NOPE9 wrote:
> I think just about everyone will suggest you communicate using a USB
> to Serial adapter .

Count me as one "everyone" that doesn't.

> It is a great solution.

For small values of "great".  Big drawbacks with serial ports is that the
user has to know which one a device is connected to.  With a USB serial port
it's even worse because you don't know without some digging which COM port
number the operating decided to assign a particular adapter.  Another
drawback is that the system doesn't know the list of devices connected to
it.  A app can't look around for devices it knows how to handle, or be run
automatically when its particular device type is connected.

> Async serial communication is supported by nearly every development
> language plus

True, although this could be explained because only a few years ago that was
how it was done.

> you find it on lots of devices.

Not anymore, at least counting newly designed devices, not existing ones.

> Aysnc serial communication is not obsolete and will be viable for the
> next 20 years [ I think ] .

It will likely be around in niches for a long time yet to come, but it is
basically obsolete already for mainstream purposes.  Can you show even a
single mass market device produced today that has RS-232 connectivity but
not USB?

Printers are a good example.  20 years ago printers came with a parallel
port and often a serial port.  Then USB came along and it was at first
added, then the serial port was dropped, and now the parallel port is gone
too.


********************************************************************
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