>
>   I think I got in over my head with this one so far. I bought Myke's book
> last fall "Programming and Customizing PICs" and got through about half of it
> (totally confused, too) before realizing I needed a programmer. I regained a
> bit of bravery THIS fall and bought the YAP programmer from Wirz Elec. I'm
> the kind of person that would like to know exactly WHAT I'm trying to learn
> before I just dive in to breadboarding this thing and making an LED flash. I
> realized that I am going to have to learn some kind of code to program this
> thing, and I don't know where to start. I have downloaded MPASM, but don't
> know if that is what I write programs in...but then again, I don't know what
> goes where and so on...
>
>   Do I need any other books or like a college course in computer
> programming?? I used to program BASIC a lot as a kid, and I understand
> strings and variables and all, but this looks a lot more confusing.  I'm not
> completely clueless about electronics as I have designed LOTS of stuff in the
> analog audio realm (amplifiers, crossovers, EQ's) and I'm a repair tech for a
> car stereo shop (which is a big reason why I chose the PIC, because there are
> a lot of apps in car audio that could use something like this marvel). But
> trying to make the connection between hardware, software and what I want it
> to do is just a little more than frustrating....but I can't bring myself to
> going back to BCD counters and 555 timers (gag).
>
>   So if there's anyone out there that isn't going to tell me I need to buy a
> $500 C++ assembler and has some advice (even if it's like "you're outta your
> mind, you stupid kid" (I'm 23) ) I'm open to suggestion.
>
>   TIA to all!
>
> Aaron

> I've decided to enter the world of PIC development and am looking for a
> good place to start reading about the various manufacturers, types,
> speeds, etc... So I can learn all I can. Rather than ask a zillion
> questions here, I'd like to first ask if anyone has a good site that gives
> the PIC basics and pointers to programmers, etc... and I can figure this
> stuff out for myself. After all, discovery and research is what makes it
> fun, right? ;-)
>
> Thanks !
>
> -->Neil
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Neil Bradley            There'd be no more N'Sync if everyone had guns.
> Synthcom Systems, Inc.
> ICQ #29402898
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
> ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

> I've decided to enter the world of PIC development and am looking for a
> good place to start reading about the various manufacturers, types,
> speeds, etc... So I can learn all I can. Rather than ask a zillion
> questions here, I'd like to first ask if anyone has a good site that gives
> the PIC basics and pointers to programmers, etc... and I can figure this
> stuff out for myself. After all, discovery and research is what makes it
> fun, right? ;-)
>
> Thanks !
>
> -->Neil
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Neil Bradley            There'd be no more N'Sync if everyone had guns.
> Synthcom Systems, Inc.
> ICQ #29402898
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
> ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.
>
>

> Hi. I am new to this list. I am experienced with assembly and using chips
> such as the 8085 and Motorola 68000 and a recent graduate of electronic
> engineering. I have been reading my butt off on the topic of PICS and have
> a programmer and MPLAB and software for simulation.  My question is this:
> For the wide range of PICmicro's I might work with, what would anyone
> suggest for a good component and tool base to begin working with (crystals,
> caps..and such.)
>
> Thanks for any help.
>
> ~Chris
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.piclist.com
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

> I'm new to the world of PICs (aside from having read about how great
> they are for years, anyway :) and am looking for some advice on the
> best way to get started. I've tried reading the FAQ, but I'm it's not
> exactly clear on some things.
>
> First, let me state that I run Linux primarily, though I do have
> access to Windows (through VMware -- and, yes, this does give me
> direct access to the serial and parallel ports). My preference is
> towards having options to work in both environments.
>
> So, that said, I have a handful of PICs (18F458, 16LF84A and 16LF870)
> and I'm trying to figure out the simplest, barebones (if necessary)
> way to get started programming them without having to buy a premade
> programmer. It seems to me that I should be able to throw together
> some components on a breadboard and get started with next to nothing
> from what I've read, but I can't find instructions that directly tell
> me so. I've seen a lot of simple programmers out there, but it seems
> that a number of them require some form of bootstrapping (because they
> use a PIC themselves) or they are for a specific chip that isn't one
> of those listed above.
>
> I think a lot of my confusion is likely simply misunderstanding. I'll
> ask a few specific questions and then ask for some general advice:
>
> 1. Is a programmer designed to work with a 16C84 able to work for the
> 16LF84A or even 16LF870?
> 2. Is this (http://www.jdm.homepage.dk/easypic.htm) just too good to be true?
> 3. Will the JDM design (http://www.jdm.homepage.dk/newpics.htm) work
> for any of the above PICs? Based on the one SparkFun sells it looks
> like I should be able to use it with all my chips.
> 4. What programmer software is recommended for Linux?
> 5. Does anyone know of a PIC C environment that works with the Eclipse IDE?
> 6. What books do people recommend that are still pretty current (the
> ones I've browsed at the bookstore often seem to be pretty old)?
>
> I hope I haven't gotten too long winded, but I'm really excited to get
> started and I'm just trying to sort everything out in my head.

