Post by thread:[PIC] PicKit vs ICD

I currently use a PicKit2 (along with a couple of non-microchip ICD's), and am considering buying another one (or a PicKit3 more likely) since I really like the way it operates. Like it just works, on pretty much everything I've tried... 3.3V, 5V, ICD-powered, project-powered, etc. etc. etc.. If I'm having a problem with one of the other ICD's I grab the pickit and it just works. I occasionally on here will see people saying things like (paraphrasing), "I need to get another ICD2, and in the meantime I'm using the PicKit2", or similar remarks that indicate that there is something better about the ICD2, but from everything I read, and especially with the newer firmware loads in the PicKit, I sure can't figure out what it is. Did I miss something? -forrest

On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Forrest Christian <spam_OUTforrestcTakeThisOuTimach.com> wrote: > I currently use a PicKit2 (along with a couple of non-microchip ICD's), > and am considering buying another one (or a PicKit3 more likely) since I > really like the way it operates. Like it just works, on pretty much > everything I've tried... 3.3V, 5V, ICD-powered, project-powered, etc. > etc. etc.. If I'm having a problem with one of the other ICD's I grab > the pickit and it just works. > > I occasionally on here will see people saying things like > (paraphrasing), "I need to get another ICD2, and in the meantime I'm > using the PicKit2", or similar remarks that indicate that there is > something better about the ICD2, but from everything I read, and > especially with the newer firmware loads in the PicKit, I sure can't > figure out what it is. > > Did I miss something? ICD 2 is better integrated into MPLAB and it supports PIC32 debugging (barely currently but it is said that MPLAB 8.20 will have better support of ICD 2 for PIC 32 programming and debugging). If you do not use PIC32 debugging, then PICkit 2 is actually as good (or arguable better) than ICD 2 in terms of debugging capability. In terms of programming, IMHO PICkit 2 is always better than ICD 2 since it can control target power. Take note that PICkit 2 does support programming of PIC32. It also has other functionality that ICD 2 does not have (logic probe, serial function and console version programming software: pk2cmd). On the other hand, ICD 3 is totally different beast than ICD 2. It is much faster than PICkit 2 and ICD 2 for debugging of bigger PIC18/24/32/dsPICs. Xiaofan

On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Xiaofan Chen <.....xiaofancKILLspam@spam@gmail.com> wrote: {Quote hidden}> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Forrest Christian <forrestcKILLspamimach.com> wrote: >> I currently use a PicKit2 (along with a couple of non-microchip ICD's), >> and am considering buying another one (or a PicKit3 more likely) since I >> really like the way it operates. Like it just works, on pretty much >> everything I've tried... 3.3V, 5V, ICD-powered, project-powered, etc. >> etc. etc.. If I'm having a problem with one of the other ICD's I grab >> the pickit and it just works. >> >> I occasionally on here will see people saying things like >> (paraphrasing), "I need to get another ICD2, and in the meantime I'm >> using the PicKit2", or similar remarks that indicate that there is >> something better about the ICD2, but from everything I read, and >> especially with the newer firmware loads in the PicKit, I sure can't >> figure out what it is. >> >> Did I miss something? > > ICD 2 is better integrated into MPLAB and it supports PIC32 > debugging (barely currently but it is said that MPLAB 8.20 > will have better support of ICD 2 for PIC 32 programming > and debugging). > > If you do not use PIC32 debugging, then PICkit 2 is actually > as good (or arguable better) than ICD 2 in terms of debugging > capability. Here I mean that PICkit 2 seems to be more reliable than ICD 2. But YMMV. Technically they are basically the same in terms of debugging capability. And you do not need to switch firmware when you use PICkit 2 when changing to different family of PICs. {Quote hidden}> In terms of programming, IMHO PICkit 2 is > always better than ICD 2 since it can control target > power. Take note that PICkit 2 does support programming > of PIC32. It also has other functionality that ICD 2 does > not have (logic probe, serial function and console version > programming software: pk2cmd). > > On the other hand, ICD 3 is totally different beast than > ICD 2. It is much faster than PICkit 2 and ICD 2 for > debugging of bigger PIC18/24/32/dsPICs. > > Xiaofan >

On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Xiaofan Chen <.....xiaofancKILLspam.....gmail.com> wrote: {Quote hidden}> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Xiaofan Chen <EraseMExiaofancspam_OUTTakeThisOuTgmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Forrest Christian <forrestcspam_OUTimach.com> wrote: >>> I currently use a PicKit2 (along with a couple of non-microchip ICD's), >>> and am considering buying another one (or a PicKit3 more likely) since I >>> really like the way it operates. Like it just works, on pretty much >>> everything I've tried... 3.3V, 5V, ICD-powered, project-powered, etc. >>> etc. etc.. If I'm having a problem with one of the other ICD's I grab >>> the pickit and it just works. >>> >>> I occasionally on here will see people saying things like >>> (paraphrasing), "I need to get another ICD2, and in the meantime I'm >>> using the PicKit2", or similar remarks that indicate that there is >>> something better about the ICD2, but from everything I read, and >>> especially with the newer firmware loads in the PicKit, I sure can't >>> figure out what it is. >>> >>> Did I miss something? >> >> ICD 2 is better integrated into MPLAB and it supports PIC32 >> debugging (barely currently but it is said that MPLAB 8.20 >> will have better support of ICD 2 for PIC 32 programming >> and debugging). >> >> If you do not use PIC32 debugging, then PICkit 2 is actually >> as good (or arguable better) than ICD 2 in terms of debugging >> capability. > > Here I mean that PICkit 2 seems to be more reliable > than ICD 2. But YMMV. Technically they are basically > the same in terms of debugging capability. And you > do not need to switch firmware when you use PICkit > 2 when changing to different family of PICs. One more thing, you can use two PICkit 2 to debug 2 PICs. You can not do that with ICD 2. {Quote hidden}>> In terms of programming, IMHO PICkit 2 is >> always better than ICD 2 since it can control target >> power. Take note that PICkit 2 does support programming >> of PIC32. It also has other functionality that ICD 2 does >> not have (logic probe, serial function and console version >> programming software: pk2cmd). >> >> On the other hand, ICD 3 is totally different beast than >> ICD 2. It is much faster than PICkit 2 and ICD 2 for >> debugging of bigger PIC18/24/32/dsPICs. >> >> Xiaofan >> >

>I currently use a PicKit2 (along with a couple of non-microchip >ICD's), and am considering buying another one (or a PicKit3 more >likely) since I really like the way it operates. Like it just >works, on pretty much everything I've tried... 3.3V, 5V, >ICD-powered, project-powered, etc. etc. etc.. If I'm having a >problem with one of the other ICD's I grab the pickit and it just >works. > >I occasionally on here will see people saying things like >(paraphrasing), "I need to get another ICD2, and in the meantime >I'm using the PicKit2", or similar remarks that indicate that >there is something better about the ICD2, but from everything I >read, and especially with the newer firmware loads in the PicKit, >I sure can't figure out what it is. > >Did I miss something? I suspect that much has been learnt from the ICD2 problems, which has helped the development of the Pickit2 and later ICD devices. However before getting a Pickit3 I suggest you look at the ICD3, which has a High Speed USB interface. I don't know if the Pickit3 has HS or FS USB, but I am finding the ICD3 'blindingly fast' compared to an ICD2 for doing programming and debugging.

That maybe something related to the PIC18F2550/4550 silicon design and Microchip USB software stack. Somehow there is always a slight opportunity the whole chip is whipped out (sometime, just the flash memory, sometime, flash+configuration bits) when user is plugging the device to the PC USB port. Before PICkit2 V2.4x release, this seems happened in a high frequency. After V2.5x release, it got better. For PICkit2, this issue has been claimed fixed. The real reason still is not clear and not verified. When one PICKit 2 is dead, you can always using another one (or any other type of PIC programmer, such as ICD2, ICD3, etc) bring it back by re-programming the chip. This is the reason some people recommend to have at least two PICkit 2 for safety reason. (For the low price, and the good performance when it is working, it worth the investment.) Apparently, this happens to user who use Microchip USB stacks for their own application too. Check Microchip forum for more reference. Funny N. Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com ________________________________ From: Forrest Christian <KILLspamforrestcKILLspamimach.com> To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <RemoveMEpiclistTakeThisOuTmit.edu> Sent: Tuesday, January 6, 2009 3:14:30 AM Subject: [PIC] PicKit vs ICD I currently use a PicKit2 (along with a couple of non-microchip ICD's), and am considering buying another one (or a PicKit3 more likely) since I really like the way it operates. Like it just works, on pretty much everything I've tried... 3.3V, 5V, ICD-powered, project-powered, etc. etc. etc.. If I'm having a problem with one of the other ICD's I grab the pickit and it just works. I occasionally on here will see people saying things like (paraphrasing), "I need to get another ICD2, and in the meantime I'm using the PicKit2", or similar remarks that indicate that there is something better about the ICD2, but from everything I read, and especially with the newer firmware loads in the PicKit, I sure can't figure out what it is. Did I miss something? -forrest

Consider the price and its hardware capability, ICD3 is just another story. If you don't think the budget is an issue and have the time to wait potential software bugs/glitches to be fixed. The ICD3 is a good bet just for its speed. Funny N. Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com ________________________________ From: Xiaofan Chen <spamBeGonexiaofancspamBeGonegmail.com> To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <TakeThisOuTpiclistEraseMEspam_OUTmit.edu> Sent: Tuesday, January 6, 2009 3:54:35 AM Subject: Re: [PIC] PicKit vs ICD On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Forrest Christian <RemoveMEforrestcTakeThisOuTimach.com> wrote: {Quote hidden}> I currently use a PicKit2 (along with a couple of non-microchip ICD's), > and am considering buying another one (or a PicKit3 more likely) since I > really like the way it operates. Like it just works, on pretty much > everything I've tried... 3.3V, 5V, ICD-powered, project-powered, etc. > etc. etc.. If I'm having a problem with one of the other ICD's I grab > the pickit and it just works. > > I occasionally on here will see people saying things like > (paraphrasing), "I need to get another ICD2, and in the meantime I'm > using the PicKit2", or similar remarks that indicate that there is > something better about the ICD2, but from everything I read, and > especially with the newer firmware loads in the PicKit, I sure can't > figure out what it is. > > Did I miss something? ICD 2 is better integrated into MPLAB and it supports PIC32 debugging (barely currently but it is said that MPLAB 8.20 will have better support of ICD 2 for PIC 32 programming and debugging). If you do not use PIC32 debugging, then PICkit 2 is actually as good (or arguable better) than ICD 2 in terms of debugging capability. In terms of programming, IMHO PICkit 2 is always better than ICD 2 since it can control target power. Take note that PICkit 2 does support programming of PIC32. It also has other functionality that ICD 2 does not have (logic probe, serial function and console version programming software: pk2cmd). On the other hand, ICD 3 is totally different beast than ICD 2. It is much faster than PICkit 2 and ICD 2 for debugging of bigger PIC18/24/32/dsPICs. Xiaofan

The PICkit 2 is designed later than ICD2, so it might have "learned" some lessons from ICD2. The ICD3 is a strip-down version of RealICE. And There is a high curiosity/desire for the PICKit3 (which will be available this month) for more improvement from PICKit 2. Apparently, the PICKit2 and ICD2 has some common features. So will be the new PICkit 3 when comparing with PICkit2 and ICD2. We will see what is going on shortly. Functionally, they all working on most PICs, the end-user need making some decision on the minor differences. I personally now own a ICD2 (this probably the last ICD2 I got exchanged from Microchip free exchange program, I cannot remember how many ICD2 I have damaged. It wold cost a fortune without the free exchange program.) and some enhanced versions of PICKIT 2 (designed by my team with Full PICkit 2 circuit, some unique feature for programmer-to-go. On the new BB0703+ family, a USB buck/boost power circuit for reliable +5V supply is also added). Funny N. Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com ________________________________ From: Xiaofan Chen <xiaofancEraseME.....gmail.com> To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <EraseMEpiclistmit.edu> Sent: Tuesday, January 6, 2009 3:56:24 AM Subject: Re: [PIC] PicKit vs ICD On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Xiaofan Chen <RemoveMExiaofancEraseMEEraseMEgmail.com> wrote: {Quote hidden}> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Forrest Christian <RemoveMEforrestcspam_OUTKILLspamimach.com> wrote: >> I currently use a PicKit2 (along with a couple of non-microchip ICD's), >> and am considering buying another one (or a PicKit3 more likely) since I >> really like the way it operates. Like it just works, on pretty much >> everything I've tried... 3.3V, 5V, ICD-powered, project-powered, etc. >> etc. etc.. If I'm having a problem with one of the other ICD's I grab >> the pickit and it just works. >> >> I occasionally on here will see people saying things like >> (paraphrasing), "I need to get another ICD2, and in the meantime I'm >> using the PicKit2", or similar remarks that indicate that there is >> something better about the ICD2, but from everything I read, and >> especially with the newer firmware loads in the PicKit, I sure can't >> figure out what it is. >> >> Did I miss something? > > ICD 2 is better integrated into MPLAB and it supports PIC32 > debugging (barely currently but it is said that MPLAB 8.20 > will have better support of ICD 2 for PIC 32 programming > and debugging). > > If you do not use PIC32 debugging, then PICkit 2 is actually > as good (or arguable better) than ICD 2 in terms of debugging > capability. Here I mean that PICkit 2 seems to be more reliable than ICD 2. But YMMV. Technically they are basically the same in terms of debugging capability. And you do not need to switch firmware when you use PICkit 2 when changing to different family of PICs. {Quote hidden}> In terms of programming, IMHO PICkit 2 is > always better than ICD 2 since it can control target > power. Take note that PICkit 2 does support programming > of PIC32. It also has other functionality that ICD 2 does > not have (logic probe, serial function and console version > programming software: pk2cmd). > > On the other hand, ICD 3 is totally different beast than > ICD 2. It is much faster than PICkit 2 and ICD 2 for > debugging of bigger PIC18/24/32/dsPICs. > > Xiaofan >

True. The PICkit 2 team is the best I have ever known from Microchip. They are really open-mind and always listen to the end-user. That's why you can list so many unique features. Funny N. Au Group Electronics, http://www.AuElectronics.com ________________________________ From: Xiaofan Chen <RemoveMExiaofancTakeThisOuTspamgmail.com> To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <EraseMEpiclistspamspamBeGonemit.edu> Sent: Tuesday, January 6, 2009 3:59:31 AM Subject: Re: [PIC] PicKit vs ICD On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Xiaofan Chen <RemoveMExiaofancKILLspamgmail.com> wrote: {Quote hidden}> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Xiaofan Chen <xiaofancSTOPspamspam_OUTgmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Forrest Christian <spamBeGoneforrestcSTOPspamEraseMEimach.com> wrote: >>> I currently use a PicKit2 (along with a couple of non-microchip ICD's), >>> and am considering buying another one (or a PicKit3 more likely) since I >>> really like the way it operates. Like it just works, on pretty much >>> everything I've tried... 3.3V, 5V, ICD-powered, project-powered, etc. >>> etc. etc.. If I'm having a problem with one of the other ICD's I grab >>> the pickit and it just works. >>> >>> I occasionally on here will see people saying things like >>> (paraphrasing), "I need to get another ICD2, and in the meantime I'm >>> using the PicKit2", or similar remarks that indicate that there is >>> something better about the ICD2, but from everything I read, and >>> especially with the newer firmware loads in the PicKit, I sure can't >>> figure out what it is. >>> >>> Did I miss something? >> >> ICD 2 is better integrated into MPLAB and it supports PIC32 >> debugging (barely currently but it is said that MPLAB 8.20 >> will have better support of ICD 2 for PIC 32 programming >> and debugging). >> >> If you do not use PIC32 debugging, then PICkit 2 is actually >> as good (or arguable better) than ICD 2 in terms of debugging >> capability. > > Here I mean that PICkit 2 seems to be more reliable > than ICD 2. But YMMV. Technically they are basically > the same in terms of debugging capability. And you > do not need to switch firmware when you use PICkit > 2 when changing to different family of PICs. One more thing, you can use two PICkit 2 to debug 2 PICs. You can not do that with ICD 2. {Quote hidden}>> In terms of programming, IMHO PICkit 2 is >> always better than ICD 2 since it can control target >> power. Take note that PICkit 2 does support programming >> of PIC32. It also has other functionality that ICD 2 does >> not have (logic probe, serial function and console version >> programming software: pk2cmd). >> >> On the other hand, ICD 3 is totally different beast than >> ICD 2. It is much faster than PICkit 2 and ICD 2 for >> debugging of bigger PIC18/24/32/dsPICs. >> >> Xiaofan >> >

I've heard you should avoid the ICD, get ICD2. Robotics Guy -----Original Message----- From: @spam@piclist-bounces@spam@spam_OUTmit.edu [spamBeGonepiclist-bouncesKILLspammit.edu] On Behalf Of Xiaofan Chen Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 4:30 AM To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Subject: Re: [PIC] PicKit vs ICD On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 2:42 PM, KPL <.....kpl.listesspam_OUTgmail.com> wrote: {Quote hidden}>> >> Yes there is. Check out the -S option. I have used that option under >> Linux for a while. You need to Assign the unit ID first with the >> -N option (one by one). After that you can use -SUnit1 and >> -SUnit2 to use the two PICkit 2 programmers. > > OK, thanks. Seems my pk2cmd is too old, it does not show that option, > will have to upgrade. > > Actually programming fails too often too. > That should not be the case. Maybe you are really using an old version. You should download from Micochip website. http://www.microchip.com/pickit2 Xiaofan