| Andy Neil 01/08/10 08:35 Read: 254 times Basingstoke Uk |
#172260 - I'm (probably) with Neil Responding to: Erik Malund's previous message |
Neil Kurzman said:
SPI is next then I2C Erik Malund said:
I2C is next then SPI SPI is really just about the signal lines; I2C adds stuff like addressing, NAKs, etc - so, from that point-of-view, SPI is "simpler" Especially when it's just 1 master and 1 slave (possibly the case here) - so no addressing is required. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Connecting two 8051s | Poonam Kothawade | 01/08/10 01:31 |
| ther are lots of interfaces | Neil Kurzman | 01/08/10 01:58 |
| "RS232" (sic?) | Andy Neil | 01/08/10 02:25 |
| That is why i said type | Neil Kurzman | 01/08/10 18:08 |
| a slight difference of opinion | Erik Malund | 01/08/10 07:43 |
| I'm (probably) with Neil | Andy Neil | 01/08/10 08:35 |
| I do not, specifically if ... | Erik Malund | 01/08/10 08:50 |
| I thought you'd like that! | Andy Neil | 01/08/10 09:33 |
| I was looking from a code point of veiw | Neil Kurzman | 01/08/10 18:14 |
| if one was the best there would only be one. | Andy Neil | 01/09/10 03:38 |
| yes and no | Erik Malund | 01/09/10 07:41 |
| Lots of interfaces - Microwire; SPI; I2C | Andy Neil | 01/08/10 08:31 |
| parallel? | Maarten Brock | 01/10/10 04:01 |
| You may use whatever you like! | Andy Neil | 01/08/10 02:18 |
| I2C is serial communication. | Richard Erlacher | 01/08/10 09:44 |
| Already noted | Andy Neil | 01/08/10 10:50 |
| Sorry ... didn't mean to steal your thunder ... | Richard Erlacher | 01/08/10 12:49 |
| Is this (question) a Joke ...??? | Kiran V. Sutar | 01/09/10 12:25 |
| Very tired of the "depends" response | Justin Fontes | 01/10/10 00:41 |
| Agreed...but this happens always... | Kiran V. Sutar | 01/10/10 01:21 |
I think you missed the point!  | Andy Neil | 01/10/10 02:41 |
| Re: 'Depends'.. | Gopal Amlekar | 01/10/10 06:53 |
| it's typical ... | Richard Erlacher | 01/10/10 08:18 |
| All too common! | Andy Neil | 01/10/10 08:52 |
| FAQ isn't easy - flowchart not adequate | Per Westermark | 01/10/10 07:12 |
| Exactly! | Andy Neil | 01/10/10 08:50 |
| You wouldn't do it in everyday life - so why do it here?! | Andy Neil | 01/10/10 09:00 |
| Concrete enough? | Kai Klaas | 01/10/10 13:31 |
| Wow! | Andy Neil | 01/10/10 16:28 |
| Yes, for a while... | Kai Klaas | 01/11/10 08:42 |
| Well.. is this pretty good? | Justin Fontes | 01/11/10 21:15 |
| Still missing the point? | Andy Neil | 01/12/10 03:41 |
| Youre missing my point | Justin Fontes | 01/12/10 10:48 |
| Exactly!! | Kai Klaas | 01/12/10 11:12 |
| I see - but disagree | Andy Neil | 01/12/10 11:21 |
| not 'demanding' but 'asking' is encouraged | Erik Malund | 01/12/10 11:35 |
| Still often not possible to help... | Per Westermark | 01/12/10 17:45 |
| I agree Justin..but... | Kiran V. Sutar | 01/13/10 04:09 |
| Lots of usage details possible without giving product away | Per Westermark | 01/13/10 08:29 |
| My answer was to be quiet! | Kai Klaas | 01/13/10 08:35 |
| I will admit.... | Justin Fontes | 01/13/10 11:38 |
| That's why folks should search before posting! | Richard Erlacher | 01/13/10 12:21 |
| Please provide more details... | Anurag Mishra | 03/22/10 07:06 |
Don't you think it's a bit late for that?! | Andy Neil | 03/22/10 07:16 |