5 ms·

Both FTDI and Prolific have done this kind of thing. I switched to the CH340 a while back without any issues.

by voltagex_ 6y ago

omgtehlion 6y ago
how about cp2102? I prefer it to ch340, for no reason though ))
- pantalaimon 6y ago
  I found both cp2102 and ch340 seem to use less power too than ft232r. At least there are some boards I can power with the 3.3V output of the cp2102 and ch340 dongles, but which will brown-out with the old ft232r ones.
- janekm 6y ago
  It's my go-to part for this purpose also (and I don't believe I've encountered any clones so far, knock on wood). Another part I've used in a high-volume application is the Holtek HT42B534 which is great because it's CDC class and hence doesn't need a driver for Win/Mac/Linux. It's EOL sadly. There's HT42B564 which is a HID-class replacement. The other alternative is using a cheap micro with USB interface.
- analog31 6y ago
  Aha, I didn't know about the CP2102. Looks like I'll have to give one a whirl, and there's even a breakout board at Adafruit. I've used relatively few VCP adapters since I've been using microcontrollers with built-in VCP. I was nervous about the CH340 because the Windows drivers seemed to come from some weird place in China, but maybe US sourced drivers aren't any more of a comfort in these times.
  - voltagex_ 6y ago
    If someone wants to quote me for a full reverse engineering of those drivers then I'd be interested in (crowd)funding it. But in terms of risks to worry about, it's pretty low down on the list IMO.
makomk 6y ago
If I remember rightly, what Prolific did was worse in some ways because it rendered genuine but older-revision chips that they'd actually made non-functional with current drivers. (Also, some of the CH340 clones are genuinely really badly done and can't understand register writes that differ even slightly from what a particular version of the official driver sent.)

5 ms·

Both FTDI and Prolific have done this kind of thing. I switched to the CH340 a while back without any issues.

by voltagex_ 6y ago

Both FTDI and Prolific have done this kind of thing. I switched to the CH340 a while back without any issues.

omgtehlion 6y ago
how about cp2102? I prefer it to ch340, for no reason though ))
- pantalaimon 6y ago
  I found both cp2102 and ch340 seem to use less power too than ft232r. At least there are some boards I can power with the 3.3V output of the cp2102 and ch340 dongles, but which will brown-out with the old ft232r ones.
- janekm 6y ago
  It's my go-to part for this purpose also (and I don't believe I've encountered any clones so far, knock on wood). Another part I've used in a high-volume application is the Holtek HT42B534 which is great because it's CDC class and hence doesn't need a driver for Win/Mac/Linux. It's EOL sadly. There's HT42B564 which is a HID-class replacement. The other alternative is using a cheap micro with USB interface.
- analog31 6y ago
  Aha, I didn't know about the CP2102. Looks like I'll have to give one a whirl, and there's even a breakout board at Adafruit. I've used relatively few VCP adapters since I've been using microcontrollers with built-in VCP. I was nervous about the CH340 because the Windows drivers seemed to come from some weird place in China, but maybe US sourced drivers aren't any more of a comfort in these times.
  - voltagex_ 6y ago
    If someone wants to quote me for a full reverse engineering of those drivers then I'd be interested in (crowd)funding it. But in terms of risks to worry about, it's pretty low down on the list IMO.
makomk 6y ago
If I remember rightly, what Prolific did was worse in some ways because it rendered genuine but older-revision chips that they'd actually made non-functional with current drivers. (Also, some of the CH340 clones are genuinely really badly done and can't understand register writes that differ even slightly from what a particular version of the official driver sent.)