In message , Andrew Hall writes >Hello all, > >I'm starting a new project which requires a small embedded micro. At the >moment I am thinking of using the PIC or the Amtel AVR. > >Does anybody have any opinions on which is the best generally ? > >My initial impression is : > >The PIC has excellent support and is popular but has a idiosyncratic >architecture? > >The AVR is not so widely used but is generally faster (1 instruction per >clock at 16MHz) and is slightly more conventional in it's architecture >(although also Harvard). > >These are just initial impressions, anybody care to comment ? Anybody >used both ? I've used both the PIC 16C84 and the AVR 1200. The AVR architecture is *much* easier to undertand than the PIC. The AVR assembler doesn't have macros. This can easily be overcome by the use of a general purpose macro-processor like m4. Programmers for the AVR chips are a lot simpler than for the PICs, needing virtually no hardware. The AVR 1200 is cheaper in small quantities than the 16F84. Leon -- Leon Heller: leon@lfheller.demon.co.uk http://www.lfheller.demon.co.uk Amateur Radio Callsign G1HSM Tel: +44 (0) 118 947 1424 See http://www.lfheller.demon.co.uk/dds.htm for details of my AD9850 DDS system - schematic and software.