Re: Counterfeit FTDI chips?
- From: support1_at_ftdichip_dot_com@xxxxxxx (usbfan)
- Date: 06 May 2009 15:35:31 GMT
Hi Mikko,
If you send details of where / when you purchased your devices to
suport1@xxxxxxxxxxxx I will be happy to investigate any possible
counterfeits offline.
-------------------------------------
Okkim Atnarivik wrote:
Dear Colleaques,
I just returned to an old project which I hadn't had time to advance
for
months. The project involves a FT245R parallel-to-USB converter IC from
FTDI.
I could not make the WinXP drivers install, however, and finally tried
the
USBView program which reported the Vendor code 0x067B and product ID
0x2303
suggesting that the chip is actually a Prolific PL2303 !
Now, PL2303 looks pin-compatible enough with FT245R that it could get
powered-up in my circuit, and could even respond to a vendor code query
over USB. Otherwise it looks more compatible with the FT232R.
A simple explanation would be that I've been swindled and the FT245R is
a
fake, although the IC case has the FT245R markings on it and it has
been
bought as a FT245R.
What bothers me is that according to my notebook, months ago I've
been
able to get FT_ListDevices function of the FTDI driver to actually
report
the very FT245R. I'm not sure whether I was ever able to actually pass
data
over the USB link - I seem to recall that I was, but there is no
mention of
that in my notebook. Now I'd like to figure out whether there is any
other
explanation to seeing the Prolific vendor ID (besides the counterfeit
theory)
- any suggestions?
Originally I thought that the EEPROM containing the Vendor ID has
gotten
corrupted, but removing the chip from the PCB and soldering a fresh
(assumed) FT245R still gave the Prolific ID. I tried running the
USBView on
three different PC's, with same results. Then I might have mistaken my
chip
with another USB chip in the system (for instance, the Altera
USB-blaster
programming cable appears to contain an FTDI chip), but removal of the
USB
cable leading to my board correctly made the Profilic-ID'd chip
disappear
from the USBView scan.
Now I'm dumbfounded - if my batch of chips are fakes, where did that
earlier FT_ListDevices recognition come from? Besides, what is the use
to sell PL2303's as FT245R's, wouldn't it be even more profitable to
sell
just dead blocks of plastic with FTDI credentials stamped on - the ones
I have
get caught anyway because the driver won't install? I see a bit more
sense in trying to sell PL2303's as FT232R's (I guess they might be
more pin
compatible) although even then the fakes get caught at the driver
installation phase.
Regards,
Mikko
--
+----------------------------------------------------------+
| http://forums.cabling-design.com/ |
| *** a better way to USENET *** |
| no-spam Web and RSS interface to your favorite newsgroup |
| sci.electronics.design - 314130 messages and counting! |
+----------------------------------------------------------+
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Counterfeit FTDI chips?
- From: Bob Larter
- Re: Counterfeit FTDI chips?
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: taxes, and U.R.Guilty
- Next by Date: Re: Radon
- Previous by thread: Need a simple DC output current limiter
- Next by thread: Re: Counterfeit FTDI chips?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
