Darrel Johansen wrote:
>
> John Kirk wrote:
> >
> > ... Having a piece of software install and work the first time is not
> > hard to test before shipping it, but MicroChip did not bother to do this.
> > Good luck: John Kirk
>
> Well, two things:
>   1. The interim software versions are not fully tested, and this is published
> in
>       our documentation.  Interim software releases are usually to support new
>       parts and don't go through our full test cycle (but do go through all of
>       our automated regression tests).
>   2. This version was pretty well tested, but it's a new paradigm.  If it's
>       not what you were used to it's because of two reasons.  These two reason
s
>       were the two biggest customer requests for MPLAB:
>          - PLEASE support other software tools (CCS, HI-TECH, etc.)
>          - PLEASE make projects handle more than a single source file.
>
> Both of these features were added, and as a result the Project Manager is a
> little
> more complex.  For that reason, we published the MPLAB v3.40 Project Tutorial
> and
> EVERYWHERE we could, advised people to read it to get up to date on the new
> Project
> Manager.
>
> We feel pretty good about the feedback so far, but it seems that not everyone
> has gone
> through the tutorial.  If you're having problems, please download that and ste
p
> through
> it.

I have problems also.
I DID download the tutorial at the same time I downloaded Mplab about 2
months ago. It didnt match the software, and was therefore more
confusing to a beginner than no tutorial at all. I querried microchip,
and this list to attemp to match a set of documentation with a version
of mplab (pin the tail on the donkey game!) , but I didnt get any
definitive result, so I gave up on the tutorial and manual to match any
particular version of mplab.  I recall someone saying that the
documentation had not caught up with the software, but did not say which
documentation files go with which version of the software.I screwed
around with it for hours on end and finally was able to use it for basic
use, but I still feel like one of the blind men trying to describe an
elephant, since I only know what I was able to work out. Nice. Of
course, If I were familiar with aome older version it wouldnt have been
as hard. How come the document files cant state which version they apply
to? From reading this list, It would seem that the stuff is full of
bugs, too many to recall and list here, and so, I wonder....Does anyone
know of a version that can be had which has few bugs, and has matching
documenttion??? Would it be the DOS version??????
Don