On Sun, Aug 18, 2002 at 03:55:47AM +1000, Roman Black wrote: > Byron A Jeff wrote: > > > * The standalong programmer is accomplished by simply having an optional > > board with one or more ZIF sockets that plugs into the manditory ICSP > > interface. The universal programmer is much better covered by Brenden's > > CUMP design, which it much further along than we are anyway. > > You said "optional ZIF socket"?? I think the fact > that Sean stated he can get ZIF sockets cheap in > Taiwan would make it a must-have item. The perceived > value of a ZIF socket to the newbie is high, as it > can be used to program PICs for distribution and for > use in simple designs they got from the net. > ICSP is just NOT as good. Yes Roman, I said optional. And it's not an issue of cost. It never has been. The primary programming interface is direct downloading onto the onboard PIC. This requires nothing more than plugging the unit into a serial or USB port and applying power. There's nothing to move and nothing to transfer. As you can tell I feel that the physical process of programming is an impediment to the development process. And this preceeded using PICs. I had the exact same issues with EPROMs on my homebuilt 6809, 68000 family, and 8031 family projects. Self programming flash based PICs are the best thing since sliced bread. I really don't think it's right for us to foist our old style of development upon new users. That's one of the reasons that Basic Stamps and OOPICs do so well in that arena, they're just plug and go. And newbies and hobbyists don't program for distribution. The program for a series of one off projects. Finally ICSP is not only just as good, it's better because one doesn't have to physically move the processor around to do development with it. This isn't about either small scale or production programming. It's about getting code into a PIC for development. And by that criteria, the standard ZIF interfaced PIC programmer falls behind every other method including ICSP, ICD, bootloading, and embedded programming development environments like Myke's BASIC87X and the Basic Stamp. It hinders the development process, not facilitates it. > > > * The folks who just want a cheap simple programmer, well there are already a > > bunch of existing Designs and PCBS, including your own El Cheapo. So in this > > case all we really need to do is nothing at all and let the existing market > > take care of it. > > This point dumbfounds me. I believe that the original > *need* for the standard beginner device was so that > newbies like Kieren wouldn't need to tie-up list member's > time trying to get a home-built programmer working?? But they already exists. I don't understand why we want to duplicate devices that already exist. Wouter's WISP628 costs $17 and you can get it today. Tony has the Fobbit, the V5Exp, and the Pocket Programmer. None of these are homebuilt. All of them are already available. So why duplicate the effort? I stand by my statement. If all we're talking about is a programmer, then there's not much more to do. I guess I'll get motivated to do a quick PCB for the TLVP and sell it as a kit to add to the bunch. A prototyper/designer will be helpful to both new users, and for those of us who cannot simply whip up a PCB in 15 minutes to try out a design. It lets you prototype, to noodle with a design, before having to commit time and effort to the drudge process of laying out and populating a board. That's one reason why I wirewrap boards. It's reasonably quick and I can easily tear down errors. > > So you're saying that after this device consumes a large > amount of list-hours, and become the great device you > mention (which I like BTW!), you do run the risk that > a week after you release the thing you still have Kieren > Mk2 asking which way around to put his transistor > and why it gets so hot? That's a straw man argument. No what it does is negates the 12 other questions that a new user would have asked about chips, programmers, wiring, board debugging, which was an LED goes, what value resistor to use, wht the LCD display doesn't work, and how to filter PWM before getting to the question of why the transistor is so hot. > This *beginner pack* needs to be cheap and *entry-level* > if it is to succeed. For you to state that the new device > fills a higher need, and that the newbies are expected to > keep struggling with transistor orientation in homemade > programmers, seems contrary to the original needs that > prompted the design of a beginner kit. :o) It's going to be fully assembled. That's one point we've all agreed on. It'll have a built in ICSP socket that can either be temporarily wired to the final target board, or wired to the breadboard. But by the time you get around to using it, the project will already be designed, the software already written and tested, the I/O interfaces already working. In short by the time you need the programmer function, the project will already be finished so you'll only need to use that connector once (OK maybe twice ;-) per project. At that insertion rate, one would need a ZIF socket like... never! BAJ -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.