| ??? 09/13/10 09:16 Read: times |
#178538 - not helpful! Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Ninad Sonawane said:
This is not a 'normally' situation.
I am not trying to build a conventional dot matrix printer. And how are people supposed to know that if you don't mention it?! How can people give you relevant suggestions if you withold necessary details?! So what is it, exactly, about your particular "dot matrix printer" that prevents you from using such techniques? I just need to know whether there is any simpler way of controlling so may pins with the least number of controllers. The simplest way is to get smart and not drive more pins than are strictly necessary! Again, people can't give you relevant and appropriate suggestions without knowing your particular requirements and constraints! |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| I/O pin extension | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Start by specify your need | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| you really have to list down the full requirements | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| A suggestion | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Specefic Requirements | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why relays? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| But dot matrix printers normally don't have X*Y array head | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Only need *one* column of dots! [ED] | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Head has constant speed w/o steps even with stepper motors | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| reply | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not helpful! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Necessity of relays | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Relays are not necessary | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| What's a "design"? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Discrete or integrated | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| So what's the reason for a slow ctar-at-a-time head? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Printer Purpose | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Still no specific reason for a matrix! [Ed] | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| More care while finding solution | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: "many others" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Smaller than a relay | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Relays Take Drivers Too | 01/01/70 00:00 |