ATtiny85 USB - loses connection

I have successfully added the ATtiny profile and drives to my IDE and managed to upload a program to two of them. A couple hours later the IDE can't find them after it gives the instruction to "plug in device now...". I've tried two additional modules and nothing works.

Do I need to go back and reload the digistump AVR info and the USB driver? I haven't resorted to that because everything appears to be working properly, right up to "Device search timed out".

This is reminding me of the goat rope last year when FTDI was bricking Nanos. It turns out my PC can't see the USB-serial programmer, either. I'm going to reload the IDE and see if that gets the USB driver back on track...

... when FTDI was bricking Nanos with COUNTERFEIT FTDI chips.

I never had any issues with boards that had legitimate FTDI chips on them.

What I would do is reboot, and also try a different USB cable.

CrossRoads: ... when FTDI was bricking Nanos with COUNTERFEIT FTDI chips.

I never had any issues with boards that had legitimate FTDI chips on them.

You're absolutely right. I should have said what you said. But when ordering knockoffs, I don't know anyone who was informed enough to know that the chips themselves were knockoffs. In my view, in the world of open source, it was not expected that someone would (or could) take umbrage over a clone.

dmjlambert: What I would do is reboot, and also try a different USB cable.

Did both of those. Did not work.

In my view, in the world of open source, it was not expected that someone would (or could) take umbrage over a clone.

I don't believe FTDI considers their design/intellectual property to be open source, hence the steps they took with Microsoft to step the counterfeit chips working with Stolen VID/PID info , etc.

CrossRoads: I don't believe FTDI considers their design/intellectual property to be open source,...

Completely agree, but as a consumer it is not possible to know that a chip on a clone is also cloned. So, was FTDI justified in going after consumers or should they have taken a different path? If, in their view, this was a giant conspiracy in which informed consumers took part, yes, but otherwise, no.

In my view, all they did to individual hobbyists, besides a couple weeks of inconvenience, is drive us to use other interfaces, eg, the 340. I'm happy not to use their product and I'm guessing that they are happy to deal only with reputable manufacturers.