Searching \ for '[PIC] 16F875' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: piclist.com/techref/microchip/devices.htm?key=16F
Search entire site for: '16F875'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[PIC] 16F875'
2005\08\11@210326 by Dave King

flavicon
face
Just noticed that the 875 has a built in op amp as well as a/d.
Has anyone played with this one? I'm curious how well the op amp
works with the a/d and so on. Could make for a slightly smaller
board or fewer parts.

Dave

2005\08\11@224705 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
This is an interesting PIC but the OPAMP is too slow to be
used for our application (trans-impedance amplifier for
photo diode current amplification). According to a VP in
Microchip, they are exploring different options of putting
an OPAMP to the PICs. This may be the first but there will
be more PICs with built-in general purpose OPAMPs. It should
be quite okay for normal applications (eg: error amplifier for
SMPS, i.e. PID control).

Regards,
Xiaofan

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave King
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 8:36 AM
To: pic_micro MIT
Subject: [PIC] 16F875

Just noticed that the 875 has a built in op amp as well as a/d.
Has anyone played with this one? I'm curious how well the op amp
works with the a/d and so on. Could make for a slightly smaller
board or fewer parts.

Dave

2005\08\12@045125 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
By the way, I think it should be 16F785.

-----Original Message-----
From: Chen Xiao Fan
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 10:47 AM
To: 'Microcontroller discussion list - Public.'
Subject: RE: [PIC] 16F875


This is an interesting PIC but the OPAMP is too slow to be
used for our application (trans-impedance amplifier for
photo diode current amplification). According to a VP in
Microchip, they are exploring different options of putting
an OPAMP to the PICs. This may be the first but there will
be more PICs with built-in general purpose OPAMPs. It should
be quite okay for normal applications (eg: error amplifier for
SMPS, i.e. PID control).

Regards,
Xiaofan

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave King
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 8:36 AM
To: pic_micro MIT
Subject: [PIC] 16F875

Just noticed that the 875 has a built in op amp as well as a/d.
Has anyone played with this one? I'm curious how well the op amp
works with the a/d and so on. Could make for a slightly smaller
board or fewer parts.

Dave

2005\08\12@063336 by Jan-Erik Soderholm

face picon face
Chen Xiao Fan wrote :

> By the way, I think it should be 16F785.

Seems so.

Another thing, the Line Card says
"20P, 20SO, 20SS"

Is this
is the first DIP-20 PIC ??

Jan-Erik.



2005\08\15@001547 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
Yes it should be the first DIP20 PIC. There are quite some will
follow: PIC16F631/639/677/685/687/689/690.

What the line card does not mention is that they will also come
with 4mmx4mm QFN package as well.

The 8/14/20 pin PIC will be supported by PICkit 2.

Regards,
Xiaofan

-----Original Message-----
From: Jan-Erik Soderholm [spam_OUTjan-erik.soderholmTakeThisOuTspamtelia.com]
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 6:34 PM

Another thing, the Line Card says
"20P, 20SO, 20SS"

Is this
is the first DIP-20 PIC ??

Jan-Erik.

2005\08\15@045801 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:15:43 +0800, Chen Xiao Fan wrote:

> The 8/14/20 pin PIC will be supported by PICkit 2.

Yes I noticed that - it won't support 18 pin PICs!

Cheers,



Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\08\15@052149 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
PICkit 2 is aiming to support most of the PICs including
PIC12F/PIC16F/PIC18F/PIC18J/dsPICs even though right now the
support is quite limited.

It will support more chips once Microchip release the
firmware source code and some capable hackers will do it for
Linux as well. One person is actually doing it right now.

PICkit 1 does support 18pin PIC like 16F627A/628A/648A in
the latest V1.70 classic software.

Regards,
Xiaofan

{Original Message removed}

2005\08\15@052656 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
By the way, to me the 16F 18pin parts are now legacy parts already since
the new 16F parts are all low cost 8/14/20/28pin standard flash parts. :)
So please do not recommend 16F628A any more to new hobbyists. :)
Instead please recommend PIC18F or dsPICs.

Regards,
Xiaofan

-----Original Message-----
From: Howard Winter [.....HDRWKILLspamspam@spam@H2Org.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 4:58 PM
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
Subject: RE: [PIC] 16F875

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:15:43 +0800, Chen Xiao Fan wrote:

> The 8/14/20 pin PIC will be supported by PICkit 2.

Yes I noticed that - it won't support 18 pin PICs!



2005\08\15@054815 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> By the way, to me the 16F 18pin parts are now legacy parts
> already since
> the new 16F parts are all low cost 8/14/20/28pin standard
> flash parts. :)
> So please do not recommend 16F628A any more to new hobbyists. :)
> Instead please recommend PIC18F or dsPICs.

I do not agree completely.

A big argument for newbies is the amount of webinfo for a chip. Sadly,
the 16x84 still rules in this aspect. The 16F628(A) and 18F877(A) are
viable alternatives. 18F info is still scarce.

There are no low-price/low-pin-count 18F chips. Many hobbyists want
their designs to be low-cost. This definitely points to 12/14 bit cores.
Maybe an 18F could be used as learning tool (but I would not recommend
this), but not a 30F.

When one realy needs the power of the 30F's IMHO there are better
choices, like the various ARM chips.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\15@061320 by Lindy Mayfield

flavicon
face
I remember just around a month or two ago the 16F88 being talked about as being the hobbyist chip of choice, along with the 16F877 as you mentioned.


> By the way, to me the 16F 18pin parts are now legacy parts
> already since
> the new 16F parts are all low cost 8/14/20/28pin standard
> flash parts. :)
> So please do not recommend 16F628A any more to new hobbyists. :)
> Instead please recommend PIC18F or dsPICs.

I do not agree completely.

A big argument for newbies is the amount of webinfo for a chip. Sadly,
the 16x84 still rules in this aspect. The 16F628(A) and 18F877(A) are
viable alternatives. 18F info is still scarce.

There are no low-price/low-pin-count 18F chips. Many hobbyists want
their designs to be low-cost. This definitely points to 12/14 bit cores.
Maybe an 18F could be used as learning tool (but I would not recommend
this), but not a 30F.

When one realy needs the power of the 30F's IMHO there are better
choices, like the various ARM chips.

Wouter van Ooijen



2005\08\15@063210 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> I remember just around a month or two ago the 16F88 being
> talked about as being the hobbyist chip of choice, along with
> the 16F877 as you mentioned.

As far as web-presence is concerned the F88 will loose badly because it
is a relatively new chip. But it is cretainly the most capable 18-pin
chip.

But IMHO the main reason for choosing 12/14-bit core chip is that you
want be able to eventually make your project cheap. Which chip you start
with is less important, so why not choos the biggest one, which is the
16F877A.

If you don't want to make your project small/cheap (in the end) the
18F's look much better.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\15@082533 by Jan-Erik Soderholm

face picon face
I've found the F683/F688 to be a nice
8/14 pin combination for many low
cost,
low pin (but still using capable chips) projects.

They are also
from the same generation
with similar internal features (apart from the
diff pin counts), so it's easy to move from one
to the other...

And
the F88 isn't that different if you need
the additional peripherials...

For low cost and *large volume* there
might be better chips, but I'm
talking
about the hobbyist market here.

FWIW...

Regards,

Jan-Erik.



2005\08\15@090705 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 11:48:17AM +0200, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
> > By the way, to me the 16F 18pin parts are now legacy parts
> > already since
> > the new 16F parts are all low cost 8/14/20/28pin standard
> > flash parts. :)
> > So please do not recommend 16F628A any more to new hobbyists. :)
> > Instead please recommend PIC18F or dsPICs.
>
> I do not agree completely.

Debate! Debate! ;-)

>
> A big argument for newbies is the amount of webinfo for a chip. Sadly,
> the 16x84 still rules in this aspect.

It's very sad.

> The 16F628(A) and 18F877(A) are
> viable alternatives.

I'd add the 16F88 into this list too.

> 18F info is still scarce.

Very scarce. And the dsPIC is worse. Does anyone have knowledge of
a page that describes a simple blink-an-led for the dsPIC? I haven't
found any assembly info on the part at all (other than the datasheet).

> There are no low-price/low-pin-count 18F chips. Many hobbyists want
> their designs to be low-cost. This definitely points to 12/14 bit cores.

The 18F1330 and 18F1320 are 18 pin parts. They are $5.38 USD according to
digikey. Still cheaper than a 16F84.

Generally hobbyists are one-off type folks. A couple of dollars isn't
going to make that much difference on a part.

> Maybe an 18F could be used as learning tool (but I would not recommend
> this), but not a 30F.

I don't think there's a good 30F tutorial yet. Also personally I'm leery
of being tied to Mchips 30F C compiler.

> When one realy needs the power of the 30F's IMHO there are better
> choices, like the various ARM chips.

Do ARMs come in hobby friendly packages? The dsPIC 30F3013 is available in
a 28 pin DIP package. And especially for hobby use, packaging is important.

BAJ

2005\08\15@090949 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 12:32:12PM +0200, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
> > I remember just around a month or two ago the 16F88 being
> > talked about as being the hobbyist chip of choice, along with
> > the 16F877 as you mentioned.
>
> As far as web-presence is concerned the F88 will loose badly because it
> is a relatively new chip. But it is cretainly the most capable 18-pin
> chip.

Which is why I recommend it as the 16F84/16F628 replacement.

> But IMHO the main reason for choosing 12/14-bit core chip is that you
> want be able to eventually make your project cheap. Which chip you start
> with is less important, so why not choos the biggest one, which is the
> 16F877A.

That's an interesting question. I really don't believe it matters too much
on the hobby front. Projects are generally done in singles. Convenience is
more important than costs.

But I wonder what the breakover is? 10 parts? 25?

BAJ

2005\08\15@095031 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> > The 16F628(A) and 18F877(A) are
> > viable alternatives.
> I'd add the 16F88 into this list too.

I meant viable is the sense that a reasonable amount of web coverage
exists for these parts. IMHO the F88 is *not* viable in *this* aspect.
The F628(A) is, but on thechnical arguments alone I would indeed prefer
the F88 as newbie chip (but the 877A even more, because it has plenty of
I/O pins to add a debug LCD or two :) , and this chip *does* haev some
web coverage :)

> The 18F1330 and 18F1320 are 18 pin parts. They are $5.38 USD
> according to digikey. Still cheaper than a 16F84.

Yes, but that is not releveant. The 18F's don't have the web coverage of
the x84, f628 or f877, and the 18F family lacks the quivalents of the
F676, F629 etc.

> Generally hobbyists are one-off type folks. A couple of dollars isn't
> going to make that much difference on a part.

Judging from what I hear from my customers there are roughly two parts
of hobbyists, typically:
1- teenagers who want more than just modding their PC
2- retired techies who want to get a bite of the uC world

For category two your argument holds. Such guys typically buy a 16F877A,
an 18F4520, or even a 30F. And a Wisp628 kit, build, or even an ICD2.

For gategory one your argument does not seem to apply. They typically
buy an F84-04, and try to get a serial-port-powered programmer to work.

> Do ARMs come in hobby friendly packages? The dsPIC 30F3013 is
> available in a 28 pin DIP package. And especially for hobby use,
> packaging is important.

No, point taken. But you can buy ARM modules with DIP pinout.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\15@095031 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> > But IMHO the main reason for choosing 12/14-bit core chip
> is that you
> > want be able to eventually make your project cheap. Which
> chip you start
> > with is less important, so why not choos the biggest one,
> which is the
> > 16F877A.
>
> That's an interesting question. I really don't believe it
> matters too much on the hobby front.

