Sign in
Search piclist
Subscribe to piclist
piclist by Keywords
12F675 | 16F628 | 16F84 | 16f877 | 16F877A | 16F88 | 18F458 | ADC | AVR | Bootloader | CAN | CCS | CRC | EAGLE | EEPROM | ICD | ICSP | IDE | JDM | LED | Macros | Microchip | MPLAB | PCB-CAD | PIC10F | Pic12f675 | PIC16F84 | PIC16F84A | PIC16F877 | PIC18 | PIC18F452 | PicBasic | PICC | PICSTART | PWM | RS-485 | RS232 | SMT | SPI | UART | USART | USB | Wireless | Wisp628 | Xilinx
Ads
Discussion Groups
See Also
Discussion Groups | Piclist | pic programmer - close the thread?
A discussion group for the PICMicro microcontroller. Also called the Microchip PIC, this list is dedicated to the use and abuse of this fine, simple, microcontroller. Close to topic posts are welcome, ie. general electronics.
pic programmer - close the thread? - ydexter - Mar 24 3:19:00 2004
|
My God, I asked about a good PIC programmer, not about a stupid pencil. If I would be interested about pencil's theory I wouldn't ask about it in a PIC discussion group. The 'problem' is that Microchip has strict rules (like many others chips) about PIC programming. They are not very easy for a beginer, and I think they can trouble even an expert at the beginning. So, some people, in a bad attempt to build 'the cheapest' && 'the littlest' && 'another bad attributes' PIC programmer neglected some microchip recommandations. If you try to email them and ask about the problems, they will say something like: 'so what? what's the problem if you get a write error once at 1 thousand writes? write it again!' OK, they are right, but I say that it's no need of cheap programmers, since parts are not so expensive now. Don't try to tell me that PICStartPlus has inside a $120 worth components. And don't sell me the idea that we have to pay the mental effort invested in building that. We already do this buying Microchip's PICs. And the programmer is not such a big design anyway for them. So, who want's cheap will choose the well-known programmers, but I don't like the idea to have a hazardous write there - you know, maybe Murphy is dead, but I belive ghost don't sleep :) . This bad write can occurr in very special moment. I wonder why people are not interested in real PIC programmers, with proper power supply ( are we in a energetic crisis already?). Why not to use real signal shapes, not spikes with attenuators? Why not to feed the PIC from a real serious power supply and we use instead RS232 weak power? I saw Wisp from Wouter , but sincerly is a bit tricky for me: 40 V at 1A just to programm the PIC - I'm still search for an explanation in Microchip's docs. Maybe Wouter can tell us about those cheap programmers, and why nobody builded a true one until now. And please, skip that pencil thing.... thanks |
|
|
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: pic programmer - close the thread? - Michael Puchol - Mar 24 5:02:00 2004
|
Hi, I would recommend the PICQUICK, if you are in the lookout for an excellent quality PIC programmer. This programmer supports all available PIC chips, and also does some EEPROMs. Since it uses a FPGA for the programming work, it can be reconfigured via software for any new PIC that comes out the production lines, so at least the investment is somewhat guaranteed. It has a power supply, parallel-port connection (DB25 to DB9 on the board), and a ZIF socket that fits all PIC sizes. It will automatically detect the part in the socket, warn you if the programming software is not configured for the part, and if the options / flags are not correct. I have tried the "cheapo" JDM programmers, the Willem, and finally this one - and believe me, I go for the PICQUICK. It also features serial programming with automated serialisation of the PICs. You can see more here: http://www.pic-tools.com/prg_picquick.htm I am not affiliated to these guys, just a very happy costumer that was very frustrated when programming PICs until I got this. Regards, Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "ydexter" <> To: <> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 9:19 AM Subject: [piclist] pic programmer - close the thread? > My God, I asked about a good PIC programmer, not about a stupid > pencil. If I would be interested about pencil's theory I wouldn't ask > about it in a PIC discussion group. > > The 'problem' is that Microchip has strict rules (like many others > chips) about PIC programming. They are not very easy for a beginer, > and I think they can trouble even an expert at the beginning. So, some > people, in a bad attempt to build 'the cheapest' && 'the littlest' && > 'another bad attributes' PIC programmer neglected some microchip > recommandations. If you try to email them and ask about the problems, > they will say something like: 'so what? what's the problem if you get > a write error once at 1 thousand writes? write it again!' > > OK, they are right, but I say that it's no need of cheap programmers, > since parts are not so expensive now. Don't try to tell me that > PICStartPlus has inside a $120 worth components. And don't sell me the > idea that we have to pay the mental effort invested in building that. > We already do this buying Microchip's PICs. And the programmer is not > such a big design anyway for them. So, who want's cheap will choose > the well-known programmers, but I don't like the idea to have a > hazardous write there - you know, maybe Murphy is dead, but I belive > ghost don't sleep :) . This bad write can occurr in very special moment. > > I wonder why people are not interested in real PIC programmers, with > proper power supply ( are we in a energetic crisis already?). Why not > to use real signal shapes, not spikes with attenuators? Why not to > feed the PIC from a real serious power supply and we use instead RS232 > weak power? > I saw Wisp from Wouter , but sincerly is a bit tricky for me: 40 V at > 1A just to programm the PIC - I'm still search for an explanation in > Microchip's docs. Maybe Wouter can tell us about those cheap > programmers, and why nobody builded a true one until now. > > And please, skip that pencil thing.... > > thanks > > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the instructions > Yahoo! Groups Links |
|
|
Stellaris® MCU Family: New Parts, New Package, New Price.
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
pic programmer - close the thread? - techy fellow - Mar 24 5:49:00 2004
|
Hi,
I am a newbie to PIC/ AVR but I find that Kit 128 from 'Kitsrus.com' I am using
is quite good. No problem for me to program hex files downloaded from Elektor and other
site. It is USB powered. Very small in size. Can program lots of PIC family. The only
complain I have is, no ICSP. They do produce other models like the Kit 150 that has
ICSP.
If you want a programmer that can program some other MCUs (like AVR and scenix),
perhaps, you can check Kit 117 out.
So far, they are very active in updating firmware. Here is their web address;
http://www.kitsrus.com/upuc.html#k149
I am just an end-user. Not affiliated to them in anyways.
cheers,
Michael Puchol <m...@sonar-security.com> wrote: Hi,
|
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: pic programmer - close the thread? - Bert Drake - Mar 24 10:50:00 2004
|
I use a Kit 150, and am very happy with it. It is
similar to kit 128, but has ICSP. However it is not USB powered like Kit
128. Kit 150 requires an external power supply.
It doesn't have a serial connector, if that is important
to you. If you want both serial and USB, that would be kit 149, I
think.
|
|
|
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: pic programmer - close the thread? (kind of a rant) - Dave Mucha - Mar 24 12:35:00 2004
|
--- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote: > My God, I asked about a good PIC programmer, not about a stupid > pencil. If I would be interested about pencil's theory I wouldn't ask > about it in a PIC discussion group. Yes and no. You asked for a good programmer AND you said that a ready made device should not include profit to the person who designed it. The reason things cost so much is that it may take a day(s) to read the data sheets from MicroChip another day to lay out the board and test it. Another day to fix the problems so that there is no error in 1,000 writes. Then one has to make boards that are either expensive due to low quantity or expensive due to high quantity. Then, you expect the person to post his results for free ? If you want cheap, expect errors. But, expect one bad chip in 100 too. It's not always the programmers fault. If you search the archive, the people who boast GREAT results have spent the $150.00 for professional programmers. People who make the home brew style opt for the simplier method and are willing to test each chip and re-program if something didn't work just right. I hope you don't take offense, but asking for a ultra low cost device that works 100% of the time, and has perfectly shaped waves instead of some programming trick is asking a LOT. There are 3 features one can expect. A good design A low cost design A fast (or simple) design The problem is you only ever go to pick TWO. The reason there are so many cheap designs for these are that the mostly work ( 2 and 3) so are useful to the average hobbiest. The reason there are good ones (1 and 3) is because people who make a living at this are willing to pay $$$ to get the job done correctly, the first time, with no errors. If you are new to this hobby, you can expect that the programmer will be the least of your headaches. I think I pushed the limits of the topic and thank everone for their allowing me to drift off topic. I'll not post on this again. Dave . . . . |
|
|
Stellaris® MCU Family: New Parts, New Package, New Price.
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: pic programmer - close the thread? - Ty Hoeffer - Mar 24 12:36:00 2004
|
I have a KIT 149 & absolutly LOVE it. It works first time EVERY time. The only odd thing is that it shows up as a High Speed Serial Device in the USB device list. No problem, it was just odd to me. I have this programmer as well as the parallel programmer made by the same group ( kit 96? i think ) They both work very well & can have a 40 pin ZIF socke to allow programming just about any PIC you could imagine. TWO THUMBS UP on this Programmer! Ty Hoeffer Charlottesville, Va. On Wednesday 24 March 2004 10:50, Bert Drake wrote: > I use a Kit 150, and am very happy with it. It is similar to kit 128, > but has ICSP. However it is not USB powered like Kit 128. Kit 150 > requires an external power supply. > > It doesn't have a serial connector, if that is important to you. If you > want both serial and USB, that would be kit 149, I think. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: techy fellow > To: > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 4:49 AM > Subject: [piclist] pic programmer - close the thread? > Hi, > > I am a newbie to PIC/ AVR but I find that Kit 128 from 'Kitsrus.com' I > am using is quite good. No problem for me to program hex files > downloaded from Elektor and other site. It is USB powered. Very small in > size. Can program lots of PIC family. The only complain I have is, no > ICSP. They do produce other models like the Kit 150 that has ICSP. > > If you want a programmer that can program some other MCUs (like AVR > and scenix), perhaps, you can check Kit 117 out. > > So far, they are very active in updating firmware. Here is their web > address; http://www.kitsrus.com/upuc.html#k149 > > I am just an end-user. Not affiliated to them in anyways. > > cheers, > > Michael Puchol <> wrote: > Hi, > > I would recommend the PICQUICK, if you are in the lookout for an > excellent quality PIC programmer. This programmer supports all available > PIC chips, and also does some EEPROMs. Since it uses a FPGA for the > programming work, it can be reconfigured via software for any new PIC > that comes out the production lines, so at least the investment is > somewhat guaranteed. > > It has a power supply, parallel-port connection (DB25 to DB9 on the > board), and a ZIF socket that fits all PIC sizes. It will automatically > detect the part in the socket, warn you if the programming software is > not configured for the part, and if the options / flags are not correct. > I have tried the "cheapo" JDM programmers, the Willem, and finally this > one - and believe me, I go for the PICQUICK. It also features serial > programming with automated serialisation of the PICs. > > You can see more here: http://www.pic-tools.com/prg_picquick.htm > > I am not affiliated to these guys, just a very happy costumer that > was very frustrated when programming PICs until I got this. > > Regards, > > Mike > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "ydexter" <> > To: <> > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 9:19 AM > Subject: [piclist] pic programmer - close the thread? > > > My God, I asked about a good PIC programmer, not about a stupid > > pencil. If I would be interested about pencil's theory I wouldn't > > ask about it in a PIC discussion group. > > > > The 'problem' is that Microchip has strict rules (like many others > > chips) about PIC programming. They are not very easy for a > > beginer, and I think they can trouble even an expert at the > > beginning. So, some people, in a bad attempt to build 'the > > cheapest' && 'the littlest' && 'another bad attributes' PIC > > programmer neglected some microchip recommandations. If you try to > > email them and ask about the problems, they will say something > > like: 'so what? what's the problem if you get a write error once > > at 1 thousand writes? write it again!' > > > > OK, they are right, but I say that it's no need of cheap > > programmers, since parts are not so expensive now. Don't try to > > tell me that PICStartPlus has inside a $120 worth components. And > > don't sell me the idea that we have to pay the mental effort > > invested in building that. We already do this buying Microchip's > > PICs. And the programmer is not such a big design anyway for them. > > So, who want's cheap will choose the well-known programmers, but I > > don't like the idea to have a hazardous write there - you know, > > maybe Murphy is dead, but I belive ghost don't sleep :) . This bad > > write can occurr in very special moment. > > > > I wonder why people are not interested in real PIC programmers, > > with proper power supply ( are we in a energetic crisis already?). > > Why not to use real signal shapes, not spikes with attenuators? > > Why not to feed the PIC from a real serious power supply and we > > use instead RS232 weak power? > > I saw Wisp from Wouter , but sincerly is a bit tricky for me: 40 V > > at 1A just to programm the PIC - I'm still search for an > > explanation in Microchip's docs. Maybe Wouter can tell us about > > those cheap programmers, and why nobody builded a true one until > > now. > > > > And please, skip that pencil thing.... > > > > thanks > > > > > > > > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the > > instructions > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the > instructions > > > instructions > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >------ Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To -- *************************************************************************** * Ty Hoeffer -- IS Net Engineer -- UVa. Health System/Computing Services * pth3k at Virginia.EDU -- http://warhammer.mcc.virginia.edu/ty * "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner. * Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the decision." Ben Franklin *************************************************************************** |
|
|
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: pic programmer - kitsrus softwrare - Dave Mucha - Mar 24 12:39:00 2004
|
--- In , techy fellow <techyf@y...> wrote: > Hi, > > I am a newbie to PIC/ AVR but I find that Kit 128 from 'Kitsrus.com' I am using is quite good. No problem for me to program hex files downloaded from Elektor and other site. It is USB powered. Very small in size. Can program lots of PIC family. The only complain I have is, no ICSP. They do produce other models like the Kit 150 that has ICSP. > > If you want a programmer that can program some other MCUs (like AVR and scenix), perhaps, you can check Kit 117 out. > > So far, they are very active in updating firmware. Here is their web address; > http://www.kitsrus.com/upuc.html#k149 > > I am just an end-user. Not affiliated to them in anyways. > > cheers, What software are you using ? I'm interested in USB and have not made a move to everthing usb as yet, but I know it's comming. Dave |
|
|
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: pic programmer - close the thread? - Don Hackler - Mar 24 13:58:00 2004
|
Ty Hoeffer wrote: >I have a KIT 149 & absolutly LOVE it. It works first time EVERY time. The >only odd thing is that it shows up as a High Speed Serial Device in the >USB device list. No problem, it was just odd to me. > The 149 and 150 programmers use the general purpose FTDI USB-Serial chip with the generic USB serial port drivers from FTDI. What you have is effectively one of the external USB serial port dongles built into the programmer. I have a 150 and really like it so far... I also have an EPIC parallel port widget which works fine for 18 pin parts... >I have this programmer >as well as the parallel programmer made by the same group ( kit 96? i >think ) They both work very well & can have a 40 pin ZIF socke to allow >programming just about any PIC you could imagine. TWO THUMBS UP on this >Programmer! > > Ty Hoeffer > Charlottesville, Va. >On Wednesday 24 March 2004 10:50, Bert Drake wrote: >>I use a Kit 150, and am very happy with it. It is similar to kit 128, >>but has ICSP. However it is not USB powered like Kit 128. Kit 150 >>requires an external power supply. >> >>It doesn't have a serial connector, if that is important to you. If you >>want both serial and USB, that would be kit 149, I think. >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: techy fellow >> To: >> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 4:49 AM >> Subject: [piclist] pic programmer - close the thread? >> >> >> Hi, >> >> I am a newbie to PIC/ AVR but I find that Kit 128 from 'Kitsrus.com' I >>am using is quite good. No problem for me to program hex files >>downloaded from Elektor and other site. It is USB powered. Very small in >>size. Can program lots of PIC family. The only complain I have is, no >>ICSP. They do produce other models like the Kit 150 that has ICSP. >> >> If you want a programmer that can program some other MCUs (like AVR >>and scenix), perhaps, you can check Kit 117 out. >> >> So far, they are very active in updating firmware. Here is their web >>address; http://www.kitsrus.com/upuc.html#k149 >> >> I am just an end-user. Not affiliated to them in anyways. >> >> cheers, >> >> Michael Puchol <> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I would recommend the PICQUICK, if you are in the lookout for an >>excellent quality PIC programmer. This programmer supports all available >>PIC chips, and also does some EEPROMs. Since it uses a FPGA for the >>programming work, it can be reconfigured via software for any new PIC >>that comes out the production lines, so at least the investment is >>somewhat guaranteed. >> >> It has a power supply, parallel-port connection (DB25 to DB9 on the >>board), and a ZIF socket that fits all PIC sizes. It will automatically >>detect the part in the socket, warn you if the programming software is >>not configured for the part, and if the options / flags are not correct. >>I have tried the "cheapo" JDM programmers, the Willem, and finally this >>one - and believe me, I go for the PICQUICK. It also features serial >>programming with automated serialisation of the PICs. >> >> You can see more here: http://www.pic-tools.com/prg_picquick.htm >> >> I am not affiliated to these guys, just a very happy costumer that >>was very frustrated when programming PICs until I got this. >> >> Regards, >> >> Mike >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "ydexter" <> >> To: <> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 9:19 AM >> Subject: [piclist] pic programmer - close the thread? >> >> > My God, I asked about a good PIC programmer, not about a stupid >> > pencil. If I would be interested about pencil's theory I wouldn't >> > ask about it in a PIC discussion group. >> > >> > The 'problem' is that Microchip has strict rules (like many others >> > chips) about PIC programming. They are not very easy for a >> > beginer, and I think they can trouble even an expert at the >> > beginning. So, some people, in a bad attempt to build 'the >> > cheapest' && 'the littlest' && 'another bad attributes' PIC >> > programmer neglected some microchip recommandations. If you try to >> > email them and ask about the problems, they will say something >> > like: 'so what? what's the problem if you get a write error once >> > at 1 thousand writes? write it again!' >> > >> > OK, they are right, but I say that it's no need of cheap >> > programmers, since parts are not so expensive now. Don't try to >> > tell me that PICStartPlus has inside a $120 worth components. And >> > don't sell me the idea that we have to pay the mental effort >> > invested in building that. We already do this buying Microchip's >> > PICs. And the programmer is not such a big design anyway for them. >> > So, who want's cheap will choose the well-known programmers, but I >> > don't like the idea to have a hazardous write there - you know, >> > maybe Murphy is dead, but I belive ghost don't sleep :) . This bad >> > write can occurr in very special moment. >> > >> > I wonder why people are not interested in real PIC programmers, >> > with proper power supply ( are we in a energetic crisis already?). >> > Why not to use real signal shapes, not spikes with attenuators? >> > Why not to feed the PIC from a real serious power supply and we >> > use instead RS232 weak power? >> > I saw Wisp from Wouter , but sincerly is a bit tricky for me: 40 V >> > at 1A just to programm the PIC - I'm still search for an >> > explanation in Microchip's docs. Maybe Wouter can tell us about >> > those cheap programmers, and why nobody builded a true one until >> > now. >> > >> > And please, skip that pencil thing.... >> > >> > thanks >> > >> > >> > >> > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the >> >> instructions >> >> > Yahoo! Groups Links >> >> to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the >>instructions >> >> >> >> >>instructions >> >> >> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor >> ADVERTISEMENT >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>------ Yahoo! Groups Links >> >> a.. To >> > |
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: pic programmer - close the thread? - Bennet Williams - Mar 24 16:13:00 2004
|
Showing up as a generic High Speed Serial Device is not so odd when you consider that you have to pay the USB Forum $2,500 a year to have a vendor ID assigned to you. That really stinks for us little guys. BRW --- In , Ty Hoeffer <pth3k@v...> wrote: > I have a KIT 149 & absolutly LOVE it. It works first time EVERY time. The > only odd thing is that it shows up as a High Speed Serial Device in the > USB device list. No problem, it was just odd to me. I have this programmer > as well as the parallel programmer made by the same group ( kit 96? i > think ) They both work very well & can have a 40 pin ZIF socke to allow > programming just about any PIC you could imagine. TWO THUMBS UP on this > Programmer! > > Ty Hoeffer > Charlottesville, Va. |
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: pic programmer - kitsrus softwrare - techy fellow - Mar 24 20:39:00 2004
|
Kitsrus provide the software as well. One thing you need to take care is, if the kit
uses the USB chip from Fidi (I think), you will have to go to Fidi's web site to download
the appropriate driver for your O/S (eg. W2K, XP, etc.). Once you have install the driver,
you can then install the software from Kitsrus. Kitsrus provides both the firmware for the
kit and software in one nice file. You can download the file from their web page.
The software even comes with a picture to show you which slot in the Ziff
socket you should place your selected chip family ! Newbies like me need such
guidiance.
Another important thing to take note is, the firmware and the software must be used
together that comes from the same file. Thus, you cannot use say, ver. 18 firmware and ver
19 software. It won't work. You will have to first flash a blank 16F628 chip with
firmware ver. 19, swap the chip, uninstall the existing software from your PC and then
re-install ver 19 software.
Hope the above info helps.
Good luck.
Davis
Dave Mucha <d...@juno.com> wrote: --- In p...@yahoogroups.com, techy fellow <techyf@y...> wrote:
|
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: Re: pic programmer - close the thread? (kind of a rant) - Vasile Surducan - Mar 25 2:33:00 2004
|
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Dave Mucha wrote: > --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote: > > My God, I asked about a good PIC programmer, not about a stupid > > pencil. If I would be interested about pencil's theory I wouldn't > ask > > about it in a PIC discussion group. > The reason things cost so much is that it may take a day(s) to read > the data sheets from MicroChip another day to lay out the board and > test it. Another day to fix the problems so that there is no error > in 1,000 writes. Dave, you are extremely optimistic ! I like your opinion. :) just for igrek_dexter: http://geocities.com/vsurducan/electro/PIC/rom/index.html best regards, Vasile |
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: pic programmer - close the thread? (kind of a rant) - ydexter - Mar 26 10:41:00 2004
|
--- In , "Dave Mucha" <davemucha@j...> wrote: > --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote: > > My God, I asked about a good PIC programmer, not about a stupid > > pencil. If I would be interested about pencil's theory I wouldn't > ask > > about it in a PIC discussion group. > Yes and no. YES, because I don't believe the pencil's theory. > You asked for a good programmer AND you said that a ready made device > should not include profit to the person who designed it. NO, I just asked for a schematics, there are some people with free schematics, but you can buy the PCB and components ... > The reason things cost so much is that it may take a day(s) to read > the data sheets from MicroChip another day to lay out the board and > test it. Another day to fix the problems so that there is no error > in 1,000 writes. Reeally? > Then one has to make boards that are either expensive due to low > quantity or expensive due to high quantity. > > Then, you expect the person to post his results for free ? I do, linux, *BSD, are free. > If you want cheap, expect errors. I don;t want cheap && errors. At the end it will prove to be expensive && errors. > But, expect one bad chip in 100 too. It's not always the > programmers fault. I will expect this when Microchip will move the factories in some no-silicium country. > If you search the archive, the people who boast GREAT results have > spent the $150.00 for professional programmers. > > People who make the home brew style opt for the simplier method and > are willing to test each chip and re-program if something didn't work > just right. > > I hope you don't take offense, but asking for a ultra low cost device > that works 100% of the time, and has perfectly shaped waves instead > of some programming trick is asking a LOT. I didn't asked for ultra low, I just want to do it myself, I can buy the parts. > There are 3 features one can expect. > > A good design > A low cost design > A fast (or simple) design I can do at least 1000 features. > The problem is you only ever go to pick TWO. > > The reason there are so many cheap designs for these are that the > mostly work ( 2 and 3) so are useful to the average hobbiest. > > The reason there are good ones (1 and 3) is because people who make a > living at this are willing to pay $$$ to get the job done correctly, > the first time, with no errors. > > If you are new to this hobby, you can expect that the programmer will > be the least of your headaches. > > I think I pushed the limits of the topic and thank everone for their > allowing me to drift off topic. > > I'll not post on this again. > > Dave With $150 you can buy a powerful CPU or even a more powerful graphic card with a good GPU. So, don't try to tell me a programmer, even the best can cost me $150! You can generate waves , a good ones with a more cheap hardware than a P4 CPU. |
|
|
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: pic programmer - close the thread? (kind of a rant) - peterhawken - Mar 26 13:37:00 2004
|
It is a shame that a newcomer to the group feels able to make this kind of post. I have followed this thread from the beginning and noted Dave's first reply and his second. I thought it was good advice: don't spend a huge amount of time to produce something that will very likely be inferior to a low cost commercial product. In response, ydexter has seen fit to argue with someone who has freely given his own time to assist another developer. In my opinion it is good, sound advice; the product of a lot of experience. Now if the original poster decides that he knows better, it would be polite to simply say thank you and move on. I am sure that when ydexter asks the next question, Dave Mucha will think carefully before offering any more of his time. So will I. I don't want to give advice and then have to debate it at length to prove that I am right. In the short time I have been reading and posting to this group I have seen some good advice and some good discussions about developers techniques and opinions. It would be a shame if this sort of post were to be accepted here as the norm, as it is in so many usenet newsgroups these days. --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote: > --- In , "Dave Mucha" <davemucha@j...> wrote: > > --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote: > > > My God, I asked about a good PIC programmer, not about a stupid > > > pencil. If I would be interested about pencil's theory I wouldn't > > ask > > > about it in a PIC discussion group. > > > > > > Yes and no. > > YES, because I don't believe the pencil's theory. > > You asked for a good programmer AND you said that a ready made device > > should not include profit to the person who designed it. > > NO, I just asked for a schematics, there are some people with free > schematics, but you can buy the PCB and components ... > > > The reason things cost so much is that it may take a day(s) to read > > the data sheets from MicroChip another day to lay out the board and > > test it. Another day to fix the problems so that there is no error > > in 1,000 writes. > > Reeally? > > > Then one has to make boards that are either expensive due to low > > quantity or expensive due to high quantity. > > > > Then, you expect the person to post his results for free ? > > I do, linux, *BSD, are free. > > > If you want cheap, expect errors. > > I don;t want cheap && errors. At the end it will prove to be expensive > && errors. > > > But, expect one bad chip in 100 too. It's not always the > > programmers fault. > > I will expect this when Microchip will move the factories in some > no-silicium country. > > > If you search the archive, the people who boast GREAT results have > > spent the $150.00 for professional programmers. > > > > People who make the home brew style opt for the simplier method and > > are willing to test each chip and re-program if something didn't work > > just right. > > > > I hope you don't take offense, but asking for a ultra low cost device > > that works 100% of the time, and has perfectly shaped waves instead > > of some programming trick is asking a LOT. > > I didn't asked for ultra low, I just want to do it myself, I can buy > the parts. > > > There are 3 features one can expect. > > > > A good design > > A low cost design > > A fast (or simple) design > > I can do at least 1000 features. > > > The problem is you only ever go to pick TWO. > > > > The reason there are so many cheap designs for these are that the > > mostly work ( 2 and 3) so are useful to the average hobbiest. > > > > The reason there are good ones (1 and 3) is because people who make a > > living at this are willing to pay $$$ to get the job done correctly, > > the first time, with no errors. > > > > If you are new to this hobby, you can expect that the programmer will > > be the least of your headaches. > > > > I think I pushed the limits of the topic and thank everone for their > > allowing me to drift off topic. > > > > I'll not post on this again. > > > > Dave > > With $150 you can buy a powerful CPU or even a more powerful graphic > card with a good GPU. So, don't try to tell me a programmer, even the > best can cost me $150! You can generate waves , a good ones with a > more cheap hardware than a P4 CPU. |
|
|
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: pic programmer - close the thread? (kind of a rant) - Phil - Mar 26 14:53:00 2004
|
The simple and sad fact is this medium (forums) is conducive to argument and disagreement. Its pretty amazing to find post after post with a strong disagreement in the first few lines yet the substantive differences are small. I think its just too easy to say "you're wrong" rather than taking a more measured response. Or no response at all - some people just can't leave it alone... Compared with other forums (fora?) though, this one is pretty good. Phil --- In , "peterhawken" <peterhawken@s...> wrote: > It is a shame that a newcomer to the group feels able to make this > kind of post. I have followed this thread from the beginning and > noted Dave's first reply and his second. I thought it was good > advice: don't spend a huge amount of time to produce something that > will very likely be inferior to a low cost commercial product. > > In response, ydexter has seen fit to argue with someone who has > freely given his own time to assist another developer. In my opinion > it is good, sound advice; the product of a lot of experience. Now if > the original poster decides that he knows better, it would be polite > to simply say thank you and move on. I am sure that when ydexter > asks the next question, Dave Mucha will think carefully before > offering any more of his time. So will I. I don't want to give > advice and then have to debate it at length to prove that I am right. > > In the short time I have been reading and posting to this group I > have seen some good advice and some good discussions about developers > techniques and opinions. It would be a shame if this sort of post > were to be accepted here as the norm, as it is in so many usenet > newsgroups these days. > > --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote: > > --- In , "Dave Mucha" <davemucha@j...> wrote: > > > --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote: > > > > My God, I asked about a good PIC programmer, not about a stupid > > > > pencil. If I would be interested about pencil's theory I > wouldn't > > > ask > > > > about it in a PIC discussion group. > > > > > > > > > Yes and no. > > > > YES, because I don't believe the pencil's theory. > > > > > > > You asked for a good programmer AND you said that a ready made > device > > > should not include profit to the person who designed it. > > > > NO, I just asked for a schematics, there are some people with free > > schematics, but you can buy the PCB and components ... > > > > > The reason things cost so much is that it may take a day(s) to > read > > > the data sheets from MicroChip another day to lay out the board > and > > > test it. Another day to fix the problems so that there is no > error > > > in 1,000 writes. > > > > Reeally? > > > > > Then one has to make boards that are either expensive due to low > > > quantity or expensive due to high quantity. > > > > > > Then, you expect the person to post his results for free ? > > > > I do, linux, *BSD, are free. > > > > > If you want cheap, expect errors. > > > > I don;t want cheap && errors. At the end it will prove to be > expensive > > && errors. > > > > > But, expect one bad chip in 100 too. It's not always the > > > programmers fault. > > > > I will expect this when Microchip will move the factories in some > > no-silicium country. > > > > > If you search the archive, the people who boast GREAT results > have > > > spent the $150.00 for professional programmers. > > > > > > People who make the home brew style opt for the simplier method > and > > > are willing to test each chip and re-program if something didn't > work > > > just right. > > > > > > I hope you don't take offense, but asking for a ultra low cost > device > > > that works 100% of the time, and has perfectly shaped waves > instead > > > of some programming trick is asking a LOT. > > > > I didn't asked for ultra low, I just want to do it myself, I can buy > > the parts. > > > > > There are 3 features one can expect. > > > > > > A good design > > > A low cost design > > > A fast (or simple) design > > > > I can do at least 1000 features. > > > > > The problem is you only ever go to pick TWO. > > > > > > The reason there are so many cheap designs for these are that the > > > mostly work ( 2 and 3) so are useful to the average hobbiest. > > > > > > The reason there are good ones (1 and 3) is because people who > make a > > > living at this are willing to pay $$$ to get the job done > correctly, > > > the first time, with no errors. > > > > > > If you are new to this hobby, you can expect that the programmer > will > > > be the least of your headaches. > > > > > > I think I pushed the limits of the topic and thank everone for > their > > > allowing me to drift off topic. > > > > > > I'll not post on this again. > > > > > > Dave > > > > With $150 you can buy a powerful CPU or even a more powerful graphic > > card with a good GPU. So, don't try to tell me a programmer, even > the > > best can cost me $150! You can generate waves , a good ones with a > > more cheap hardware than a P4 CPU. |
|
|
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: Re: pic programmer - close the thread? (kind of a rant) - Wilson - Engenharia Contemp - Mar 26 16:19:00 2004
|
Yes Phil, i think so. I guess nobody knows everything as well nobody knows nothing. So let´s leave it alone... The great idea about this group is help each other and do not spell offensive things... Regards, Wilson Wilson Antonieti Engenharia de Desenvolvimento Tel.: (11) 4223-5117 Fax.: (11) 4223-5103 Visite nosso site: www.contemp.com.br PRECISÃO AO SEU ALCANCE!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phil" <> To: <> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 4:53 PM Subject: [piclist] Re: pic programmer - close the thread? (kind of a rant) > The simple and sad fact is this medium (forums) is conducive to > argument and disagreement. Its pretty amazing to find post after > post with a strong disagreement in the first few lines yet the > substantive differences are small. I think its just too easy to > say "you're wrong" rather than taking a more measured response. Or > no response at all - some people just can't leave it alone... > > Compared with other forums (fora?) though, this one is pretty good. > > Phil > > --- In , "peterhawken" <peterhawken@s...> > wrote: > > It is a shame that a newcomer to the group feels able to make this > > kind of post. I have followed this thread from the beginning and > > noted Dave's first reply and his second. I thought it was good > > advice: don't spend a huge amount of time to produce something that > > will very likely be inferior to a low cost commercial product. > > > > In response, ydexter has seen fit to argue with someone who has > > freely given his own time to assist another developer. In my > opinion > > it is good, sound advice; the product of a lot of experience. Now > if > > the original poster decides that he knows better, it would be > polite > > to simply say thank you and move on. I am sure that when ydexter > > asks the next question, Dave Mucha will think carefully before > > offering any more of his time. So will I. I don't want to give > > advice and then have to debate it at length to prove that I am > right. > > > > In the short time I have been reading and posting to this group I > > have seen some good advice and some good discussions about > developers > > techniques and opinions. It would be a shame if this sort of post > > were to be accepted here as the norm, as it is in so many usenet > > newsgroups these days. > > > > > > > > --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote: > > > --- In , "Dave Mucha" <davemucha@j...> > wrote: > > > > --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote: > > > > > My God, I asked about a good PIC programmer, not about a > stupid > > > > > pencil. If I would be interested about pencil's theory I > > wouldn't > > > > ask > > > > > about it in a PIC discussion group. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes and no. > > > > > > YES, because I don't believe the pencil's theory. > > > > > > > > > > You asked for a good programmer AND you said that a ready made > > device > > > > should not include profit to the person who designed it. > > > > > > NO, I just asked for a schematics, there are some people with free > > > schematics, but you can buy the PCB and components ... > > > > > > > The reason things cost so much is that it may take a day(s) to > > read > > > > the data sheets from MicroChip another day to lay out the board > > and > > > > test it. Another day to fix the problems so that there is no > > error > > > > in 1,000 writes. > > > > > > Reeally? > > > > > > > Then one has to make boards that are either expensive due to > low > > > > quantity or expensive due to high quantity. > > > > > > > > Then, you expect the person to post his results for free ? > > > > > > I do, linux, *BSD, are free. > > > > > > > If you want cheap, expect errors. > > > > > > I don;t want cheap && errors. At the end it will prove to be > > expensive > > > && errors. > > > > > > > But, expect one bad chip in 100 too. It's not always the > > > > programmers fault. > > > > > > I will expect this when Microchip will move the factories in some > > > no-silicium country. > > > > > > > If you search the archive, the people who boast GREAT results > > have > > > > spent the $150.00 for professional programmers. > > > > > > > > People who make the home brew style opt for the simplier method > > and > > > > are willing to test each chip and re-program if something > didn't > > work > > > > just right. > > > > > > > > I hope you don't take offense, but asking for a ultra low cost > > device > > > > that works 100% of the time, and has perfectly shaped waves > > instead > > > > of some programming trick is asking a LOT. > > > > > > I didn't asked for ultra low, I just want to do it myself, I can > buy > > > the parts. > > > > > > > There are 3 features one can expect. > > > > > > > > A good design > > > > A low cost design > > > > A fast (or simple) design > > > > > > I can do at least 1000 features. > > > > > > > The problem is you only ever go to pick TWO. > > > > > > > > The reason there are so many cheap designs for these are that > the > > > > mostly work ( 2 and 3) so are useful to the average hobbiest. > > > > > > > > The reason there are good ones (1 and 3) is because people who > > make a > > > > living at this are willing to pay $$$ to get the job done > > correctly, > > > > the first time, with no errors. > > > > > > > > If you are new to this hobby, you can expect that the > programmer > > will > > > > be the least of your headaches. > > > > > > > > I think I pushed the limits of the topic and thank everone for > > their > > > > allowing me to drift off topic. > > > > > > > > I'll not post on this again. > > > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > With $150 you can buy a powerful CPU or even a more powerful > graphic > > > card with a good GPU. So, don't try to tell me a programmer, even > > the > > > best can cost me $150! You can generate waves , a good ones with a > > > more cheap hardware than a P4 CPU. > > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the instructions > Yahoo! Groups Links |
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: Re: pic programmer - close the thread? (kind of a rant) - Chad Russel - Mar 26 20:48:00 2004
|
Has anyone considered open sourcing the whole thing? Linux seems to be working. I would be willing to donate time and some money. The world was not created equal, expecially regarding rates of exchange, monthly income, and interpretation of words. two cents from Chad --- Phil <> wrote: > The simple and sad fact is this medium (forums) is conducive to > argument and disagreement. Its pretty amazing to find post after > post with a strong disagreement in the first few lines yet the > substantive differences are small. I think its just too easy to > say "you're wrong" rather than taking a more measured response. Or > no response at all - some people just can't leave it alone... > > Compared with other forums (fora?) though, this one is pretty good. > > Phil > > --- In , "peterhawken" <peterhawken@s...> > wrote: > > It is a shame that a newcomer to the group feels able to make this > > kind of post. I have followed this thread from the beginning and > > noted Dave's first reply and his second. I thought it was good > > advice: don't spend a huge amount of time to produce something that > > > will very likely be inferior to a low cost commercial product. > > > > In response, ydexter has seen fit to argue with someone who has > > freely given his own time to assist another developer. In my > opinion > > it is good, sound advice; the product of a lot of experience. Now > if > > the original poster decides that he knows better, it would be > polite > > to simply say thank you and move on. I am sure that when ydexter > > asks the next question, Dave Mucha will think carefully before > > offering any more of his time. So will I. I don't want to give > > advice and then have to debate it at length to prove that I am > right. > > > > In the short time I have been reading and posting to this group I > > have seen some good advice and some good discussions about > developers > > techniques and opinions. It would be a shame if this sort of post > > were to be accepted here as the norm, as it is in so many usenet > > newsgroups these days. > > > > > > > > --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote: > > > --- In , "Dave Mucha" <davemucha@j...> > wrote: > > > > --- In , "ydexter" <ydexter@y...> wrote: > > > > > My God, I asked about a good PIC programmer, not about a > stupid > > > > > pencil. If I would be interested about pencil's theory I > > wouldn't > > > > ask > > > > > about it in a PIC discussion group. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes and no. > > > > > > YES, because I don't believe the pencil's theory. > > > > > > > > > > You asked for a good programmer AND you said that a ready made > > device > > > > should not include profit to the person who designed it. > > > > > > NO, I just asked for a schematics, there are some people with > free > > > schematics, but you can buy the PCB and components ... > > > > > > > The reason things cost so much is that it may take a day(s) to > > read > > > > the data sheets from MicroChip another day to lay out the board > > > and > > > > test it. Another day to fix the problems so that there is no > > error > > > > in 1,000 writes. > > > > > > Reeally? > > > > > > > Then one has to make boards that are either expensive due to > low > > > > quantity or expensive due to high quantity. > > > > > > > > Then, you expect the person to post his results for free ? > > > > > > I do, linux, *BSD, are free. > > > > > > > If you want cheap, expect errors. > > > > > > I don;t want cheap && errors. At the end it will prove to be > > expensive > > > && errors. > > > > > > > But, expect one bad chip in 100 too. It's not always the > > > > programmers fault. > > > > > > I will expect this when Microchip will move the factories in some > > > no-silicium country. > > > > > > > If you search the archive, the people who boast GREAT results > > have > > > > spent the $150.00 for professional programmers. > > > > > > > > People who make the home brew style opt for the simplier method > > > and > > > > are willing to test each chip and re-program if something > didn't > > work > > > > just right. > > > > > > > > I hope you don't take offense, but asking for a ultra low cost > > device > > > > that works 100% of the time, and has perfectly shaped waves > > instead > > > > of some programming trick is asking a LOT. > > > > > > I didn't asked for ultra low, I just want to do it myself, I can > buy > > > the parts. > > > > > > > There are 3 features one can expect. > > > > > > > > A good design > > > > A low cost design > > > > A fast (or simple) design > > > > > > I can do at least 1000 features. > > > > > > > The problem is you only ever go to pick TWO. > > > > > > > > The reason there are so many cheap designs for these are that > the > > > > mostly work ( 2 and 3) so are useful to the average hobbiest. > > > > > > > > The reason there are good ones (1 and 3) is because people who > > make a > > > > living at this are willing to pay $$$ to get the job done > > correctly, > > > > the first time, with no errors. > > > > > > > > If you are new to this hobby, you can expect that the > programmer > > will > > > > be the least of your headaches. > > > > > > > > I think I pushed the limits of the topic and thank everone for > > their > > > > allowing me to drift off topic. > > > > > > > > I'll not post on this again. > > > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > With $150 you can buy a powerful CPU or even a more powerful > graphic > > > card with a good GPU. So, don't try to tell me a programmer, even > > > the > > > best can cost me $150! You can generate waves , a good ones with > a > > > more cheap hardware than a P4 CPU. ===== My software has no bugs. Only undocumented features. __________________________________ |
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: pic programmer - close the thread? (kind of a rant) - ydexter - Apr 6 3:13:00 2004
|
Hello, I'm sorry to be so late with the answer, but I must aswer you. I don't want to make noise here, but I think I was misunderstood. I think I have the right to clarify things. Do I? I inserted the answers .... --- In , "peterhawken" <peterhawken@s...> wrote: > It is a shame that a newcomer to the group feels able to make this > kind of post. I'm not a newcomer. About shame, it is your opinion. >I have followed this thread from the beginning and > noted Dave's first reply and his second. I thought it was good > advice: don't spend a huge amount of time to produce something that > will very likely be inferior to a low cost commercial product. I respect Dave's advice. I told it directly and I requested what I really want. I specified that I need something different, I just asked if there is a solution available, only that. I didn't say somethign wrong about Dave, I know some people preffers some other solutions. > In response, ydexter has seen fit to argue with someone who has > freely given his own time to assist another developer. Dave is here on his free choice. I apreciate his answer, I will apreciate future answers. I just told him I will follow my idea as much as possible. Dave told me about the risks, I knew a few of them, I considered the others. NO problem. >In my opinion > it is good, sound advice; the product of a lot of experience. Now if > the original poster decides that he knows better, it would be polite > to simply say thank you and move on. I think is not a good idea to fill the messages with all thanks words. Of course I apreciate the Dave's ideas. >I am sure that when ydexter > asks the next question, Dave Mucha will think carefully before > offering any more of his time. Don't try to think for others, just leave Dave express his own will. If he will choose to do this, let him tell me. >So will I. I don't want to give > advice and then have to debate it at length to prove that I am >right. Your choice, but it looks you already make some people nervous here with your choose. > In the short time I have been reading and posting to this group I > have seen some good advice and some good discussions about >developers > techniques and opinions. It would be a shame if this sort of post > were to be accepted here as the norm, as it is in so many usenet > newsgroups these days. My sort of post is not a shame for the group, i didn't swear, and I didn't say Dave is wrong. I will review my posts to check again if I did somethign wrong. Don't overreact to my posts, they are fare away from what you saw on usenet. It was just a disscussion, full of arguments. The only shame I have is I don't speak/write a very good english. But I saw people are tollerant here. I'm really sorry is Dave or someone was offended , I didn't intended to contest or deny somebody's advice from here. But I keep my free choice not to follow them and I will accept the responsabilities. Does it sounds offending? thanks |
(You need to be a member of piclist -- send a blank email to piclist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )