>>> So, is it generally accepted that a newbee like me would be better off
>>> with MPASM? Does MPSAM work well with the ITU unit and does anyone use the
>>I dunno, sounds like a religious issue. :-) Yes and yes.
>I use both the MPASM compiler and the ITU PIC-1 programmer. I am extremely
>happy with both of them (but I wish their new programmer, that handles all of
>the PICs was out at the time I bought mine)
>One thing, the MPASM is great because it is free. And, as several others
>have mentioned, most of the code examples both on this list and in all of
>notes are aimed toward this compiler. This makes it much easier to start
>learning how to program these little goldmines.
>I initially bought my programmer for using on my senior project this semester.
>We used a 16C65, and had no trouble with using the programmer (even through
>a dos window within Windows 95). The kit was easy to build, and had the
>whold thing working in about an hour.
>So from my limited experience anyway, I would recommend using MPASM, and using
>an ITU programmer. I have used the PROMATE programmer, and was happy with
>it, but for a poor student like me, I could not afford one. I have also
>used a Tribal Microsystems programmer, which programmed just about
>everything under the sun......but about twice the price of PROMATE.
>anyway, my $.02
> Steve Budde
> e-mail: spam_OUTsbuddeTakeThisOuTsiu.edu
> WWW: http://www.silug.org/~budde
I guess I am sold on the ITU unit. Now to use some plastic money...