That might be true when you do the math, but it is not the way a lot of
newbies seem to see it. And you must include that a newbie will probably
fry a few chips, so even a one-of project might need 10 chips.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\15@105819 by scott larson

picon face
I am a noob in the PIC world, and i've been using the 16f84a, as it
definitely has the most documentation and support. however, i also
have a book on the 16f876 by Chuck Hellebuyck. I occasionally get
samples from microchip, my selection being influenced by the features
each chip provides (op-amps, ADC, AUSART MI²C Compatible/SPI, low
power, the number of i/o pins, etc.)
I'm just a college student making little projects with the PIC over my
summer break, i hope to get into the microcontroller field.

what i would like to get more info about is the dsPIC and the rfPIC.




On 8/15/05, Wouter van Ooijen <wouterspamKILLspamvoti.nl> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

>

2005\08\15@115242 by Sean Schouten

face picon face
Excuse my ignorance, because I too am a beginner in the vast field of
microcontrollers...

I was under the impression that the low and high range of Microchip's
(regular) PICmicro line were in fact similar enough to start with any
(regular) pic and migrate to another without too many problems other
than peripheral addressing etc changing. Is that the case or am I on
another planet?

I bought a book on amazon.com called "Pic in Practice" by 'D.W.
Smith', that obviously mainly covers the PIC16F84 (mister popular) and
some other PICmicros' that have some other functions that the
PIC16F84 does not share. I my self just used the book to get started
with the real basics, on the 12F629 and the 16F684 that I got with the
PICstart1 kit that got given to me for my birthday. No problems at
all, and with a little help from the datasheet it all seemed to work
out just great. So forgive me for not seeing the problem of finding
the right PICmicro to start with. IMHO just need to start on something
or rather anything to atleast get the basic feel and understanding.

Thanks,

Sean Schouten.

2005\08\15@120657 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 03:50:33PM +0200, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
> > > The 16F628(A) and 18F877(A) are
> > > viable alternatives.
> > I'd add the 16F88 into this list too.
>
> I meant viable is the sense that a reasonable amount of web coverage
> exists for these parts.

I see where you're coming from.

> IMHO the F88 is *not* viable in *this* aspect.

OTOH periperal support is similar enough that generally it transfers. So
virtually everything that can be leaned with a 16F877 will work for the most
part on the 16F88.

> The F628(A) is, but on thechnical arguments alone I would indeed prefer
> the F88 as newbie chip (but the 877A even more, because it has plenty of
> I/O pins to add a debug LCD or two :) , and this chip *does* haev some
> web coverage :)

I have no arguments with the 877A. I think it's a great part. But for
some reason hobby folks starting out seem to want a smaller package.
I never figured out why.

>
> > The 18F1330 and 18F1320 are 18 pin parts. They are $5.38 USD
> > according to digikey. Still cheaper than a 16F84.
>
> Yes, but that is not releveant. The 18F's don't have the web coverage of
> the x84, f628 or f877, and the 18F family lacks the quivalents of the
> F676, F629 etc.

Very true. There are no sub-18 pin 18F parts AFAIK.

{Quote hidden}

There's cheap. And then there's too cheap. Category one is the latter.
They would get more bang for their buck with a 877A and a bootloader.

>
> > Do ARMs come in hobby friendly packages? The dsPIC 30F3013 is
> > available in a 28 pin DIP package. And especially for hobby use,
> > packaging is important.
>
> No, point taken. But you can buy ARM modules with DIP pinout.

Cool. I may need to check that out at some point in the future.

BAJ

2005\08\15@121411 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 05:52:39PM +0200, Sean Schouten wrote:
> Excuse my ignorance, because I too am a beginner in the vast field of
> microcontrollers...

Well welcome aboard.

> I was under the impression that the low and high range of Microchip's
> (regular) PICmicro line were in fact similar enough to start with any
> (regular) pic and migrate to another without too many problems other
> than peripheral addressing etc changing. Is that the case or am I on
> another planet?

It does work for the most part. I think that in the 16F family you run
into paging/banking issues when you ramp up. That's probably why it's
better to ramp down (i.e. start with the biggest best chip and work your
way down).

{Quote hidden}

It's a running debate on the list. It's a theory I call "You love what you
learn". A web blog here: http://unplugd.com/junkyard/?q=node/1
gives an example. To quote:

"If the first tool mastered is a hammer, everything looks like nails.

Studies we carried out at Grant High School, Mt. Gambier, South Australia,
showed that users' preference for applications to do specific tasks, is
closely related to when in their education they were introduced to the
applications. A concrete example: Half a photography class was subjected to
Adobe Photoshop for image manipulation, the other half was using The Gimp.
Halfway through the term, the students swapped 'weapons'. The study showed,
that the ones who were initially using Photoshop didn't like Gimp, and the
'Gimp-borne' students thought that Photoshop was crap.

With this in mind, I move that we need to consider carefully whenever we
introduce new tools to students."

I see the same problem with the 16F84. Start newbies with it and they'll
tend to stick to it like glue. Even if this means going all around the
world to solve an issue that hardware takes care of easily.

BAJ

2005\08\15@123323 by Maarten Hofman

face picon face
> I have no arguments with the 877A. I think it's a great part. But for
> some reason hobby folks starting out seem to want a smaller package.
> I never figured out why.

If you saw the way I soldered before I started working with PICs, you
would know. I still have the PCB with the socket for the 16F84A that I
managed to mess up, just because of soldering those 18 pins. Imagine
me doing 40 pins at the time :). Now I am no longer afraid of it,
however, my version 3 will use the 16F877.

> > 1- teenagers who want more than just modding their PC
> > 2- retired techies who want to get a bite of the uC world

I'm neither, though probably closer to 2, except for my huge
Microcontroller background from university. I like cheap, though.

As for parts, a few days ago I did a complete analysis of some of the
needs in one of my projects, and found that only two PICs were
attractive:

16F628A ($1.61, built in USART, 3.5mA@20MHz, >140 RAM, 128 EEPROM,
>1.5 (2) KWord) and, amazing enough (I never heard of the part before,
but it came up from my parametric search) the 16F688 (slightly more
expensive at $1.87, but much better specs: built in USART, only
2.4mA@20MHz, >140 RAM, 256 EEPROM >1.5 KWord (4) KWord). So I might
try the 16F688 at some point. The smaller footprint (a 14-pin 16F?)
might be useful, in this particular case.

Greetings,
Maarten Hofman.

2005\08\15@124602 by Jan-Erik Soderholm

face picon face
Maarten Hofman wrote :

> the 16F688 (slightly more  expensive at
$1.87, but much
> better specs: built in USART, only 2.4mA@20MHz,
>
>140 RAM, 256 EEPROM >1.5 KWord (4) KWord).

Don't forget a much more
versatile intosc with 1% prec,
8 step "gearbox" and 8 Mhz without any
ext. components.

The USART is a EUSART with (e.g.) a 16 bit baud rate
register for "closer" buad rates.

The F688 has a 10-bit ADC (F628 only
comparators).

And (what I like) is that the F688 is quite like
the 8-
pin F683. So they plays well together...

Jan-Erik.



2005\08\15@125646 by olin piclist

face picon face
Sean Schouten wrote:
> I was under the impression that the low and high range of Microchip's
> (regular) PICmicro line were in fact similar enough to start with any
> (regular) pic and migrate to another without too many problems other
> than peripheral addressing etc changing.

Pretty much for the 12 bit, 14 bit, and 16 bit cores.  The 24 bit dsPIC
(30F) core has a significantly different architecture, although some things
will look familiar.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\08\15@134938 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> There's cheap. And then there's too cheap. Category one is the latter.
> They would get more bang for their buck with a 877A and a bootloader.

Only if they have that level of buck available, which they often don't
(or at least they are not willing to spend it on PIC stuff).

Actually the intelligent most back-for-the-buckers buy a 16F628A and a
16F877A, use a serial port progger to prog Wisp628 into the first, build
a breadboard Wisp628, and start hacking thew 16F877.

> Cool. I may need to check that out at some point in the future.

But check the prices, for instance http://www.olimex.com; I sell some of their
products, but not the ARM modules, because IMHO the ARM boards (with
some peripherals, serial port for bootloading, etc) are better B-F-B.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\15@134938 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> As for parts, a few days ago I did a complete analysis of some of the
> needs in one of my projects, and found that only two PICs were
> attractive:
>
> 16F628A ($1.61, built in USART, 3.5mA@20MHz, >140 RAM, 128 EEPROM,
> >1.5 (2) KWord) and, amazing enough (I never heard of the part before,
> but it came up from my parametric search) the 16F688 (slightly more
> expensive at $1.87, but much better specs: built in USART, only
> 2.4mA@20MHz, >140 RAM, 256 EEPROM >1.5 KWord (4) KWord).

Did you check the other 14-pin chips too?

As a rule you can count on the more recently introduced chips to give
more B-F-B (can we make that an officicial abbreviation?). Most 14-pins
chips are very recent.

I would ditch the 16F628(A) for the 16F648A.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\15@135438 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> > I was under the impression that the low and high range of
> Microchip's
> > (regular) PICmicro line were in fact similar enough to
> start with any
> > (regular) pic and migrate to another without too many problems other
> > than peripheral addressing etc changing.
>
> Pretty much for the 12 bit, 14 bit, and 16 bit cores.  The 24
> bit dsPIC
> (30F) core has a significantly different architecture,
> although some things will look familiar.

For a newbie I would limit this to the 12/14 bit cores, with some
warnings for the 12-bit pitfalls (return == retlw 0, call limitations,
etc) and warnings for the code paging on the larger chips (on a 12-bit
1k is large) and of course banking (but that is unavoidable on nearly
all chips).

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\15@151532 by Maarten Hofman

face picon face
> > 16F628A ($1.61, built in USART, 3.5mA@20MHz, >140 RAM, 128 EEPROM,
> > >1.5 (2) KWord) and, amazing enough (I never heard of the part before,
> > but it came up from my parametric search) the 16F688 (slightly more
> > expensive at $1.87, but much better specs: built in USART, only
> > 2.4mA@20MHz, >140 RAM, 256 EEPROM >1.5 KWord (4) KWord).

> Did you check the other 14-pin chips too?

I used the filtering software of the Microchip website. I assume it
gives me all options.

> I would ditch the 16F628(A) for the 16F648A.

In my case that would mean paying $0.24 more and getting very little
in return: no reduction in power consumption and the same number of
pins. Paying $0.25 more for the 16F688 seems a better deal to me,
especially after I read Jan-Erik's post about the more accurate USART.

Greetings,
Maarten Hofman.

2005\08\15@155427 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
Maarten Hofman wrote:

{Quote hidden}

Agreed. The F88 is an awesome device, having so many advantages over other
PICs. MY favorite scheme is the dual oscillator; the user can waddle
along at 32K
using flea-power then switch to a high-speed 8Mhz to do some real work
at normal
current drain, then switch back again. Add to that the bootloader
capability, and for
0.25USD more its an incredible bargain.

--Bob








>Greetings,
>Maarten Hofman.
>
>  
>


--
Note: To protect our network,
attachments must be sent to
.....attachKILLspamspam.....engineer.cotse.net .
1-866-263-5745 USA/Canada
http://beam.to/azengineer

2005\08\15@160237 by Sean Schouten

face picon face
> Studies we carried out at Grant High School, Mt. Gambier, South Australia,
> showed that users' preference for applications to do specific tasks, is
> closely related to when in their education they were introduced to the
> applications. A concrete example: Half a photography class was subjected to
> Adobe Photoshop for image manipulation, the other half was using The Gimp.
> Halfway through the term, the students swapped 'weapons'. The study showed,
> that the ones who were initially using Photoshop didn't like Gimp, and the
> 'Gimp-borne' students thought that Photoshop was crap.
>
> With this in mind, I move that we need to consider carefully whenever we
> introduce new tools to students."
>
> I see the same problem with the 16F84. Start newbies with it and they'll
> tend to stick to it like glue. Even if this means going all around the
> world to solve an issue that hardware takes care of easily.
>

First off, thank you for welcoming me! :)

I still believe in something my father says every now and then; "Using
the right tool for the right job". It's a shame that most people are
not as adventurous as one might hope.

I find it a strange thing that people actually still use the 16F84.
Isn't it almost pre-historic? My book ("PIC in Practice", by D.W.
Smith) also makes use of atleast one other PICmicro other than the
16F84, because it seems to lack things like an A/D converter. You
could ofcourse use some external AD-converting peripheral, but why
should you? If you aren't in need of anything special it would be a
waste not to use the fully integrated peripherals; waste of time,
waste of money.

Sean.

2005\08\15@161418 by Jan-Erik Soderholm

face picon face
Bob Axtell wrote :

> Maarten Hofman wrote:
> > ...Paying $0.25 more
for the 16F688...

> Agreed. The F88 is an awesome device,...


Not
that a missing "8" makes *that* a big
difference, but anyway...

:-)

Regards,

Jan-Erik.



2005\08\15@161928 by Jan-Erik Soderholm

face picon face
Damn...

A missing "6", of course...

:-(

Jan-Erik.



2005\08\15@161946 by Sean Schouten

face picon face
> For a newbie I would limit this to the 12/14 bit cores, with some
> warnings for the 12-bit pitfalls (return == retlw 0, call limitations,
> etc) and warnings for the code paging on the larger chips (on a 12-bit
> 1k is large) and of course banking (but that is unavoidable on nearly
> all chips).
>

I think that Microchip's PICkit 1 is a great place to start, it was
for me anyway. It comes with a 12F629 and a 16F684, both great
microcontrollers which hardly differ. A 'newbie' would only be in need
of a some good material on starting with pics that would start you off
with initialization of the microcontrollers, and take you through how
you would go about initializing PORTA (as an example) and it's
functions and how you would go about using them and further from there
on.

I personally don't have too much experience with PICmicro's as of yet,
but am dying to try out the dsPIC a.s.a.p. as well... I infact have
allready ordered one that I can play around with as soon as I manage
to build an ICD2 clone or compatible programmer so that I  can
actually write to the dsPIC.

May I ask you about these 12-bit pitfalls that you speak of? RETURN ==
RETLW 0 meaning that RETLW 0 should be used preferably to RETURN ? I
would like to hear more about the pitfalls you speak of, please do not
hesitate to show me some informative examples!

Thanks,

Sean.

2005\08\15@165758 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> May I ask you about these 12-bit pitfalls that you speak of? RETURN ==
> RETLW 0 meaning that RETLW 0 should be used preferably to RETURN ? I
> would like to hear more about the pitfalls you speak of, please do not
> hesitate to show me some informative examples!

read http://www.voti.nl/swp and http://www.voti.nl/picfaq

The pic12 menemonic RETURN (or RET?) is translated to RETLW 0, because
the 12bits don't have a return instruction that doesn't also modify W.
This can come as a surprise to a 14bit core programmer, who expects that
he can leave a value in W, return, ans then use that value. Not so on
the 12bit chips.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\15@185313 by dave

picon face
>IMHO just need
>to start on something
>or rather anything to atleast get the basic
>feel
>and understanding.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Sean Schouten.

Sean,
  You have really hit the nail on the head
there.  If you just wan to hit the ground
running, then you can hit it with anything.  I
started out on Motorolla 68hc11's, and when I
switched to the PIC pretty much all the concepts
were the same, so if you are just intent on
learning the basics, then whatever you can find
is the way to go.  As far as actually moving code
between chips, I only have experience working
with the 18f series, but I have moved mountains
of code back and fourth between them without a
problem.  On top of that, Microchip seems to take
care that all of it's peripherals are standard
between chips, adding and removing them as
modules.  The information for the 30f series
supports that, with most of the configuration
informaiton being in the family refernce guide
instead of the individual chip datasheets, they
jsut show you how to configure any SPIx module,
and you just mkae sure that the chip you order
has the spi module.  I agree with the person who
suggested starting with the one that has the most
peripherals and only scaling it down when you get
to the productions stage, and microchips free
sample program means that even if you need 10
chips, between the low voltage and normal voltage
versions and being able to order once a month,
you can have enough chips to goof around wiht for
the price of none!  All the development for this
project:
engineering.lssu.edu/students/ROV03.html
was done with free sample 18f452's, and there
were a-lot of 18f452's in the dead bin when we
got done.  Buy Big (esp when it is free).
dave



               
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

2005\08\15@201403 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
I should have add the 8/14/20 pin chips to my recommendations
as well. Just I think 18pin device including 16F628A/16F88
is in the legacy mode now.

Just take note I've only worked with 16F (all <=2k words so no
paging) so far at work. I am only now starting to mess with
18F4550 USB and dsPICs from a hobbyist's point of view and
like them because they are C-language friendly.

Let me revise my conclusion. Forget about 16F88/87xA for the
hobbyist because of paging. Start with 2k 8/14/20 pin device
with up to 2k words with a PICkit 1 or PICkit 2. Then go up to
18F parts. Then go up to dsPICs (or other chips with easy-to-
handle package like DIP/SOIC/SSOP).

Regards,
Xiaofan

2005\08\16@033226 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> Start with 2k 8/14/20 pin device
> with up to 2k words with a PICkit 1 or PICkit 2.

Actually one could get an 8k chip and start worrying about paging only
when the code exceeds 2k. But maybe the beginner would not receognise
the problem when it hits him.

For my assembler class I used the 16F688 in a PicKit1 clone.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\16@034704 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
Are you interested to produce a PICKit 2 clone with 18F2550?
Then it can be easily upgradeable. Anyway all the information
is there and maybe you can simply modified the PICkit 1
clone.

Are you interested to hack PICKit 2? I just placed an order
for PICkit 2. The shipment is expensive. :( I am sure PICkit
2 will soon work with both Linux and Windows.

By the way, why not use the Wisp628 with the class? Is it
because that PICKit 1 is easy to handle than Wisp628?

Regards,
Xiaofan

{Original Message removed}

2005\08\16@035606 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
Yeah it seems to me that 16F688 is a good choice as
well if pre-warned about paging. As well as the
upcoming 16F687/8/9 20 pin device are good choice.
They all have EUSART and easy to handle DIP20 packaging
as well as a 8MHz internal RC osc. The only weak point
about all these 8/14/20 pin device compared to 16F88
is that they do not support bootloader.

Regards,
Xiaofan

{Original Message removed}

2005\08\16@041214 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>I have no arguments with the 877A. I think it's a great part.
>But for some reason hobby folks starting out seem to want a
>smaller package. I never figured out why.

Probably because TTL chips came in 14/16 pin packages, and when you went to
28/40 pin packages you were getting into "heavy metal" chips with lots of
functionality.

14/16 pin chips had functionality levels that you could understand, larger
chips had lots of stuff inside that needed fancy degrees to understand and
you couldn't alter, apart from memory chips.

It may be a historical perspective, but to a certain degree for new people
it will still hold.

2005\08\16@042845 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> Are you interested to produce a PICKit 2 clone with 18F2550?

I am interested in far too many things. But that is certainly on my
list.

> is there and maybe you can simply modified the PICkit 1
> clone.

I doubt it, my clone is a PCB with lots and lots of peripherals.

> Are you interested to hack PICKit 2? I just placed an order
> for PICkit 2. The shipment is expensive. :( I am sure PICkit
> 2 will soon work with both Linux and Windows.

I'll wait at least till that dust clears! I do have a PicKit 2 around
somewhere here. It will probably end up in my shop.

> By the way, why not use the Wisp628 with the class? Is it
> because that PICKit 1 is easy to handle than Wisp628?

I 'forced' the students to buy the thing, so they could work at home too
and I don't have to worry about stolen or maltreated boards. This sets
an upper limit on the price. A Wisp628 + power supply + target board
would not have fitted that price. This board needs just be plugged into
an USB port and it works, very convenient for an informatics (not
electronics) student.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\16@044554 by Vasile Surducan

face picon face
On 8/16/05, Wouter van Ooijen <EraseMEwouterspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTvoti.nl> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

How ?

Vasile

2005\08\16@052212 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
You are really helpful to share that. Thanks. Last time
I was a TA, we did ask the students to buy the kits (for
a boost converter) at cost.

There is not really too much dust. PICkit 2 firmware is
now available to some selected people and I am quite sure that
PICkit 2 will soon work with an adapted version of usb_pickit
under Linux with libusb.

Right now I think PICkit 2 support is still missing from
MPLAB and the chip support is not that great now. But
it does have great potential. It is aiming high. It is
good to know that it will probably end up in your shop. :)

Regards,
Xiaofan

{Original Message removed}

2005\08\16@052412 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
>> I 'forced' the students to buy the thing
>
> How ?

Just like they are forced to buy their books: by putting it on the
'required for this class' list. The school agreed, provided that the PCB
price is compareable to a course book (~ E 50, and of course that the
class would require no other things).

After the class another teacher tried to buy a PCB from students (I was
out of stock at that moment) but he could not find one willing to sell
:)

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\16@053801 by Vasile Surducan

face picon face
On 8/16/05, Wouter van Ooijen <wouterspamspam_OUTvoti.nl> wrote:
> >> I 'forced' the students to buy the thing
> >
> > How ?
>
> Just like they are forced to buy their books: by putting it on the
> 'required for this class' list. The school agreed, provided that the PCB
> price is compareable to a course book (~ E 50, and of course that the
> class would require no other things).

Hmm, if you try this here, the risk to be shut because do not respect
a hard conquered democracy...


> After the class another teacher tried to buy a PCB from students (I was
> out of stock at that moment) but he could not find one willing to sell
> :)

Damn studing students do you have ! I'm imagining all learning this
summer instead of taking a bath naked somewhere in the Europe...
:)

Vasile

>
> Wouter van Ooijen
>
> -- -------------------------------------------
> Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
> consultancy, development, PICmicro products
> docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu
>
>
> -

2005\08\16@055941 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> Hmm, if you try this here, the risk to be shut because do not respect
> a hard conquered democracy...

I don't think it is much different from a 'required' book. The student
is not realy required to buy the PCB or the book (he can in theory
complete the course without the book, or with his friend's book, or with
a pdf on a laptop), it is just that the lessons, homework and final work
are arranged in a way that assumes that the student has full-time access
to all items on the 'required for this class' list. I think the
arrangement in your country would be similar?

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\16@063456 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 09:12:10AM +0100, Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> >I have no arguments with the 877A. I think it's a great part.
> >But for some reason hobby folks starting out seem to want a
> >smaller package. I never figured out why.
>
> Probably because TTL chips came in 14/16 pin packages, and when you went to
> 28/40 pin packages you were getting into "heavy metal" chips with lots of
> functionality.

But does that really hold water in today's climate where a newbie isn't
going to start with TTL?

> 14/16 pin chips had functionality levels that you could understand, larger
> chips had lots of stuff inside that needed fancy degrees to understand and
> you couldn't alter, apart from memory chips.

That's the whole point of using a microcontroller. It gives you virtually
unlimited versitility using software as opposed to hardware.

> It may be a historical perspective, but to a certain degree for new people
> it will still hold.

I think we need to work harder to break the perception. Hardware is easier
than software for peripheral activities. Bigger is easier than smaller in a
lot of cases. It facilitates you right sizing a project instead of trying to
stuff too much functionality in a smaller part.

BAJ

2005\08\16@090931 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
I think many people will be very interested in you clone,
including me. :)

Any possibility that the information will be available
to the public? Maybe you can also sell them as a
quick prototype board for new comers of PIC. Of course
it will be better if PIC18F2550 is used instead of the
old 16C745.

Regards,
Xiaofan


----- Original Message -----
From: "Wouter van Ooijen" <@spam@wouterKILLspamspamvoti.nl>
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.hardware.microcontrollers.pic
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 4:26 PM
Subject: RE: [PIC] 16F875
>maybe you can simply modified the PICkit 1
> clone.
>
I doubt it, my clone is a PCB with lots and lots of peripherals.
...
This board needs just be plugged into an USB port and it works, very
convenient for an informatics (not electronics) student.

2005\08\16@100356 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> I think many people will be very interested in you clone,
> including me. :)
>
> Any possibility that the information will be available
> to the public?

The only info I have available is the course page:
http://www.voti.nl/hvu/2TPRJ5/index.html (dutch only).

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\16@101513 by Sean Schouten

face picon face
> I think many people will be very interested in you clone,
> including me. :)
>
> Any possibility that the information will be available
> to the public?

Are you reffering to a PICkit 2 clone, or what?

You can get information on ICD clones:


Here: http://www.mcu.cz/modules/news/article.php?storyid=430 (bottom
scematic is what I will work off of (to attempt) to create a true ICD2
usb clone, or so I hope).

Here: http://www.mcu.cz/modules/news/article.php?storyid=449

# I got the above links of off
http://www.edaboard.com/ftopic70755-0-asc-0.html, which I managed to
google. There is some information here and there in the forum as
well... #

And Here: http://stolz.de.be/ (check conversations in the guestbook as well!).

2005\08\16@160446 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
> But for some reason hobby folks starting out seem to want a
> smaller package. I never figured out why.
>
Assembly complexity (or perhaps PERCEIVED complexity) is dependent
on the number of connections you must solder/wrap/connect (and
perhaps on the number of number of holes you have to drill.)
Also, large chips get you into the depressing realm where sockets
for the chips are depressingly expensive.

BillW

2005\08\16@161423 by Peter

picon face


On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Sean Schouten wrote:

>> With this in mind, I move that we need to consider carefully whenever we
>> introduce new tools to students."

M$ has considered that for most schools already.

> I find it a strange thing that people actually still use the 16F84.
> Isn't it almost pre-historic? My book ("PIC in Practice", by D.W.

I have older chips than that in the CPU box ;-) Like 16C54XT-04 with
datecode 93xx or so. And that is recent. Occasionally I use one. I still
have the breadboarded programmer I built from scratch for them in ~1994.
And the driver works (the wonders on open source *nix).

Peter

2005\08\16@172948 by Charles Craft

picon face
I think it's easier to have a mental check list that nothing is being forgotten with the smaller chips.
Having 20 or 30 extra pins on a large parts leaves wondering what did I forget to hook up.

And if you're using one of those cursed white plastic breadboards you gain a lot more connections points
with a skinny dip vs a 28 or 40 pin wide chip.

{Original Message removed}

2005\08\16@203431 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
Sorry but I was referring to Wouter's PICKit 1 clone.

I know the ICD2 clone but finally I decided to get
an original one. I have also made a simple one using
the information from stolz.de.be (the old information)
but it is not working properly with dsPICs and 18F USB
parts I want to try. I may look back it some time later.

Now I am waiting for my PICkit 2 and try to make
it work with Linux (as well as Win32 command line) as soon
as possible. The protocol is the quite similar to PICkit 1.
A quick hack to usb_pickit will probably work already.

I will also look if PICkit 1 can be upgraded to a PICkit
2 with some simple hardware modification. WH Tan has
done some modification of the PICkit 1 firmware to port
it to 18F2550.

Regards,
Xiaofan

{Original Message removed}

2005\08\16@205936 by Sean Schouten

face picon face
>
> I will also look if PICkit 1 can be upgraded to a PICkit
> 2 with some simple hardware modification. WH Tan has
> done some modification of the PICkit 1 firmware to port
> it to 18F2550.


Be sure to let us know if you come up with any cool conversion for PICkit 1!

Hmmm, I heard something about people having problems with some ICD
clones, that's why I would like to make a clone that's as close to the
real thing as possible. This poor student doesn't quite have the funds
to buy a real ICD as of yet, otherwize I would probably do so without
any hesitation. :-)

Anyway,

Best Regards.

2005\08\16@213334 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
Thanks a lot, Wouter. The board looks quite nice. Any
possibility that you will sell it as well?

Hopefully the webpage will be converted to English later.
It will be very useful information to PIC learners.

Regards,
Xiaofan

-----Original Message-----
From: Wouter van Ooijen [KILLspamwouterKILLspamspamvoti.nl]
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 10:02 PM

> I think many people will be very interested in you clone,
> including me. :)
>
> Any possibility that the information will be available
> to the public?

The only info I have available is the course page:
http://www.voti.nl/hvu/2TPRJ5/index.html (dutch only).

Wouter van Ooijen

2005\08\17@020817 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> Thanks a lot, Wouter. The board looks quite nice. Any
> possibility that you will sell it as well?

Like so many other things that is on my list :)

But maybe I'll skip this one for the shop and make a pickit 2 clone
instead.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\17@022651 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
The same to me, got too many things to learn in my
spare time. I have to concentrate now on 18F USB
and upgrade my C skills first. Thanks for the suggestions
to learn Python as well. I find it to be nice
to use together with pyserial. Still I need to
learn how to use it with libusb (python wrapper).

PICKit 2 clone will be very nice tools for new
beginners. :)

Regards,
Xiaofan

-----Original Message-----
From: Wouter van Ooijen
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 2:06 PM

> Thanks a lot, Wouter. The board looks quite nice. Any
> possibility that you will sell it as well?

Like so many other things that is on my list :)

But maybe I'll skip this one for the shop and make a pickit 2 clone
instead.

Wouter van Ooijen

2005\08\17@025837 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> The same to me, got too many things to learn in my
> spare time. I have to concentrate now on 18F USB
> and upgrade my C skills first. Thanks for the suggestions
> to learn Python as well. I find it to be nice
> to use together with pyserial. Still I need to
> learn how to use it with libusb (python wrapper).

If you have mastered that (especially when in a portable way!) I want to
learn from you! Then the next Wisp can be 18F2550 based :)

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\17@050631 by Chen Xiao Fan

face
flavicon
face
Libusb is very portable. It took me (a lousy C programmer)
about three weeks to do some simple porting of Linux
program to Windows (PICDEM FS USB bootloader, FS USB demo
program and usb_pickit for PICkit 1). I put them in
the Microchip forum. Using libusb, the same source
code can be used for Windows and Linux.

http://forum.microchip.com/tm.asp?m=106529
usb_pickit, an command line application for PICkit 1 programmer

http://forum.microchip.com/tm.asp?m=106426
fsusb: PIC FS USB demo board bootloader application which works
with Microchip bootloader firmware.

http://forum.microchip.com/tm.asp?m=107340
fsusb_demo: PICDEM FS USB Demo application which works with
Microchip Demo firmware.

As for python wrapper, I think Mark Rages has done something
using SWIG. I will look at his code later. I need to learn more
basics of Python and SWIG.

If the next Wisp is 18F2550 based, it will be wonderful.
The USB bootloader code is there and it can be
upgradeable just like PICkit 2.

Regards,
Xiaofan


{Original Message removed}

2005\08\17@052743 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> If the next Wisp is 18F2550 based, it will be wonderful.

The next will most probably be a Wisp648, using the current PCB but with
a 16F648A chip with new firmware. There must be an upgrade path for the
current Wisp628 users.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\08\17@091844 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
BAJ,

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:07:04 -0400, Byron A Jeff wrote:

> > A big argument for newbies is the amount of webinfo for a chip. Sadly,
> > the 16x84 still rules in this aspect.
>
> It's very sad.

And it's continuing!  Over here, the current edition of Everyday Practical Electronics magazine has published
a "Multicore cable tester" project, that specifies a 16F84!  The standard of coding is very unsophisticated
(at least there's decent commenting) - it doesn't use any Include files, so all the port addresses etc. are
hard-coded.  It even leaves program locations 0 to 4 unprogrammed, which doesn't sound safe to me.  The whole
thing would have been reasonable five years ago, but there's no excuse for it being published now.  It's not
even as if any particular features are being used - it would be trivial to put it into a 16F627/8 or pretty
much any other 18-pin PIC.

I obviously can't reproduce the code here for copyright reasons, but anyone wanting to have a look will find
it here:  ftp://ftp.epemag.wimborne.co.uk/pub/PICS/Cable_Tester/Multicore%20Cable%20Tester%20V2.6.zip  or
follow the links from  http://www.epemag.wimborne.co.uk

I feel a "Letter to the Editor" coming on!

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\08\17@192205 by Jinx

face picon face
> > > the 16x84 still rules in this aspect.
> >
> > It's very sad.
>
> And it's continuing!  Over here, the current edition of Everyday
> Practical Electronics magazine has published a "Multicore cable
> tester" project, that specifies a 16F84!

I no longer use my purpose-built F84 programmer. I'd have to
drag out the 386 and go back to DOS, that's how long I've had
it ! It served me well, weaning me off those EPROM and OTP
Motorolas so long ago

I've never completely understood why magazine articles lag so
far behind the times. The devices they use definitely fall into the
"last week's takeaway leftovers in the fridge" category. Part of
it could be that suppliers, especially those that cater to hobbyists,
are slow off the mark. For example in Aus and NZ, Jaycar and
Dick Smith would be the two major retailers of electronic parts.
You can see them in the far corner down the back of the shop
(would not be surprised if they're out the back next to the bins in
a few year if the current trend of stuffing the stores with mobile
phones and other appliances continues, but anyhoo). In the latest
Jaycar catalogue they have two NEW NEW NEW PICs. The
F88 and F877A. Reasonably priced, but how long since I used
an F877A ? And only 12C in the 8-pin. At DSE, their latest
addition is the 628. RS has a better range but the prices are not
for the faint-hearted. Plus the courier fee on top of course

>From time to time a magazine like Silicon Chip has a constructor
article for a PIC programmer, often cheapish and simple but good
quality nonetheless which can cope with newer devices. A project
like that is not likely to appeal to the rare-to-occassional PIC user,
who might buy it pre-programmed for a project or as part of a kit

Yet in spite of this, issues following still persist with the expensive
F84, although not quite so much as they used to. There's some
move to the 628. Often the only reference to resource material is
Microchip's home page. No advice to download MPLAB for
example. Those who don't know the scope of Microchip's products
wouldn't know what they're missing out on

I wonder if, say, the author of a low-power project using a 12F
would have it rejected on "availability" grounds or be required to
offer a mail order service. RS appears to be the only place you
can get a 12F one-off around here

A "device" that is advancing is the PICAXE. It doesn't appeal
to me in any way at all, but I admire the way they have adapted
a micro, identified a market, and pushed it like hell. Unfortunately
there are a lot of constructor articles based on the PICAXE that
have supplanted "proper" micro articles which I might have been
interested in. Porting what the PICAXE does in the circuit back
to assembler is a bit of a nuisance, but for the right project might
be worth it

IMHO the magazines and retailers need to have a collective
shake-up. There's no real reason why they can't all just move
into the 21st Century. For a start, reject anything using an F84

OK, my first cuppa of the day's gone cold, time to get a new
one and start work ;-)

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2005 , 2006 only
- Today
- New search...