Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
> Without knowing the finer details, one thing that *seems*
> harder with the dsPIC's, is to get support in some of the
> common hobbyist-oriented PIC programmers... ;-) ;-)

A few months ago the consensus was that anyone messing with dsPICs would be
using at least an ICD2 anyway, and that therefore there wouldn't be much
demand for a hobbyist programmer to support dsPICs.  I've seen a lot of
hobbyist complaining about the lack thereof lately, so has something changed
or are they not thinking this thru all the way?

Do you honestly think I would sell a reasonable amount of additional
EasyProgs if it supported dsPICs?  The host software is already tested and
working, and I've got the ProProg firmware that I should be able to port
without too much trouble.  The downside is that dsPICs won't be programmable
in the ZIF socket because they have a completely different pinout, and of
course I have limited bandwidth so this would be done at the expense of
something else, like adding 16F88 support.

OK, how about a show of hands?  I'm not going to hold anyone to this, but
who out there would personally be inclined to buy an EasyProg (in any form)
if it:

supported dsPICs?
16F88?
Any other PIC?


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist