free 8085 microprocessor assembler for windows

On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 13:48:28 +0000, Ian Bell <ruffrecords@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>panpipe2005 wrote:
>
>> free 8085 assembler for windows with source code in visual basic is
>> available at
>> http://www.planet-source-code.com
>
>Does anyone still use the 8085?

Legacy systems, such as long life-cycle military devices, still may have
8085s. Had to do some firmware maintenance on one a couple of years ago.

-- 
Rich Webb   Norfolk, VA

Chuck F. wrote:
> No, the Rabbit uses an incompatible subset, and doesn't even include all 
> the 8080 instructions.  This makes it binary incompatible with any 
> software ever built for 8080, 8085, z80, 64180, z180, etc.  A very 
> foolish decision, IMO.

Sure it was a dumb decision, but ZWorld had the "incompatible subset" 
precedent of Dynamic C :)

I hear they'll ship the Rabbit 4000 in 2006.

Kelly

On 30/12/2005 the venerable Ian Bell etched in runes:

.
.
.
> I partly agree, except I would have thought the 8051 was a). a closer
> competitor to PICs and b). available around the time of the 8085 and still
> in volume production by several manufacturers.
> 
> Ian

I think Intel were making the 8048 when the 8085 was young. The 8051 came later. I believe the 8085
was the first micro with a multiplexed address/data bus and ALE signal, but that may just be old
age talking.

-- 
John B

John B wrote:

> On 30/12/2005 the venerable Ian Bell etched in runes:
> 
> .
> .
> .
>> I partly agree, except I would have thought the 8051 was a). a closer
>> competitor to PICs and b). available around the time of the 8085 and
>> still in volume production by several manufacturers.
>> 
>> Ian
> 
> I think Intel were making the 8048 when the 8085 was young. The 8051 came
> later. I believe the 8085 was the first micro with a multiplexed
> address/data bus and ALE signal, but that may just be old age talking.
> 

AFAIR (and I was there) the 8080 came out around 1976 and I am certain the
8051 came out in 1980. I suspect the 8085 came out somewhere between the
two but there was not much in it. The 8051 seems to me to be the oldest
surviving single chip microcontroller and easily gives the PIC a run for
its money.

Ian

The 8085 became popular because it only needed a single power supply,
but was otherwise an 8080. The mux'ed addr bus opened up some more pins
that made it good for control apps.

The 8051 was a incredible chip, and is still competitive due to the
many enhancements a lot of companies have made. It was the barrel
shifter and internal UART that made the things fly off the shelf. Then
the CMOS version added more life to it, and I liked the Dallas parts
that cut down the internal clock cycles to make them 4X faster.

Now you can get 8051's with just about anything integrated into it:
USB, Ethernet, etc.

I think they will still be around many years from now. That kind of
momentum doesn't stop easily.

For what its worth, I switched to the 68hc11 some years back, and now I
use the newest 9s12 devices. These trace their roots back to the 6800,
which is just a little newer than the 8080. I don't remember when the
6800 came out, exactly, but I used one in 1978 if I remember correctly.

Eric

I went to the web site.

Could not find the assembler. ( lots of x86 assemblers tho )

Has anyone located it there ??

thanks

donald

On 31 Dec 2005 14:11:47 -0800, the renowned "Eric"
<englere.geo@yahoo.com> wrote:

>The 8085 became popular because it only needed a single power supply,
>but was otherwise an 8080. The mux'ed addr bus opened up some more pins
>that made it good for control apps.
>
>The 8051 was a incredible chip, and is still competitive due to the
>many enhancements a lot of companies have made. It was the barrel
>shifter and internal UART that made the things fly off the shelf.

Barrel shifter? You mean bit operations? Intel used to call those a
"boolean processor". 

> Then
>the CMOS version added more life to it, and I liked the Dallas parts
>that cut down the internal clock cycles to make them 4X faster.

If they hadn't priced the CMOS EPROM versions into the stratosphere
initially (I recall about $40 each in small quantities) it would have
gone a lot further. That short-sighted strategy allowed many other
competitors to get into the market. 

>Now you can get 8051's with just about anything integrated into it:
>USB, Ethernet, etc.
>
>I think they will still be around many years from now. That kind of
>momentum doesn't stop easily.
>
>For what its worth, I switched to the 68hc11 some years back, and now I
>use the newest 9s12 devices. These trace their roots back to the 6800,
>which is just a little newer than the 8080. I don't remember when the
>6800 came out, exactly, but I used one in 1978 if I remember correctly.
>
>Eric

I think it came out around '76 at the then-bargain price of only
$395/chip. It also needed a nasty two-phase clock that had to swing
very quickly and tightly to the rails with a heavy capacitive load. 


Best regards, 
Spehro Pefhany
-- 
"it's the network..."                          "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

Eric wrote:

> For what its worth, I switched to the 68hc11 some years back, and now I
> use the newest 9s12 devices. These trace their roots back to the 6800,
> which is just a little newer than the 8080. I don't remember when the
> 6800 came out, exactly, but I used one in 1978 if I remember correctly.
> 

I am pretty sure the 6800 and 8080 were around at the same time because I
built an 8080 system and a mate built a 6800 one. I remember the 8080
needed a clock ship and a control signal decoder chip and THREE power
rails. The 6800 has a single 5V rail but a strange synchronous bus.

Ian

Kelly Hall wrote:

> Chuck F. wrote:
> 
>> No, the Rabbit uses an incompatible subset, and doesn't even include 
>> all the 8080 instructions.  This makes it binary incompatible with any 
>> software ever built for 8080, 8085, z80, 64180, z180, etc.  A very 
>> foolish decision, IMO.
> 
> 
> Sure it was a dumb decision, but ZWorld had the "incompatible subset" 
> precedent of Dynamic C :)
> 
> I hear they'll ship the Rabbit 4000 in 2006.

  It's been a while comming - first talked about in the press
back in April 2003.
  The sparse info suggests it has NO (significant) on chip memory (?),
so that makes it a 3 die/chip solution [CPU+FLASH+RAM] - which is not as 
appealing as the Zilog, Freescale, or even Maxim DS80C40x Ethernet 
variants.
  Plus they now have to go against the tide of ARM releases...

-jg

John B wrote:
> On 30/12/2005 the venerable Ian Bell etched in runes:
> 
> .. .. ..
>> I partly agree, except I would have thought the 8051 was a). a
>> closer competitor to PICs and b). available around the time of
>> the 8085 and still in volume production by several
>> manufacturers.
> 
> I think Intel were making the 8048 when the 8085 was young. The
> 8051 came later. I believe the 8085 was the first micro with a
> multiplexed address/data bus and ALE signal, but that may just
> be old age talking.

Far from the first.  The 8008 multiplexed the address, and needed 
an external buffer address register.  That was about '71 or '72. 
It used an 18 pin package IIRC, and was the first real GP 
microprocessor.  I don't count the 4004.  Addressed 16k total 
memory, with 8 input ports and 24 output ports.  It had an 
interrupt structure, but couldn't save its own state.

-- 
"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
  the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article.  Click on
  "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
  "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>