On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 10:31:46PM -0000, Thomas Fleckenstein wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
> Thanks to you and the others who provided feedback on that topic.
>

> 1. I would like to go for the smaller/less expensive/more elegant solution
>    but as usual, there is not much time left for showing a prototype.
>    I probably will use a chip with a built-in USART to simplify things
>    (this is probably a much more expensive solution compared to the
>    solution you mentioned which uses a Pic12cxxx device).

It's about $1 USD difference between a 12CXXX and a 16F62X part. Unless it's
an extremely high volume application, the difference in price is negligable.

>
> I need to stick with the rs232 specs, so I will use a MAX232 or similar.

Good idea.

>
> As I already mentioned, i like your idea with the PIC12cxxx devices a lot.
> How much time do you think it would take to develop a stable firmware ?

Longer than using a hardware USART because in a pure software solution you'll
have to track both incoming and outgoing, whereas with the hardware solution
you'll only need to track the precise timing of the software UART.

BAJ

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body