On Fri, 9 Aug 2002 16:38:58 -0400, Michael A. Powers wrote:
>Don't get me wrong, I like Microchip, and I like the way that=
 they
>provide their development software for free. =A0But there are just=
 a few
>things about MPLAB that really get to me. =A0I can ignore the=
 small
>bugs, lackluster interface, and the fact Microsoft is developing=
 64
>bit windows and MPLAB is still 16 bit. Such things are=
 immaterial.
>(Hopefully v. 6.0 will be a big improvement.) =A0What I can't=
 ignore is
>the poor performance of the simulator. =A0It seems to be=
 intentionally
>lethargic! =A0Why must programs like SPEED.EXE be used as an=
 accelerant?
>Is MPLAB sandbagged? =A0It consumes about 1% of the CPU's=
 resources and
>idles the rest. =A0I though that Microchip might not expend much=
 effort
>on MPLAB in the hopes that 3rd party developers would pick up=
 the
>slack, but where are they?
>
>What do you think about this?

I haven't liked MPLAB for at least 5 years (since before they=
 said
MPLAB 6 would be out "anytime" and "soon"). Yes, they were saying=
 that
at the Masters Conference in 1997! So far I'm not too impressed=
 with
MPLAB 6 either, but it's obviously still young.

My major gripes with MPLAB has always the 16-bit code, the=
 clunky
simulator (although I do use it once in a while), the AWFUL=
 support for
3rd party compilers -- especially source level debugging in C.=
 Some may
say it's not realistic to ask Microchip to support 3rd party=
 tools,
BUT...

this leads us to Michael's question "I though that Microchip=
 might not
expend much effort on MPLAB in the hopes that 3rd party=
 developers
would pick up the slack, but where are they?"

The answer is simple: Would you expend significant time and=
 energy to
design, develop and market a 3rd party equivalent to MPLAB when=
 MPLAB
is FREE? I've thought several times about writing one myself, but=
 each
time I look at what I might be able to charge for it and the=
 limited
market size -- well, it's very discouraging to say the least.=
 Plus,
Microchip is not very willing to divulge technical details of=
 things
like the Picstart+ interface and such. I doubt anyone could sell
anything less than a full-featured IDE for a sum that would pay=
 back
the engineering investment in a reasonable time frame.

I'm disappointed in Microchip's development tool group. They are=
 good
guys and I've met several of them. My own personal opinion is=
 they
really don't have sufficient funding/staffing/support with=
 regards to
the tools they'd like to produce and support. Of course, that's=
 my
opinion... I could be wrong. ;-)

Matt Pobursky
Maximum Performance Systems

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu