Discussion
The website pictures are another sore spot. He originally took most of those pictures from my website, along with a few from other peoples websites. He did this without asking. When I asked him to remove my pictures, he pleaded with me to allow him to keep them up. In a moment of weakness, I agreed, with the proviso that I receive credit. Unfortunately, this gives the impression that I approve of the rest of it. 
bojangles said:
let me get this straight...
Moto-concepts chips = good ( sanj supports this )
impconcepts chips = bad ( sanj website is used for instruction but does not support )
I an not trying to blame anyone for anything.. just trying to straighten up the mess of information out there....
Bruce
Bruce, see my post here for more info on Marcus, Sanj and Motoconcepts..
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=29659&f=17&h=0
Devil’s Advocate
Sanj and Marcus are great guys and both support their products to the nth degree, I know, I have personal experience. Especially with Sanj. He is stand up all the way…
BUT…
I cringe when some of us (and they) get on the PIRACY high horse because, after all, these chips are no more than tweaks for Lotus’ intellectual property to begin with, and I doubt they get any royalties for every chip Sanj/Marcus sells.
PLUS…
Sanj/Marcus will sell you Lotus stock S4 and S4s code. Does Lotus get a cut of this?? I doubt it.
Maybe it’s time to get off the horse.
Just my thoughts.
Lucas.
Sanj and Marcus are great guys and both support their products to the nth degree, I know, I have personal experience. Especially with Sanj. He is stand up all the way…
BUT…
I cringe when some of us (and they) get on the PIRACY high horse because, after all, these chips are no more than tweaks for Lotus’ intellectual property to begin with, and I doubt they get any royalties for every chip Sanj/Marcus sells.
PLUS…
Sanj/Marcus will sell you Lotus stock S4 and S4s code. Does Lotus get a cut of this?? I doubt it.
Maybe it’s time to get off the horse.
Just my thoughts.
Lucas.
karmavore said:
Sanj/Marcus will sell you Lotus stock S4 and S4s code. Does Lotus get a cut of this?? I doubt it.
Not quite correct. I will reprogram your memcal to S4s specs, and charge you for my efforts. Small distinction, but there nonetheless.
I will give you one guess as to who does all 4-cylinder GM ECU memcal reprogramming for Lotus Cars USA.
As far as being on a high horse goes, I think you're out of line. Do you honestly believe that anyone who knowingly buys a stolen copy of Marcus' work should be entitled to help and support? You get what you pay for, so if you want to pay 1/3 for a known pirated chip, don't come crying to me or Marcus when it doesn't work right. Or if it does work, but you're unhappy with it.
>> Edited by sanj on Friday 6th May 00:34
Let's try another cliché...
People in glass houses... yadda, yadda.
I would never buy a chip from this person nor do I think you or Marcus should support him, but...
I think it's also out of line for you, Marcus, and others to complain too much about intellectual property theft when, with out such theft, you wouldn't have a product to begin with.
If you'd written the code from scratch or paid Lotus for every chip you alter or "reprogram" then you'd have an intellectually consistent leg to stand on. Otherwise, in a manner of speaking, turn about is fair play.
One of the big VW/Audi/Porsche chip tuners, Garrett Lim, encrypts his code and provides a decrypting chip which sits between the code and the ECU. In essence, the code is free but you pay for the decrypting hardware which decrypts at run (drive) time. That's the only way to protect yourself.
If I wanted to get really picky I’d ask you if every piece of software on your computer is fully licensed. See my point?
Again, I think you’re a HUGE asset to the community, I’m just getting a little worked up by the hypocrisy that seems to be occurring here.
Lucas.
People in glass houses... yadda, yadda.
I would never buy a chip from this person nor do I think you or Marcus should support him, but...
I think it's also out of line for you, Marcus, and others to complain too much about intellectual property theft when, with out such theft, you wouldn't have a product to begin with.
If you'd written the code from scratch or paid Lotus for every chip you alter or "reprogram" then you'd have an intellectually consistent leg to stand on. Otherwise, in a manner of speaking, turn about is fair play.
One of the big VW/Audi/Porsche chip tuners, Garrett Lim, encrypts his code and provides a decrypting chip which sits between the code and the ECU. In essence, the code is free but you pay for the decrypting hardware which decrypts at run (drive) time. That's the only way to protect yourself.
If I wanted to get really picky I’d ask you if every piece of software on your computer is fully licensed. See my point?
Again, I think you’re a HUGE asset to the community, I’m just getting a little worked up by the hypocrisy that seems to be occurring here.
Lucas.
My .02 for what it's worth,
Every person that has a Lotus would have got a factory programmed memcal with it. The 'tuner' reverse engineers and enhances this firmware to suit his/her needs. I believe Marcus et al charge for the 'value added' part only. I am not aware of any licensing agreement that prohibits the reverse engineering of this firmware from Lotus although doing so would invalidate any warranty. Third parties included. This being said, does he hold copyright on his enhancement? Has the performance of the vehicle been changed enough to call the code his? Is a RUF still a Porsche? A Callaway still a Corvette? To some yes, but others no. Subjective I suppose.
Since the machine can only run with the specific code you cannot opt to suddenly change OS's in case of disagreement. The original provider should always be in a position to provide updates/changes cheaper than having an end user go their own route.
What if Lotus stops selling ECU's? Do we throw the car away or plumb in a Motec? The automotive aftermarket thrives on marketing workalike products that enhance what the manufacturer originally provided. Been to SEMA lately?
Although I have no knowledge of what Sanj charges to 'restore' stock Lotus code to a memcal; I would hope that the cost is minimal. We are only talking about a cheapo 256K eeprom and a few moments of time. Maybe an hours worth of labour and the chip and packaging costs? Again, I don't know since I already backed mine up and shouldn't need this service. I consider that code to be mine, not Lotus's. It came with the car after all.
Steve
edit: Nomex on; A Callaway will always stil be a Corvette
>> Edited by arium on Friday 6th May 04:10
Every person that has a Lotus would have got a factory programmed memcal with it. The 'tuner' reverse engineers and enhances this firmware to suit his/her needs. I believe Marcus et al charge for the 'value added' part only. I am not aware of any licensing agreement that prohibits the reverse engineering of this firmware from Lotus although doing so would invalidate any warranty. Third parties included. This being said, does he hold copyright on his enhancement? Has the performance of the vehicle been changed enough to call the code his? Is a RUF still a Porsche? A Callaway still a Corvette? To some yes, but others no. Subjective I suppose.
Since the machine can only run with the specific code you cannot opt to suddenly change OS's in case of disagreement. The original provider should always be in a position to provide updates/changes cheaper than having an end user go their own route.
What if Lotus stops selling ECU's? Do we throw the car away or plumb in a Motec? The automotive aftermarket thrives on marketing workalike products that enhance what the manufacturer originally provided. Been to SEMA lately?
Although I have no knowledge of what Sanj charges to 'restore' stock Lotus code to a memcal; I would hope that the cost is minimal. We are only talking about a cheapo 256K eeprom and a few moments of time. Maybe an hours worth of labour and the chip and packaging costs? Again, I don't know since I already backed mine up and shouldn't need this service. I consider that code to be mine, not Lotus's. It came with the car after all.
Steve
edit: Nomex on; A Callaway will always stil be a Corvette
>> Edited by arium on Friday 6th May 04:10
I think, and I've been away from the VW scene for a while, that VAG (VW Audi Group) is/was/are considering going after tuners for reverse engineering their code.
You can't go to Best Buy and by a software product, reverse engineer it, and then resell it as yours. ...let alone do so then bitch if some one then rips you off in the same way!
What is the difference?
It makes no difference that it's a Lotus, or there are only a few of us, or whatever. Intellectually it is the same thing.
Again, I have no issues with any of this and have bought two chips form Sanj. I just think that if you live by the sword you have to expect to die by it... damn, another cliché!!!
Lucas.
You can't go to Best Buy and by a software product, reverse engineer it, and then resell it as yours. ...let alone do so then bitch if some one then rips you off in the same way!
What is the difference?
It makes no difference that it's a Lotus, or there are only a few of us, or whatever. Intellectually it is the same thing.
Again, I have no issues with any of this and have bought two chips form Sanj. I just think that if you live by the sword you have to expect to die by it... damn, another cliché!!!
Lucas.
I've been following the threads on the "chips" can code for awhile now, I personally have a fully disassembled copy of the S4s code. I have this because I personally disassembled it.
I believe there are few things that need to be understood about chips and code.
Perhaps a bit of information about how the code in the mem-cal actually works will help shed some light on the subject.
There are two separate parts to the "code" on the mem-cal.
One part is the program, or algorithm. This is actually software, it tells the microprocessor how to read sensor, test the memory, what pins are used for inputs, outputs and how to calculate pulse widths, timing events, and some math functions.
The second part is the calibration. This part contains engine/drivetrain specific information. The spark tables, fuel tables, boost thresholds, coolant limits, number of cylinders, error codes, and such.
The calibration is JUST data, and only DATA.
What Marcus has done (and what is being sold) is the DATA in the mem-cal, creating their own calibration, they have not edited the algorithm. They are charging for DATA, and the research that went into developing the data.
You already own the program code (algorithm) you got it when you bought the car. Marcus, Sanj, or who ever has sold you new DATA to use with this The fact that the data and the algorithm reside on the same ?storage device? (in this case an EPROM) tends to confuse the issue.
This is no different than purchasing a copy of Microsoft Excel, then purchasing a file that is an excel spreadsheet from someone that has the DATA that you want. Just because Excel and the spread sheet are both on the same ?storage device? (your hard drive) doesn?t mean that Microsoft holds the license agreement on the spreadsheet data.
As for the licensing or copyright issues, the algorithm probably belongs to GM, Delco, Delphi, or perhaps Lotus Engineering. Some parts are similar to other GM algorithms, and some parts are different. The original s4S calibration (data) would probably belong to Lotus Engineering.
Well.. that?s my $0.02 worth?
John Welch
I believe there are few things that need to be understood about chips and code.
Perhaps a bit of information about how the code in the mem-cal actually works will help shed some light on the subject.
There are two separate parts to the "code" on the mem-cal.
One part is the program, or algorithm. This is actually software, it tells the microprocessor how to read sensor, test the memory, what pins are used for inputs, outputs and how to calculate pulse widths, timing events, and some math functions.
The second part is the calibration. This part contains engine/drivetrain specific information. The spark tables, fuel tables, boost thresholds, coolant limits, number of cylinders, error codes, and such.
The calibration is JUST data, and only DATA.
What Marcus has done (and what is being sold) is the DATA in the mem-cal, creating their own calibration, they have not edited the algorithm. They are charging for DATA, and the research that went into developing the data.
You already own the program code (algorithm) you got it when you bought the car. Marcus, Sanj, or who ever has sold you new DATA to use with this The fact that the data and the algorithm reside on the same ?storage device? (in this case an EPROM) tends to confuse the issue.
This is no different than purchasing a copy of Microsoft Excel, then purchasing a file that is an excel spreadsheet from someone that has the DATA that you want. Just because Excel and the spread sheet are both on the same ?storage device? (your hard drive) doesn?t mean that Microsoft holds the license agreement on the spreadsheet data.
As for the licensing or copyright issues, the algorithm probably belongs to GM, Delco, Delphi, or perhaps Lotus Engineering. Some parts are similar to other GM algorithms, and some parts are different. The original s4S calibration (data) would probably belong to Lotus Engineering.
Well.. that?s my $0.02 worth?
John Welch
You almost sold me John, but to use your example:
I can write an Excel sheet to a million CD-ROMs and sell them on the street corner for $10 and be within my rights (I think).
I CAN NOT write an excel sheet AND EXEL its self to a CD-ROM and sell them on the same street corner. I need to go to a street corner in Bangkok for that.
That's what is happening here. The vendors (yourself included) are selling the data AND the code.
I suppose you could say that the code is free and you’re only selling the data, but nevertheless you are making a copy of something that I don’t think you have the rights to do.
<dick chaney>Do I care? Absolutely not. Does Lotus care? I bet not really. Is it hypocriful to do this and then complain when someone does it to you? I think to a degree, yes. </dick chaney>
Good discussion,
Lucas.
I can write an Excel sheet to a million CD-ROMs and sell them on the street corner for $10 and be within my rights (I think).
I CAN NOT write an excel sheet AND EXEL its self to a CD-ROM and sell them on the same street corner. I need to go to a street corner in Bangkok for that.
That's what is happening here. The vendors (yourself included) are selling the data AND the code.
I suppose you could say that the code is free and you’re only selling the data, but nevertheless you are making a copy of something that I don’t think you have the rights to do.
<dick chaney>Do I care? Absolutely not. Does Lotus care? I bet not really. Is it hypocriful to do this and then complain when someone does it to you? I think to a degree, yes. </dick chaney>
Good discussion,
Lucas.
bojangles said:
I really take offence to the accusation that i have a KNOWN forgery of someone's work..
I have been trying for a week now to find out what i have bought.. Nobody seems to be able to identify their own work..
I mean the seller absolutely flatly denies that the chip is a clone.. he claims it is just a used chip.
anyway if the work to copy a chip is only a matter of a cheap eprom and a few seconds of time....How could a clone have broken code or missing bits? I mean they make copies of eproms all over at lightning speed and the failure rate is extremely low. It also seems very unlikely that someone who copies a chip would take a bad one and copy that. If i was so inclined, id buy the latest and greatest chip from a known supplier and copy that one.. makes sense I think...
I dont really beieve that the identifying stickers fall off the chips.. But there must be a way to identify the chips... will a OBD scan work?
I find it frustrating to be suddenly accused of some wrongdoing when i am trying hard to learn what happened.
I know new chips cost hundreds.. this one was advertised as a used one for less.. makes prefect sense to me.
BRuce
Whoa Bruce,
I'm not accusing you of doing anything wrong, if I gave that impression I apologize. Ian is the one that did something wrong, telling you his clone was a used legitimate chip. Obviously he must have gotten ahold of a used legitimate chip at some point, but not dozens. If you bought it based on that assumption, I understand, but you should also understand that I feel no need to give you support, either. Unfortunately, there is no way to positively identify a clone based on the chip contents, as they must be identical to function. If I saw the chip with my own eyes I could probably tell you if is one I sold or not, but paper labels can be duplicated pretty easily, too.
As far as improperly copying an EPROM, it can happen, though as you point out, it is rare. If the first copy is corrupt, then all copies will be corrupt, if the first copy is used to program the rest.
There is another component to this discussion, that Lucas (karmavore) touched on briefly, and that is service and support.
I do not sell chips and leave it up to the user to figure out how to get the old soldered-in EPROM out of the memcal and a socket properly installed. Many perfectly good Lotus memcals have been ruined by people who attempted to do so, and the memcals that work in the Esprit are very rare and getting rarer. In fact, the only remaining source for replacement memcals is our friend Squelch.
I sell a service, which includes proper and careful EPROM removal and socket installation. I also sell support. If a customer isn't happy, then I'm not going to just walk away and say "too bad". I have given hundreds of hours of my time to help Lotus Esprit owners around the world help with their cars, whether related to ECMs or not.
Finally, this is not my business, it is a hobby. It's a good thing, because otherwise I'd be in the poorhouse.
I do not sell chips and leave it up to the user to figure out how to get the old soldered-in EPROM out of the memcal and a socket properly installed. Many perfectly good Lotus memcals have been ruined by people who attempted to do so, and the memcals that work in the Esprit are very rare and getting rarer. In fact, the only remaining source for replacement memcals is our friend Squelch.
I sell a service, which includes proper and careful EPROM removal and socket installation. I also sell support. If a customer isn't happy, then I'm not going to just walk away and say "too bad". I have given hundreds of hours of my time to help Lotus Esprit owners around the world help with their cars, whether related to ECMs or not.
Finally, this is not my business, it is a hobby. It's a good thing, because otherwise I'd be in the poorhouse.
karmavore said:
You almost sold me John, but to use your example:
I can write an Excel sheet to a million CD-ROMs and sell them on the street corner for $10 and be within my rights (I think).
I CAN NOT write an excel sheet AND EXEL its self to a CD-ROM and sell them on the same street corner. I need to go to a street corner in Bangkok for that. ?
That's what is happening here. The vendors (yourself included) are selling the data AND the code.
I suppose you could say that the code is free and you?re only selling the data, but nevertheless you are making a copy of something that I don?t think you have the rights to do.
<dick chaney>Do I care? Absolutely not. Does Lotus care? I bet not really. Is it hypocriful to do this and then complain when someone does it to you? I think to a degree, yes. </dick chaney>
Good discussion,
Lucas.
Your WAY off here Luke...
You missed the point entierly.
Lotus owners already have a copy of the program (algorithm)
Marcus and Sanj aren't selling the PROGRAM, they are selling the DATA. The only market for the DATA is to people who already have the PROGRAM.
Because the typical Lotus owner can not copy the DATA themselves, it is sold in a format that they can use, an EPROM which includes the DATA and the PROGRAM.
John
Conspicuously absent from this discussion is our resident IP attorney, OKC. I know lawyers don't like to get involved in these online discussions, so that's probably why. Just look at the disclaimers about "this is not an attorney-client relationship..." every time they do. Can't blame them, having created the lawsuit insane environment they thrive in, and I don’t fault you if your lurking there dude.
Anyway, if I own a legitimate copy of Excel, last I looked, I was allowed to make copies of that for my own use/backups/installations to my hard drive, etc. Now, if I purchase a spreadsheet that comes with a copy of Excel, which I already own and have a license to use, I think that would be considered "OK" so to speak. MS would certainly not like it, but if the user already has a licensed copy of what they are receiving, then I don't think they can complain much. Or look at it this way: If I took my new quarter terabyte SATA hard drive out of my 3GHz computer (new, just bragging...) with its legitimate Excel install on it and a spreadsheet that came with the Excel install, say invoice.xlt, and physically sent the whole thing to Sanj, who then overwrote MS' invoice.xlt with his new super duper invoice.xlt which works better and sent it back to me, would there be any copyright issues? No. Now if Sanj sent me a new hard drive with Excel and his invoice.xlt on it, knowing full well that I have a legitimate copy of Excel in the first place (or my car wouldn't start), would there be any copyright issues? I don't think so.
The chip modders are selling and have a copyright on the data portions of the chip. Someone that copies that code and sells that copy is violating copyright law, near as my unprofessional opinion can determine.
Dr.Hess
(I'm a physician, not a lawyer.)
Anyway, if I own a legitimate copy of Excel, last I looked, I was allowed to make copies of that for my own use/backups/installations to my hard drive, etc. Now, if I purchase a spreadsheet that comes with a copy of Excel, which I already own and have a license to use, I think that would be considered "OK" so to speak. MS would certainly not like it, but if the user already has a licensed copy of what they are receiving, then I don't think they can complain much. Or look at it this way: If I took my new quarter terabyte SATA hard drive out of my 3GHz computer (new, just bragging...) with its legitimate Excel install on it and a spreadsheet that came with the Excel install, say invoice.xlt, and physically sent the whole thing to Sanj, who then overwrote MS' invoice.xlt with his new super duper invoice.xlt which works better and sent it back to me, would there be any copyright issues? No. Now if Sanj sent me a new hard drive with Excel and his invoice.xlt on it, knowing full well that I have a legitimate copy of Excel in the first place (or my car wouldn't start), would there be any copyright issues? I don't think so.
The chip modders are selling and have a copyright on the data portions of the chip. Someone that copies that code and sells that copy is violating copyright law, near as my unprofessional opinion can determine.
Dr.Hess
(I'm a physician, not a lawyer.)
Okay, so it's now understood that there are two distinct portions of an eeprom. An area where executable code is stored(the algorythm or program) and the data area(tables for fuel,spark,etc).
Unfortunately the GM ECM of the Lotus 4 banger day is a primitive beast. The chip is such that it cannot be modifed (enhanced) without physical removal. It is also a device that requires entire erasure before making even one small change. It must be rewritten in its entirety. The original authors of the factory chip obviously own the intellectual rights to ALL the information in it. However, since the firmware is embedded any modifcation entails replacement of the entire chip. By purchasing the Lotus you did buy a license to use that software and are free to modify it to suit your end needs. Lotus would also have a tough case to make if you shared an eeprom with someone whom also owned a Lotus. They'd have a great case if you went into business using their firmware with 3rd party electronics and created a different engine management system for another makers brand.
Modern engine management systems are quite different. They use flash memory that can be sector erased (portions) and rewritten on the fly. The factory can also 'lock' certain parts so that they cannot be erased. That would be the program part. Using boundary scan type interfaces (jtag) you can plug into your cars computer and troubleshoot, retrieve stored data AND reprogram certain portions of its memory. That is what all of these new handeld reprogrammers accomplish. Of course on initial startup the reprogrammer grabs your computer s/n and using a unique unlock algorythm it will thereafter only function with that vehicle. Sanj's cloning issues resolved.
