DVDs using NEC1 dev 0, no subdevice
Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2004 9:30 am
I just made an Excel sheet sorting and merging the OBC to function name mapping for 26 KM upgrades for DVDs that use NEC1 protocol, device 0, no subdevice.
I was expecting a lot of duplication (that the files would group into just a few distinct code sets). I found far more of them were unique than I expected.
The non unique were:
A) All four of the Daewoo, the Elta, the Momitsu and one of the two Coby were all nearly identical and the Sungale was very close to them.
B) The Himax was nearly the same as one of the two Norcent and the Zensonic was very close to those.
C) The Memorex was identical to the Tevion.
The other 13 out of 26 were totally unique, none similar to any of the three groups above nor any two similar to each other.
I'll post a cleaned up copy of that XLS sheet later, since it might be a useful resource for anyone who has just a few NEC1:0 decodes for some DVD. It has the filename of each upgrade file heading a column of all the functions arranged by OBC.
If anyone knows of errors (such as function names selected badly) in the construction of those upgrades, please tell me. At this point I don't know whether some of the stranger differences among files that are largely the same represent real firmware differences or errors in building the upgrades.
Also, if you remember or notice this thread when adding any new NEC1:0 DVD upgrades, please call my attention to them so I can keep this up to date.
I was expecting a lot of duplication (that the files would group into just a few distinct code sets). I found far more of them were unique than I expected.
The non unique were:
A) All four of the Daewoo, the Elta, the Momitsu and one of the two Coby were all nearly identical and the Sungale was very close to them.
B) The Himax was nearly the same as one of the two Norcent and the Zensonic was very close to those.
C) The Memorex was identical to the Tevion.
The other 13 out of 26 were totally unique, none similar to any of the three groups above nor any two similar to each other.
I'll post a cleaned up copy of that XLS sheet later, since it might be a useful resource for anyone who has just a few NEC1:0 decodes for some DVD. It has the filename of each upgrade file heading a column of all the functions arranged by OBC.
If anyone knows of errors (such as function names selected badly) in the construction of those upgrades, please tell me. At this point I don't know whether some of the stranger differences among files that are largely the same represent real firmware differences or errors in building the upgrades.
Also, if you remember or notice this thread when adding any new NEC1:0 DVD upgrades, please call my attention to them so I can keep this up to date.
