True --- having worked with both approaches, the ICD(2) is much easier, and
more versatile than the old output-to-LCD thing. Firstly, no LCD "glue" code
needed, and secondly, the LCD would be useless in things like infinite
loops, or weird jumps or resets.

Cheers,
Ishaan


----- Original Message -----
From: "Samo Benedicic" <samo_benedicic@YAHOO.COM>
To: <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2003 12:42
Subject: Re: [PIC]: 16F877 - cheaper/better choice?


> Maybe even 100%, but I really doubt that with the same
> ease as you could do it with an ICD.
>
> Regards, Samo
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
> [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads