSA42s.
>
> Tony.
>
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 22:38:43 +, you wrote:
>
> >Hi Bill,
> >
> >Indeed, it seems bonkers. I assume it's because someone has a huge stash
> >of open collector output 74 series shift registers, and either thinks
> >they're the same, or that most people won't notice the difference.
> >
> >I bought two batches of 500 of them, from two different chinese suppliers,
> >and they are all exactly the same, having the same laser engraved batch
> >number even. To be fair, the prices were suspiciously good, but I wasn't
> >banking on fake shift register ICs
> >
> >They are badged as TI SN74HC595N, and batch GM1807FSF.
> >
> >I have some 'normal' SN74HC595N, and swapping these out for the real ones
> >generates the expected behaviour ( and yes, inv G is indeed pulled low).
> >
> >With the 'fake' ones, they will appear to work OK with a pull up resistor
> >present (as you'd expect with an open collector output), but are unable to
> >source any current.
> >
> >I thought it was just me, but then I googled GM1807FSF and found someone
> >else (in German) having the same problem!
> >
> >https://www.mikrocontroller.net/topic/463936
> >
> >David
> >
> >On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 at 22:24, Bill van Dijk  wrote:
> >
> >> That is really weird. Please understand I am not questioning what you 
> are
> >> saying, but perhaps there is another explanation. The 74LS596 (I have 
> never
> >> seen an HC version) is indeed an open collector chip similar to the
> >> 74HC595, which is a tri-state device. On the 74HC595 the inv G (pin 13)
> >> should be held low for normal operation. If it goes high for any reason,
> >> the output will float in tri-state mode, similar to what an open 
> collector
> >> would look like. As you say, I can’t for the life of me not figure why
> >> anyone would bother to rebadge those chips especially since there does 
> not
> >> seem to be an economic one (which is usually the motivation).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Bill
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *From:* neoni...@googlegroups.com [mailto:neoni...@googlegroups.com] 
> *On
> >> Behalf Of *David Pye
> >> *Sent:* Friday, January 25, 2019 4:12 PM
> >> *To:* neoni...@googlegroups.com
> >> *Subject:* Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> It seems even things barely worth faking are being faked also.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I have a bag of 500 74HC595 shift registers, that are actually rebadged
> >> 74HC596s (as in, open collector, SINK, not SOURCE-capable).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Which are useless for my application :-(
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> Groups
> >> "neonixie-l" group.
> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
> an
> >> email to neonixie-l+...@googlegroups.com.
> >> To post to this group, send email to neoni...@googlegroups.com.
> >> To view this discussion on the web, visit
> >> 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/008501d4b4fc%24bb636a80%24322a3f80%24%40gmail.com
> >> <
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/008501d4b4fc%24bb636a80%24322a3f80%24%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email_source=footer
> >
> >> .
> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> >>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/b53bebbb-c7e7-41ec-9b0a-bbb3e821d150n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[Tony]

There are indeed some strange 'counterfeits' around. Maybe they were a
deliberate attempt to confuse reverse engineering of some product, but
never used? or it could have been a simple mistake.

I have a few thousand MPSA92 which have been remarked from MPSA42,
with the 4 and 9 superimposed. They work perfectly as PNP HV
transistors so it's possible somebody just forgot to change the
engraver text and the mistake wasn't noticed until they had a large
pile of mismarked PNP MPSA42s.

Tony.

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 22:38:43 +, you wrote:

>Hi Bill,
>
>Indeed, it seems bonkers.  I assume it's because someone has a huge stash
>of open collector output 74 series shift registers, and either thinks
>they're the same, or that most people won't notice the difference.
>
>I bought two batches of 500 of them, from two different chinese suppliers,
>and they are all exactly the same, having the same laser engraved batch
>number even.  To be fair, the prices were suspiciously good, but I wasn't
>banking on fake shift register ICs
>
>They are badged as TI SN74HC595N, and batch GM1807FSF.
>
>I have some 'normal' SN74HC595N, and swapping these out for the real ones
>generates the expected behaviour ( and yes,  inv G is indeed pulled low).
>
>With the 'fake' ones, they will appear to work OK with a pull up resistor
>present (as you'd expect with an open collector output), but are unable to
>source any current.
>
>I thought it was just me, but then I googled GM1807FSF and found someone
>else (in German) having the same problem!
>
>https://www.mikrocontroller.net/topic/463936
>
>David
>
>On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 at 22:24, Bill van Dijk  wrote:
>
>> That is really weird. Please understand I am not questioning what you are
>> saying, but perhaps there is another explanation. The 74LS596 (I have never
>> seen an HC version) is indeed an open collector chip similar to the
>> 74HC595, which is a tri-state device. On the 74HC595 the inv G (pin 13)
>> should be held low for normal operation. If it goes high for any reason,
>> the output will float in tri-state mode, similar to what an open collector
>> would look like. As you say, I can’t for the life of me not figure why
>> anyone would bother to rebadge those chips especially since there does not
>> seem to be an economic one (which is usually the motivation).
>>
>>
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* neonixie-l@googlegroups.com [mailto:neonixie-l@googlegroups.com] *On
>> Behalf Of *David Pye
>> *Sent:* Friday, January 25, 2019 4:12 PM
>> *To:* neonixie-l@googlegroups.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules
>>
>>
>>
>> It seems even things barely worth faking are being faked also.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have a bag of 500 74HC595 shift registers, that are actually rebadged
>> 74HC596s (as in, open collector, SINK, not SOURCE-capable).
>>
>>
>>
>> Which are useless for my application :-(
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "neonixie-l" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web, visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/008501d4b4fc%24bb636a80%24322a3f80%24%40gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/008501d4b4fc%24bb636a80%24322a3f80%24%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email_source=footer>
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/dt6n4epl4q4pc6or71ghtcc0tgps04sf0e%404ax.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[David Pye]

Hi Bill,

Indeed, it seems bonkers.  I assume it's because someone has a huge stash
of open collector output 74 series shift registers, and either thinks
they're the same, or that most people won't notice the difference.

I bought two batches of 500 of them, from two different chinese suppliers,
and they are all exactly the same, having the same laser engraved batch
number even.  To be fair, the prices were suspiciously good, but I wasn't
banking on fake shift register ICs

They are badged as TI SN74HC595N, and batch GM1807FSF.

I have some 'normal' SN74HC595N, and swapping these out for the real ones
generates the expected behaviour ( and yes,  inv G is indeed pulled low).

With the 'fake' ones, they will appear to work OK with a pull up resistor
present (as you'd expect with an open collector output), but are unable to
source any current.

I thought it was just me, but then I googled GM1807FSF and found someone
else (in German) having the same problem!

https://www.mikrocontroller.net/topic/463936

David

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 at 22:24, Bill van Dijk  wrote:

> That is really weird. Please understand I am not questioning what you are
> saying, but perhaps there is another explanation. The 74LS596 (I have never
> seen an HC version) is indeed an open collector chip similar to the
> 74HC595, which is a tri-state device. On the 74HC595 the inv G (pin 13)
> should be held low for normal operation. If it goes high for any reason,
> the output will float in tri-state mode, similar to what an open collector
> would look like. As you say, I can’t for the life of me not figure why
> anyone would bother to rebadge those chips especially since there does not
> seem to be an economic one (which is usually the motivation).
>
>
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> *From:* neonixie-l@googlegroups.com [mailto:neonixie-l@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *David Pye
> *Sent:* Friday, January 25, 2019 4:12 PM
> *To:* neonixie-l@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules
>
>
>
> It seems even things barely worth faking are being faked also.
>
>
>
> I have a bag of 500 74HC595 shift registers, that are actually rebadged
> 74HC596s (as in, open collector, SINK, not SOURCE-capable).
>
>
>
> Which are useless for my application :-(
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "neonixie-l" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/008501d4b4fc%24bb636a80%24322a3f80%24%40gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/008501d4b4fc%24bb636a80%24322a3f80%24%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email_source=footer>
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/CAOQ6x0FggEjn0WWRt0MSRtvu9vkXDc2uN-VwEywE_85MLRa%3DiQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

RE: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[Bill van Dijk]

That is really weird. Please understand I am not questioning what you are 
saying, but perhaps there is another explanation. The 74LS596 (I have never 
seen an HC version) is indeed an open collector chip similar to the 74HC595, 
which is a tri-state device. On the 74HC595 the inv G (pin 13) should be held 
low for normal operation. If it goes high for any reason, the output will float 
in tri-state mode, similar to what an open collector would look like. As you 
say, I can’t for the life of me not figure why anyone would bother to rebadge 
those chips especially since there does not seem to be an economic one (which 
is usually the motivation).

 

Bill

 

From: neonixie-l@googlegroups.com [mailto:neonixie-l@googlegroups.com] On 
Behalf Of David Pye
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 4:12 PM
To: neonixie-l@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

 

It seems even things barely worth faking are being faked also.

 

I have a bag of 500 74HC595 shift registers, that are actually rebadged 
74HC596s (as in, open collector, SINK, not SOURCE-capable).

 

Which are useless for my application :-(

 

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/008501d4b4fc%24bb636a80%24322a3f80%24%40gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[David Pye]

It seems even things barely worth faking are being faked also.

I have a bag of 500 74HC595 shift registers, that are actually rebadged
74HC596s (as in, open collector, SINK, not SOURCE-capable).

Which are useless for my application :-(

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 at 20:58, Bill van Dijk  wrote:

> There can be a few different reasons for the i2c buss to hang, and may not
> be the fault of the DS3231. For instance, if there is a software interrupt
> during an i2c read or write, that can do it. Are you using a mpu based
> hardware i2c engine, or do you bit-bang the buss?
>
>
>
> If the DS3231 is battery backed up, than resetting the power will not
> reset the buss either. In cases where I use a battery backup, I use a small
> routine to test the buss at every startup, including brownout and watch dog
> events:
>
>
>
> void I2C_Test() //test to see if I2C line is in a valid (stopped) state
>
> {
>
> if//test I2C line
>
>(!input(i2c_SDA))   //if SDA stuck low - Fault Condition
>
>{
>
>I2CEN=0;//temporary disable I2C Hardware Module
>
>output_drive(i2c_SCL);  //set SCL as output
>
>  while
>
>(!input(i2c_SDA))   //Continue loop until SDA is released (high)
>
> {
>
> output_toggle(i2c_SCL);//Toggle I2C clock line till fault clears
>
> delay_us(10);
>
> }
>
>output_float(i2c_SCL);  // set SCL back as input
>
>I2CEN=1;// re-enable I2C Hardware Module
>
>}
>
> }
>
>
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* neonixie-l@googlegroups.com [mailto:neonixie-l@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Luka C
> *Sent:* Friday, January 25, 2019 3:45 PM
> *To:* neonixie-l 
> *Subject:* Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules
>
>
>
> I have written previously about a similar incident with ATmega328p chips
> ordered from Aliexpress. They did not arrived in a reel, but just packed in
> a small plastic bag. Two of them worked fine, but Atmel Studio was unable
> to even read the ID of the third one, thus rendering it unprogrammable and
> useless..and since it's an SMD, it was not as easy as just popping it out
> of the socket. I guess they are chips which failed QC and somehow, these
> companies got them, performed a somewhat "basic check" and sold them as new
> ones.
>
>
>
> I have also ordered a lot of 10 DS3231 chips from some other Aliexpress
> seller (they had considerable 5* ratings so I decided to give it a try).
> They were like 14$/10pcs. The chips worked, the time is still very precise
> after two years of operation of the older clock I made. However, I did
> notice one "bug" in the chip. If you keep querying the chip too often (like
> in an unconditional loop) for seconds, it will eventually hang the I2C
> line. The solution was to set a timeout for I2C read operation, and if
> timeout does occur, the master (microcontroller) has to keep clocking the
> SCL line until the DS3231 releases the bus. However, I've read some people
> reporting the same "bug" on multiple sites, so I'm not sure if it's a "bug"
> specific to possibly counterfeit chips or just a general bug that affects
> genuine ones as well.
>
>
> On Thursday, January 3, 2019 at 1:41:52 AM UTC+1, gregebert wrote:
>
> For now I'm going to hold off on any experiments that require
> code-changes. I'll keep this RTC chip online for additional experiments;
> known-good RTC will go into the second board-set.
>
> It appears the alarm registers are testable with software; I dont have the
> INT/SQW pin connected in my system.
>
>
>
> I'm really itching to get the NIMO lit-up and running. So close to
> actually firing it up, but I wont attempt that unless everything is 100%
> stable. Mindset is that I have only 1 chance to get it right and it must be
> right the first time. Anything that can go wrong and remain uncorrected for
> more than a few milliseconds is assumed to result in a dead NIMO tube, and
> I only have 1.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "neonixie-l" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/9529a437-2084-41b9-af82-158aa95ff505%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/9529a437-2084-41b9-af82-158aa95ff505%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email_source=footer>
> .
> For more opt

RE: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[Bill van Dijk]

There can be a few different reasons for the i2c buss to hang, and may not be 
the fault of the DS3231. For instance, if there is a software interrupt during 
an i2c read or write, that can do it. Are you using a mpu based hardware i2c 
engine, or do you bit-bang the buss?

 

If the DS3231 is battery backed up, than resetting the power will not reset the 
buss either. In cases where I use a battery backup, I use a small routine to 
test the buss at every startup, including brownout and watch dog events:

 

void I2C_Test() //test to see if I2C line is in a valid (stopped) state

{

if//test I2C line

   (!input(i2c_SDA))   //if SDA stuck low - Fault Condition

   {

   I2CEN=0;//temporary disable I2C Hardware Module 

   output_drive(i2c_SCL);  //set SCL as output 

 while

   (!input(i2c_SDA))   //Continue loop until SDA is released (high)

{   

output_toggle(i2c_SCL);//Toggle I2C clock line till fault clears

delay_us(10); 

} 

   output_float(i2c_SCL);  // set SCL back as input 

   I2CEN=1;// re-enable I2C Hardware Module 

   }

}

 

Bill

 

 

 

From: neonixie-l@googlegroups.com [mailto:neonixie-l@googlegroups.com] On 
Behalf Of Luka C
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 3:45 PM
To: neonixie-l 
Subject: Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

 

I have written previously about a similar incident with ATmega328p chips 
ordered from Aliexpress. They did not arrived in a reel, but just packed in a 
small plastic bag. Two of them worked fine, but Atmel Studio was unable to even 
read the ID of the third one, thus rendering it unprogrammable and useless..and 
since it's an SMD, it was not as easy as just popping it out of the socket. I 
guess they are chips which failed QC and somehow, these companies got them, 
performed a somewhat "basic check" and sold them as new ones.

 

I have also ordered a lot of 10 DS3231 chips from some other Aliexpress seller 
(they had considerable 5* ratings so I decided to give it a try). They were 
like 14$/10pcs. The chips worked, the time is still very precise after two 
years of operation of the older clock I made. However, I did notice one "bug" 
in the chip. If you keep querying the chip too often (like in an unconditional 
loop) for seconds, it will eventually hang the I2C line. The solution was to 
set a timeout for I2C read operation, and if timeout does occur, the master 
(microcontroller) has to keep clocking the SCL line until the DS3231 releases 
the bus. However, I've read some people reporting the same "bug" on multiple 
sites, so I'm not sure if it's a "bug" specific to possibly counterfeit chips 
or just a general bug that affects genuine ones as well.


On Thursday, January 3, 2019 at 1:41:52 AM UTC+1, gregebert wrote:

For now I'm going to hold off on any experiments that require code-changes. 
I'll keep this RTC chip online for additional experiments; known-good RTC will 
go into the second board-set.

It appears the alarm registers are testable with software; I dont have the 
INT/SQW pin connected in my system.

 

I'm really itching to get the NIMO lit-up and running. So close to actually 
firing it up, but I wont attempt that unless everything is 100% stable. Mindset 
is that I have only 1 chance to get it right and it must be right the first 
time. Anything that can go wrong and remain uncorrected for more than a few 
milliseconds is assumed to result in a dead NIMO tube, and I only have 1. 

 

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
<mailto:neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com> .
To post to this group, send email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com 
<mailto:neonixie-l@googlegroups.com> .
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/9529a437-2084-41b9-af82-158aa95ff505%40googlegroups.com
 
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/9529a437-2084-41b9-af82-158aa95ff505%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email_source=footer>
 .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/003a01d4b4f0%24aaac8250%24000586f0%24%40gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[Luka C]

I have written previously about a similar incident with ATmega328p chips 
ordered from Aliexpress. They did not arrived in a reel, but just packed in 
a small plastic bag. Two of them worked fine, but Atmel Studio was unable 
to even read the ID of the third one, thus rendering it unprogrammable and 
useless..and since it's an SMD, it was not as easy as just popping it out 
of the socket. I guess they are chips which failed QC and somehow, these 
companies got them, performed a somewhat "basic check" and sold them as new 
ones.

I have also ordered a lot of 10 DS3231 chips from some other Aliexpress 
seller (they had considerable 5* ratings so I decided to give it a try). 
They were like 14$/10pcs. The chips worked, the time is still very precise 
after two years of operation of the older clock I made. However, I did 
notice one "bug" in the chip. If you keep querying the chip too often (like 
in an unconditional loop) for seconds, it will eventually hang the I2C 
line. The solution was to set a timeout for I2C read operation, and if 
timeout does occur, the master (microcontroller) has to keep clocking the 
SCL line until the DS3231 releases the bus. However, I've read some people 
reporting the same "bug" on multiple sites, so I'm not sure if it's a "bug" 
specific to possibly counterfeit chips or just a general bug that affects 
genuine ones as well.

On Thursday, January 3, 2019 at 1:41:52 AM UTC+1, gregebert wrote:
>
> For now I'm going to hold off on any experiments that require 
> code-changes. I'll keep this RTC chip online for additional experiments; 
> known-good RTC will go into the second board-set.
> It appears the alarm registers are testable with software; I dont have the 
> INT/SQW pin connected in my system.
>
> I'm really itching to get the NIMO lit-up and running. So close to 
> actually firing it up, but I wont attempt that unless everything is 100% 
> stable. Mindset is that I have only 1 chance to get it right and it must be 
> right the first time. Anything that can go wrong and remain uncorrected for 
> more than a few milliseconds is assumed to result in a dead NIMO tube, and 
> I only have 1. 
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/9529a437-2084-41b9-af82-158aa95ff505%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[Frank Bemelman]

Ok, I see. Perhaps it is just a single defective RTC chip you have there.
You could write a software patch to set the day to 1, at every rollover :)
And then wait for the next weird behaviour :)

Op do 3 jan. 2019 om 00:27 schreef gregebert 

> When I looked at the raw data from the RTC, which is in packed BCD
> format,  I could clearly see that my code was not properly parsing it. I
> believe it was Sep 30--> Oct 01 where I calculated the wrong month.
>
> The Jan 01 rollover bug has incorrect BCD data from the RTC itself.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "neonixie-l" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/e92236f5-0fbe-46f3-ab1b-efbf339aa91e%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
-- 
Vriendelijke groeten,
Frank Bemelman

Frank Techniek
Vennestraat 11X
2161LE  Lisse
Telefoon +31 252 769 178

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/CAEhU53_15iPky%2B2jDsY%3DAHLu5Fj0S8cu7KrdRZH9pGEyYtkr%3DA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[Dekatron42]

Ok, but if you feel like going back to the faulty one, setting the alarm 
register will show you if the RTC is doing what it should internally and 
the data read from it is wrong (unless you make an error in programming the 
alarm registers that is ;) ).

/Martin

On Thursday, 3 January 2019 01:41:52 UTC+1, gregebert wrote:
>
> For now I'm going to hold off on any experiments that require 
> code-changes. I'll keep this RTC chip online for additional experiments; 
> known-good RTC will go into the second board-set.
> It appears the alarm registers are testable with software; I dont have the 
> INT/SQW pin connected in my system.
>
> I'm really itching to get the NIMO lit-up and running. So close to 
> actually firing it up, but I wont attempt that unless everything is 100% 
> stable. Mindset is that I have only 1 chance to get it right and it must be 
> right the first time. Anything that can go wrong and remain uncorrected for 
> more than a few milliseconds is assumed to result in a dead NIMO tube, and 
> I only have 1. 
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/2da8c570-4966-4e7d-8f36-5c2447844ad9%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[gregebert]

For now I'm going to hold off on any experiments that require code-changes. 
I'll keep this RTC chip online for additional experiments; known-good RTC 
will go into the second board-set.
It appears the alarm registers are testable with software; I dont have the 
INT/SQW pin connected in my system.

I'm really itching to get the NIMO lit-up and running. So close to actually 
firing it up, but I wont attempt that unless everything is 100% stable. 
Mindset is that I have only 1 chance to get it right and it must be right 
the first time. Anything that can go wrong and remain uncorrected for more 
than a few milliseconds is assumed to result in a dead NIMO tube, and I 
only have 1. 


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/d5e04cc4-cc84-41e0-a5ff-1630747d8134%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[Dekatron42]

What happens if you set the alarm registers to 00:00:00 at 1/1, is the alarm 
triggered at rollover?

/Martin

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/c6b35025-1df8-49da-9458-ba8d5722eab2%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[gregebert]

When I looked at the raw data from the RTC, which is in packed BCD format,  
I could clearly see that my code was not properly parsing it. I believe it 
was Sep 30--> Oct 01 where I calculated the wrong month.

The Jan 01 rollover bug has incorrect BCD data from the RTC itself.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/e92236f5-0fbe-46f3-ab1b-efbf339aa91e%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[Frank Bemelman]

But if your first rollover problem was a software bug, then why would this
particular rollover problem not be  another software bug?

Op wo 2 jan. 2019 om 15:58 schreef gregebert 

> It comes up as 09/01/2017. I'll keep this RTC online for a few more weeks,
> as the system debug is almost done.
> There was another rollover a few months ago where the date was messed-up,
> but I traced that to a software bug that was my fault.
>
> [image: ScreenHunter_15 Jan. 02 06.48.jpg]
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "neonixie-l" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/84ed03ec-1fff-491e-ba9f-cead91660273%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
-- 
Vriendelijke groeten,
Frank Bemelman

Frank Techniek
Vennestraat 11X
2161LE  Lisse
Telefoon +31 252 769 178

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/CAEhU539rizPRcZ%3DSehyMLu_hbT%2BGNXMu6%2Bdi-bo0%3D3hzVyDbFg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[gregebert]

It comes up as 09/01/2017. I'll keep this RTC online for a few more weeks, 
as the system debug is almost done.
There was another rollover a few months ago where the date was messed-up, 
but I traced that to a software bug that was my fault.

[image: ScreenHunter_15 Jan. 02 06.48.jpg]

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/84ed03ec-1fff-491e-ba9f-cead91660273%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[Paul Andrews]

What happens if you let it roll over from a different date? Say 12/31/2017? My 
guess in that case would be 08/01/2017.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/c7e06a19-5d78-4e81-b742-19ba479fee88%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[gregebert]

Happy New Year, unless you rely on the dirt-chip RTC module I bought 
several months ago, because today would be Sept 2, 2018.

WHAT ???  That's the date my RTC chip reported this morning: 09/02/2018
Last night, before midnight and right after I got tired of writing 
software, it was correct at 12/31/2018. 

The funny thing is, this counterfeit RTC module has kept the time very 
accurately over several months. My previous experience with a different 
fake chip was that it was losing about 2 hours per day; since this one was 
accurately keeping the time I assumed it was a genuine Maxim device. Nay, 
not so...

After resetting the correct date, it's showing that now. So I wonderif 
someone went to such lengths to make such a time-wise accurate fake, why 
would they bungle so poorly on a simple Dec31 --> Jan01 rollover ?

Sure enough, when I forced the RTC back just before midnite and let it 
roll-over, I got another wrong date (09/01/2018), so this RTC is even more 
messed-up than I thought.

[image: ScreenHunter_14 Jan. 01 12.38.jpg]

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/d40b66a6-8433-41b8-a9f1-46a0a97f5ac6%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[vfdclock]

It's very simple,a lot of this kind of chips are from older PCBs and 
de-solderd and recreate the surface to make it can be resell on the market, 
most of these kind of people are in GugangDong Prov. China,especially from 
the ShanTou city,it's a huge industry in GuangDong,China, you can find a 
lot of the fake/retread chips from taobao, most of the sellers are also 
from ShanTou,GuangDong City if you check the location of the sellers.
The price of on DS3231 retread chips are less than 0.1~0.2usd after been 
cleaned,plating the legs,and recreate the surface marks,and of course if 
the can send it to you via HONGKONG,the int-mail price can low down to 
started from ~1/6usd. That is why you can find a lot of the sellers who can 
give you the price like $2 even with the free shipping from HongKong.
So if the price is too low,and the sellers' location is GuangDong or 
written like HongKong, 90% are made by retread chips.But it does not mean 
all the stuffs are unsaleable.buy it or not depends on yourself.


在 2016年2月4日星期四 UTC+8下午11:04:45，gregebert写道：
>
> Lesson learned: You get what you pay for.
>
> I bought a $2 US realtime clock module on Ebay, imported from China, and 
> the DS3231 chip appears to be counterfeit because it was not keeping 
> accurate time. I was suspicious about the price, considering I paid almost 
> $8 US just for the DS3231 from a reputable supplier. Over a few days, it 
> lost about 1 hour of time.
>
> After replacing the chip with a genuine Maxim DS3231, it's running 
> correctly.
>
> A quick web-search found there are several others who have experienced 
> this.
>
> Despite having to replace the RTC chip, the module itself is still worth 
> the price because it included a rechargeable Li-ion coin battery and a 
> serial EEPROM (no time yet to see if that's working correctly...)
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/2e174ad7-fc59-42de-ae5a-8aeb2a6d14eb%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

['Terry S' via neonixie-l]

By "reconditioned", do you mean counterfeit? 
Why would the markings be different? I could see if they were from an older 
batch... salvaged parts.

I got burned one time at work on counterfeit parts, bad op-amps from 
Burr-Brown. Except not really, fake parts made in China. Why would they 
counterfeit a 60 cent part?  Because they can make 55 cents on it and sell 
them by the millions.

In most applications it would never have been caught. But it was in mine, 
and caused quite a ripple back up the supply chain.

Terry

On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 11:04:43 AM UTC-6, 严泽远 wrote:

> There're so many reconditioned DS3231SN chips in China market, most of 
> them are disassembled from some old equipment, just like electricity 
> meter... I can find some RTC module list price 0.5USD with DS3231SN on it, 
> it must be reconditioned one since a new DS3231SN will over 1.5USD. But 
> it's not difficult to recognize the new one or reconditioned one, the 
> thickness and laser characters are different.
>
> Laser characters of reconditioned have wider line than real one, looks 
> rough, please check them:
>
>
>
>
> 在 2016年2月4日星期四 UTC+8下午11:04:45，gregebert写道：
>>
>> Lesson learned: You get what you pay for.
>>
>> I bought a $2 US realtime clock module on Ebay, imported from China, and 
>> the DS3231 chip appears to be counterfeit because it was not keeping 
>> accurate time. I was suspicious about the price, considering I paid almost 
>> $8 US just for the DS3231 from a reputable supplier. Over a few days, it 
>> lost about 1 hour of time.
>>
>> After replacing the chip with a genuine Maxim DS3231, it's running 
>> correctly.
>>
>> A quick web-search found there are several others who have experienced 
>> this.
>>
>> Despite having to replace the RTC chip, the module itself is still worth 
>> the price because it included a rechargeable Li-ion coin battery and a 
>> serial EEPROM (no time yet to see if that's working correctly...)
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/0b8c91d4-42bb-49c0-a4be-00be0d912edd%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

['threeneurons' via neonixie-l]

One thing about eBay sellers, is not properly handling the devices. I 
bought some power FETs from an eBay seller once, and he stuck them in plain 
white static generating styrofoam. Even Futurlec shipped chips to me in 
plain non-antistatic plastic bags. I now only buy semiconductors from 
vendors that static protection, like Mouser & Digi-key.

And those "counterfeits", can be recycled chips. They stick computer boards 
over open fires, to melt the solder, and let the ICs slide off. The ICs are 
collected, cleaned, and possibly remarked. Antistatic protection, is the 
least of your worries with those, even if they did handle them properly. I 
guess you can call those reconditioned. 


On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 7:04:45 AM UTC-8, gregebert wrote:
>
> Lesson learned: You get what you pay for.
>
> I bought a $2 US realtime clock module on Ebay, imported from China, and 
> the DS3231 chip appears to be counterfeit because it was not keeping 
> accurate time.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/ec933637-28e5-4afb-b930-d96b8c609bd2%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[Dan Hollis]

Looks like a counterfeit to me.

I've been spending a lot of time lately analyzing chinese counterfeit 
chips. They are everywhere.


-Dan

On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Michail1 via neonixie-l wrote:


It's also possible it was simply a bad chip.

Michail


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/581b5f.761df886.43e64337%40aol.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

[Dekatron42]

I agree on the battery, I bought some similar units a few years ago which 
were incorrectly designed so that they were trying to charge non-chargeable 
batteries!

I also had problems with the EEPROMs and about everything else on these and 
other modules. The modules were bought from a usually respectable Swedish 
company but they had made the poor decision to try to earn more money and 
also bought from the free Chinese market and not from their ordinary 
distributors. I got new modules when I could show how poor they were but 
they gave me a real headache before I figured out that they had poor 
components and were incorrectly designed.

I still find photos of the same modules from some resellers, but I don't 
know if they deliver the same poor modules.

/Martin

On Friday, 5 February 2016 10:15:37 UTC+1, Oscilloclock wrote:
>
> I'd be concerned about the Li-ion button battery - leaking chemicals in a 
> HV nixie clock, or possibly causing fire, is another level of risk.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/ce1057e7-2c10-4de3-9f56-5c83ce704729%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[neonixie-l] Re: Counterfeit RTC modules

['Terry S' via neonixie-l]

Greg, you really ought to inform Maxim. They may want the part.
Terry

On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 9:04:45 AM UTC-6, gregebert wrote:

> Lesson learned: You get what you pay for.
>
> I bought a $2 US realtime clock module on Ebay, imported from China, and 
> the DS3231 chip appears to be counterfeit because it was not keeping 
> accurate time. I was suspicious about the price, considering I paid almost 
> $8 US just for the DS3231 from a reputable supplier. Over a few days, it 
> lost about 1 hour of time.
>
> After replacing the chip with a genuine Maxim DS3231, it's running 
> correctly.
>
> A quick web-search found there are several others who have experienced 
> this.
>
> Despite having to replace the RTC chip, the module itself is still worth 
> the price because it included a rechargeable Li-ion coin battery and a 
> serial EEPROM (no time yet to see if that's working correctly...)
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/6a4e61ed-a823-42d8-828e-bddd5815b5a0%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.