Whatever you get: make sure it does ICD and ICSP. IMNSHO, the improvement ICD gives you over burn and churn flash programming is much greater than the difference between JW and flash. If you have been using a good (ie: fast) simulator, you will be very disappointed by the performance of MPSIM. Luckily, with ICD you can do much of your debugginng on the target hardware. Bob Ammerman RAm Systems (contract development of high performance, high function, low-level software) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeanette Eya-Zeissig" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 11:58 PM Subject: [PIC]: Which PIC development system? > Hi, > > I've been a lurker on this list for some time, and I've gleaned a > lot of good tips from the responses to other people's questions. Now I'm in > a situation where I need some advice, and its a situation that doesn't seem > to come up as a topic very often. I've been working on a series of walking > robots using PIC16F84's for control, and in adding sensory systems have > arrived at the point where I seriously need to use a device with more I/O > pins. Simply ganging up more F84's just won't do. I've grown intractably > attached to the instant erasibility of the F series, and vow never to > return to windowed parts. So far, so good: just go to 16F87X's, end of > problem, right? > It would be except for the fact that I do all my development on > Apple computers using Kevin Coble's MacPIC software, a shareware assembler > with simulator that supports several popular programmer boards. Its a great > piece of work and a real bargain, but it does not support the new parts. > About a year and a half ago Kevin seemed to drop off the face of the Earth. > His website is still there, and I assume you could still download MacPIC, > but e-mails to him go unanswered. So, after this amount of time I must > conclude that upgrades of this fine program have ended and the F87X chips, > etc. will never be supported. For me this means switching to a completely > new development system, hence my e-mail to this list. > I want to solicit opinions on the most cost effective development > system for someone like myself, who: > 1. Writes only in MChip assembly. > 2. Would have to acquire a laptop (preferably) or a desktop system > to serve pretty much as a > dedicated PIC development platform. > 3. Has no problem putting together some kind of programming board > compatible with the > assembler he winds up with. > > Naturally, I don't want to shell out any more dough than I have to. > My initial thoughts are some kind of Wintel box running Windows 95 or 98, > MPLAB, and a programmer like that offered by Peter Anderson. Or would it be > better to go to Linux, gnupic, etc.? What are the system requirements for > the latest version of MPLAB? I've searched the MChip site and downloaded > the MPLAB manual, but I'm damned if I can find any reference to what I need > to have. I'm sure this all sounds very funny; I can see a certain humorous > element to it myself. Maybe this is the kind of stuff that everybody just > knows as part of the cultural heritage, so there's no need to ask. If so, > consider me as a Papua/New Guinea bush guy who just washed up in Santa > Monica and needs to buy a car. Nothing fancy, just enough to be freeway > legal and pass smog inspection. Thanks in advance for any help. > > John Zeissig > > > > > > > To see the 'bot > > -- > http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! > email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body > > -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body