<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 12:06 AM, Volker Kuhlmann <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:list0570@paradise.net.nz">list0570@paradise.net.nz</a>></span> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">
<br>
</div>Not quite, but close. The current boards have an LPC1769, the first<br>
versions were LPC1114. All the same price, so you might as well get the<br>
big one (and stock of the older ones is running out).<br></blockquote><div>I meant the formerly top secret chip on the JTAG debugger, not the main MCU: <a href="http://ics.nxp.com/lpcxpresso/images/lpc-link.jpg">http://ics.nxp.com/lpcxpresso/images/lpc-link.jpg</a></div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im"><br>
> Also, why would throw away the JTAG debugger?<br>
<br>
</div>The emphasis here is on paperweight, not JTAG. Why would you *NOT* throw<br>
out a piece of proprietary silicon whos only purpose is to make sure you<br>
pay (that's why it has the big encryption chip) and which doesn't work<br>
properly on Linux even after you pay the US$1k, with all the other parts<br>
of the toolchain being open source, when you can buy a decent JTAG<br>
adapter for a fraction of the price that also works with open source<br>
software? </blockquote><div>Ahh, okay. That would be annoying.</div><div><br></div><div>Simon</div></div>