Hi Guys
I am on the process of buying a notebook, but I would like to get one with a
serial port which is a very hard to find. The notebooks that have it are
very expensive or out of date. The question is how much not having a serial
port is a handicap? Can you easily emulate it on USB (using adaptors), if
you write a program how do you interface with equipment that only has serial
interface?
Best regards
Luis
_______________________________________________ http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>I am on the process of buying a notebook, but I would like to
>get one with a serial port which is a very hard to find. The
>notebooks that have it are very expensive or out of date.
This is the way the world is moving I am afraid. So called "legacy port
free" machines have no serial, mouse, keyboard or printer ports, and often
no floppy drive. They do have USB, often have firewire, and with many of the
modern video chipsets a second video port which allows a second screen
operational while the main notebook screen is also operational.
>The question is how much not having a serial port is a handicap?
>Can you easily emulate it on USB (using adaptors), if you write
>a program how do you interface with equipment that only has serial
>interface?
USB to serial, USB to parallel, and USB to keyboard/mouse adaptors are
readily available, along with USB floppy drives. Firewire hard drives are
available for expansion of disk space, along with USB memory sticks. A USB
to serial cable generally appears as a com port, starting at COM3. many
machines have a modem built in, which is set at COM2, and often you can get
a port expander attachment which has legacy ports in it, and the serial port
there will generally be set at COM1.
> I am on the process of buying a notebook, but I would like to get one with a
> serial port which is a very hard to find. The notebooks that have it are
> very expensive or out of date. The question is how much not having a serial
> port is a handicap? Can you easily emulate it on USB (using adaptors), if
> you write a program how do you interface with equipment that only has serial
> interface?
My notebook does not come with a serial port but instead, comes with 4 USB 2.0 ports. The serial port is really dead. Anyhow, I bought a USB to Serial adapter shaped just like an ordinary dongle. Very compact and light weight. Does not require seperate power supply. Comes with neccessary drivers. Cost me about USD 25.00. Works like a champ. I am using it to do programming on the BS2 demo board. No problem so far. Yet to test it on PICDem Plus and ICD2 though.
I think Belkin might have one although mine is a brandless one and made in Taiwan.
Hi Guys
I am on the process of buying a notebook, but I would like to get one with a
serial port which is a very hard to find. The notebooks that have it are
very expensive or out of date. The question is how much not having a serial
port is a handicap? Can you easily emulate it on USB (using adaptors), if
you write a program how do you interface with equipment that only has serial
interface?
Best regards
Luis
_______________________________________________ http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
> Can you easily emulate it on USB (using
> adaptors), if
> you write a program how do you interface with equipment that
> only has serial
> interface?
USB-to-serial adapters emulate a windows serial port, so an application
that uses windows calls to access the port won't even notice the
difference.
There are some problem areas however, for instance PIC programmers that
try to use the port directly (will fail), or that do use windows calles
but wiggle the handshake lines to program the PIC (will be very very
slow).
Wouter van Ooijen
-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu
>
>
> Hi Guys
> I am on the process of buying a notebook, but I would like to get one with
a
> serial port which is a very hard to find. The notebooks that have it are
> very expensive or out of date. The question is how much not having a
serial
> port is a handicap? Can you easily emulate it on USB (using adaptors), if
> you write a program how do you interface with equipment that only has
serial
> interface?
> Best regards
> Luis
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.piclist.com
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>
On Sep 27, 2004, at 7:57 AM, Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> A USB
> to serial cable generally appears as a com port, starting at COM3. many
> machines have a modem built in, which is set at COM2, and often you
> can get
> a port expander attachment which has legacy ports in it, and the
> serial port
> there will generally be set at COM1
The implication is anything that uses windows drivers or "higher level"
to talk to the com ports should work fine with USB ports, while things
that deal with the "standard 8250 UART" or use rom bios or lower level
calls will probably have problems...
