Maarten Hofman wrote:

>>This calls for a little balance on "building-your-own" ....
>>.... and keep the money for the Pickit in the pocket for a while ....
>>    
>>
>
>That is fine, I don't mind a little balance. I can however give my
>reasoning in more detail for arguing for the PicKit 2:
>  

The advantages (of PicKit 2) are obvious for serious work. Like 
programming many PICs or in preparation for a career.
I dont think anyone disagrees with you. I dont.

>1) It supports a variety of the newer Microchip devices that a random
>programmer grabbed from the web is unlikely to support (I agree, the
>PicKit 2 will probably never supprt the 16F84A. This is, in my eyes, a
>good thing. The fact that it doesn't yet supprt the 16F628A series is
>disappointing, but I read that it will be remedied soon) like the
>16F688, which I think is a wonderful PICmicro to start your experience
>with.
>  
>

I programmed the 16F628A successfully with this programmer and
WinPicProg software.
It also supports the 16F648A.
There is nothing wrong with the 16F84A if you have one in stock. It just
is not 'the latest mode'.
The same will happen with the 16F628. It, too, will lose the 'popularity
contest'.
But in a circuit it keeps on working just like before ......

>3) It is quite easy to use as an ICSP programmer, as you just need to
>add a header pin to your circuitboard to which you can attach it. It
>can even power your circuit through this configuration.
>  
>
The PPort programmers on the WinPicProg site is suitable as an ICSP
programmer.
I left off the ZIF socket(s) and connected directly to my application
(blinking a LED).
Great for learning.

>4) There is no risk that you will blow up either your parallel port or
>your serial port with it (and sometimes the rest of your motherboard).
>  
>
I used a CMOS bufferchip. The PPort drives CMOS inputs, except for 1 line.
The risk is no more than hooking-up a parallel-port-printer to that port.

>I first built my own programmer, I did not have all the parts for it,
>so I spent about $25, if I include the adapter and the parallel port
>cable.
>
I did a lot of reading before building. I stayed away from a JDM type
programmer. The (possible) problems are well-publicized.
I have never considered the 16F84 too. Based on knowledge I gained on
this list..
The PPort programmer works best if the hardware is installed right at 
the PPort. No cable needed.
Using it ICSP style (board at the PPort) brings the convenience (and the
LED indicators) near the keyboard.

BTW this programmer had VPP-before-VDD capability long before it was
needed (16F628A, 16F648A).
How about the PicKit 2 ?

More importantly, at that point I did not even know if PIC programming
was for me.
Money (for a PicKit or other) would not solve my problem. (reading,
learning, listening would).
(in my case) It would have been an outright bad decison to buy a PicKit.

Here is where we differ.

.... for me there are only 2 kinds of PIC-programmers :
>>>> The ones that program the PIC at hand and the ones that do not.

Herman in PHL.


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