Searching \ for '[PIC]: Which is best ICD2 clone?' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/microchip/devprogs.htm?key=icd
Search entire site for: 'Which is best ICD2 clone?'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[PIC]: Which is best ICD2 clone?'
2005\08\11@090334 by John Nall

picon face
I have seen several references to an ICD2 clone, and think that I might
try and build one.  But googling "ICD2 clone" appears to indicate that
there have been several such devices produced by various and sundry
people.  Which is good, of course, and I feel sure that each and every
person who did the development feels that his (or hers) is the "best."  
But is there a concensus among this group, which I consider the most
authoritative, as to which would win the competition?  Although several
factors could go into it, I would consider the main criteria to be how
solid and bug-free the result is.

Thanks for the help.

John

2005\08\11@094433 by John J. McDonough

flavicon
face
John

The business of programming a PIC or communicating with it is pretty simple,
at least from the hardware side.  The tough part is in the software, and
most of the clones use Microchip's software, so I wouldn't expect them to be
all that different, really.  There is one design out there that requires you
to etch a fairly intricate board, that might be a little tougher but lead to
a more aesthetic result.  Another basically expects you to wire something
together on a perfboard.  Probably easier but not as pretty.  What do YOU
value?

Some of the simpler ones are serial only.  Since I would expect the ICD2 to
work with a USB to serial converter (unlike a Tait-style programmer), this
might not be such a big issue.  But serial ports are becoming scarce.

One thing I would note.  A lot of people seem to have trouble getting the
ICD2 installed.  I did, and based on the Microchip ICD2 forum, I had a lot
less trouble than many.  Although I don't believe there is any operational
difference between the real thing and the clones, you might consider the
extra bucks for the real thing, if only for the added confidence when you
are going through the install battles.

A lot of people's problems seem to be around the USB drivers, so again, this
would make me a little squeamish about the USB-Serial converter idea.  On
the other hand, if you do have a real serial port, the serial port install
seems to be less of an issue.

I do suspect that if one starts with a clean computer with no trace of
MPLAB, and follows Microchip's instructions TO THE LETTER, the ICD2 will
work just fine.  Most of the problems seem to stem from left over bits of
USB drivers or people taking "harmless" shortcuts.  Well, that and
programming cables too long (the cable needs to be really short!)

Just some thoughts...

--McD

{Original Message removed}

2005\08\11@100942 by John Nall

picon face
John J. McDonough wrote:

> > I do suspect that if one starts with a clean computer with no trace
> of MPLAB, and follows Microchip's instructions TO THE LETTER, the ICD2
> will work just fine.  Most of the problems seem to stem from left over
> bits of USB drivers or people taking "harmless" shortcuts.  Well, that
> and programming cables too long (the cable needs to be really short!)
>
> Just some thoughts...

Thanks for the thoughts.  :-)  Actually, I have the ICD2 from Microchip,
and it seems to work just fine (once I managed to get the drivers
installed correctly).  My interest in putting together a clone version
of the same thing is more along the path of fun than of necessity.   And
perf board construction is more up my alley -- I doubt that I could
produce a PCB if my life depended on it.

John

2005\08\11@101420 by Jan-Erik Soderholm

face picon face
John J. McDonough wrote :


> A lot of people's problems seem to be
around the USB drivers,
> so again, this
> would make me a little
squeamish about the USB-Serial
> converter idea.

Would not that be a
"serial install" without any
USB drivers (for the IDS2 as such) ?

>
On
> the other hand, if you do have a real serial port, the serial
>
port install
> seems to be less of an issue.

And would probably also
work if you use a
USB->Serial converter, since that is transparent
to
the application (MPLAB or whatever), not ?

Jan-Erik.



2005\08\11@102641 by John J. McDonough

flavicon
face
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Nall" <spam_OUTjwnallTakeThisOuTspamgmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PIC]: Which is best ICD2 clone?


> installed correctly).  My interest in putting together a clone version of
> the same thing is more along the path of fun than of necessity.   And

A man after my own heart.

I broke down and got the real thing.  I have a sort of religious aversion to
buying a programmer, but I have a couple of projects that have been put off
way too long and I wanted to get on with them without getting yet another
project in the way.  I feel a little "dirty" using a boughten programmer, so
building an ICD2 clone is still on my to-do list!

--McD

2005\08\11@103414 by John J. McDonough

flavicon
face
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jan-Erik Soderholm" <.....jan-erik.soderholmKILLspamspam@spam@telia.com>
Subject: RE: [PIC]: Which is best ICD2 clone?


> Would not that be a
> "serial install" without any
> USB drivers (for the IDS2 as such) ?

I think so.  I'm just not sure.  The USB/Serial needs to somehow hook the
serial driver, I'm not totally comfortable with how all that happens. That's
why I said "a little squeamish".

--McD

2005\08\12@080045 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
John J. McDonough wrote:

> I think so.  I'm just not sure.  The USB/Serial needs to somehow hook the
> serial driver, I'm not totally comfortable with how all that happens. That's
> why I said "a little squeamish".

I guess they don't "hook" in the classic sense, they rather present
themselves to Windows as a serial device driver -- similar to the drivers
of multi-serial boards, which have been on the market long before USB
serial ports.

These drivers obviously depend on the application using them through the
presented interface, and they may have (undocumented) limitations and bugs
in the implementation of the serial API.

That's actually something the Windows driver certification was designed to
help overcome, but again, the market forces are such that a few bucks
cheaper is so much more effective than certified drivers that certified
drivers are becoming practically extinct... and then people complain that
drivers are unstable :)  But I think the manufacturers did their part in
not advertising properly who has and who hasn't certified drivers, to even
give this fact a chance of becoming a marketing item.

Gerhard

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