>
> > I'm new to the world of PICs
>
> read http://www.voti.nl/swp
> it is getting a bit dated, but IMHO still usefull for a newbie
>
> > So, that said, I have a handful of PICs
>
> you know Mirochips has a sampling service?
>
> > 1. Is a programmer designed to work with a 16C84 able to work for the
> > 16LF84A or even 16LF870?
>
> yes, for the 870 checkj wether the PC software supports the chip
>
> > 2. Is this (http://www.jdm.homepage.dk/easypic.htm) just too
> > good to be true?
>
> yes. it might work, it might not work (in your particular case).
>
> > 3. Will the JDM design (http://www.jdm.homepage.dk/newpics.htm) work
> > for any of the above PICs?
>
> same
>
> > 6. What books do people recommend that are still pretty current (the
> > ones I've browsed at the bookstore often seem to be pretty old)?
>
> books? get the datasheet(s)!
>
> Wouter van Ooijen
>
> -- -------------------------------------------
> Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
> consultancy, development, PICmicro products
> docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu
>
>

>
> Tamas Rudnai( spamBeGonetamas.rudnaiSTOPspamEraseMEgmail.com) is reported to have said:
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> > I was just wondering if MPLAB or other PIC programmer works with WINE?
>
> I use icprog with wine and the sparkfun PIC-PG2C.  Works fine, so far.
>
> I was suprised to find that the new JAL-V2 windows package also runs
> on wine.
>
> Linux Pikdev works as well with the Sparkfun (Olimex) programmer.
>
> WT

> On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 11:18:34PM +0200, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
>  
>>> It just starts the same round of arguments that always seem
>>> to float around
>>> when this discussion starts. Most of the time you talk to JDM and Tait
>>> style programmer advocates, they are looking for cheap,
>>> simple, and instant
>>> gratification.
>>>      
>> Note that I am not saying that such programmers don't have their place.
>> If your time is cheap by all means try one or two, if they work, fine!
>> But if they don't drop them, and try a design that has a much higher
>> chance of working, but costs a little more. Adding a level booster to a
>> dumb programmer combines the bad aspects of both: it is still a serial
>> port pin wiggler with all the associated XP problems, but the complexity
>> approaches a Wisp628 or other simple but intelligent programmer.
>>    
>
> I'm a firm non-believer in serial ports because of their varibility.
> Unfortunately because of USB both serial and parallel ports are slowly
> dying with no guarantees either will be available in the near future.
> I'll be sorely disappointed when we get to the point where a programmer
> cannot be bootstrapped simply because the interface complexity prohibits
> it. Right now USB to serial converters seems to be the only type of
> interface that may survive the purge. This has steered my interest in
> figuring out how to bootstrap from them.
>
> BAJ
>  

> > It just starts the same round of arguments that
> always seem
> > to float around
> > when this discussion starts. Most of the time you
> talk to JDM and Tait
> > style programmer advocates, they are looking for
> cheap,
> > simple, and instant
> > gratification.
>
> Note that I am not saying that such programmers
> don't have their place.
> If your time is cheap by all means try one or two,
> if they work, fine!
> But if they don't drop them, and try a design that
> has a much higher
> chance of working, but costs a little more. Adding a
> level booster to a
> dumb programmer combines the bad aspects of both: it
> is still a serial
> port pin wiggler with all the associated XP
> problems, but the complexity
> approaches a Wisp628 or other simple but intelligent
> programmer.
>
> Wouter van Ooijen
>