My read on what the Sanj is saying is this. Make sure you know what you're buying and from whom. If you buy from the original author of the upgraded chip there is opportunity for support and updgrades. You'll also have a higher confidence level of engine reliability. Why would you buy a chip from an unknown source that has perhaps leaned out the fuel AND disabled the knock sensor? That would be an extreme example of what could happen when playing with an unknown. Buyer beware. Personally if I were the tuner I would create a different checksum for every chip I created and reference that to an individuals name. Least then you'd know where the 'used' chip came from. The checksum incidentally is a mathematical operation that creates a unique sum when run on a chips contents. It real purpose is to verify write integrity. One slipped bit generates a totally different checksum.
The only caution I see in this whole discussion is that I would not reprogram/supply an factory (stock) prom unless I had either the orignal defective supplied by the user or a backup image supplied on disk. Even Luke should concur with this proviso.
Steve
As Sanj stated, it is a hobby not a business venture. That certainly changes the perspective on many things. Pretty hard to go after someone for intellectual rights violations on that premise. That works both ways of course.
Unfortunately the GM ECM of the Lotus 4 banger day is a primitive beast. The chip is such that it cannot be modifed (enhanced) without physical removal. It is also a device that requires entire erasure before making even one small change. It must be rewritten in its entirety. The original authors of the factory chip obviously own the intellectual rights to ALL the information in it. However, since the firmware is embedded any modifcation entails replacement of the entire chip. By purchasing the Lotus you did buy a license to use that software and are free to modify it to suit your end needs. Lotus would also have a tough case to make if you shared an eeprom with someone whom also owned a Lotus. They'd have a great case if you went into business using their firmware with 3rd party electronics and created a different engine management system for another makers brand.
Modern engine management systems are quite different. They use flash memory that can be sector erased (portions) and rewritten on the fly. The factory can also 'lock' certain parts so that they cannot be erased. That would be the program part. Using boundary scan type interfaces (jtag) you can plug into your cars computer and troubleshoot, retrieve stored data AND reprogram certain portions of its memory. That is what all of these new handeld reprogrammers accomplish. Of course on initial startup the reprogrammer grabs your computer s/n and using a unique unlock algorythm it will thereafter only function with that vehicle. Sanj's cloning issues resolved.
My read on what the Sanj is saying is this. Make sure you know what you're buying and from whom. If you buy from the original author of the upgraded chip there is opportunity for support and updgrades. You'll also have a higher confidence level of engine reliability. Why would you buy a chip from an unknown source that has perhaps leaned out the fuel AND disabled the knock sensor? That would be an extreme example of what could happen when playing with an unknown. Buyer beware. Personally if I were the tuner I would create a different checksum for every chip I created and reference that to an individuals name. Least then you'd know where the 'used' chip came from. The checksum incidentally is a mathematical operation that creates a unique sum when run on a chips contents. It real purpose is to verify write integrity. One slipped bit generates a totally different checksum.
The only caution I see in this whole discussion is that I would not reprogram/supply an factory (stock) prom unless I had either the orignal defective supplied by the user or a backup image supplied on disk. Even Luke should concur with this proviso.
Steve
As Sanj stated, it is a hobby not a business venture. That certainly changes the perspective on many things. Pretty hard to go after someone for intellectual rights violations on that premise. That works both ways of course.
So how do the coorporate chip tuners deal with this issue? Do they pay the OEM's? How do they sell the programmers that are now available for many cars now? Interseting discussion.
I personally feel that if I own a device/computer etc, I cant be told what I can and cant do with it when it comes to modification, improvment, tweaking etc.
John
www.skynetworks.gotdns.com
PS: Squelch, still waiting on the shafts?
I personally feel that if I own a device/computer etc, I cant be told what I can and cant do with it when it comes to modification, improvment, tweaking etc.
John
www.skynetworks.gotdns.com
PS: Squelch, still waiting on the shafts?
1) Please don’t think I’m some stick-in-the-mud ninny. I have/had several chips both for my old VW and the Lotus. I was just playing Devils Advocate and trying to spark discussion.
2) I like the checksum idea. How would that work though? I mean, a checksum is a function of the data. If two chips are identical how can they have different checksums?
Lucas.
2) I like the checksum idea. How would that work though? I mean, a checksum is a function of the data. If two chips are identical how can they have different checksums?
Lucas.
Gassing Station | Esprit | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff