Searching \ for '[PIC] MPLAB 8.60' 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/languages.htm?key=mplab
Search entire site for: 'MPLAB 8.60'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[PIC] MPLAB 8.60'
2010\10\28@060439 by cdb

flavicon
face
I was told at the Microchip shindig I attended today, that v8.60 will be the last version of MPLAB as we know it - all development is now frozen on this series and all effort is now on MPLAB X.

Colin
--
cdb,  on 28/10/2010




2010\10\28@061519 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 6:04 PM, cdb <spam_OUTcolinTakeThisOuTspambtech-online.co.uk> wrote:
>  I was told at the Microchip shindig I attended today, that v8.60 will be
> the last version of MPLAB as we know it - all development is now frozen on
> this series and all effort is now on MPLAB X.
>

It does not make sense to support MPLAB and MPLAB X
at the same time in the long run. So of course Microchip will
drop the support of MPLAB in the future.



-- Xiaofan

2010\10\28@063019 by cdb

flavicon
face


:: So of course Microchip will
:: drop the support of MPLAB in the future.

According to the Sydney Sales rep and the Microchip Development Engineer, that is today (v8.60 is available for download)!
--
cdb, .....colinKILLspamspam@spam@btech-online.co.uk on 28/10/2010
Web presence: http://www.btech-online.co.uk   Hosted by:  http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=7988359
 

2010\10\28@064356 by Jan-Erik Soderholm

face picon face
On 2010-10-28 12:30, cdb wrote:
>
>
> :: So of course Microchip will
> :: drop the support of MPLAB in the future.
>
> According to the Sydney Sales rep and the Microchip Development Engineer,
> that is today (v8.60 is available for download)!
> --
> cdb, colinspamKILLspambtech-online.co.uk on 28/10/2010
>
> Web presence: http://www.btech-online.co.uk
>
> Hosted by:  http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=7988359
>

Now, Colin talkes about "new development" and Xiaofan
talkes about "support". That is definitely not the same
thing. Just becuse 8.60 (the last "new development" of MPLAB)
is available for download today doesn't meen that the support
for the traditional MPLAB also stops today...

I would not expect the support for MPLAB to be dropped
before MPLAB-X has been released for some time and matured
with a couple of bug-releases and so on.




>
>
>
>
>

2010\10\28@070042 by Nicola Perotto

picon face
On 28/10/2010 10.15, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 6:04 PM, cdb<.....colinKILLspamspam.....btech-online.co.uk>  wrote:
>>   I was told at the Microchip shindig I attended today, that v8.60 will be
>> the last version of MPLAB as we know it - all development is now frozen on
>> this series and all effort is now on MPLAB X.
>>
> It does not make sense to support MPLAB and MPLAB X
> at the same time in the long run. So of course Microchip will
> drop the support of MPLAB in the future.
>
Support is also respect for the customers (we)...

2010\10\28@090407 by Bento, Joseph (Electronic Communications Tech) n/a

flavicon
face


-----Original Message-----
From: EraseMEpiclist-bouncesspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTMIT.EDU [piclist-bouncesspamspam_OUTMIT.EDU] On Behalf Of cdb
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 4:04 AM
To: @spam@PICLISTKILLspamspamMIT.EDU
Subject: [PIC] MPLAB 8.60

I was told at the Microchip shindig I attended today, that v8.60 will be the last version of MPLAB as we know it - all development is now frozen on this series and all effort is now on MPLAB X.

Colin
--
cdb,  on 28/10/2010


I'm still a novice when it comes to PIC programming.  While a Mac is my primary computer at home, I run XP in a virtual machine to run MPLAB without issue.  The other day, I downloaded the latest beta of MPLAB X and installed it on the Mac in the OSX environment.  I must have a configuration issue, because it is not recognizing PIC specific statements in the C code - 'TRISB = 0x03' as an example is squiggly underlined as invalid.  The Hi-Tech compiler is set in the preferences.  If anyone else has experienced this, please let me know where to look for a problem.

On another issue, I did read where the Pickit2 will indeed be supported in a future beta release, and definitely in the production release of MPLAB X.

Joe

2010\10\28@092528 by Jan-Erik Soderholm

face picon face
On 2010-10-28 15:03, Bento, Joseph (Electronic Communications Tech) wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Note that, as a "beta", there is no guarantee that anything works... :-)

2010\10\28@093749 by jim

flavicon
face

 All,

At the risk of sounding naive, what is MPLAB X?   And what makes it so different from MPLAB as we know it now?

Just curius.

Regards,

Jim

{Quote hidden}

> -

2010\10\28@094153 by jim

flavicon
face

Jan-Erik,

Although this is true, it is also tru that they expect everything to
work reasonably.  That is what the  beta test is for.  To let a multitude of users (testers) try it out,
run it through it's paces, and see if
anything crops up that the programmers and in houses testers didn't
find.  It's almost guaranteed that
there will be something show up.  But, regardless, the programmers
expect thing to work for the most part
as they think it should.  
Regards,

Jim

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [PIC] MPLAB 8.60
> From: Jan-Erik Soderholm <jan-erik.soderholmEraseMEspam.....telia.com>
> Date: Thu, October 28, 2010 8:24 am
> To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <EraseMEpiclistspammit.edu>
>
>
> On 2010-10-28 15:03, Bento, Joseph (Electronic Communications Tech) wrote:
> >
> >
> > {Original Message removed}

2010\10\28@094238 by Bento, Joseph (Electronic Communications Tech) n/a

flavicon
face


-----Original Message-----
From: RemoveMEpiclist-bouncesEraseMEspamEraseMEmit.edu [RemoveMEpiclist-bouncesspam_OUTspamKILLspammit.edu] On Behalf Of RemoveMEjimTakeThisOuTspamspamjpes.com
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 7:38 AM
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
Subject: RE: [PIC] MPLAB 8.60


 All,

At the risk of sounding naive, what is MPLAB X?   And what makes it so different from MPLAB as we know it now?

Just curius.

Regards,

Jim


MPLAB X is Java-based, and cross platform compatible.  It will therefore run natively on Windows, OSX, Linux, etc.

See http://devupdates.microchip.com/mplab/

Joe

2010\10\28@102624 by PICdude

flavicon
face
Neat.  Does that also mean Android (with appropriate hardware  interface)?  May not be the best interface for regular development,  but I can certainly see uses for this for field programming/tweaking.

Cheers,
-Neil.


Quoting "Bento, Joseph (Electronic Communications Tech)" <EraseMEJBentospamspamspamBeGonerideuta.com>:

> MPLAB X is Java-based, and cross platform compatible.  It will  
> therefore run natively on Windows, OSX, Linux, etc.
>
> See http://devupdates.microchip.com/mplab/
>
> Joe
>
>
>

2010\10\28@103637 by Neil Cherry

face
flavicon
face
On 10/28/2010 10:26 AM, PICdude wrote:
> Neat.  Does that also mean Android (with appropriate hardware  
> interface)?  May not be the best interface for regular development,  
> but I can certainly see uses for this for field programming/tweaking.
>
> Cheers,
> -Neil.

Neil, Android doesn't run Java. I also think that this might be a
bit large to be used on an Android phone (but I've been wrong before).

-- Linux Home Automation         Neil Cherry       RemoveMEncherryKILLspamspamlinuxha.com
http://www.linuxha.com/                         Main site
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/                    My HA Blog
Author of:            Linux Smart Homes For Dummie

2010\10\28@104653 by Mark E. Skeels

flavicon
face
What about an Android tablet PC?

*http://tinyurl.com/2fcnnsu*

Mark Skeels
Engineer
Competition Electronics, Inc.
TEL: 815-874-8001
FAX: 815-874-8181
http://www.competitionelectronics.com

On 10/28/2010 9:33 AM, Neil Cherry wrote:
> On 10/28/2010 10:26 AM, PICdude wrote:
>> Neat.  Does that also mean Android (with appropriate hardware
>> interface)?  May not be the best interface for regular development,
>> but I can certainly see uses for this for field programming/tweaking.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Neil.
> Neil, Android doesn't run Java. I also think that this might be a
> bit large to be used on an Android phone (but I've been wrong before).

2010\10\28@104725 by jim

flavicon
face

Cool.  Thanks.

Regards,

Jim

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: [PIC] MPLAB 8.60
> From: "Bento, Joseph (Electronic Communications Tech)"
> <JBentoSTOPspamspamspam_OUTrideuta.com>
> Date: Thu, October 28, 2010 8:42 am
> To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <spamBeGonepiclistSTOPspamspamEraseMEmit.edu>
>
>
> {Original Message removed}

2010\10\28@105313 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Jan-Erik Soderholm <
KILLspamjan-erik.soderholmspamBeGonespamtelia.com> wrote:

> Note that, as a "beta", there is no guarantee that anything works... :-)
>

I would say that is an Alpha version as several features are still not yet
implemented so people cannot even test the whole lot properly.

Maybe the "Release Candidate" will be Beta quality and the "Release" as a
"Release Candidate"? (I really like their movement towards this platform
independent environment, however, as we already have learnt Microchip is not
a software vendor.)

Tamas




>
>

2010\10\28@105348 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
Android is basically a Linux, is not it?

Tamas


On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Mark E. Skeels <
EraseMEmskeelsspamEraseMEcompetitionelectronics.com> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

>

2010\10\28@105803 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
jim@jpes.com wrote:
> At the risk of sounding naive, what is MPLAB X?

MPLAB was getting too stable and reliable, so something had to be done.
After much mating of elephants, it was decided to completely ditch all the
existing code and rewrite the whole thing in Java.  That will provide years
of work for Vince and company fixing the endless new bugs, trying to make
the simulator run even a decent fraction of the speed it does now, listen to
complaints about taking away ICE support, and the like.

>  And what makes it so different from MPLAB as we know it now?

It's a complete rewrite in a different language.  That not only means new
and exciting bugs, but almost certainly some developers won't be able to
resist the temptation to make the user interface just different enough to be
a pain to those of us regularly using the existing MPLAB.  Microchip has
much fun planned for us.  Too bad much of it won't envolve productively
debugging new PIC code.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

2010\10\28@110246 by PICdude

flavicon
face
Actually, there are a lot of similarities, which have started becoming  more known since the Oracle-Google lawsuit recently.  First, Android  dev in done in Java, so it should be a much easier port.  But  apparently the java class files get converted into a slightly  different format of the same code to be run on Android.  And  apparently the VM's (JVM & Dalvik) are almost identical.  Hence the  suit.  I don't remember all the specifics offhand right now.

Cheers,
-Neil.


Quoting Neil Cherry <@spam@ncherry@spam@spamspam_OUTlinuxha.com>:

> Neil, Android doesn't run Java. I also think that this might be a
> bit large to be used on an Android phone (but I've been wrong before).
>
> --
> Linux Home Automation         Neil Cherry       spamBeGonencherryspamKILLspamlinuxha.com
> http://www.linuxha.com/                         Main site
> http://linuxha.blogspot.com/                    My HA Blog
> Author of:            Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
>

2010\10\28@110430 by PICdude

flavicon
face
Yes.


Quoting Tamas Rudnai <.....tamas.rudnaispam_OUTspamgmail.com>:

{Quote hidden}

>> -

2010\10\28@110648 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
Neil Cherry wrote:
> Neil, Android doesn't run Java.

It was my understanding that Android runs *only* Java apps.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

2010\10\28@112316 by Funny NYPD

picon face
Agree.  As a matter of fact, some of our machines are still using MPLAB 8.30. It is stable and fast, why change if not necessary. (Honestly, most of the time, higher releases doesn't seem to getting better.)

It is just another MBA story of "I got money to spend".


Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com
http://www.AuElectronics.com/products
http://augroups.blogspot.com/




________________________________
From: Olin Lathrop <TakeThisOuTolin_piclistKILLspamspamspamembedinc.com>
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <.....piclistspamRemoveMEmit.edu>
Sent: Thu, October 28, 2010 10:58:39 AM
Subject: Re: [PIC] MPLAB 8.60

RemoveMEjimspamspamBeGonejpes.com wrote:
> At the risk of sounding naive, what is MPLAB X?

MPLAB was getting too stable and reliable, so something had to be done.
After much mating of elephants, it was decided to completely ditch all the
existing code and rewrite the whole thing in Java.  That will provide years
of work for Vince and company fixing the endless new bugs, trying to make
the simulator run even a decent fraction of the speed it does now, listen to
complaints about taking away ICE support, and the like.

>  And what makes it so different from MPLAB as we know it now?

It's a complete rewrite in a different language.  That not only means new
and exciting bugs, but almost certainly some developers won't be able to
resist the temptation to make the user interface just different enough to be
a pain to those of us regularly using the existing MPLAB.  Microchip has
much fun planned for us.  Too bad much of it won't envolve productively
debugging new PIC code.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

2010\10\28@113419 by Michael Watterson

face picon face
 On 28/10/2010 14:42, Bento, Joseph (Electronic Communications Tech) wrote:
>
> MPLAB X is Java-based, and cross platform compatible.  It will therefore run natively on Windows, OSX, Linux, etc.
>
> See http://devupdates.microchip.com/mplab/
>
> Joe
>
But hopefully not as painfully slowly as other Java based IDEs I have abandoned using,

The whole point though of Java is that's it's not Native. It sounded like a nice idea once. I'm not convinced that java is a good idea anymore.

2010\10\28@120501 by AK

flavicon
face
The naming 'X' and the move to java really has me worried that this
decision was not made by nor will be directed by the engineering
department.  If we end up with a slower interface and slower simulator
with candy buttons and menus I would have to think hard about putting
up with it over AVR dev tools.


On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Michael Watterson <spamBeGonemike@spam@spamspam_OUTradioway.org> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

>

2010\10\28@120949 by Jan-Erik Soderholm

face picon face


On 2010-10-28 17:34, Michael Watterson wrote:
> On 28/10/2010 14:42, Bento, Joseph (Electronic Communications Tech)
> wrote:
>>
>> MPLAB X is Java-based, and cross platform compatible.  It will
>> therefore run natively on Windows, OSX, Linux, etc.
>>
>> See http://devupdates.microchip.com/mplab/
>>
>> Joe
>>
> But hopefully not as painfully slowly as other Java based IDEs I have
> abandoned using,
>
> The whole point though of Java is that's it's not Native. It sounded
> like a nice idea once. I'm not convinced that java is a good idea
> anymore.
>

After Oracle bought SUN, and the lack of clear information about the
roadmap for Java (from Oracle), there is a lot of "talk" around Java
in the IT industry right now. Time will tell, as usualy...

2010\10\28@122114 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
AK wrote:
> The naming 'X' and the move to java really has me worried that this
> decision was not made by nor will be directed by the engineering
> department.

I don't think so.  I believe "X" came from not originally knowing the
version number the rewritten MPLAB would have.  I think it's now been
decided to be version 10(?).

As for the engineering bit, it seems to me that the engineers are generally
for it, and I'm confident that the decision was made by competent people
like Joe and Derek, even if I don't agree with it.  I think there were two
primary motivations: to support other platforms and that the existing code
was getting difficult to maintain.  I'm sure of the first, not so much about
the second.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

2010\10\28@122118 by Bob Ammerman

flavicon
face
> Neil Cherry wrote:
>> Neil, Android doesn't run Java.
>
> It was my understanding that Android runs *only* Java apps.

My understanding also. But not just any Java app. It provides a certain environment very different from that provided by a desktop operating system, and in turn expects things of the apps that run under it that a desktop OS does not.

For example, an Android app doesn't even have a "main" method!

-- Bob Ammerman
RAm Systems

2010\10\28@125655 by Alan Melia

flavicon
face
<rant>
All I see is a huge VM that has been the dream of "cross platform" for the
last X years.  From experience all it means is that you will end up having
multiple Java VM's on your machine to support the differing versions of
applications.  It is just like .Net, but worse because they have been doing
it longer.  Also now Oracle effectively owns Java it's future is far from
certain IMHO.

Surely it would have made more sense to build a plug-in to Eclipse if they
wanted to go down this route?
</rant>

Hopefully there will still be a command line tool set. I would even learn
Linux if I had to...

Alan Melia
w: http://www.melmac.co.uk

{Original Message removed}

2010\10\28@133157 by Herbert Graf

picon face
On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 12:21 -0400, Bob Ammerman wrote:
> > Neil Cherry wrote:
> >> Neil, Android doesn't run Java.
> >
> > It was my understanding that Android runs *only* Java apps.
>
> My understanding also. But not just any Java app. It provides a certain
> environment very different from that provided by a desktop operating system,
> and in turn expects things of the apps that run under it that a desktop OS
> does not.
>
> For example, an Android app doesn't even have a "main" method!

Under windows programs don't really have a "main" either, it's all event
driven.

FWIW Android DOES support "native" apps in a very limited way, for
performance reasons (needed less now with Froyo).

TTYL

2010\10\28@140934 by Jan-Erik Soderholm

face picon face


On 2010-10-28 18:56, Alan Melia wrote:
> <rant> All I see is a huge VM that has been the dream of "cross
> platform" for the last X years.  From experience all it means is that
> you will end up having multiple Java VM's on your machine to support the
> differing versions of applications.  It is just like .Net, but worse
> because they have been doing it longer.  Also now Oracle effectively
> owns Java it's future is far from certain IMHO.
>
> Surely it would have made more sense to build a plug-in to Eclipse if
> they wanted to go down this route? </rant>
>

Well, it runs under NetBeans, which the same idea, more or less...

http://devupdates.microchip.com/mplab/Files/Getting_Started_with_MPLAB-X.pdf




> Hopefully there will still be a command line tool set. I would even
> learn Linux if I had to...
>
> Alan Melia w: http://www.melmac.co.uk
>
> {Original Message removed}

2010\10\28@152311 by cdb

flavicon
face


:: why change if not necessary.

We were told this was partly due to Windows 7 being (and I quote) 'considered unstable, and caused driver problems',  Microchip only use XP internally so they said. I would imagine part of it is an attempt to satisfy the growing number of Linux and Mac users.

Colin
--
cdb, TakeThisOuTcolinspamspambtech-online.co.uk on 29/10/2010
Web presence: http://www.btech-online.co.uk   Hosted by:  http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=7988359
 

2010\10\28@155351 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
Change is not bad - unreliable software is...

Frankly, to put something into Beta stage which has many non functional
modules implies that they are trying to push it through no matter what. And
probably they do not have a big software development team to keep up with
the demand.

I thought Hitech has a MacOS X version? Would not it be easier to take that
one over rather than developing a brand new Java based one?

Tamas


On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 8:23 PM, cdb <colinEraseMEspambtech-online.co.uk> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

>

2010\10\28@160514 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
Tamas Rudnai wrote:
> Change is not bad

Change has a cost.  Sometimes the cost is worth it, but this should be
carefully considered.

Or put another way, change *is* bad, just that sometimes not changing things
is worse.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

2010\10\28@160658 by Bento, Joseph (Electronic Communications Tech) n/a

flavicon
face
Hi-Tech's OSX version worked with Eclipse.  I don't believe this is available since Hi-Tech was acquired my Microchip.

Joe


{Original Message removed}

2010\10\28@162254 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Bento, Joseph (Electronic Communications
Tech) <@spam@JBentoRemoveMEspamEraseMErideuta.com> wrote:

> Hi-Tech's OSX version worked with Eclipse.  I don't believe this is
> available since Hi-Tech was acquired my Microchip.
>

Exactly! So all that Microchip should have done to release Hi-Tech with
eclipse which was working already -- maybe C18, and MPASM and MPSIM would
have been needed to compile on Linux and Mac and interfacing with Eclipse
too similarly with PICC, but pretty much job done.

Maybe I watch this in a wrong way, but otherwise why did they pay off
HiTech? They had something already plus a team who knew how to do this
already.

Tamas



>
> Joe
>
>
> {Original Message removed}

2010\10\28@164023 by Funny NYPD

picon face
>Change is not bad - unreliable software is...

Not for Microchip's software.

Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com
http://www.AuElectronics.com/products
http://augroups.blogspot.com/




________________________________
From: Tamas Rudnai <EraseMEtamas.rudnaispam@spam@gmail.com>
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <@spam@piclistspam_OUTspam.....mit.edu>
Sent: Thu, October 28, 2010 3:53:50 PM
Subject: Re: [PIC] MPLAB 8.60

Change is not bad - unreliable software is...

Frankly, to put something into Beta stage which has many non functional
modules implies that they are trying to push it through no matter what. And
probably they do not have a big software development team to keep up with
the demand.

I thought Hitech has a MacOS X version? Would not it be easier to take that
one over rather than developing a brand new Java based one?

Tamas


On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 8:23 PM, cdb <spamBeGonecolinEraseMEspambtech-online.co.uk> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

>

2010\10\28@184335 by M.L.

flavicon
face

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Bento, Joseph (Electronic
Communications Tech) <RemoveMEJBento@spam@spamspamBeGonerideuta.com> wrote:
> MPLAB X is Java-based, and cross platform compatible.  It will therefore run natively on Windows, OSX, Linux, etc.
>
> See http://devupdates.microchip.com/mplab/
>
> Joe

I wouldn't say "natively" I'd say "like crap"
I've seen few Java applications that don't run at 1/100th the speed of
their previous (non Java) version.
Am I wrong? Are there good examples of large, complicated, Java
applications that run just as well as a natively compiled version?

--
Martin K.

2010\10\28@190154 by Michael Watterson

face picon face
 On 28/10/2010 23:43, M.L. wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Bento, Joseph (Electronic
> Communications Tech)<.....JBento@spam@spamEraseMErideuta.com>  wrote:
>> MPLAB X is Java-based, and cross platform compatible.  It will therefore run natively on Windows, OSX, Linux, etc.
>>
>> See http://devupdates.microchip.com/mplab/
>>
>> Joe
> I wouldn't say "natively" I'd say "like crap"
> I've seen few Java applications that don't run at 1/100th the speed of
> their previous (non Java) version.
> Am I wrong? Are there good examples of large, complicated, Java
> applications that run just as well as a natively compiled version?
>
I don't know of any.
There is a problem too calling any native API or native DLL from Java. The time overhead is horrid.
C# runs on Linux and Windows.
QT is cross platform GUI stuff.
Developers (for anything other than Apple products) that buy a Mac mysteriously seem to run Linux. Seems an expensive way to run Linux, but I suppose stylish

2010\10\28@190155 by Funny NYPD

picon face
I don't know anything about Java, all I know is: "anything I installed written in Java" sucks.

Funny N.
Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com
http://www.AuElectronics.com/products
http://augroups.blogspot.com/




________________________________
From: M.L. <.....mRemoveMEspamlkeng.net>
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <.....piclistSTOPspamspam@spam@mit.edu>
Sent: Thu, October 28, 2010 6:43:13 PM
Subject: Re: [PIC] MPLAB 8.60

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Bento, Joseph (Electronic
Communications Tech) <JBentoEraseMEspam@spam@rideuta.com> wrote:
> MPLAB X is Java-based, and cross platform compatible.  It will therefore run
>natively on Windows, OSX, Linux, etc.
>
> See http://devupdates.microchip.com/mplab/
>
> Joe

I wouldn't say "natively" I'd say "like crap"
I've seen few Java applications that don't run at 1/100th the speed of
their previous (non Java) version.
Am I wrong? Are there good examples of large, complicated, Java
applications that run just as well as a natively compiled version?

-- Martin K.

2010\10\28@195345 by Joseph Bento

face
flavicon
face
I **think** one of my issues with trying the MPLAB X beta on my Mac is I'm running 64bit.  Apparently, MPLAB X is not designed to run on JRE 64-bit.

Joe

2010\10\28@212413 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Joseph Bento <RemoveMEjosephspamspamBeGonekirtland.com> wrote:
> I **think** one of my issues with trying the MPLAB X beta on my Mac
> is I'm running 64bit.  Apparently, MPLAB X is not designed to run
> on JRE 64-bit.

On the other hand, Apple is hinting dropping its own Java support
in the future.
http://www.9to5mac.com/31749/apple-hints-no-java-in-tigers-tank

Of course, Oracle/Sun can supply Java for Mac if they want.


-- Xiaofan

2010\10\28@213200 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Olin Lathrop
<spamBeGoneolin_piclistKILLspamspam@spam@embedinc.com> wrote:
> AK wrote:
>> The naming 'X' and the move to java really has me worried that this
>> decision was not made by nor will be directed by the engineering
>> department.
>
> I don't think so.  I believe "X" came from not originally knowing the
> version number the rewritten MPLAB would have.  I think it's now been
> decided to be version 10(?).
>
> As for the engineering bit, it seems to me that the engineers are generally
> for it, and I'm confident that the decision was made by competent people
> like Joe and Derek, even if I don't agree with it.  I think there were two
> primary motivations: to support other platforms and that the existing code
> was getting difficult to maintain.  I'm sure of the first, not so much about
> the second.
>

>From what I hear, I think the second is also an important reason
(for example, the COM architecture where the glue logic
between the plugins and MPLAB is very difficult to be used).
And I think these two reasons alone are very good to move
away from the current MPLAB code base.

As for choosing Netbean over Eclipse, that is another story.
Microchip seems to like to support the No 2 (eg: Netbean
for MPLAB X and MIPS M4k core for PIC32) and not the No 1
(Eclipse and ARM Cortex M3 Core for PIC32 ). In terms of
PIC32, I am sure they make a mistake. In terms of Netbean
versus Eclipse, I am not sure. Of the two, Eclipse is of course
much more popular.



-- Xiaofan

2010\10\28@213618 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:01 AM, Funny NYPD <funnynypdspam_OUTspam@spam@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I don't know anything about Java, all I know is: "anything I installed written
> in Java" sucks.
>

On the other hand, Android phones (based on Google's Java implementation)
are very popular and seems to be quite good even though I am
still using a lowly Nokia, which is still the best to be used is a
phone is used as a phone for voice call and SMS ;-)


-- Xiaofa

2010\10\28@215221 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 6:43 AM, M.L. <spamBeGonem@spam@spamlkeng.net> wrote:
> I wouldn't say "natively" I'd say "like crap"
> I've seen few Java applications that don't run at 1/100th the speed of
> their previous (non Java) version.
> Am I wrong? Are there good examples of large, complicated, Java
> applications that run just as well as a natively compiled version?
>

The problem is that there are no native compiled version for
many large application which is based on Java. Those applications
(ERP, telecom, etc) are typically outside of the domain knowledge
of the majority of the audiences of PIClist (electronics engineering
professionals or hobbyists). After all, Oracle, IBM, SAP all rely
on Java and they are the leaders in the business software world.

I am not saying that I know Java and it is arguable those big
applications run well or not. I am not a Java fan myself based
on my limited exposure to Java based application (eg Lotus Notes).
However, I am saying we are probably not knowledgeable enough to
judge Java based applications.

-- Xiaofa

2010\10\28@215530 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 4:22 AM, Tamas Rudnai <RemoveMEtamas.rudnaiEraseMEspamKILLspamgmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Bento, Joseph (Electronic Communications
> Tech) <spamBeGoneJBentospam_OUTspamRemoveMErideuta.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi-Tech's OSX version worked with Eclipse.  I don't believe this is
>> available since Hi-Tech was acquired my Microchip.
>>
>
> Exactly! So all that Microchip should have done to release Hi-Tech with
> eclipse which was working already -- maybe C18, and MPASM and MPSIM would
> have been needed to compile on Linux and Mac and interfacing with Eclipse
> too similarly with PICC, but pretty much job done.
>
> Maybe I watch this in a wrong way, but otherwise why did they pay off
> HiTech? They had something already plus a team who knew how to do this
> already.
>

HiTech's strong point is the compiler technology. And it immediately
brings the PICC compiler for PIC12/16 which Microchip does not have.

As for HiTech's expertise in Eclipse, I am pretty sure that is almost
non-existent judging on their Eclipse IDE implementation.



-- Xiaofan

2010\10\29@011415 by William \Chops\ Westfield

face picon face

On Oct 28, 2010, at 7:58 AM, Olin Lathrop wrote:

> MPLAB was getting too stable and reliable, so something had to be  
> done.

Hmm.  MIPS instead of ARM, NetBeans instead of Eclipse.  Microchip is  a regular iconoclast!  In a way, I guess that's nice.  Sort of.

BillW

2010\10\29@012303 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 1:14 PM, William "Chops" Westfield
<.....westfwspamRemoveMEmac.com> wrote:
>
> On Oct 28, 2010, at 7:58 AM, Olin Lathrop wrote:
>
>> MPLAB was getting too stable and reliable, so something had to be
>> done.

As for how stable MPLAB is, I think it is like "YMMV". Olin does
not really use the IDE much (other than debugging) so it is
probably stable. For others which does use the IDE more often,
it is not that pretty in reality.

Just look at the complaints in the forum.
http://www.microchip.com/forums/f57.aspx

> Hmm.  MIPS instead of ARM, NetBeans instead of Eclipse.  Microchip is
> a regular iconoclast!  In a way, I guess that's nice.  Sort of.
>

Yea sort of nice -- choice is kind of nice.

-- Xiaofan

2010\10\29@013613 by PICdude

flavicon
face
Like everything else, Java has it's place.  For deploying to the  masses, it's probably best to go off and develop something native for  each intended target platform.

However, Java becomes quite appealing for corporate apps that need to  run on multiple platforms.  It's been quite a while (~10 years) since  I did any Java development (except for my recent dabbling with Android  dev), but up to that time, we were developing in-house applications  that needed to run on multiple platforms (Win, Unix and Mac) and Java  saved tons of time.

Within reason, performace is good.  But then again, we developed a  very large app on Smalltalk for multiple target platforms and  performance bogged down so much as the app grew during intial  development, that the project was scrapped.  By comparison, Java was a  Veyron back then. :)

Cheers,
-Neil.



Quoting "M.L." <mspam@spam@lkeng.net>:

> I wouldn't say "natively" I'd say "like crap"
> I've seen few Java applications that don't run at 1/100th the speed of
> their previous (non Java) version.
> Am I wrong? Are there good examples of large, complicated, Java
> applications that run just as well as a natively compiled version?
>
> --
> Martin K.

2010\10\29@020423 by William \Chops\ Westfield

face picon face
[A bunch of collected responses.]

> It is stable and fast, why change if not necessary. (Honestly, most  
> of the time, higher releases doesn't seem to getting better.)

If you don't change, people complain too.  I certainly cringe every  time I use something with a W95-style interface (doesn't support  obviously good idea like a per-user "Documents" folder, for one  example), and I just laugh at those PCB tools that "you can still run  in a DOS window, and it's free."  Fast and stable, maybe.  Ugly,  painful, and embarrassing too, if you're claiming to be a "leading  vendor" in any area.
(I remember being very happy when Cadsoft released their X-windows  based EAGLE for Macs.  I thought it was a great compromise.  But I had  cause to fire it up again a little while ago and was ... shocked.)

Besides, time passes you by.  Microchip probably looked at what it was  going to take to make the old MPLAB work "well" on new platforms (Mac,  Linux, even just Windows 7, anything 64bit, anything multicore), threw  up their hands and said "we are not in the business of chasing the  latest GUI fad to come out of cupertino or redmond or wherever.  We  want to write compilers and simulators and tools that enhance our core  microcontroller business.  Give us a framework where we can do that  and let someone else
worry about the exact appearance of semi-transparent 3-d buttons and  all that crap!"
(what language is the old MPLAB written in, anyway?


> But hopefully not as painfully slowly as other Java based IDEs I  
> have abandoned using...

Eh.  Buy a faster computer.  It's small change, these days.


> I would have to think hard about putting up with it over AVR dev  
> tools.

Haven't I heard that AVRStudio is going away in favor of something  Eclipse based as well?
(or maybe that was just the WINAVR package...)


> Surely it would have made more sense to build a plug-in to Eclipse

Eclipse has all the same java-related complaints, doesn't it?
They should have done an emacs extension!


> change *is* bad, just that sometimes not changing things is worse.

Or perhaps change is good, but not changing would have been better :-)
More realistically (as per first paragraphs), change is inevitable and  necessary, and how well you manage it means the difference in the  number of happy customers.


> I've seen few Java applications that don't run at 1/100th the speed of
> their previous (non Java) version.

Such as?  What apps have converted to java without also adding a bunch  of other stuff?
Don't some java apps end up natively compiled?


> Developers (for anything other than Apple products) that buy a Mac
> mysteriously seem to run Linux. Seems an expensive way to run Linux,  
> but
> I suppose stylish.

Nonsense.  Developers with Macs drop down into a unix shell and run  linux apps that have been natively compiled for the MacOSX linux-like  underlayer, which usually works.  They can run linux apps, and it may  look like linux, but it's not.

>
> For example, an Android app doesn't even have a "main" method!

OMG it's an Arudino!  :-)

BillW

2010\10\29@023323 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:04 AM, William "Chops" Westfield
<EraseMEwestfwRemoveMEspamSTOPspammac.com>wrote:

> > But hopefully not as painfully slowly as other Java based IDEs I
> > have abandoned using...
>
> Eh.  Buy a faster computer.  It's small change, these days.
>

I have fairly new stuff here, and still can feel that is slower than a
native app. However, what I concern is not the GUI where a click or typing
is much slower than anything else. In fact I like how the new IDE looks like
and what features it brings in terms of helping the developer to overview
his/her projects. I worry about, however, the compiler and simulator. If
they are not native apps then we (PIC developers / IDE users) may suffer in
productivity. I really like how fast is the MPSIM (the old, native code
based one) and would be said if it was slow down. The only problem is that
the simulator is not yet available for testing so in the meantime just
waiting to see more.

Tamas



{Quote hidden}

>

2010\10\29@023830 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Tamas Rudnai <RemoveMEtamas.rudnaiKILLspamspamTakeThisOuTgmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:04 AM, William "Chops" Westfield
> <spamBeGonewestfwspam@spam@mac.com>wrote:
>
>> > But hopefully not as painfully slowly as other Java based IDEs I
>> > have abandoned using...
>>
>> Eh.  Buy a faster computer.  It's small change, these days.
>>
>
> I have fairly new stuff here, and still can feel that is slower than a
> native app. However, what I concern is not the GUI where a click or typing
> is much slower than anything else. In fact I like how the new IDE looks like
> and what features it brings in terms of helping the developer to overview
> his/her projects. I worry about, however, the compiler and simulator. If
> they are not native apps then we (PIC developers / IDE users) may suffer in
> productivity. I really like how fast is the MPSIM (the old, native code
> based one) and would be said if it was slow down. The only problem is that
> the simulator is not yet available for testing so in the meantime just
> waiting to see more.

No need to worry. The compilers are still the existing native compiler.
What on earth would they want to develop a Java based compiler to
replace the existing GCC based C30/C32?


-- Xiaofan

2010\10\29@044252 by alan.b.pearce

face picon face
> I've seen few Java applications that don't run at 1/100th the speed of
> their previous (non Java) version.
> Am I wrong? Are there good examples of large, complicated, Java
> applications that run just as well as a natively compiled version?

Look at the JMRI program suite, written in Java, runs across all OS platforms. It is a large suite that has very few bugs, and appears to run at very acceptable speed - it has to, it is doing real time things in that it is designed to control a model railway, so things have to happen in an appropriate timescale.

It is an open source project, with a reasonable size development team, and a yahoo support group.

See http://jmri.org/ for the download and information pages. The support group is at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jmriusers/

2010\10\29@051717 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Xiaofan Chen <RemoveMExiaofancspam_OUTspamgmail.com> wrote:

> No need to worry. The compilers are still the existing native compiler.
> What on earth would they want to develop a Java based compiler to
> replace the existing GCC based C30/C32?
>

True, but what about C18 and MPASM?

Tamas


>
>
> --
> Xiaofan
>
>

2010\10\29@060015 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Tamas Rudnai <tamas.rudnaispamspamgmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Xiaofan Chen <spam_OUTxiaofancspam_OUTspamspam_OUTgmail.com> wrote:
>
>> No need to worry. The compilers are still the existing native compiler.
>> What on earth would they want to develop a Java based compiler to
>> replace the existing GCC based C30/C32?
>>
>
> True, but what about C18 and MPASM?
They are also native.

-- Xiaofa

2010\10\29@094634 by Neil Cherry

face
flavicon
face
On 10/28/2010 10:46 AM, Mark E. Skeels wrote:
>> On 10/28/2010 10:26 AM, PICdude wrote:
>>> Neat.  Does that also mean Android (with appropriate hardware
>>> interface)?  May not be the best interface for regular development,
>>> but I can certainly see uses for this for field programming/tweaking.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Neil.
>> Neil, Android doesn't run Java. I also think that this might be a
>> bit large to be used on an Android phone (but I've been wrong before).
>>
> What about an Android tablet PC?
>
> *http://tinyurl.com/2fcnnsu*

Let me clarify my statement, when you write code you write code for
Android in Java. When it's compiled it's compiled for the Darvek (?)
vm. That 'jar' file is not binary compatible with Java vms.

-- Linux Home Automation         Neil Cherry       ncherryspam_OUTspamlinuxha.com
http://www.linuxha.com/                         Main site
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/                    My HA Blog
Author of:            Linux Smart Homes For Dummie

2010\10\29@095056 by Neil Cherry

face
flavicon
face
On 10/28/2010 11:02 AM, PICdude wrote:
> Actually, there are a lot of similarities, which have started becoming  
> more known since the Oracle-Google lawsuit recently.  First, Android  
> dev in done in Java, so it should be a much easier port.  But  
> apparently the java class files get converted into a slightly  
> different format of the same code to be run on Android.  And  
> apparently the VM's (JVM & Dalvik) are almost identical.  Hence the  
> suit.  I don't remember all the specifics offhand right now.

Just the other day I read about (at least part) of the lawsuit
where Oracle claims that Google stole the API. I've not yet read
what the rest of the lawsuit claims.

-- Linux Home Automation         Neil Cherry       RemoveMEncherryKILLspamspam@spam@linuxha.com
http://www.linuxha.com/                         Main site
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/                    My HA Blog
Author of:            Linux Smart Homes For Dummie

2010\10\29@095436 by Neil Cherry

face
flavicon
face
On 10/28/2010 11:07 AM, Olin Lathrop wrote:
> Neil Cherry wrote:
>> Neil, Android doesn't run Java.
>
> It was my understanding that Android runs *only* Java apps.

I think I may be nitpicking here. The code is Java, the VM is
Dalvek (apparently different).

Android can run native apps but that might be the modified Linux
native programs.

-- Linux Home Automation         Neil Cherry       ncherryspamBeGonespam.....linuxha.com
http://www.linuxha.com/                         Main site
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/                    My HA Blog
Author of:            Linux Smart Homes For Dummie

2010\10\29@172649 by cdb

flavicon
face
According to the man at uChip, the Hitech offering is to be withdrawn (apart from the 16F incarnation) only the uChip bannered offering will exist, with a price change and all products will have the same licence.

The licencing is proposed to follow the Hitech model. Pay an up front price for the compiler, and then a yearly subscription price for continued updates.  Whether bug fixes are considered an up date he didn't say. Neither was he clear on whether the initial compiler price would decrease slightly with the anticipation of extra revenue via the subscription scheme.

The free versions will still exist but with no optimisation. Again he wasn't clear on whether this was no optimisation at all or similar to the current offering.

Colin
--
cdb, KILLspamcolinspam.....btech-online.co.uk on 30/10/2010
Web presence: http://www.btech-online.co.uk   Hosted by:  http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=7988359
 

2010\10\29@175154 by Barry Gershenfeld

picon face
"Knock, knock."

"Who's there?"
..
..
..
..
...(long pause)..
..
..
..
"Java.

2010\10\29@181344 by sergio masci

flavicon
face


On Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Barry Gershenfeld wrote:

{Quote hidden}

Judging by the "shortness" of your "long pause" you must be using one of them there new quantum computing watsits that doesn't actually run the Java code but instead trys to work out what the programmer actually wanted and provides that instead.

:-

2010\10\29@205656 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 5:26 AM, cdb <spam_OUTcolinspamKILLspambtech-online.co.uk> wrote:
> According to the man at uChip, the Hitech offering is to be withdrawn
> (apart from the 16F incarnation) only the uChip bannered offering will
> exist, with a price change and all products will have the same licence.

Not so sure about PICC18. It still has some following.

> The licencing is proposed to follow the Hitech model. Pay an up front price
> for the compiler, and then a yearly subscription price for continued
> updates.  Whether bug fixes are considered an up date he didn't say.
> Neither was he clear on whether the initial compiler price would decrease
> slightly with the anticipation of extra revenue via the subscription
> scheme.

Now that is super bad. That is the worst thing to learn from HiTech.
Hopefully this is not true.

> The free versions will still exist but with no optimization. Again he
> wasn't clear on whether this was no optimisation at all or similar to the
> current offering.
>



-- Xiaofan

2010\10\29@220516 by Tamas Rudnai

face picon face
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Barry Gershenfeld <RemoveMEgbarry42RemoveMEspamEraseMEgmail.com>wrote:

> "Knock, knock."
>
> "Who's there?"
> .
> .
> .
> .
> ..(long pause)..
> .
> .
> .
> "Java."
>

LOL! That made my day :-)

Tama


'[PIC] MPLAB 8.60'
2010\11\01@060358 by alan.b.pearce
face picon face
> > The licencing is proposed to follow the Hitech model. Pay an up
front price
> > for the compiler, and then a yearly subscription price for continued
> > updates.
>
> Now that is super bad. That is the worst thing to learn from HiTech.
> Hopefully this is not true.

I agree - the buy once and free upgrades has been a great way to
distribute the tools.
-- Scanned by iCritical.


'[PIC] MPLAB 8.60'
2010\12\30@063308 by Electron
flavicon
face
At 22.51 2010.10.29, you wrote:
>"Knock, knock."
>
>"Who's there?"
>.
>.
>.
>.
>..(long pause)..
>.
>.
>.
>"Java."

Just in time! ;D

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2010 , 2011 only
- Today
- New search...