>
> Byron A Jeff wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 11:18:34PM +0200, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
> >
> >>> It just starts the same round of arguments that always seem
> >>> to float around
> >>> when this discussion starts. Most of the time you talk to JDM and Tait
> >>> style programmer advocates, they are looking for cheap,
> >>> simple, and instant
> >>> gratification.
> >>>
> >> Note that I am not saying that such programmers don't have their place.
> >> If your time is cheap by all means try one or two, if they work, fine!
> >> But if they don't drop them, and try a design that has a much higher
> >> chance of working, but costs a little more. Adding a level booster to a
> >> dumb programmer combines the bad aspects of both: it is still a serial
> >> port pin wiggler with all the associated XP problems, but the
> complexity
> >> approaches a Wisp628 or other simple but intelligent programmer.
> >>
> >
> > I'm a firm non-believer in serial ports because of their varibility.
> > Unfortunately because of USB both serial and parallel ports are slowly
> > dying with no guarantees either will be available in the near future.
> > I'll be sorely disappointed when we get to the point where a programmer
> > cannot be bootstrapped simply because the interface complexity prohibits
> > it. Right now USB to serial converters seems to be the only type of
> > interface that may survive the purge. This has steered my interest in
> > figuring out how to bootstrap from them.
> >
> > BAJ
> >
> I have done several designs with USB converters. I agree, its just about
> all that is left.
>
> I realize that USB is replacing parallel ports and serial ports left and
> right, but USB has proven
> (to my mind) to be incredibly unreliable, at least under Windows.
>
> The main problem with USB VCP is that there is no visibility. If there
> is an error, there is almost
> no ability to see what is wrong. The comm port moves all over the place,
> forcing the user code to
> test all available VCP ports to locate your "product". You can't
> reliably bit-bang anything, the timing
> is unreliable.
>
> I've tested myriad Win2K, Win98, and  WinXP systems using USB. Win98
> will gladly accept multiple
> copies of the same driver. Win2K and WinXP systems are afflicted with
> "Windows sickness"... it just
> stops working, no idea why.
>
> A product I am now finishing the firmware on accepts USB (VCP) ports or
> a DB9 connection. The
> DB9 connection is infinitely more reliable than the VCP port. Tested
> with 7 different WinXP systems.
>
> --Bob

>
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 09:44:51AM +0100, Tamas Rudnai wrote:
> > I have never tested by myself but some people claims that IEEE1394 is
> much
> > more reliable (and of course faaaaster).
>
> Bit speed at the wire for Firewire isn't faster than USB 2.0 to a single
> device (400 Mbps vs 480 Mbps). However it's unclear which is faster in
> two situations:
>
> 1) Overall bandwidth including overhead
> 2) Overall bandwidth in multidevice setups. I think that Firewire
> distributes better.
>
> The final issue is getting readily available, cost effective Firewire
> interfaces for the client. USB has the huge advantage of being built in
> to many uCs as a client.
>
> > As far as I know USB was designed
> > only to be able to produce things cheaper than that. Is anybody have
> some
> > experience with Firewire/i-Link/IEEE1394 in general? If somebody would
> like
> > to develop for firewire what chip / solution is preferred?
>
> Excellent questions. I'd love to hear the answer.
>
> BAJ

> > > One of the thoughts I had was using it to low-voltage program a PIC for use
> > > in an intelligent programmer. Once the programmer has been bootstrapped, it
> > > could then be moved to a different connector and used for serial
> > > programming.  
> >
> > Well that's fundamentally what I do in my bootloader setup. The only difference
> > is that the bootloaded PIC is the target chip instead of being the intermediary
> > programming chip.
>
> You commonly use LVP?

> > I know sometimes it seems that I'm railing against intelligent programmers. I
> > believe that they have their place. What I really mourn is the fact that the
> > modern PC is becoming a barren wasteland for the DIY hobbyist. Parallel ports
> > are dying and serial ports will soon follow. Modern periperals that used to
> > utilize those ports have virtually become all USB (i.e. mice, printers, modems
> > etc.) So they are becoming a PC appendix with no discernable useful function.
>

> A significant part of the PIC comunity (and a market Mchip has activly
>sought) is hobbiests. People where time does not equal money. Some of those
>people will find more joy and satisfaction in doing it thierselves even if it
>takes longer and costs more. Then there's the "students" (I use the term very
>broadly), sure anyone can buy a programmer, write some code and flash a chip
>- but how much more does a person learn when they have to figure out all the
>details to build and debug thier own programmer?