If you have the liberty to use a PCMCIA slot with your notebook, you can buy
PCMCIA-to-serial and PCMCIA-to-parallel adapters for your notebook. If you
are concerned with throughput, these *might* be faster than USB-to-serial
and USB-to-parallel adapters, but will usually cost you more:
1 port RS-232 PCMCIA card: ~ $100 USD
2 port RS-232 PCMCIA card: ~ $153 USD
1 port EPP (parallel port) PCMCIA card: ~ $100 USD
I have started to the USB serial port adapters on all my newer computers, and they have worked well. You can find them all over the place - I got one at Circuit City and the other at Radio Shark.
-- Lawrence Lile, P.E.
Electrical and Electronic Solutions
Project Solutions Companies http://www.projsolco.com
>Hi Guys
>I am on the process of buying a notebook, but I would like to get one with a
>serial port which is a very hard to find. The notebooks that have it are
>very expensive or out of date. The question is how much not having a serial
>port is a handicap? Can you easily emulate it on USB (using adaptors), if
>you write a program how do you interface with equipment that only has serial
>interface?
>Best regards
My main laptop has no serial, parallel ports, or any CD or floppy.
Works nicely. I've found the IONetworks Edgeports to be the most reliable serial adaptors, if they are a bit pricey. Other than that, Belkin "PDA Adaptors" sell for about $19, and work acceptably well. Anything that uses the FTDI chipset should be good.
> I am on the process of buying a notebook, but I would like to get one with a
> serial port which is a very hard to find.
Are you using the term "notebook" to apply to "a small laptop
computer"? Those small machines are certainly shedding their legacy
ports, but the larger machines (those with a 14" display and weighing
in at 7+ lbs) still seem to come will a full complement of ports.
> The question is how much not having a serial
> port is a handicap? Can you easily emulate it on USB (using adaptors), if
> you write a program how do you interface with equipment that only has serial
> interface?
The USB to serial (and parallel) adaptors work quite well, and will
support most "commercial" devices. You'll run into problems with
devices/apps that use bit-banging on the control lines, as many of the
simple PIC-based tools are known to do.
On Mon, 2004-09-27 at 10:16, Luis Moreira wrote:
> Hi Guys
> I am on the process of buying a notebook, but I would like to get one with a
> serial port which is a very hard to find. The notebooks that have it are
> very expensive or out of date. The question is how much not having a serial
> port is a handicap? Can you easily emulate it on USB (using adaptors), if
> you write a program how do you interface with equipment that only has serial
> interface?
> Best regards
What do you define as "very expensive"? I recently bought a Dell 600m
for about $1400USD and it has a serial port.
Now, whether a serial port or not is important is up to you. The serial
adapters are pretty solid, almost everything I've tried to do with them
has worked without fail.
For me the extra "stuff" of a serial adapter was just too annoying for
me, I like having everything I need in the laptop itself. TTYL
At 11:08 AM 9/27/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>I have started to the USB serial port adapters on all my newer computers,
>and they have worked well. You can find them all over the place - I got
>one at Circuit City and the other at Radio Shark.
Lawrence/Dave:-
Could you mention a few items that you've used them with that might
be of interest to people here?
I assume they worked okay on a Picstart+, but what else?
Do they deal with the h/w handshaking lines?
How about using them for communication with a target system that you've
programmed yourself?
I'm looking at some of the new computers that have 60-80G HDD and
DVD writers for very reasonable prices.. the main compromise is the
screen size.
>At 11:08 AM 9/27/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>>I have started to the USB serial port adapters on all my newer computers, and they have worked well. You can find them all over the place - I got one at Circuit City and the other at Radio Shark.
>
>Lawrence/Dave:-
>
>Could you mention a few items that you've used them with that might
>be of interest to people here?
>
>I assume they worked okay on a Picstart+, but what else?
Well.. AVRISP in my case, but I think a picstart would be fine.
>Do they deal with the h/w handshaking lines?
Nicely. They implement a limited set IIRC. Most applications don't use the whole set.
>How about using them for communication with a target system that you've
>programmed yourself?
No problems here, other than possible latency between bytes.
The bytes are bursted through the interface, and there may be delays that affect your protocol.
>I'm looking at some of the new computers that have 60-80G HDD and
>DVD writers for very reasonable prices.. the main compromise is the
>screen size.
Toshiba Libretto L1 is what I've been using for the last couple years.
That, and a Libretto-50 for bench debugging, which has a "real" serial port.
> The implication is anything that uses windows drivers or "higher level"
> to talk to the com ports should work fine with USB ports, while things
> that deal with the "standard 8250 UART" or use rom bios or lower level
> calls will probably have problems...
Actually, most things that talk directly will still work. I'm not exactly
sure what magic these divers invoke to make it happen, but many of them work
surprisingly well.
*BUT*, almost all serial port PIC programmers will not. Most of these
programmers use the transmit data line to control !MCLR. The USB port
insists that TD must contain data, and asynchronous serial data at that.
One could imagine a programmer that would use that line for some other
purpose, but there is no asynchronous serial line involved in PIC
programming, and more lines are needed than are available as control lines,
so you are left with the same problem.
Serial port PIC programmers that have a second PIC on the programmer itself
probably will work, but this gets you into the whole, proprietary software
space, as does pretty much any USB programmer. You could also do the
bootloader thing, but IMO this is a giant step backward. The traditional
Tait designs will not work with a USB port, and as best I can tell, there
isn't much hope of making them work.
> *BUT*, almost all serial port PIC programmers will not. Most of these
> programmers use the transmit data line to control !MCLR. The USB port
> insists that TD must contain data, and asynchronous serial data at that.
> One could imagine a programmer that would use that line for some other
> purpose, but there is no asynchronous serial line involved in PIC
> programming, and more lines are needed than are available as control lines,
> so you are left with the same problem.
>
> Serial port PIC programmers that have a second PIC on the programmer itself
> probably will work, but this gets you into the whole, proprietary software
> space, as does pretty much any USB programmer. You could also do the
> bootloader thing, but IMO this is a giant step backward. The traditional
> Tait designs will not work with a USB port, and as best I can tell, there
> isn't much hope of making them work.
I'd be very surprised if many of those "Tait"-type programmers would work
under XP/2k at all, given how iron-fisted those NT-based operating systems
are with the hardware resources. I would expect those cheaper serial based
solutions without some on-board smarts (i.e., a PIC or something similar) not
to work at all, even with a real serial port.
But I'm only going by what I've heard from others. I started using a Warp-13a
and I've never looked back. As far as I'm concerned, that was the single best
$110 I've spent on PIC related stuff. Of course, I do LOVE my ICD2... ;-)
> I'd be very surprised if many of those "Tait"-type
> programmers would work
> under XP/2k at all, given how iron-fisted those NT-based
> operating systems
> are with the hardware resources. I would expect those
> cheaper serial based
> solutions without some on-board smarts (i.e., a PIC or
> something similar) not
> to work at all, even with a real serial port.
IIRC some software for the very ceahpo's has been modified to use
windows calls. Alternatively there are direct-access drivers that
provide a virtual UART. Neither seems a good idea to me, and I think
both will be slow. But it might work.
Better stick to the intelligence-on-board programmers: ICD2, PS+,
Wisp628, Olin's programmers, WarpN, various DIY programmers, ...
Wouter van Ooijen
-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu
> Anyhow, I bought a USB to Serial adapter shaped just like an
> ordinary dongle. Very compact and light weight. Does not
> require seperate power supply. Comes with neccessary drivers.
> Cost me about USD 25.00.
> I'd be very surprised if many of those "Tait"-type programmers would work
> under XP/2k at all, given how iron-fisted those NT-based operating systems
> are with the hardware resources.
Much better than you'd think, if you allow for some simple code
changes at the PC end.
I recently ran into a situation where I needed more bandwidth to my
SX28 than I could get from the serial port and decided to experiment
using the EPP protocol. That turned out to be pretty darn trivial
using Beyond Logic's PortTalk driver. ;-)
I'm almost exclusively a Unix-based software developer (I've never
used anything other than Perl under Windows, and rarely use Windows to
begin with) and since I don't own any of the MS devlopment tools I'm
working under Cygwin. This is my first time interfacing the parallel
port, and I've been writing SX code for about 2 weeks now. So,
suffice to say there were a lot of unknowns going in.
I spent the better part of a day struggling to get it working, and in
the end the only problem I had was that I misread the pinouts on the
25 pin connector. D'oh! Soldering cables was the *one* thing I knew
how to do and I screwed that up. Everything else I had done right
from the get-go.
If anyone is curious how to use the EPP port as a non-privelaged user
under Windows XP using Cgywin/gcc to communicate with a SX (or,
basically any PIC) let me know and I'll write it up. So far I've just
got data going from the PC to PIC and I'm about to tackle interrupt
handlers on the PC end to read data sent by the SX/PIC.
> I'd be very surprised if many of those "Tait"-type programmers would work
> under XP/2k at all, given how iron-fisted those NT-based operating systems
> are with the hardware resources. I would expect those cheaper serial
based
> solutions without some on-board smarts (i.e., a PIC or something similar)
not
> to work at all, even with a real serial port.
Needs some configuration but I am using a Tait-style serial programmer and
the venerable NoPPP on both XP and XP/SP2. Many others I know have at least
the Tait serial working on W2K.
> But I'm only going by what I've heard from others. I started using a
Warp-13a
> and I've never looked back. As far as I'm concerned, that was the single
best
> $110 I've spent on PIC related stuff. Of course, I do LOVE my ICD2... ;-)
I see nothing wrong with that. I like having all sorts of open
source/freeware programming software available because it gives me some
comfort that on the NEXT OS version someone will port it. I wouldn't object
to spending some money for a programmer if the software was good and I had
some expectation that I wouldn't be buying (and learning) something else
come the next OS upgrade.
I have only used RS232 adapters to talk TX/RX with no hardware flow control to a PIC or another project, never used any of the control lines. I can't address whether this would produce issues or not.
No issues with PICstart Plus.
-- Lawrence Lile, P.E.
Electrical and Electronic Solutions
Project Solutions Companies http://www.projsolco.com
We've seen Belkin USB/Serial port adapters turn the on board serial port(s)
off. For some reason the drivers sem to clobber the on-board Serial port.
Try unloading the Belkin driver and your serial port may come back to life.
Just unplugging the USB adapter doesn't seem to do the trick. [Also remember
to check the BIOS -- some let you turn the on-board serial port off]
Another observation is that some USB/Serial port adapters are advertised as
faster than others. If you want RS-232 serial communications above
38.4Kbaud you may need to pick your adapter carefully.
We've tried a number of USB/RS-232 adapters for process monitoring and
general protocol snooping. None seem to work as well as a board based
serial port.
>>
>> Speaking as a hypothetical low-volume custom hardware/firmware
>> designer,
>> one of the most common projects is to connect random and various
>> bits of hardware to a "standard PC." Historically, this has been
>> done via
>> the serial port, and speeds faster than the serial port are seldom
>> required, so low speed USB is probably fine. The problem being
>> addressed
>> is simply
>> that modern PCs are starting to not HAVE any serial ports. And of
>> course
>> USB has obvious advantages (even at low speeds) WRT power and
>> scalability.
>> I was sort-of hoping that a flash version of 16F745 would be
>> microchips
>> low-effort solution to that space.
>
> Yes, your point is well taken. I've asked my FAE, to provide some
> insight on this situation (which I just faced the other day when I
> tried
> to hook up some of our older dev tools to find that my laptop doesn't
> have
> a serial port - but does have 2 USB ports). I ended up resolving the
> problem by buying a serial-to-USB adapter from Fry's, but it was
> annoying
> to have to make this extra trip.
>
>
I haven't heard back, but so far indications are that microchip is only
working on the bigger, badder, faster USB things :-(
> I have only used RS232 adapters to talk TX/RX with no
> hardware flow control to a PIC or another project, never used
> any of the control lines. I can't address whether this would
> produce issues or not.
>
> No issues with PICstart Plus.
The PS+ protocol uses hanshakes.
Wouter van Ooijen
-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu
>I'm looking at some of the new computers that have 60-80G HDD and
>DVD writers for very reasonable prices.. the main compromise is the
>screen size.
I have a Dell Inspiron 8600c with 15" widescreen, that I am essentially
happy with. Seeing I was getting it using taxpayers money, I got the highest
resolution screen (1920x1200), but in retrospect I should have got the
middle resolution one - my eyes are just getting too old for the fine pitch
screen on single pixel lines. The only other thing I hate about it is the
mousepad, but I new it came with that, although I prefer a trackball.
> >I'm looking at some of the new computers that have 60-80G HDD and
> >DVD writers for very reasonable prices.. the main compromise is the
> >screen size.
>
> I have a Dell Inspiron 8600c with 15" widescreen, that I am essentially
> happy with. Seeing I was getting it using taxpayers money, I got the highest
> resolution screen (1920x1200), but in retrospect I should have got the
> middle resolution one - my eyes are just getting too old for the fine pitch
> screen on single pixel lines. The only other thing I hate about it is the
> mousepad, but I new it came with that, although I prefer a trackball.
I think I have the same or similar one. It's fine when docked with a large
monitor, but in the evening when I'm tired, my eyes just can't focus this
close anymore. Time for reading glasses, I suppose. :(
--
D. Jay Newman ! DCX - it takes off and lands base down, KILLspamjayKILLspamsprucegrove.com ! as God and Robert Heinlein intended. http://enerd.ws/robots/ !
_______________________________________________ http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
> I think I have the same or similar one. It's fine when docked with a large
> monitor, but in the evening when I'm tired, my eyes just can't focus this
> close anymore. Time for reading glasses, I suppose. :(
Have you tried just making the fonts bigger? I realize that Windoze
is pretty brain damaged when it comes to dealing with fine pixel
pitch, but I think there are some things that can be done. Windows XP
seems to have a much better ability to scale your desktop than
previous versions. You might want to install the "tools for the
visually impaired" -- I have a vague recollection that the older (Win
98) versions of these tools only allowed for very large
magnifications, but I think the newer versions will work for those who
are only slightly visually impaired.
> D. Jay Newman writes:
>
> > I think I have the same or similar one. It's fine when docked with a large
> > monitor, but in the evening when I'm tired, my eyes just can't focus this
> > close anymore. Time for reading glasses, I suppose. :(
>
> Have you tried just making the fonts bigger? I realize that Windoze
I do. On the other hand, this sort of defeats the purpose of having
a high resolution screen.
> > D. Jay Newman writes:
> >
> > > I think I have the same or similar one. It's fine when docked with a large
> > > monitor, but in the evening when I'm tired, my eyes just can't focus this
> > > close anymore. Time for reading glasses, I suppose. :(
> >
> > Have you tried just making the fonts bigger? I realize that Windoze
>
> I do. On the other hand, this sort of defeats the purpose of having
> a high resolution screen.
Not really. A higher resolution screen allows for smoother fonts
which are more readable and much less tiring on your eyes. Large,
anti-aliased fonts on a fine-pitch LCD is a *wonderful* way to work!
A much bigger issue with the fine-pitch displays are bitmap images.
Many programs include only one size of icons which cannot be reised.
Many web sites make use of graphics for navigation which become
unreadable on these displays. The latter, though, could be remedied
by a browser extension to automatically resize (and smooth) every
image by a specified value.
> Reading glasses. One day I'll remember to make that appointment. :)
If you spend a fair bit of time working in from of a computer, it
really pays to have a good display and to have it set up properly.
I'm not sure if eye strain causes a permanent loss of vision (this
might be an old wives tale) but there is no question that it leads to
headaches and short-term eye fatigue.
As an aside, I used to do a lot of software engineering/management
consulting and I couldn't believe the number of shops that had
developers working on the same crappy 17" CRTs as the receptionist who
did nothing more than the occasional email. In many cases, my first
campaign was to get all of the developers 20" trinitrons (this was
before large LCDs got so cheap.) The increase in productivity from
that alone was astounding.
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 15:47:57 -0400, Peter Johansson wrote:
> As an aside, I used to do a lot of software engineering/management
> consulting and I couldn't believe the number of shops that had
> developers working on the same crappy 17" CRTs as the receptionist who
> did nothing more than the occasional email.
They were lucky - the last place I worked almost everyone had crappy 15" CRT monitors - some of them were so
crappy that couldn't really handle 800 x 600. And for some reason, the developers always got the worst stuff!
Maybe being made redundant wasn't that bad... :-)
On Sep 28, 2004, at 11:57 AM, D. Jay Newman wrote:
> I do. On the other hand, this sort of defeats the purpose of having
> a high resolution screen.
Yes and no. With LCDs, you get maximum sharpness at native resolution,
which often leaves me wishing they hadn't been so resulution-crazy when
they made the displays. 1280x1024 is too many dots for a 17inch
display,
IMO, and 1024x768 is too many for my 12inch laptop screen... (but
1600x1200
looks ok on a 21inch monitor...)
I suppose it depends a lot on whether you're doing most text or mostly
graphics. Modern operating systems have this annoying tendency to
optimize so the GUI looks good, rather than the actual application.
Hi all
The issue is if I build a prototype board with lets say a 16F877A and use
the serial port of the PC to communicate with it there's no problem I can
use any program in any language to talk to it, I can even use hyperterminal
just for testing but if I have a USB port with a serial adaptor can I do the
same?
Regards
Luis
> The issue is if I build a prototype board with lets say a 16F877A and use
> the serial port of the PC to communicate with it there's no problem I can
> use any program in any language to talk to it, I can even use hyperterminal
> just for testing but if I have a USB port with a serial adaptor can I do the
> same?
> The issue is if I build a prototype board with lets say a
> 16F877A and use
> the serial port of the PC to communicate with it there's no
> problem I can
> use any program in any language to talk to it, I can even use
> hyperterminal
> just for testing but if I have a USB port with a serial
> adaptor can I do the
> same?
Yes, provided that your PC program uses windows calls (not direct
hardware access), and does not rely too much on timing of the
communicatiuon. I know this is not an easy answer, but it's the best you
will get.
Wouter van Ooijen
-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu
> The issue is if I build a prototype board with lets say a 16F877A and use
> the serial port of the PC to communicate with it there's no problem I can
> use any program in any language to talk to it, I can even use hyperterminal
> just for testing but if I have a USB port with a serial adaptor can I do the
> same?
With standard serial comms (that is, using what is available through
standard communication programs like Hyperterminal or better TeraTerm) I've
never had a problem using USB to serial adapters. And it's much easier to
get additional serial ports if you need them (say to see the debug output
of a few PICs at the same time ...)
They seem to be of limited use with proprietary software that tries to do
funky things with the port lines directly and assumes a certain port chip,
but for standard serial communication I think they are really cool.
On Wed, 2004-09-29 at 07:23, Luis Moreira wrote:
> Hi all
> The issue is if I build a prototype board with lets say a 16F877A and use
> the serial port of the PC to communicate with it there's no problem I can
> use any program in any language to talk to it, I can even use hyperterminal
> just for testing but if I have a USB port with a serial adaptor can I do the
> same?
> Regards
On Sep 29, 2004, at 4:58 AM, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
>> I can even use hyperterminal just for testing but if I have
>> a USB port with a serial adaptor can I do the same?
>>
It shouldn't be a problem. Devices like internal modems have been
so far from physical com ports for so long that even ancient com
programs like kermit tend to include high-level port drivers to
handle the non-standard hardware.
sprucegrove.com ! as God and Robert Heinlein intended.
