Searching \ for 'First deciding on PIC, then asking what it can be' 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/devices.htm?key=pic
Search entire site for: 'First deciding on PIC, then asking what it can be'.

No exact or substring matches. trying for part
PICList Thread
'First deciding on PIC, then asking what it can be '
1997\10\11@190747 by Glenn Johansson

flavicon
face
part 0 1049 bytes
You are right that no definitive answers exist, because a developer only chooses the PIC16C84 if the processing speed, stack depth, code size, data size, eeprom size and number of I/O pins is what he needs. If something else is needed, another hardware is used instead of PIC16C84.

On that note, this seems to be a common mistake. Some people on this mailing list first decide on a PIC, and THEN they ask whether it would be possible to do this and that with it. In a development process, one should instead first mention a product, and THEN think of the best way of designing this product so it's cheap to manufacture or whatever. Often PIC chips can be a successful solution in areas where a person without imagination wouldn't expect to see a PIC (for example in a device that needs a DTMF-sending feature), but most of the times the development time and functionality speak against using PIC chips as video cards, phone modems and anti-slipping for walking sticks.

However, I share the excitment for what microcontrollers can be used for...


1997\10\12@103814 by Glenn

flavicon
face
part 0 1049 bytes
You are right that no definitive answers exist, because a developer only chooses the PIC16C84 if the processing speed, stack depth, code size, data size, eeprom size and number of I/O pins is what he needs. If something else is needed, another hardware is used instead of PIC16C84.

On that note, this seems to be a common mistake. Some people on this mailing list first decide on a PIC, and THEN they ask whether it would be possible to do this and that with it. In a development process, one should instead first mention a product, and THEN think of the best way of designing this product so it's cheap to manufacture or whatever. Often PIC chips can be a successful solution in areas where a person without imagination wouldn't expect to see a PIC (for example in a device that needs a DTMF-sending feature), but most of the times the development time and functionality speak against using PIC chips as video cards, phone modems and anti-slipping for walking sticks.

However, I share the excitment for what microcontrollers can be used for...


1997\10\14@142334 by oortje Hanneman & Wouter van Ooijen

picon face
At 06:19 PM 10/10/1997 +0200, you wrote:
>>Question for experienced 16C84 assembler programmers:
>>In your experience, what is the most severe limit on a 16C84:
>> (snip)
>>I realise that no single definitive answer exists,
>>but I'd like to hear some opinions.
>
>You are right that no definitive answers exist, because a developer only
chooses the PIC16C84 if the
> processing speed, stack depth, code size, data size, eeprom size and
number of I/O pins is what he needs. If > something else is needed, another
hardware is used instead of PIC16C84.

Of course, but from the perspective of someone who is writing a (hopefully
re-) useable library, the question is still valid!

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1997 , 1998 only
- Today
- New search...