>While it certainly works most of the time, it was designed for low cost, not >high reliability. Calling it a "reliable platform" is a bit misleading. I remember someone on the Microchip forum tells everyone else, "the ICD2 is very reliable". I think that's a real misleading. (Just kidding.) I remember xiaofan says: "ICD2 is everything but reliable". This is the same experience I got. After I switched from ICD2 to PICKit2 since sept 2007. I haven't broke a PICKit 2 yet. And I don't see how PICKit 2 is unreliable from design to practice. (I used to broke an ICD2 in about 2 month and then get a replaced "one" from Microchip by using it as my daily programming/debugging toolset. Now I use PICKit2, this reliability nightmare went away.) Now I think I have at least saved Microchip couple hundred $ for not sending broken ICD2(s) back anymore. Funny N. Au Group Electronics, New Bedford, MA, http://www.AuElectronics.com ----- Original Message ---- From: Olin Lathrop To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Sent: Monday, August 4, 2008 5:38:39 PM Subject: Re: [PIC] Quickest way to get an ICD-2 to program a PIC Funny NYPD wrote: > Per Microchip's definition of 'production programmer' guidelines, it > is still doable with PICkit 2 hardware. > It is not the design cannot have the function, it is the development > team don't want to add this function to challenge its own more > profitable toolset. But that still leaves you without the capbility, at least for now. And this doesn't address the fact that the USB voltage is used as the 5V reference voltage, which means that it can't even guarantee the proper bulk erase voltage over the full range of legal USB voltages. Again, this is a quick and dirty hobbyist programmer. It's design is appropriate for that, and I think succeeds well towards that goal. I recommend it to hobbyists over my more expensive but robust programmers, but professional and production applications have different tradeoffs. > The good news is: the PICKit2 itself is open to the public from > hardware schematic to software source code. So are other designs, like my USBProg (http://www.embedinc.com/products). The hardware has fully controllable Vdd from 0 to 6V and Vpp from 0 to over 13V. And these voltages are relative to a fixed on-board 5V reference. > The hardware has been well designed, For low cost hobby use, yes. I disagree that is is "well designed" for other purposes, like professional use or production. Microchip is the first to admit it is not intended for production. > it is just a matter of time to > pop more software/features to take the advantage of this reliable > platform. While it certainly works most of the time, it was designed for low cost, not high reliability. Calling it a "reliable platform" is a bit misleading. > For the moment, I don't see any issue if people use it in ICSP > programming. If the programmed chip malfunction, it will be caught > right away. In a one-off hobby situation, sure. In a production situation you can't afford that. You don't know, for example, what the real flash data lifetime is when it wasn't programmed or erased within the voltages according to the programming spec. > The open CMD functions might be a good start of adjusting the output > voltage for test purpose. If you're in a professional situation, how much time do you want to spend on this to save $50 or so on a programmer that was designed for robustness? ******************************************************************** 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 -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist