Apptech wrote: > It's very very very hard for an expert > to realise how very very hard some "utterly trivial" matters > can seem. Those of us who know this stuff all learned it at some point. And us old farts had to do that without the internet with its enourmous library and world wide experts to answer questions. As a result, we had to sit down and actually *think* about a problem and maybe experiment instead of blurting out a question the moment we got stuck. Now don't get me wrong. I think the internet can be a great learning tool and should be used as such, but a infinite amount of immediately available information is not in itself a teacher. In fact, it can sometimes prevent or delay true learning because it's too easy to just look up a answer when needed. That gets you the answer, but it doesn't mean you have learned the principles to come up the answer yourself next time. All too often today's students try to short cut their assignments by asking for answers at the first sign of trouble. They seem to have forgotten the purpose of the assignment is not the end result, but the process which is intended to foster learning. Maybe a basic introduction to microcontrollers would have some value, but there is plenty of existing material out there. The PIC datasheets are actually a very good source since they tell you what you need to know and are well written. My first introduction to the subject was when my high school got a PDP-8 (sortof a 12 bit PIC in a rack mounted box) my junior year. I had only interacted with computers via Basic and Fortran before. I took the manual home over spring vacation and figured I'd learn this computer's language. What I found was totally different than expected. I hadn't thought about a computer at the instruction level before. There was this huge gap between Basic code and these instructions to the point where I couldn't even see how the two related. I remember wondering how I missed the multiply and divide instructions because I knew I could multiply and divide in Basic. Then I got to some example code that implemented a multiply, and it slowly started to make sense. I probably read the two books three times each during that week, each time filling in information that was so out of context in the previous pass that it didn't make any sense then. By the time school started again, I could toggle in simple programs and had a reasonable understanding what was going on. When I got stuck, I had to figure it out. None of the teachers knew any of this stuff. There was nobody else to ask. I had no choice but to sit down and actually learn it. The point is, all the information was in the two manuals, just like all the similar information is in a PIC datasheet. All it takes is motivation and some effort. I did it with the equivalent of a PIC manual in one week in 1973 with no internet and nobody to ask, not even the computer to experiment with until I'd read the manuals three times. So no, I don't have much tolerance for someone whining about how the PIC manuals are so hard, especially when the vast library of the internet, the PIC simulator, and the PICs themselves are readily available. I have no problem helping someone when they get stuck, but they have to have tried to do their own homework first. Frankly, the ones that can't be bothered aren't worth the bother anyway. Those that have a true passion for electronics and microcontrollers are going to preservere, and will be better off for having put in their own effort. Those that don't have the passion will only ever be mediocre engineers at best, and would be better off finding something else to do. By the way, I still have one of the two book, the DEC "Small Computers Handbook". ******************************************************************** Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products (978) 742-9014. Gold level PIC consultants since 2000. -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist