Others have hit on many point.  In addition, mplab
programs more chips (via the various programmers) than
any other programming SW.  And for new chips if it
isn't first with support, it will be darn close...


--- Bob Blick <bblick@sonic.net> wrote:
> On 30 Apr 2005 at 11:21, Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
> > "Have to" do what ? Write PIC code ?
> > What do you use when you do not "have to" use
> MPLAB ?
> > Why is it that you sometimes "have to" use MPLAB ?
> > Finaly, why do you hate it ?
> 
> I use PICC, Ultraedit, and if I have a big project,
> "make". The only 
> time I use MPLAB is when I want to simulate some
> code.
> 
> I guess since I write code in C, I am freed from
> having to use MPLAB, 
> since generally my code works. When it doesn't,
> debugging is easy 
> enough through the serial port in real time.
> 
> I don't use an ICD or emulator because all the
> things I do are real-
> time, and I can't just break and continue.
> 
> MPLAB has a terrible editor, and the whole program
> is awkward and 
> dysfunctional(things we expect Windows programs to
> do, it doesn't).
> 
> But I am asking, what do people LIKE about MPLAB?
> Because I have not 
> found anything to LIKE. Things to TOLERATE, yes. But
> not if there are 
> better alternatives.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Bob
> 
> -- 
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist