Program PIC16F84(/A) with microchip MPLAB ICD 2

I'd like to program my PIC16F84 with microchip MPLAB ICD 2 (I use this
software : microchip MPLAB IDE version 6.30.0.0).
It seems that the MPLAB ICD 2 doesn't support this PIC, and I can't
program it.

What's wrong? Are there other possibilities to progam this type of PIC
with the same programmer?

Thank-you very much for reply.

Roby.

>I'd like to program my PIC16F84 with microchip MPLAB ICD 2 (I use this
>software : microchip MPLAB IDE version 6.30.0.0).
>It seems that the MPLAB ICD 2 doesn't support this PIC, and I can't
>program it.
>
>What's wrong? Are there other possibilities to progam this type of PIC
>with the same programmer?
>
>Thank-you very much for reply.
>
>Roby.
>
>

MPLAB 6.40 claims to support both the 16F84 and 16F84A with a PICSTART Plus and
a Pro Mate II, but not with an ICD2. I haven't tried it myself.

In article <2b07da3e.0410280124.520e9924@posting.google.com>,
 <robycort@libero.it> wrote:
>I'd like to program my PIC16F84 with microchip MPLAB ICD 2 (I use this
>software : microchip MPLAB IDE version 6.30.0.0).
>It seems that the MPLAB ICD 2 doesn't support this PIC, and I can't
>program it.
>
>What's wrong?

Simple. The 16F84 is virtually obsolete.

> Are there other possibilities to progam this type of PIC
>with the same programmer?

The opposite question is more important: Are there other types of
PICs that you can program with the programmer?

Check out my 16F84 is obsolete page for more info:

http://www.finitesite.com/d3jsys/16F88.html

BAJ

robycort@libero.it wrote:
> 
> I'd like to program my PIC16F84 with microchip MPLAB ICD 2 (I use this
> software : microchip MPLAB IDE version 6.30.0.0).
> It seems that the MPLAB ICD 2 doesn't support this PIC, and I can't
> program it.
> 
> What's wrong? Are there other possibilities to progam this type of PIC
> with the same programmer?
> 
> Thank-you very much for reply.
> 
> Roby.


I still use the good ol' 16F84 as well as its A incarnation ... because
I *have* them and they work.  Don't throw yours away just because
sources, including the mfgr., say they are obsolete.  Build yourself a
programmer; they can be simple.  And either cheap of free, depending on
how well stocked your parts bin happens to be.  For example, Google {PIC
and Covington}.  The "No Parts PIC Programmer", NOPP, is what I use ...
and it's the only programmer I need.  It programs the 16F84 (and its A),
and with a software upgrade from a different source it also programs the
16F628 (which I also use).

Good luck, and happy PIC'n.

Michael

In article <4187EC93.ABC01BD7@att.net>, Michael  <NoSpam@att.net> wrote:
-robycort@libero.it wrote:
-> 
-> I'd like to program my PIC16F84 with microchip MPLAB ICD 2 (I use this
-> software : microchip MPLAB IDE version 6.30.0.0).
-> It seems that the MPLAB ICD 2 doesn't support this PIC, and I can't
-> program it.
-> 
-> What's wrong? Are there other possibilities to progam this type of PIC
-> with the same programmer?
-> 
-> Thank-you very much for reply.
-> 
-> Roby.
-
-
-I still use the good ol' 16F84 as well as its A incarnation ... because
-I *have* them and they work.  Don't throw yours away just because
-sources, including the mfgr., say they are obsolete.

I agree that they work. However the difference in opinion is what does "work"
mean?

The 16F84 is quite resource limited as compared to other chips in the PIC
family. There are a laundry list of missing tools: extra timers, comparators,
ADC, PWM, capture and compare, program memory, RAM, self programmability, and
both a syncronous and asyncronous serial interface are among them.

And I agree that it doesn't matter for the blinky LED or a simple counter
project with an LCD display and a button or three. But for real projects where
you are trying to keep track of multiple items at the same time, the extra
memory and additional hardware resources can really be a lifesaver. For every
software UART, or PWM, or virtual timer you have to implement because the 16F84
lacks the real deal, the tougher the task gets in trying to manage these
resources. Hardware stuff is generally set and forget. A hardware PWM will
simply run at the right voltage. A hardware USART will signal (or interrupt)
when the next byte is ready. It cuts down on both code and complexity.

The ICD2 is also helpful because it facilitates hardware debugging at full
speed with breakpoints on an actual chip. This can prove invaluable in tough
debugging situations. But as the OP pointed out, the 16F84 isn't supported.

-  Build yourself a
-programmer; they can be simple.  And either cheap of free, depending on
-how well stocked your parts bin happens to be.  For example, Google {PIC
-and Covington}.  The "No Parts PIC Programmer", NOPP, is what I use ...
-and it's the only programmer I need.  It programs the 16F84 (and its A),
-and with a software upgrade from a different source it also programs the
-16F628 (which I also use).

My Trivial HVP programmer (http://www.finitesite.com/d3jsys/proghvp.html)
works equally as well from a PC parallel port for a 16F84. However when newer
better parts are simply a click away, because Microchip will ship you up to
3 sample parts of 5 different chips absolutely free, I have trouble advocating
sticking with the 16F84.

BAJ

All true.

I don't advocate buying 16F84 new; I do advocate using 'em if you
already have 'em and they serve your purpose.  The very idea of
abandoning a part *only* because something else has come along - a
philosophy which we have encountered in this NG all too often - strikes
me as wasteful and silly.  This from someone who is typing it on a 1997
vintage Slot 3 Pentium PC that he bought for $25 to replace the inop.
Cyrix MII motherboard of a 1998 vintage PC which he rescued from trash
pickup two years ago.  :-)

In article <418B093D.D6A08BD0@att.net>, Michael  <NoSpam@att.net> wrote:
-All true.
-
-I don't advocate buying 16F84 new; I do advocate using 'em if you
-already have 'em and they serve your purpose.  The very idea of
-abandoning a part *only* because something else has come along - a
-philosophy which we have encountered in this NG all too often - strikes
-me as wasteful and silly.  This from someone who is typing it on a 1997
-vintage Slot 3 Pentium PC that he bought for $25 to replace the inop.
-Cyrix MII motherboard of a 1998 vintage PC which he rescued from trash
-pickup two years ago.  :-)

I feel what you are saying to a point. But when it comes to PIC development,
whaqt's on chip impact significantly what you can do with it, and how much
time and trouble it'll take to make it happen. Like I said before, for simple
tasks the part is fine. But most intermedate type projects that people tackle
will have between 2 and 5 elements that the 16F84 lacks and the newer chips
carry. And so you end up having to write software for the 16F84 to handle 
what chips like the 16F88 have in hardware.

Also Microchip will happily send most anyone free samples, so there really
isn't a out of pocket expense to switch.

BAJ