On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: >> I am struggling to understand which device and which programmer to use >> etc. =A0Does the PICKIT3 replace the PICKIT2? =A0What is the MicroChip l= ow >> cost solution for programming the PIC24 line? > > Both have detailed "supported device lists" online. > All this found using a few minutes on the MC site. Unfortunately, the website doesn't really get into the differences between the PicKit 2 and 3. However, there are a number of reviews which compare the two. I am still using an ICD-2, but what follows summarizes what I have read of the PicKits: The PicKit 2 was designed by a clever individual or a very small group. It adds a lot of features in addition to basic programming without increasing hardware costs, and includes some very convenient command-line tools. As a result, it became very popular. When it came time to upgrade the PicKit 3, it was clearly done by committee. The PicKit 3 loses many of the cool features of the PicKit 2, the nice command-line tools, and while it uses a more powerful MCU it is actually slower to program. The PicKit 2 can program (some) of the 32-bit PICs, but cannot debug them. MicroChip makes no guarantees that it will support any future chips with the PicKit 2. If you do not plan to use the 32-bit PICs, you are probably better off with the PicKit 2. If you want to program and debug 32-bit PICS or be guaranteed support of the latest chips, go with the PicKit 3. -p. --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .