Searching \ for '[PIC]: Open source programmers' 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/devprogs.htm?key=programmer
Search entire site for: 'Open source programmers'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[PIC]: Open source programmers'
2000\08\07@000628 by James Newton

face picon face
As was the CUMP <sarcasm> which is NOT DEAD... its just that all the
participants have been madly working on their own for, what, 6 months
now?</sarcasm>

<flame>
The point is that programmers (and test equipment) seem to be something that
are totally ruled by "perceived value" If you charge $1000 for it, then it
must be really good and everybody will buy it. But if you try to make one
open source (or do in fact make one in the case of "the Engine" which is a
hell of a neat programmer) no one seems to want it.

Although some people (Hi Dan) have beat me bloody about the head and ears
over this point, I still don't understand how hobbyists can be so damn
STUPID as to not see the value in this. Is there some law that says we can't
build our own programmers and test equipment? And do a better job than the
commercial people? (Don't say it Dan)

The only thing people are interested in is the Free ICD, which is a clone of
the Microchip product. Is it that we have no confidence in our own abilities
to do a better job and must only copy others works?

Lame.
</flame>

For a series of ideas / products / projects that are not getting the
attention and interest they deserve,
see:
www.piclist.com/techref/default.asp?url=idea/ebb
www.piclist.com/techref/default.asp?url=piclist/cump
http://www.piclist.com/cump
http://www.sni.net/~oricom/
http://www.picnpoke.com/demo/ROMzap.html
http://www.picnpoke.com/engine.html
http://www.epemag.wimborne.co.uk/0300.htm

Sorry, couldn't help myself.


{Original Message removed}

2000\08\07@124136 by Dan Michaels

flavicon
face
James Newton wrote:
>
>As was the CUMP <sarcasm> which is NOT DEAD... its just that all the
>participants have been madly working on their own for, what, 6 months
>now?</sarcasm>
>
><flame>
>The point is that programmers (and test equipment) seem to be something that
>are totally ruled by "perceived value" If you charge $1000 for it, then it
>must be really good and everybody will buy it. But if you try to make one
>open source (or do in fact make one in the case of "the Engine" which is a
>hell of a neat programmer) no one seems to want it.
>
>Although some people (Hi Dan) have beat me bloody about the head and ears
>over this point, I still don't understand how hobbyists can be so damn
>STUPID as to not see the value in this. Is there some law that says we can't
>build our own programmers and test equipment? And do a better job than the
>commercial people? (Don't say it Dan)
>


Well, having been singled out here, I guess I'll put in my $0.02.
It's not STUPIDITY, it's REALITY and PRAGMATISM.

I was not around here during the advent of CUMP or the Engine, but my
perception of this whole thing is that most people on piclist don't
want [or have the time] to hack these sorta things. They want something
as cheap as possible [some have even been known to cut their Radio
Shack pcbs in half to save $$$], and with as little learning curve as
possible - get this over with, and then get on with their projects.
I know I am much that way. These things are just "tools" and byways on
the way to an end-goal, not avocations, for most poeple.
==================


>The only thing people are interested in is the Free ICD, which is a clone of
>the Microchip product. Is it that we have no confidence in our own abilities
>to do a better job and must only copy others works?
>
>Lame.
></flame>
>

The reason I think that the Free ICD is so popular, but the CUMP flamed,
is *ONE* thing --> it works with MPLAB. After taking the time and effort
to learn MPLAB [which is free], the ICD [also free] has a natural appeal.
I few cheap parts, and botta bing. No hacking, besides one-time h.w.
Then on to the projects. More than anything, the Free ICD sealed the
fate of CUMP. Reality is a harse mistress.

It's hard to compete with free [MPLAB], free [ICD], free, free, free,
free, free - this is true 21th century internet capitalism. The reason
the CUMP failed is because it was all committee meetings and no workers.
Just like communism - no payoff that the guy doing the work could
perceive.

The other thing of course is that there are sooooo mannnnnyyyy programmers
out there now, free, cheap, and otherwise.

best regards,
- Dan Michaels
==============


{Quote hidden}

>{Original Message removed}

2000\08\08@165438 by Dan Michaels

flavicon
face
Peter Peres wrote:
>>open source, CUMP, flames
>
.........
>not products). The key is to sell the technology, not the product.
>

The original idea of CUMP was to be open/free-everything. In
the public domain of piclist and the world. There was some talk
about it a few months ago, but nobody wanted to actually bite the
bullet and do any work. And as I indicated a day or two ago,
with so many other free/free/free/cheap/cheap/cheap programmers
around, it was kinda like reinventing the wheel. Then, along came
the Free ICD, and the coffin was caulked.

This is my take on it,
- danM

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2000 , 2001 only
- Today
- New search...