Hmmm, looks like they've forked the IDE and are running 023, whilst the rest of us have moved on to 1.0. So now they are forever playing catch-up. Might it be better for them to develop a script that adds the necessary files and hooks to an existing IDE installation rather than forking the entire install... I also hope they are actively developing code samples for the functionality that is unique to this board (CAN, etc.) and somehow integrating those samples into the main Arduino wiki. I am intrigued by the speed of the device - may have to give it a look... Thanks, DougM On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 7:31 AM, John Ferrell wrot= e: > Reviving a thread three months later... > A lot has happened in the Arduino world in three months and there are no > signs of slowing down. > > The chipKit Max 32 board is on the scene with support in the IDE. A $50 > price tag seems a bit much until the board is examined. The tiny work is > well beyond my skills. Getting started with the PIC 32 amounts to > plugging the board into a USB port, start the IDE (no install needed, it > simply runs from an EXE file), select the assigned com port, select the > board in the IDE, =A0and start programming in c. > > Blink a led and then attach more hardware as you like to the header > strips. It is running. The limitations of the form factor are a factor > and the matter of the 3.3 volt digital interface are new to me, but that > is the chip, not the environment. Everything you can reach on the chip > is done with Sip & Dip connections. > > I have not had as much time to work with it as I would like but it looks > like a winner to me. =A0The special needs & resources with different > micros do make a certain amount of device selections but in general the > environment is a big leap forward in the learning experience. > > I hope someone brings up a PIC 18F module before I really need it... > > I think my next move is to put my environment on a thumb drive and my > project in a box that will fit in my laptop bag! I will back it up to my > web space... > > On 11/17/2011 6:10 PM, doug metzler wrote: >> Several groups have gone off and built Arduino physical clones based >> on other processors. =A0There's an ARMduino, a clone that uses the .net >> compact framework, I'm sure there are several PICduinos but the >> massive failing, to my mind, is that each one requires their native >> toolchain. =A0Not one of them uses the Arduino user interface and not >> one of them will compile and flash from within that interface. >> >> In this way these people just don't get it. =A0It's not about the >> hardware, it's about the integration. >> >> I looked at all of them but I won't touch any of them until I can fire >> up the Arduino user interface, go to Tools.Board and select the board, >> and compile and run on the new processor. >> >> DougM >> >> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Jim Higgins =A0wrot= e: >>> Mr Moderator... =A0Please add one more vote for a separate Arduino tag >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ& =A0list archive >>> View/change your membership options at >>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist >>> > > -- > John Ferrell W8CCW > Be thankful we're not getting all the > government we're paying for. - Will Rogers > > > -- > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .