Older programmer compatibility issues?

ManiN

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
727
Reaction score
7
Location
Washougal, Washington
Anybody else run into issues with compatibility with older eprom programmers?

I picked up an eeTools allmax+ and at this point believe my issues of inconsistent reading and programming hiccups are due to compatibility. I have tried 2 different PCs and one does better than the other. The better one will do a good hardware test and seems to read chips ok, but the programmed eproms don't match up when I read them and compare with romident. Both PCs run XP but getting poor results in XP, I ran it in DOS with a bootdisk. The bootdisk results were better for the PC that was able to read correctly.

I had another post where someone mentioned reducing clock speed on the ISA port for better operation, but this unit is a parallel port. Any body have advice about retarding my system to allow better operation of this device?
 
Well, for one, Windows XP is going to have problems with communicating directly with hardware, just in general. Running from DOS is the best way. Another thing to check is the BIOS settings for the parallel port, see which mode you have it in. There are several, (EPP, PS/2, etc) - try a different setting. Also, be sure that nothing else is using the same IRQ, things like that.

Of course, the easy solution is just to use an older PC to run the programmer. My main programmer is a Needham's PB10, which is an ISA card. I also have an EETools TopMax. I have both programmers connected to a 486 running FreeDOS and they work flawlessly.

-Ian
 
First thing I would do is not depend on romident for verification...doesn't the burner software have a verify option?

Secondly check your BIOS settings for the parallel port...theres usually 2-3 options, and while (its been a while) I think the most advanced option is ECP...try each one to see if one works best with it. Parallel ports are usually pretty solid.

When you do change the settings in the bios, Windows may detect the parallel port differently so give it an extra couple minutes when you boot up after making the change.
 
I've got an ISA programmer that still does the job. It doesn't surprise me that a parallel port programmer might have trouble. I've seen several lower-end tools that write directly to the parallel port and are timing-sensitive. Several good suggestions above.

Well, for one, Windows XP is going to have problems with communicating directly with hardware, just in general. Running from DOS is the best way.
That's one solution, but I've had great success with Direct I/O (link) and Windows XP. This package installs a windows driver that lets older DOS programs run on XP+ but talk directly to old ISA cards. This way I have one computer on my workbench that can burn ROMs, access my home network, browse the web, and view PDFs. It won't help with your parallel-port burner but I wanted to mention this for anybody else who has an ISA burner.
 
First thing I would do is not depend on romident for verification...doesn't the burner software have a verify option?

Secondly check your BIOS settings for the parallel port...theres usually 2-3 options, and while (its been a while) I think the most advanced option is ECP...try each one to see if one works best with it. Parallel ports are usually pretty solid.

When you do change the settings in the bios, Windows may detect the parallel port differently so give it an extra couple minutes when you boot up after making the change.

It does have a verify, but I really don't trust anything within the programmer yet. I wanted an outside method to verify.

I've tried various options, and it seems to only want to run off of one output. I can try other advanced options such as ECP on the better PC. I began to think there was a timing issue because all functions were great for the better PC except the program wouldn't verify. Other than that it's fine.
 
A quasi-third-party way to verify could be to read back the rom...open it in a hex editor that has a compare function and compare it to the original file.

What roms are you trying to burn? Its possible you can have bad or flaky roms too.
 
You're sure your ROMs are good, and the chips are making good contact with the socket, right? You've completely erased them, and done a blank check before programming? A faulty or improperly erased ROM will fail verify, even though the programming phase might complete.

-Ian
 
It's Windows XP.

I have a laptop that worked beautifully with my ChipMax programmer but now will barely work after the hard drive died and it was reloaded from scratch.

There's a software issue somewhere but I can't find it.

I've tried all the different parallel port settings, the direct parallel port driver, and more. It's something in Windows.
 
Well, for one, Windows XP is going to have problems with communicating directly with hardware, just in general. Running from DOS is the best way. Another thing to check is the BIOS settings for the parallel port, see which mode you have it in. There are several, (EPP, PS/2, etc) - try a different setting. Also, be sure that nothing else is using the same IRQ, things like that.

Of course, the easy solution is just to use an older PC to run the programmer. My main programmer is a Needham's PB10, which is an ISA card. I also have an EETools TopMax. I have both programmers connected to a 486 running FreeDOS and they work flawlessly.

-Ian
I will try that...I have had some issues with my Needham's PB10 running dos mode from windows 98. It will start to program and may or may not program. I have a Acer 486 dx 66 I can try.
 
On older 486/Pentium systems see if you have a clock setting for the ISA bus or a wait state you can add in under the BIOS settings. Also make sure the parallel port is set to the proper mode.
 
It's Windows XP.

I have a laptop that worked beautifully with my ChipMax programmer but now will barely work after the hard drive died and it was reloaded from scratch.

There's a software issue somewhere but I can't find it.

I've tried all the different parallel port settings, the direct parallel port driver, and more. It's something in Windows.

What do you usually use for your parallel port setting in BIOS when using your chipmax? Just normal, epp, ecp, etc?
 
Tried all 3... normally it (and my main PC in the house where the TopMax is) is set to bi-directional and not ECP.

I've tried all three and have tried different interrupt settings. It used to be set to "never use an interrupt" which is what my main PC is set to and has worked with for years.
 
I too have an allmax+ and I ran into similar problems. It worked great in Win98 (I've had this thing a long time), but never could get it to work correctly in XP. To get around the problem I set up my test rig to dual boot win98/XP. I only boot to win98 when I need the burner. It's a PIA, but at least it works correctly. The real problem is if my MB takes a crap. Newer MBs don't support win98 so if the system dies I will be searching for an older MB or another burner.

Probably not a viable solution for you, but just thought I'd share my experience.
 
So did yours not pass self tests either with win xp, but does good with 98? I have an older laptop I might be able to load 98 on and try it.
 
I don't recall trying a self test. The unit worked in win98 so I was pretty sure the problem was related to the OS and/or application software. I'll give it a try tonight and let you know what it does.
 
I have 2 computers that have parallel ports. One is an old IBM i-series laptop that has XP, and the other is a gaming PC I built in 06' that has a duo core etc. running Win7. I tried the Allmax+ on the laptop and had sparatic results with the hardware check (now it never passes), and no good results from programing and reading that actually panned out. The PC however worked with a bootdisk in all aspects except the fact the programmed chip would fail verifications. It actually successfully read a chip and I verified the file saved with romident. This gives me confidence the programmer isn't dead, but why the failed verifications?
 
I ran the hardware tests in XP and they all passed. While I was at it, I verified a 2532 I recently burned in '98 and it was able to successfully verify in XP.

I don't recall what my issues were back when I was doing this 10 years ago, but something wasn't right. Maybe it was operator error and I've been dual booting for no reason. I'll try a few other things to see if everything checks out.
 
Ok, tried a few more things to see what would happen. Erased the 2532 and tried to program it in XP. Writes stopped/locked up at 50% complete (XP itself did not lock up, just the allmax software). Erased it again, rebooted to XP, and tried again. Locked at 64%. Erased it again and rebooted to '98, and it programmed fine.

So for whatever reason I can't get this to program in XP, but read in XP seems fine. Never had any problems in '98. Hardware tests passed in both XP and '98.

In your case I would try to boot to DOS or '98 (sounds like you already tried this???) and see if anything is different.
 
Ok, now that is like what I experience on my good PC with a DOS boot disk. I didn't try using win7. Pretty sure that won't work haha.

So you're saying when you use win 98 on the same PC it's fine? Have you tried a boot to DOS yet?
 
Yes, same PC -boot to '98 and all is fine, boot to XP and it has issues. I have not tried booting directly to DOS. I'll give it a try and see what happens.
 
Back
Top Bottom