Post by thread:[PIC]: My Time Capsule

Added TAG: can I ask you, since english is not my native thongue: Are you really blind or is just a form of expresion. If you are, how do you manege to assembly circuit in the breadboard, protoboard or the way that you call it.? Best regards Oh, by the way. If I where you, I'll use the F84 since as you say you can then upgrade to the 628, and if you use the C64, you will be able to upgrade to the F877 with minor soft changes. Bye Mauricio Jancic Janso Desarrollos Microchip Consultant (54) - 11 - 4542 - 3519 -- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 7.0.197 / Virus Database: 260.2.9 - Release Date: 06/11/2003 -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

I posted this message an hour or so ago and accidentally left off the tag. Apologies to those who will read both postings. I have been on this list for 7 years and have almost gotten started programming PIC's a couple of times. As a computer user who happens to be blind, I started looking at PIC's just about the time all the development software went from DOS to Windows so I wasn't sure exactly what I was going to do to make it all work best. I use UNIX in my job and I got in to Linux at around that time. I had bought a couple of PIC programmers and some PIC's, but the development software, programmer drivers, and even some of the documentation presented one headache after another so I kept procrastinating which is something I plan to quit doing first thing tomorrow. Now, I have a Linux system that appears to support at least one of the programmers I have well enough to program most of the PIC's on hand so now, I am just writing a program, getting ready to burn it in to a 16F84, possibly a 16f84A. I'll have to get out the box and find out what I bought, then. Now, for my PIC question. Are any of the following so obsolete that, if I built something with them, I couldn't replace it with what's current without a total re-write of the program? 16C54 12c509JW 16F84 16C71JW 16c64jw 17C42 That is pretty much what I have on hand and I do have the UV eraser for the JW parts. If memory serves me, the 16c64JW is a 40-pin PIC that was a sample included in the early PICStartB or C series programmers around 1996. By the way, the Linux tools solve all the interface problems I had before and it looks like things are about to rock. I did read the web page http://www.finitesite.com/d3jsys/16F628.html so I know that the 16F84 is obsolete but it sounds like I can go ahead and use the few I have since their code will fit in to the 16F628. If things work out this time, I will get a PICStart Plus which is supported under Linux. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK OSU Information Technology Division Network Operations Group -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

If you'd like a 16F628 I have an extra I'd be happy to give you. If you want it, send a mailing address to mdredmond at charter.net. -matt redmond Dallas, Texas On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:05:13 -0600 Martin McCormick <spam_OUTmartinTakeThisOuTDC.CIS.OKSTATE.EDU> wrote: {Quote hidden}> I posted this message an hour or so ago and >accidentally left >off the tag. Apologies to those who will read both >postings. > > I have been on this list for 7 years and have >almost gotten >started programming PIC's a couple of times. As a >computer user who >happens to be blind, I started looking at PIC's just >about the time >all the development software went from DOS to Windows so >I wasn't sure >exactly what I was going to do to make it all work best. > > I use UNIX in my job and I got in to Linux at >around that >time. I had bought a couple of PIC programmers and some >PIC's, but >the development software, programmer drivers, and even >some of the >documentation presented one headache after another so I >kept >procrastinating which is something I plan to quit doing >first thing >tomorrow. > > Now, I have a Linux system that appears to >support at least >one of the programmers I have well enough to program most >of the >PIC's on hand so now, I am just writing a program, >getting ready to >burn it in to a 16F84, possibly a 16f84A. I'll have to >get out the >box and find out what I bought, then. > > Now, for my PIC question. Are any of the >following so >obsolete that, if I built something with them, I couldn't >replace it >with what's current without a total re-write of the >program? > >16C54 12c509JW 16F84 16C71JW 16c64jw 17C42 > >That is pretty much what I have on hand and I do have the >UV eraser >for the JW parts. If memory serves me, the 16c64JW is a >40-pin PIC >that was a sample included in the early PICStartB or C >series >programmers around 1996. > > By the way, the Linux tools solve all the >interface problems I >had before and it looks like things are about to rock. > > I did read the web page > >http://www.finitesite.com/d3jsys/16F628.html > >so I know that the 16F84 is obsolete but it sounds like I >can go >ahead and use the few I have since their code will fit in >to the >16F628. > > If things work out this time, I will get a >PICStart Plus which >is supported under Linux. > >Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK >OSU Information Technology Division Network Operations >Group > >-- >http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived >three different >ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

Martin McCormick wrote: > Now, for my PIC question. Are any of the following so > obsolete that, if I built something with them, I couldn't replace it > with what's current without a total re-write of the program? > > 16C54 12c509JW 16F84 16C71JW 16c64jw 17C42 You sure know how to pick'em! This is quite a lineup of museum pieces and outright losers. However, PIC code is quite portable between chips in the same family, and even reasonably portable accross families, especially if you use some discipline up front. My advice if you're just starting now is to get a few 18F252 and don't look back. Except for wider choice of packages, the older chips are pointless in low volume designs. With the fixed 18F1320 there will soon be an 18 pin package in the 18 family. If you really need a smaller package, then look at the 16F630, 12F629, and 12F675. These are all actually 16 family parts despite their name. There is absolutely no reason to mess with 12-bit core parts for low volume designs. Hopefully we can start recommending the dsPICs soon. ***************************************************************** Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts (978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.