Response to Byron A Jeff's argument: Firstly, realize that I feel that both of our approaches, though opposite, may be right in different circumstances and with different people. Given that, my response is not an attack of your method but simply a response. > * As a beginner, not heeding the advise of someone who is more experienced than > you is a foolish venture. They've already been where you are now and their > experience is valuable. While this argument sounds good, it simply assumes the premise that with experience comes the ability to teach and guide beginners -- and this is just the opposite of my argument. Have you ever had a teacher or professor that couldn't teach? Who couldn't remember what it was like to be a student? > * As I have pointed out over and over and over and over again, the 16F84 has > the weight of inertia on its side. There's more books, tutorial, and projects > using it because it's been around for nearly 8 years, whereas the others have > come on the scene more recently. Inertia doesn't have to be bad. I argue that access to more books, turorials and projects is the greatest strength of the 16F84. And remember, I'm only recommending the 'F84 for beginners -- as a learning tool. > > * The vast majority of the material that applies to the 16F84 can be used > with the newer chips. It's not a situation like the 18F series parts where > there's a marked difference in the way that code gets done. 16F84 code runs > on 16F62X and 16F87X parts virtually unchanged. Everyone seems to be arguing > that this virtual aspect is too difficult for beginners to understand. Once again, it's because the vast majority of material that applies to the 'F84 can be used with the newer chips that I recommend the 'F84 as the PIC with built-in training wheels. > When I was first starting with PICs in 1995 or so, I ran into exactly the > same problem that I'm descrbing between the 16C84 and the 16C71, which had > A/D converters on PORTA. It required 2 extra lines of code to turn them off. Being a beginner is all about learning, so I believe that a beginner's first ADC should be built from discrete components. Then, when they move up to the fancy micro with all the bells & whistles they'll understand 'how and why' the device works and not simply set a few registers and feed information into a black box that smartly spits out ones and zeros. > * Easy to use is a highly debatable topic: > - The programmer is more difficult. Novice users will build their own > programmers. Show me a 16F84 programmer that's as simple as the TLVP. If a person can't build (or buy) an 'F84 programmer and program the chip successfully (as millions before have done) then perhaps electronics is not their thing and they should be seeking other hobbies and different newsgroups. > - The last of features on a 16F84 quickly introduces complexity in > programming. Not having a hardware USART means having to bit bang. Not > having multiple timers means having to juggle the single 8 bit timer, > counting overflows, and tracking multiple virtual timers off the single > real one. Not having a hardware CCP module means adding code to capture > the length of time of a pulse or doing lower frequency PWM by hand. > Not having enough memory (program, RAM, and data EEPROM) causes headaches > once one gets past the toy project. Not having an internal oscillator > means that one must deal with the oscillator issue immediately instead of > being able to put it off until a later time. All true, but irrelevant to the beginner. All of these wonderful things will unfold to the beginner in due time. I wonder: Have you seen some of the things that have been done with the 'F84. Many surpass the rank of 'toy project.' > Finally it's all moot anyway because the other chips can run exactly > what the 16F84 does. It's just that when it's time to take the second step > the others are ready to step up, while the 16F84 struggles to keep up. I think this is a ridiculous point. That's not my experience, nor that of the other engineers around the office here. > * Honestly when is the last time anyone here has been 'greeted' with a RTFM? > This is the most useful and helpful forum I know. While I may suggest that > a new user read/search the archives, turning them away isn't in this list's > makeup. I have read many suggestions for new users to "Read the Manual." Now this advise wasn't given with malice or with the 'F', just with a lack of appreciation for the limitations of novices. That said, I think this forum is very helpful and has a great membership. For example, I have really enjoyed reading the postings of Kiersen (sp?) and seeing his questions get more and more complex. I feel like I'm taking the journey with him. He's been given some great advice. > All in all I like Brendan's argument the best. Recommending the 16F84 nowadays > is like recommending a 486 or Pentium 90 to a new computer buyer. The > difference is that 16F84's are still available and the others are long gone > from the shelves. They were great in their time, but their time has passed This is a deceptive argument and doesn't really parallel the current debate. I would respond that if you are learning beginning machine language programming in say the Debug environment, a 486 is as good as anything. You don't need an HP calculator when you are learning to add -- at that stage all you could do is stare at the pretty orange and blue keys, with all the funky Greek lettering. > Ok Shawn, you just opened a door. So tell us about the MSP430. Specifically: > > * Features > * Cost > * Availbility > * Packaging > * Development support. And specifically for me: Linux development support > * And most importantly: what does it offer that PICs do not? What is the > value add that make it worth considering in projects? And finally, in reference to the MSP430 micro: I'll simply say that it's richly featured, ultra low power, low cost, has an inexpensive development system ($99US), etc... TI has a webpage dedicated to the device at http://focus.ti.com/docs/analog/catalog/announcements/brc.jhtml?path=templat edata/cm/brc/data/20011112msp430home2&templateId=1 On an aside, I've been running one at >125C for months without problem. And some quick answers: 1) It can be powered with a LDO 3.3V regulator 2) It can be interfaced to 5V logic with a level shifting transciever, such as the 4245 (see: SN74ALVC16424DGGR at Digikey) 3) It comes in a 44-QFP, which is inconvenient for hobbiests, but I got around this by designing a small board that carries the device, oscillator, RS232 transciever, serial flash, vreg, etc... You gotta really like it to do this, though. -Shawn -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics