> Studies we carried out at Grant High School, Mt. Gambier, South Australia,
> showed that users' preference for applications to do specific tasks, is
> closely related to when in their education they were introduced to the
> applications. A concrete example: Half a photography class was subjected to
> Adobe Photoshop for image manipulation, the other half was using The Gimp.
> Halfway through the term, the students swapped 'weapons'. The study showed,
> that the ones who were initially using Photoshop didn't like Gimp, and the
> 'Gimp-borne' students thought that Photoshop was crap.
> 
> With this in mind, I move that we need to consider carefully whenever we
> introduce new tools to students."
> 
> I see the same problem with the 16F84. Start newbies with it and they'll
> tend to stick to it like glue. Even if this means going all around the
> world to solve an issue that hardware takes care of easily.
> 

First off, thank you for welcoming me! :) 

I still believe in something my father says every now and then; "Using
the right tool for the right job". It's a shame that most people are
not as adventurous as one might hope.

I find it a strange thing that people actually still use the 16F84.
Isn't it almost pre-historic? My book ("PIC in Practice", by D.W.
Smith) also makes use of atleast one other PICmicro other than the
16F84, because it seems to lack things like an A/D converter. You
could ofcourse use some external AD-converting peripheral, but why
should you? If you aren't in need of anything special it would be a
waste not to use the fully integrated peripherals; waste of time,
waste of money.

Sean.

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist