Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Stamp to PIC migration — Parallax Forums

Stamp to PIC migration

ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
edited 2003-09-22 20:17 in General Discussion
I'm considering moving to the PIC, using the MPLAB software and the
WARP 13 as a programmer. What are the yeas and nays about this?
Anybody with horror storys with either the software or the
programmer? Many of you decided to split the ATOM because of problems.
«1

Comments

  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-22 22:37
    I've used both the Stamps (the originals back in '95, current BS1's as well
    as BS2's and BS2SX's) as well as www.melabs.com Pic Basic Pro (PBP) compiler
    with PIC's. My choice of one or the other has to do with the application.
    When I built a machine that basically did nothing but sequence i/o and count
    parts, I used a BS2. My original version of that machine used stepper
    motors, and even the BS2SX was too slow to step the motors fast enough.
    Anyway, I used the BS's when speed is not an issue (they run slow), cost is
    not an issue (like for a single application, where I won't be needing
    numerous chips) but quicker development is appreciated because I don't need
    to design a board--there are plenty of development and interface boards.

    For systems where data control, speed, power, flexibility and low cost (such
    as for a product where multiple units will be produced) are needed, then I
    use a PIC with PBP. The speed difference is VERY noticeable. The command
    library of PBP is stronger, supports more PICs (such as the versions with
    a/d, h/w pwm, etc), and the ability to insert asm code directly into the
    program is invaluable. (For faster code in time sensitive applications, as
    well as for direct h/w access and bit twiddling.)

    If I had the option to use a Flash programmed Basic Stamp compatible board
    with my PBP compiler, then I'd probably do that more often. The MicroCode
    Studio interface for PBP is far superior to the interfaces that Parallax
    uses, and the Stamps would have NO advantage over that system, other than
    the cost of entry. You'd have all of the advantages of Basic, the power of
    assembly if needed, the running speed of a compiled program, the convenience
    of a module with plenty of plug-in boards, plus the ability to directly port
    your code to a final design with no modifications. Basically, I guess it'd
    be everything that the ATOM wishes it could be, but you'd get the stability
    and reliablity of PBP.

    As far as support goes...Parallax was decent when I needed them. Often I
    found that I had to go through a tech or two before I truly found the help I
    needed, though, because I usually didn't need help on the most basic of the
    FAQ's. There were several instances where the Parallax tech support couldn't
    even give me the most basic specs on a couple of their products. In the end,
    I didn't call them unless I was really stumped. MELabs, on the other hand,
    has fewer tech support guys, but they are more capable. (I think they have
    two--Charles and Jeff, the PBP author.) In addition, I purchased my setup
    through Reynolds Electronics at www.rentron.com so I have his excellent
    tech support available to me as well. When I got Bruce Reynolds on the phone
    while I was trying to select a compiler setup, he was so helpful and gave me
    such a complete descriptions of my options that I didn't even bother to shop
    around--I knew he'd already earned my business.

    Cliff

    Original Message
    From: "singlewire" <singlewire@y...>
    To: <basicstamps@yahoogroups.com>
    Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 1:08 PM
    Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration


    I'm considering moving to the PIC, using the MPLAB software and the
    WARP 13 as a programmer. What are the yeas and nays about this?
    Anybody with horror storys with either the software or the
    programmer? Many of you decided to split the ATOM because of problems.


    To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    Body of the message will be ignored.


    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-22 22:38
    Both Stamps and PIC's have their respective places and make good complements
    in the developer's tool kit. If I need to put something together quickly,
    there is nothing I have found that gets me more consistent, quick results
    than a Stamp. I also like the fact that Basic programming does not require
    locking the door and turning off the phone. For most routine programs with
    Stamps, you can pretty much ignore the architecture of the microcontroller
    and write while eating a sandwich.

    PICmicro's, on the other hand will get you through many more
    timing-sensitive applications, will do much more in a short amount of
    process time since the are not interpreting on the fly, and have that
    ever-expanding set of peripherals on board many parts. You will need to be
    very familiar with the architecture of the microcontroller(s) you decide to
    work with. Most code for PIC's is written in C and Assembly, the experienced
    programmer knowing how and when to combine both so as to achieve the needed
    results in the shortest amount of time. Myke Predko recommended working in
    pure Assembly first & I agree. It's much easier to learn the architecture
    that way, then backing into C will not leave you short-changed. Some
    old-timers still prefer writing in all Assembly language, which is more time
    consuming, but considered by some to be more "pure'.
    Humbug - whatever gets the job done reliably in a shorter amount of time at
    a reasonable cost is for me.

    You'll always need your own power supply for a PIC design, which IMHO, the
    design of which is often another specialty altogether. Interrupts are nice
    to have, but, again at the cost of learning how to use them. Likewise Timers
    and on-board ADC.

    I have read that several Basic compilers for PIC's can be used quite
    effectively, and this may be a good bridge to use. In any case, learning to
    use PIC's should not cause you to discount and discard Basic Stamps. You
    will never get any PIC project running in the time it takes to do the same
    with a Stamp. I don't believe I am the only one who often enjoys proving out
    a concept on a Stamp, then migrating the design over to a PIC.

    I would go for it, while staying Stamp-conscious as well, because both do
    seem to have their place.

    chris

    >
    Original Message
    > From: singlewire [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=wIKgXQhrdyfvga1f2KhMS9lZAiIG4EDP7k531NC4h9cWfDDAwuXdaYCjNMF_BLQpwpodC-lpIC1VKE9AGg]singlewire@y...[/url
    > Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 4:08 PM
    > To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    > Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration
    >
    >
    > I'm considering moving to the PIC, using the MPLAB software and the
    > WARP 13 as a programmer. What are the yeas and nays about this?
    > Anybody with horror storys with either the software or the
    > programmer? Many of you decided to split the ATOM because of problems.
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the
    > Subject and Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
    > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    >
    >
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-22 22:38
    Chris, that was very well expressed. I have exactly the same philosophy.

    Sid
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-23 01:12
    Well, I like the Stamps, but I wound up with a lot of Atmel stuff, so I use
    the Atmel chips a lot more now, because their prices are good for the chips.
    Pics and Atmels are about equivalent so it wouldn't be much different
    between them except the Atmels are still better pricewise.
    For example, it's hard to put in a $60+ dollar Stamp into a digital
    thermometer where a $6.00 Atmel would work (90at2323). I sort of like to
    save the Stamp for experiments. Before the Stamp was a bit faster to
    experiment with but I've got all the Atmel tools now (ICE, etc.) so using
    them has become pretty easy nowadays. The single step trace debug is great
    if your familiar with assembler (the basic compilers compile into hex and
    assembler source so you can use the debugger).
    I still use the stamps, but I find myself using Atmels more and more, where
    before I would use the stamps for prototyping and then switch to the Atmel
    later for the price break.
    Now I just do it with the Atmels. There are two basic compilers and a free
    basic compiler as well. Along with some assemblers and C compilers as well.
    There even seems to be a Java compiler and a Pascal compiler as well (but I
    forget where I read or saw about those though). Besides I really love all
    those interrupts I have with the Atmels I can use.

    The Stamps seem to be much more robust over the other stamp clones. I have
    had temperature sensitivity problems with the other clone stamps. I haven't
    hit any compiler bugs per se, but I have had the Stamp clone basic compiler
    hang or lock up every now and then, forcing you to kill the process and
    reload it again to continue.

    The Stamps are worth the price as they have better support over the clones.
    The Parallax people put a lot of effort into the Stamps to minimize the bugs
    you run into.
    Besides that $60.00 Stamp still makes for a really really good thermometer
    though. But I'll give the Atmel chip based thermometer to my friends but not
    the Stamp based one.

    Here's a toast to the Parallax Stamp...



    Original Message
    From: singlewire [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=LlIFWeCc79zFliaRkd2TKDM-oyW7WsD3M5GFepZsx7r9g852uCxInm-t6hXmK-KHTLuGjlUtIHjxtZMvYBg]singlewire@y...[/url
    Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 3:08 PM
    To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration


    I'm considering moving to the PIC, using the MPLAB software and the
    WARP 13 as a programmer. What are the yeas and nays about this?
    Anybody with horror storys with either the software or the
    programmer? Many of you decided to split the ATOM because of problems.


    To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    Body of the message will be ignored.


    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-23 01:25
    Debuging assembly language can be a bear and has been known to cause
    loss of hair.
    My advise .Square One has some excellent books on programming pics. Copy
    thier routines into your Mplab program to creat a library of short
    routines,then modify them as needed.
    If your haven used the Mplab yet, its a very complex program so be
    prepared to spend several hours just getting to know how to use it.
    Testing the program after it has been downloaded to the pic can cause you
    to kill your cat.
    I use the stamp as a debuger for the pic ,an in circuit emulater can be
    rather expensive.
    Once you figure out how to use MPlab and how to avoid creating endless
    loops its not really that difficult but it does take a decent amount of
    time to make even a short program.

    On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 21:08:12 -0000 "singlewire" <singlewire@y...>
    writes:
    > I'm considering moving to the PIC, using the MPLAB software and the
    > WARP 13 as a programmer. What are the yeas and nays about this?
    > Anybody with horror storys with either the software or the
    > programmer? Many of you decided to split the ATOM because of
    > problems.
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the
    > Subject and Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
    > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    >
    >
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-23 06:31
    The choice of a Stamp versus PIC depends on what you want to do and how much
    you want to spend, both in the in initial purchase price and in development
    costs.

    If you want to mass-produce an item and development cost is not an issue, a
    PIC is the best choice. Keep in mind that unless you have alot of canned PIC
    code for serial I/O, counters, etc... you are going to spend alot of time
    writing your own. You also have to build / buy a programmer and purchase
    tools to write code and burn it to the PIC.

    On the other hand, it you want to bang out a one-off project in a short time
    and don't have the development funds to use a PIC, a Stamp is ideal. All the
    hard stuff is done, all you do is provide the I/O devices and power and
    write some simple code. The programming software and documentation is free,
    and for the most part it will do what you want. There are also Stamp clones
    and similar higher-level processors available, but for the most part their
    documentation and / or support sucks.

    As Jon can attest, I have banged out several very functional robots based on
    Basic Stamps (including the hardware) in the time it took other folks to use
    a PIC to provide some basic functionality to existing robot hardware. Any
    problems I have had have been dealt with by Parallax in a very timely and
    professional manner.

    The book I am currently reading has alot of bias for the 16F84 processor,
    and it looks like a neat tool, but I can't see dropping $250 for the
    supporting software and hardware.

    Original Message

    > Well, I like the Stamps, but I wound up with a lot of Atmel stuff, so I
    use
    > the Atmel chips a lot more now, because their prices are good for the
    chips.
    > Pics and Atmels are about equivalent so it wouldn't be much different
    > between them except the Atmels are still better pricewise.
    > For example, it's hard to put in a $60+ dollar Stamp into a digital
    > thermometer where a $6.00 Atmel would work (90at2323). I sort of like to
    > save the Stamp for experiments. Before the Stamp was a bit faster to
    > experiment with but I've got all the Atmel tools now (ICE, etc.) so using
    > them has become pretty easy nowadays. The single step trace debug is great
    > if your familiar with assembler (the basic compilers compile into hex and
    > assembler source so you can use the debugger).
    > I still use the stamps, but I find myself using Atmels more and more,
    where
    > before I would use the stamps for prototyping and then switch to the Atmel
    > later for the price break.
    > Now I just do it with the Atmels. There are two basic compilers and a free
    > basic compiler as well. Along with some assemblers and C compilers as
    well.
    > There even seems to be a Java compiler and a Pascal compiler as well (but
    I
    > forget where I read or saw about those though). Besides I really love all
    > those interrupts I have with the Atmels I can use.
    >
    > The Stamps seem to be much more robust over the other stamp clones. I have
    > had temperature sensitivity problems with the other clone stamps. I
    haven't
    > hit any compiler bugs per se, but I have had the Stamp clone basic
    compiler
    > hang or lock up every now and then, forcing you to kill the process and
    > reload it again to continue.
    >
    > The Stamps are worth the price as they have better support over the
    clones.
    > The Parallax people put a lot of effort into the Stamps to minimize the
    bugs
    > you run into.
    > Besides that $60.00 Stamp still makes for a really really good thermometer
    > though. But I'll give the Atmel chip based thermometer to my friends but
    not
    > the Stamp based one.
    >
    > Here's a toast to the Parallax Stamp...
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-23 07:07

    Original Message
    From: "Rodent" <daweasel@s...>
    The book I am currently reading has alot of bias for the 16F84 processor,
    and it looks like a neat tool, but I can't see dropping $250 for the
    supporting software and hardware.

    It only takes about five Stamps to cover the cost of that supporting
    software and hardware you mention...after that, the PIC's are only about
    $1.50. If you want a carrier board, that's about $9+, depending on the size.
    If you are active with projects, it won't take long to recapture your
    investment. Of course, the Stamps have a lot of accessories available.

    Cliff
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-24 01:01
    I'd have to agree about the Atmel. I was trying to get PIC running
    a while ago but just gave up on it because I didn't want to have to
    spend a lot of money on a programmer and chips. I then found out
    about the AVR and bought the STK500 dev board. It was $80 which as
    far as I know is less than the Warp13 (which is what I originally
    planend on getting), but has tons more features. It has onboard
    LED's, switches, headers, etc. so everything can be tested.

    I use BASCOM-AVR as my compiler. When I first got the stamp I was
    stumped because I was accustomed to MS Qbasic, and the stamp was
    very different. However, BASCOM is almost identical to Qbasic so I
    learned it in only a few days. It's a pretty good compiler and has
    a lot of nice features. You can download it for free too, but you
    can only use 2k of code. The full version costs $70, which isn't
    too bad.

    Probably the best thing about the AVR when compared to PIC is the
    price. The PIC16F84A, which I believe is one of the most popular
    models, is about $5. The AT90S2313, which is a rough "equivalent"
    of the PIC, is about $3. For about $2 less, you get roughly 4 times
    as much speed, twice as much flash, just under twice as much memory,
    a serial UART, and 2 more pins. Best of all, you can build a
    programmer out of just a parallel cable and a few resistors if you
    don't need a full development system.

    A good website for AVR is www.avrfreaks.com . If you think AVR
    looks interesting, you should check it out.



    --- In basicstamps@y..., "Earl Bollinger" <earlwbollinger@a...>
    wrote:
    > Well, I like the Stamps, but I wound up with a lot of Atmel stuff,
    so I use
    > the Atmel chips a lot more now, because their prices are good for
    the chips.
    > Pics and Atmels are about equivalent so it wouldn't be much
    different
    > between them except the Atmels are still better pricewise.
    > For example, it's hard to put in a $60+ dollar Stamp into a digital
    > thermometer where a $6.00 Atmel would work (90at2323). I sort of
    like to
    > save the Stamp for experiments. Before the Stamp was a bit faster
    to
    > experiment with but I've got all the Atmel tools now (ICE, etc.)
    so using
    > them has become pretty easy nowadays. The single step trace debug
    is great
    > if your familiar with assembler (the basic compilers compile into
    hex and
    > assembler source so you can use the debugger).
    > I still use the stamps, but I find myself using Atmels more and
    more, where
    > before I would use the stamps for prototyping and then switch to
    the Atmel
    > later for the price break.
    > Now I just do it with the Atmels. There are two basic compilers
    and a free
    > basic compiler as well. Along with some assemblers and C compilers
    as well.
    > There even seems to be a Java compiler and a Pascal compiler as
    well (but I
    > forget where I read or saw about those though). Besides I really
    love all
    > those interrupts I have with the Atmels I can use.
    >
    > The Stamps seem to be much more robust over the other stamp
    clones. I have
    > had temperature sensitivity problems with the other clone stamps.
    I haven't
    > hit any compiler bugs per se, but I have had the Stamp clone basic
    compiler
    > hang or lock up every now and then, forcing you to kill the
    process and
    > reload it again to continue.
    >
    > The Stamps are worth the price as they have better support over
    the clones.
    > The Parallax people put a lot of effort into the Stamps to
    minimize the bugs
    > you run into.
    > Besides that $60.00 Stamp still makes for a really really good
    thermometer
    > though. But I'll give the Atmel chip based thermometer to my
    friends but not
    > the Stamp based one.
    >
    > Here's a toast to the Parallax Stamp...
    >
    >
    >
    >
    Original Message
    > From: singlewire [noparse][[/noparse]mailto:singlewire@y...]
    > Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 3:08 PM
    > To: basicstamps@y...
    > Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration
    >
    >
    > I'm considering moving to the PIC, using the MPLAB software and the
    > WARP 13 as a programmer. What are the yeas and nays about this?
    > Anybody with horror storys with either the software or the
    > programmer? Many of you decided to split the ATOM because of
    problems.
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@y...
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the
    Subject and
    > Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-24 19:28
    If it's just a costwise comparison, pic's win big ; I think you can get
    pic's for around $2 in quantity.

    On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, Earl Bollinger wrote:

    > Well, I like the Stamps, but I wound up with a lot of Atmel stuff, so I use
    > the Atmel chips a lot more now, because their prices are good for the chips.
    > Pics and Atmels are about equivalent so it wouldn't be much different
    > between them except the Atmels are still better pricewise.
    > For example, it's hard to put in a $60+ dollar Stamp into a digital
    > thermometer where a $6.00 Atmel would work (90at2323). I sort of like to
    > save the Stamp for experiments. Before the Stamp was a bit faster to
    > experiment with but I've got all the Atmel tools now (ICE, etc.) so using
    > them has become pretty easy nowadays. The single step trace debug is great
    > if your familiar with assembler (the basic compilers compile into hex and
    > assembler source so you can use the debugger).
    > I still use the stamps, but I find myself using Atmels more and more, where
    > before I would use the stamps for prototyping and then switch to the Atmel
    > later for the price break.
    > Now I just do it with the Atmels. There are two basic compilers and a free
    > basic compiler as well. Along with some assemblers and C compilers as well.
    > There even seems to be a Java compiler and a Pascal compiler as well (but I
    > forget where I read or saw about those though). Besides I really love all
    > those interrupts I have with the Atmels I can use.
    >
    > The Stamps seem to be much more robust over the other stamp clones. I have
    > had temperature sensitivity problems with the other clone stamps. I haven't
    > hit any compiler bugs per se, but I have had the Stamp clone basic compiler
    > hang or lock up every now and then, forcing you to kill the process and
    > reload it again to continue.
    >
    > The Stamps are worth the price as they have better support over the clones.
    > The Parallax people put a lot of effort into the Stamps to minimize the bugs
    > you run into.
    > Besides that $60.00 Stamp still makes for a really really good thermometer
    > though. But I'll give the Atmel chip based thermometer to my friends but not
    > the Stamp based one.
    >
    > Here's a toast to the Parallax Stamp...
    >
    >
    >
    >
    Original Message
    > From: singlewire [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=Db72RwzQk2yzaMliZ8zLTemeFaTlaW7hRm4k7bb29eqKx8VkAXJLf4z0_aZbpPPJMBjNxEvnAz25gOIbycaV]singlewire@y...[/url
    > Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 3:08 PM
    > To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    > Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration
    >
    >
    > I'm considering moving to the PIC, using the MPLAB software and the
    > WARP 13 as a programmer. What are the yeas and nays about this?
    > Anybody with horror storys with either the software or the
    > programmer? Many of you decided to split the ATOM because of problems.
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    > Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and Body
    of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    >
    >
    >

    Sean T. Lamont, CTO / Chief NetNerd, Abstract Software, Inc. (ServNet)
    Seattle - Bellingham - Vancouver - Portland - Everett - Tacoma - Bremerton
    email: lamont@a... WWW: http://www.serv.net
    "...There's no moral, it's just a lot of stuff that happens". - H. Simpson
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-24 20:10
    it depends on which PIC your looking at, the same with the Atmels.
    $2.00 ea is larger quantities than I need, plus that model doesn't have the
    oomph I usually need. I usually like 2k or flash rom or better, thus the
    90at2323's and 90at8515's usually beat out the other ones.

    Original Message
    From: Sean T. Lamont .lost. [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=YTFm-bxVGljrtVG-F83CLcMgmDwBegt4eNmAYYKou6DEJszOwyMgaxOCxUm5Zm-gMcuOfrikzKBLeF6wAeH9SA]lamont@a...[/url
    Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 1:28 PM
    To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: RE: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration



    If it's just a costwise comparison, pic's win big ; I think you can get
    pic's for around $2 in quantity.

    On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, Earl Bollinger wrote:

    > Well, I like the Stamps, but I wound up with a lot of Atmel stuff, so I
    use
    > the Atmel chips a lot more now, because their prices are good for the
    chips.
    > Pics and Atmels are about equivalent so it wouldn't be much different
    > between them except the Atmels are still better pricewise.
    > For example, it's hard to put in a $60+ dollar Stamp into a digital
    > thermometer where a $6.00 Atmel would work (90at2323). I sort of like to
    > save the Stamp for experiments. Before the Stamp was a bit faster to
    > experiment with but I've got all the Atmel tools now (ICE, etc.) so using
    > them has become pretty easy nowadays. The single step trace debug is great
    > if your familiar with assembler (the basic compilers compile into hex and
    > assembler source so you can use the debugger).
    > I still use the stamps, but I find myself using Atmels more and more,
    where
    > before I would use the stamps for prototyping and then switch to the Atmel
    > later for the price break.
    > Now I just do it with the Atmels. There are two basic compilers and a free
    > basic compiler as well. Along with some assemblers and C compilers as
    well.
    > There even seems to be a Java compiler and a Pascal compiler as well (but
    I
    > forget where I read or saw about those though). Besides I really love all
    > those interrupts I have with the Atmels I can use.
    >
    > The Stamps seem to be much more robust over the other stamp clones. I have
    > had temperature sensitivity problems with the other clone stamps. I
    haven't
    > hit any compiler bugs per se, but I have had the Stamp clone basic
    compiler
    > hang or lock up every now and then, forcing you to kill the process and
    > reload it again to continue.
    >
    > The Stamps are worth the price as they have better support over the
    clones.
    > The Parallax people put a lot of effort into the Stamps to minimize the
    bugs
    > you run into.
    > Besides that $60.00 Stamp still makes for a really really good thermometer
    > though. But I'll give the Atmel chip based thermometer to my friends but
    not
    > the Stamp based one.
    >
    > Here's a toast to the Parallax Stamp...
    >
    >
    >
    >
    Original Message
    > From: singlewire [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=dqNZhbC5w7plcI1i3Ywszk6E-Vey42R-MlCUzGkuW5SFgkVsGCWmI2Pm-Xs4IMo8AEu2JZKZQ0davmMb]singlewire@y...[/url
    > Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 3:08 PM
    > To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    > Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration
    >
    >
    > I'm considering moving to the PIC, using the MPLAB software and the
    > WARP 13 as a programmer. What are the yeas and nays about this?
    > Anybody with horror storys with either the software or the
    > programmer? Many of you decided to split the ATOM because of problems.
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    > Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    >
    >
    >

    Sean T. Lamont, CTO / Chief NetNerd, Abstract Software, Inc. (ServNet)
    Seattle - Bellingham - Vancouver - Portland - Everett - Tacoma - Bremerton
    email: lamont@a... WWW: http://www.serv.net
    "...There's no moral, it's just a lot of stuff that happens". - H. Simpson


    To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    Body of the message will be ignored.


    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-24 20:13
    Can you use stamp instructions with atmel?????
    Original Message
    From: "Earl Bollinger" <earlwbollinger@a...>
    To: <basicstamps@yahoogroups.com>
    Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 3:10 PM
    Subject: RE: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration


    > it depends on which PIC your looking at, the same with the Atmels.
    > $2.00 ea is larger quantities than I need, plus that model doesn't have
    the
    > oomph I usually need. I usually like 2k or flash rom or better, thus the
    > 90at2323's and 90at8515's usually beat out the other ones.
    >
    >
    Original Message
    > From: Sean T. Lamont .lost. [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=5QdeVZsmpgh8x85yLIf46oSGniJgrbKn4wsrfHBdnMkrnPnmRxCzZEOxYwoXXgVNevSQkN-YI6_OCMpgsu9k]lamont@a...[/url
    > Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 1:28 PM
    > To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    > Subject: RE: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration
    >
    >
    >
    > If it's just a costwise comparison, pic's win big ; I think you can get
    > pic's for around $2 in quantity.
    >
    > On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, Earl Bollinger wrote:
    >
    > > Well, I like the Stamps, but I wound up with a lot of Atmel stuff, so I
    > use
    > > the Atmel chips a lot more now, because their prices are good for the
    > chips.
    > > Pics and Atmels are about equivalent so it wouldn't be much different
    > > between them except the Atmels are still better pricewise.
    > > For example, it's hard to put in a $60+ dollar Stamp into a digital
    > > thermometer where a $6.00 Atmel would work (90at2323). I sort of like to
    > > save the Stamp for experiments. Before the Stamp was a bit faster to
    > > experiment with but I've got all the Atmel tools now (ICE, etc.) so
    using
    > > them has become pretty easy nowadays. The single step trace debug is
    great
    > > if your familiar with assembler (the basic compilers compile into hex
    and
    > > assembler source so you can use the debugger).
    > > I still use the stamps, but I find myself using Atmels more and more,
    > where
    > > before I would use the stamps for prototyping and then switch to the
    Atmel
    > > later for the price break.
    > > Now I just do it with the Atmels. There are two basic compilers and a
    free
    > > basic compiler as well. Along with some assemblers and C compilers as
    > well.
    > > There even seems to be a Java compiler and a Pascal compiler as well
    (but
    > I
    > > forget where I read or saw about those though). Besides I really love
    all
    > > those interrupts I have with the Atmels I can use.
    > >
    > > The Stamps seem to be much more robust over the other stamp clones. I
    have
    > > had temperature sensitivity problems with the other clone stamps. I
    > haven't
    > > hit any compiler bugs per se, but I have had the Stamp clone basic
    > compiler
    > > hang or lock up every now and then, forcing you to kill the process and
    > > reload it again to continue.
    > >
    > > The Stamps are worth the price as they have better support over the
    > clones.
    > > The Parallax people put a lot of effort into the Stamps to minimize the
    > bugs
    > > you run into.
    > > Besides that $60.00 Stamp still makes for a really really good
    thermometer
    > > though. But I'll give the Atmel chip based thermometer to my friends but
    > not
    > > the Stamp based one.
    > >
    > > Here's a toast to the Parallax Stamp...
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    Original Message
    > > From: singlewire [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=NyUqVVVjPgTh6BbHzi8Q_0sjdrZGaxh-yLwjjo6ThM_GET8UCCEQYr_Y5Uk4IJ6wnFWuipEAhe-ehQ]singlewire@y...[/url
    > > Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 3:08 PM
    > > To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    > > Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration
    > >
    > >
    > > I'm considering moving to the PIC, using the MPLAB software and the
    > > WARP 13 as a programmer. What are the yeas and nays about this?
    > > Anybody with horror storys with either the software or the
    > > programmer? Many of you decided to split the ATOM because of problems.
    > >
    > >
    > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject
    and
    > > Body of the message will be ignored.
    > >
    > >
    > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject
    and
    > Body of the message will be ignored.
    > >
    > >
    > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    > Sean T. Lamont, CTO / Chief NetNerd, Abstract Software, Inc. (ServNet)
    > Seattle - Bellingham - Vancouver - Portland - Everett - Tacoma - Bremerton
    > email: lamont@a... WWW: http://www.serv.net
    > "...There's no moral, it's just a lot of stuff that happens". - H. Simpson
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    > Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    >
    >
    >
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-24 22:51
    As far as I know, there is no "stamp-compatible" AVR basic
    compiler. BASCOM, which is what I use, is based off of microsoft
    Qbasic. It took me weeks to get good at PBasic, but just a few days
    for BASCOM because I already knew Qbasic. I use Stamp sometimes,
    but I like BASCOM a lot better because of some basic differences.
    For example, you can't have a line like:

    if x = 1 then y = 1
    [noparse][[/noparse]code]

    In stamp, it would have to be like:

    if x = 1 then changey
    back:
    [noparse][[/noparse]code]
    changey:
    y = 1
    goto back

    I still use the stamp for testing, and for basic things. But more
    complex things, like using algorithms that take a lot of conditions
    are done on AVR.

    --- In basicstamps@y..., "victor Faria" <victorf@g...> wrote:
    > Can you use stamp instructions with atmel?????
    >
    Original Message
    > From: "Earl Bollinger" <earlwbollinger@a...>
    > To: <basicstamps@y...>
    > Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 3:10 PM
    > Subject: RE: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-25 00:52
    On Sun, 23 Dec 2001, Rodent wrote:

    M> The book I am currently reading has alot of bias for the 16F84 processor,
    M> and it looks like a neat tool, but I can't see dropping $250 for the
    M> supporting software and hardware.

    I must be doing something wrong then, programming the '84 for less than
    US$20.... (for the hardware - the software is free).

    Luke [noparse]:)[/noparse]
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-25 02:04
    Please forward the info then -- I have not seen any inexpensive tools.

    Original Message

    > M> The book I am currently reading has alot of bias for the 16F84
    processor,
    > M> and it looks like a neat tool, but I can't see dropping $250 for the
    > M> supporting software and hardware.
    >
    > I must be doing something wrong then, programming the '84 for less than
    > US$20.... (for the hardware - the software is free).
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2001-12-25 02:23
    I apologize, I won't talk about anything but Basic Stamps anymore here.
    If someone wants more info they can go to the www.avrfreaks.net website.

    I like the interrupts on the Atmels, once you start using interrupts, it's
    hard to go back to the simple polling looping methods.
    There is a free Atmel Basic compiler you can find it on the
    circuitcellar.com website.
    Both Pics and Atmels can be programmed using cheap parallel port
    programmers. They talk about how to make several different kinds of
    programmers for them, the chip programmer software is free from their
    respective websites. Both chip families have a lot of assemblers, compilers
    and such available.
    But a Atmel STK500 programmer eval board can be had for under $100 with
    software, it programs most all of the different Atmel chips. The Atmel board
    comes with a lot of nice features built in too. Either the Bascom or Fastcom
    Basic compilers go for $99.


    Original Message
    From: victor Faria [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=erXiFLTAP9XDyyv24r3h2wbIFry6o-lBKxuDK6xa35VtHtJRLKE6KS5-kjCgJeOS90zT9Au0jBmbSA]victorf@g...[/url
    Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 2:13 PM
    To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: Re: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration


    Can you use stamp instructions with atmel?????
    Original Message
    From: "Earl Bollinger" <earlwbollinger@a...>
    To: <basicstamps@yahoogroups.com>
    Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 3:10 PM
    Subject: RE: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration


    > it depends on which PIC your looking at, the same with the Atmels.
    > $2.00 ea is larger quantities than I need, plus that model doesn't have
    the
    > oomph I usually need. I usually like 2k or flash rom or better, thus the
    > 90at2323's and 90at8515's usually beat out the other ones.
    >
    >
    Original Message
    > From: Sean T. Lamont .lost. [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=169_6ARQT4oSHPbDw54uZosrP09HAzk3jCRDiM7LVpwmaneO1yHNyhvhWa_8-vqNbaWf_9YX1Yb1P4dP3c1tcA]lamont@a...[/url
    > Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 1:28 PM
    > To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    > Subject: RE: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration
    >
    >
    >
    > If it's just a costwise comparison, pic's win big ; I think you can get
    > pic's for around $2 in quantity.
    >
    > On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, Earl Bollinger wrote:
    >
    > > Well, I like the Stamps, but I wound up with a lot of Atmel stuff, so I
    > use
    > > the Atmel chips a lot more now, because their prices are good for the
    > chips.
    > > Pics and Atmels are about equivalent so it wouldn't be much different
    > > between them except the Atmels are still better pricewise.
    > > For example, it's hard to put in a $60+ dollar Stamp into a digital
    > > thermometer where a $6.00 Atmel would work (90at2323). I sort of like to
    > > save the Stamp for experiments. Before the Stamp was a bit faster to
    > > experiment with but I've got all the Atmel tools now (ICE, etc.) so
    using
    > > them has become pretty easy nowadays. The single step trace debug is
    great
    > > if your familiar with assembler (the basic compilers compile into hex
    and
    > > assembler source so you can use the debugger).
    > > I still use the stamps, but I find myself using Atmels more and more,
    > where
    > > before I would use the stamps for prototyping and then switch to the
    Atmel
    > > later for the price break.
    > > Now I just do it with the Atmels. There are two basic compilers and a
    free
    > > basic compiler as well. Along with some assemblers and C compilers as
    > well.
    > > There even seems to be a Java compiler and a Pascal compiler as well
    (but
    > I
    > > forget where I read or saw about those though). Besides I really love
    all
    > > those interrupts I have with the Atmels I can use.
    > >
    > > The Stamps seem to be much more robust over the other stamp clones. I
    have
    > > had temperature sensitivity problems with the other clone stamps. I
    > haven't
    > > hit any compiler bugs per se, but I have had the Stamp clone basic
    > compiler
    > > hang or lock up every now and then, forcing you to kill the process and
    > > reload it again to continue.
    > >
    > > The Stamps are worth the price as they have better support over the
    > clones.
    > > The Parallax people put a lot of effort into the Stamps to minimize the
    > bugs
    > > you run into.
    > > Besides that $60.00 Stamp still makes for a really really good
    thermometer
    > > though. But I'll give the Atmel chip based thermometer to my friends but
    > not
    > > the Stamp based one.
    > >
    > > Here's a toast to the Parallax Stamp...
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    Original Message
    > > From: singlewire [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=BUKmmGq3VZJatQkyQT0yC0kcl7u_bVm9kI6C_avUobDpJbr-a6gPzFQAF600UyNjnoVHg-puR0HgLqJs]singlewire@y...[/url
    > > Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 3:08 PM
    > > To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    > > Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration
    > >
    > >
    > > I'm considering moving to the PIC, using the MPLAB software and the
    > > WARP 13 as a programmer. What are the yeas and nays about this?
    > > Anybody with horror storys with either the software or the
    > > programmer? Many of you decided to split the ATOM because of problems.
    > >
    > >
    > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject
    and
    > > Body of the message will be ignored.
    > >
    > >
    > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject
    and
    > Body of the message will be ignored.
    > >
    > >
    > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    > Sean T. Lamont, CTO / Chief NetNerd, Abstract Software, Inc. (ServNet)
    > Seattle - Bellingham - Vancouver - Portland - Everett - Tacoma - Bremerton
    > email: lamont@a... WWW: http://www.serv.net
    > "...There's no moral, it's just a lot of stuff that happens". - H. Simpson
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    > Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    >
    >
    >


    To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    Body of the message will be ignored.


    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-19 00:12
    Hey folks,

    Learnin lots!!

    A few months ago I completed a project that took some RAW direction/speed
    data from a wind sensor and converted the Rectangular data to Polar and
    displayed it on to a display.

    I'm now looking at moving this 'program' to a PIC, if possible.

    I've heard some of you guys mention how the Stamp is a great way to
    prototype a project but is somewhat rigid (sequential logic) and a bit more
    expensive (??..maybe not!)

    Thanks
    Steve
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-19 00:23
    If you're looking to save a few bucks and aren't going to be building
    hundreds (or more) of units, you might just want to use our OEM parts.
    That way there is no code conversion. Yes, more expensive than a raw
    PIC -- but you don't have to buy or learn any new tools and if your code
    works on your shiny Stamp module then you know it will work in our OEM
    part.

    While not widely known, there are lots of small companies who do small-
    to medium-sized production runs using our EOM chips. I did it at my
    last employer. In fact, they still produce that product.

    -- Jon Williams
    -- Applications Engineer, Parallax
    -- Dallas Office


    Original Message
    From: Brady,Steven [noparse]/noparse]PYR] [noparse][[/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=US4kLeyiBcKYNMB0qQYKyEs4yHUzQ4sR6QWkv8RdlEFi2PGVxsLFszKb8Bslz6lUOBMBImXYG_RI5K2ujhfb]steven.brady2@e...[/url
    Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 6:12 PM
    To: 'basicstamps@yahoogroups.com'
    Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration


    Hey folks,

    Learnin lots!!

    A few months ago I completed a project that took some RAW
    direction/speed data from a wind sensor and converted the Rectangular
    data to Polar and displayed it on to a display.

    I'm now looking at moving this 'program' to a PIC, if possible.

    I've heard some of you guys mention how the Stamp is a great way to
    prototype a project but is somewhat rigid (sequential logic) and a bit
    more expensive (??..maybe not!)

    Thanks
    Steve

    To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject
    and Body of the message will be ignored.


    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




    This message has been scanned by WebShield. Please report SPAM to
    abuse@p....
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-19 00:27
    Well, my production run might consists of 20-30 IF, big IF, I can shrink it
    and get it running on a cutsie little platform.

    I still need to incorporate some Inverted Current Loop Comms
    (active--providing comms for sensors).

    sb

    Original Message
    From: Jon Williams [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=dQL-yiFZ0jdAon8ryD6pmf_IwiB65BboN1Lq72_sUp5LUeIIhtp2LOG5jrWrG66xJ7V_fsMCqlNCxFp_qt6O]jwilliams@p...[/url
    Sent: September 18, 2003 4:23 PM
    To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: RE: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration


    If you're looking to save a few bucks and aren't going to be building
    hundreds (or more) of units, you might just want to use our OEM parts. That
    way there is no code conversion. Yes, more expensive than a raw PIC -- but
    you don't have to buy or learn any new tools and if your code works on your
    shiny Stamp module then you know it will work in our OEM part.

    While not widely known, there are lots of small companies who do small- to
    medium-sized production runs using our EOM chips. I did it at my last
    employer. In fact, they still produce that product.

    -- Jon Williams
    -- Applications Engineer, Parallax
    -- Dallas Office


    Original Message
    From: Brady,Steven [noparse]/noparse]PYR] [noparse][[/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=Fg5i1Pgnkkkukbd85G2Og8zhhofP9VJHd9NeNR11aqQVHTRNPw_UXP9aJsnuSYiczWcLxYQw9-hVnMKFhFN_JA]steven.brady2@e...[/url
    Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 6:12 PM
    To: 'basicstamps@yahoogroups.com'
    Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration


    Hey folks,

    Learnin lots!!

    A few months ago I completed a project that took some RAW direction/speed
    data from a wind sensor and converted the Rectangular data to Polar and
    displayed it on to a display.

    I'm now looking at moving this 'program' to a PIC, if possible.

    I've heard some of you guys mention how the Stamp is a great way to
    prototype a project but is somewhat rigid (sequential logic) and a bit more
    expensive (??..maybe not!)

    Thanks
    Steve

    To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    Body of the message will be ignored.


    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




    This message has been scanned by WebShield. Please report SPAM to
    abuse@p....


    To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    Body of the message will be ignored.


    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-19 06:05
    Steve,

    The migration from Stamp to PIC is not that hard if you use PICBasic
    Pro from meLabs(www.melabs.com).

    I have transfered a large multibank program that ran on a BS2p40 to a
    PIC16F877. There were a few hurdles to get over but it wasn't that
    bad. One of them was setting the registers on the PIC to configure
    the onboard 10 bit A/D convertor. Another was for the hardware USART
    to set up the correct baude rate. The manual for PICBasic Pro covers
    these pretty good. Other issues were oscillator capacitance and not
    pulling MCLR high on the PIC.

    Here is the drawback. PicBasic Pro costs $237.45 from
    http://www.glitchbuster.com/. You save 13 bux from meLabs website.
    Plus glitchbuster has lots of PIC's and other useful IC's.

    You will also need a programmer. That is another $100 to $120
    depending on which one you select.

    In order to do in circuit programming you will need a bootloader and
    have the PIC hardware configured for in circuit programming. The
    bootloader is another 25 bux.

    So in total you will have to invest ~$370 to do it.

    As Jon mentioned, OEM components can save you some money and board
    space. I have made my own BS2p40 stamps with OEM parts for $30. This
    may be the way to go for low volume stuff, unless you want to migrate
    to PIC's in the future with other projects you could learn now with
    this one.

    I still use Stamps to do the quick and dirty stuff or to try out a
    new circuit.

    My homebrew EconoStamp 2p40 and development board:

    http://myweb.core.com/photos/jbirnsch"at"vbe.com/BasicStamp/

    replace "at" with @ to make the link work

    Jason


    --- In basicstamps@yahoogroups.com, "Brady,Steven [noparse][[/noparse]PYR]"
    <steven.brady2@e...> wrote:
    > Well, my production run might consists of 20-30 IF, big IF, I can
    shrink it
    > and get it running on a cutsie little platform.
    >
    > I still need to incorporate some Inverted Current Loop Comms
    > (active--providing comms for sensors).
    >
    > sb
    >
    >
    Original Message
    > From: Jon Williams [noparse][[/noparse]mailto:jwilliams@p...]
    > Sent: September 18, 2003 4:23 PM
    > To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    > Subject: RE: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration
    >
    >
    > If you're looking to save a few bucks and aren't going to be
    building
    > hundreds (or more) of units, you might just want to use our OEM
    parts. That
    > way there is no code conversion. Yes, more expensive than a raw
    PIC -- but
    > you don't have to buy or learn any new tools and if your code works
    on your
    > shiny Stamp module then you know it will work in our OEM part.
    >
    > While not widely known, there are lots of small companies who do
    small- to
    > medium-sized production runs using our EOM chips. I did it at my
    last
    > employer. In fact, they still produce that product.
    >
    > -- Jon Williams
    > -- Applications Engineer, Parallax
    > -- Dallas Office
    >
    >
    >
    Original Message
    > From: Brady,Steven [noparse][[/noparse]PYR] [noparse][[/noparse]mailto:steven.brady2@e...]
    > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 6:12 PM
    > To: 'basicstamps@yahoogroups.com'
    > Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Stamp to PIC migration
    >
    >
    > Hey folks,
    >
    > Learnin lots!!
    >
    > A few months ago I completed a project that took some RAW
    direction/speed
    > data from a wind sensor and converted the Rectangular data to Polar
    and
    > displayed it on to a display.
    >
    > I'm now looking at moving this 'program' to a PIC, if possible.
    >
    > I've heard some of you guys mention how the Stamp is a great way to
    > prototype a project but is somewhat rigid (sequential logic) and a
    bit more
    > expensive (??..maybe not!)
    >
    > Thanks
    > Steve
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the
    Subject and
    > Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > This message has been scanned by WebShield. Please report SPAM to
    > abuse@p...
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the
    Subject and
    > Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-19 14:20
    --- In basicstamps@yahoogroups.com, "jbirnsch" <jbirnsch@v...> wrote:
    > Steve,
    >
    > The migration from Stamp to PIC is not that hard if you use
    PICBasic
    > Pro from meLabs(www.melabs.com).
    >
    > I have transfered a large multibank program that ran on a BS2p40 to
    a
    > PIC16F877. There were a few hurdles to get over but it wasn't that
    > bad. One of them was setting the registers on the PIC to configure
    > the onboard 10 bit A/D convertor. Another was for the hardware
    USART
    > to set up the correct baude rate. The manual for PICBasic Pro
    covers
    > these pretty good. Other issues were oscillator capacitance and not
    > pulling MCLR high on the PIC.
    >
    > Here is the drawback. PicBasic Pro costs $237.45 from
    > http://www.glitchbuster.com/. You save 13 bux from meLabs website.
    > Plus glitchbuster has lots of PIC's and other useful IC's.
    >
    > You will also need a programmer. That is another $100 to $120
    > depending on which one you select.
    >
    > In order to do in circuit programming you will need a bootloader
    and
    > have the PIC hardware configured for in circuit programming. The
    > bootloader is another 25 bux.
    >
    > So in total you will have to invest ~$370 to do it.
    >
    > As Jon mentioned, OEM components can save you some money and board
    > space. I have made my own BS2p40 stamps with OEM parts for $30.
    This
    > may be the way to go for low volume stuff, unless you want to
    migrate
    > to PIC's in the future with other projects you could learn now with
    > this one.


    Here is the conumdrum.

    if you spend the $370 or so, you get the ability to do mass boards
    cheaper.

    but you need to program in BOTH PBasic AND PIC Basic if you want to
    develop on a Stamp.

    There is a break even point. and then above that is the time
    invested break even point.

    Dave
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-19 16:10
    Hi Steve:

    Personally I think that for your small quantity sticking with the stamp
    makes sense. The reason is related to your time to learn something
    new. But I did want to give you a different slant on the startup cost
    question.

    Writing assembly code is not that difficult, there's only 35
    instructions in the mid range PICs.
    The assembler, simulator is free from Microchip.
    You no longer need a $200 Picstart+, but can use the new $39 Pickit USB
    programmer with the 8 and 14 pin parts.
    The 8 and 16 pin parts are about $2 each in small qty.
    If you use FLASH parts you do not need a UV eraser, highly recommended
    for the ease of installing a new program.
    Note the latest round of PICs also support, in circuit programming, boot
    loading and in circuit debugging, but for the latter you need the ICE2
    which is a couple of hundred.

    Also the latest round of parts have more I/O pins, typically # I/O pins
    = total # pins -2. i.e. all the pins except the power supply can be
    used as I/O, so the 8 pin part can have up to 6 I/0 pins. If you use an
    external unit oscillator then you have 5 I/O pins or if you use an
    external crystal then you have 4 I/O pins. Note the using the external
    oscillator does not take up 2 pins like it used to.

    Have Fun,

    Brooke Clarke, N6GCE
    http://www.PRC68.com

    Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 16:12:21 -0700
    From: "Brady,Steven [noparse][[/noparse]PYR]" <steven.brady2@e...>
    Subject: Stamp to PIC migration

    Hey folks,

    Learnin lots!!

    A few months ago I completed a project that took some RAW direction/speed
    data from a wind sensor and converted the Rectangular data to Polar and
    displayed it on to a display.

    I'm now looking at moving this 'program' to a PIC, if possible.

    I've heard some of you guys mention how the Stamp is a great way to
    prototype a project but is somewhat rigid (sequential logic) and a bit more
    expensive (??..maybe not!)

    Thanks
    Steve
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-19 16:37
    Well, I did assume quite the start up cost in getting said hardware/software
    just to start the production run.

    I'm going to show my boss the Stamp kit and if he buys in to it then I
    "think" I could get him to cover the rest of the start up gear.

    I COULD use Stamps but I'd rather use, listen for the boo's, a cheap little
    IC to take care of it (PIC) rather than a STAMP.

    It's like sending flight trainers (Cessna's and such) to war.
    Or maybe more like using a real F18 as a trainer for complete
    noobies....teach them to fly on the simple stuff....
    Ok, I can't think of a good analogy...but I'd just hate to waste something
    so versatile/useful.

    sb

    Original Message
    From: Dave Mucha [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=Xr-GQ4OYY5U_7LiVVnYUz1k0SdO8ZiMcSwZla-hY2aOESQhB80E77SHpLVjPg3ZorJ1PYST1iDA]davemucha@j...[/url
    Sent: September 19, 2003 6:21 AM
    To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Re: Stamp to PIC migration


    --- In basicstamps@yahoogroups.com, "jbirnsch" <jbirnsch@v...> wrote:
    > Steve,
    >
    > The migration from Stamp to PIC is not that hard if you use
    PICBasic
    > Pro from meLabs(www.melabs.com).
    >
    > I have transfered a large multibank program that ran on a BS2p40 to
    a
    > PIC16F877. There were a few hurdles to get over but it wasn't that
    > bad. One of them was setting the registers on the PIC to configure
    > the onboard 10 bit A/D convertor. Another was for the hardware
    USART
    > to set up the correct baude rate. The manual for PICBasic Pro
    covers
    > these pretty good. Other issues were oscillator capacitance and not
    > pulling MCLR high on the PIC.
    >
    > Here is the drawback. PicBasic Pro costs $237.45 from
    > http://www.glitchbuster.com/. You save 13 bux from meLabs website.
    > Plus glitchbuster has lots of PIC's and other useful IC's.
    >
    > You will also need a programmer. That is another $100 to $120
    > depending on which one you select.
    >
    > In order to do in circuit programming you will need a bootloader
    and
    > have the PIC hardware configured for in circuit programming. The
    > bootloader is another 25 bux.
    >
    > So in total you will have to invest ~$370 to do it.
    >
    > As Jon mentioned, OEM components can save you some money and board
    > space. I have made my own BS2p40 stamps with OEM parts for $30.
    This
    > may be the way to go for low volume stuff, unless you want to
    migrate
    > to PIC's in the future with other projects you could learn now with
    > this one.


    Here is the conumdrum.

    if you spend the $370 or so, you get the ability to do mass boards
    cheaper.

    but you need to program in BOTH PBasic AND PIC Basic if you want to
    develop on a Stamp.

    There is a break even point. and then above that is the time
    invested break even point.

    Dave




    To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    Body of the message will be ignored.


    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-19 16:39
    Another option:

    There are several free C compilers for PICs. Most, if not all, of them
    are 'cripple-ware' of the commercial version, but still quite capable.

    I would certainly check out
    http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist/begin.htm. This is a link to a
    bunch of beginner stuff.

    http://www.voti.nl/swp/index.html is another good starting point.

    As far as a programmer, I would certainly consider Microchips ICD 2. It
    is a programmer and also a in-circuit debugger for (some) of the flash
    parts that. It allows one to set breakpoints, single-step, set watches
    and other cool stuff. (no more debug statment sprinkling!)

    amg


    On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 05:05:48 -0000 "jbirnsch" <jbirnsch@v...> writes:
    > Steve,
    >
    > The migration from Stamp to PIC is not that hard if you use PICBasic
    > Pro from meLabs(www.melabs.com).
    >
    > I have transfered a large multibank program that ran on a BS2p40 to
    > a PIC16F877. There were a few hurdles to get over but it wasn't that
    > bad. One of them was setting the registers on the PIC to configure
    > the onboard 10 bit A/D convertor. Another was for the hardware USART
    > to set up the correct baude rate. The manual for PICBasic Pro covers
    > these pretty good. Other issues were oscillator capacitance and not
    > pulling MCLR high on the PIC.
    >
    > Here is the drawback. PicBasic Pro costs $237.45 from
    > http://www.glitchbuster.com/. You save 13 bux from meLabs website.
    > Plus glitchbuster has lots of PIC's and other useful IC's.
    > You will also need a programmer. That is another $100 to $120
    > depending on which one you select.
    >
    > In order to do in circuit programming you will need a bootloader and
    > have the PIC hardware configured for in circuit programming. The
    > bootloader is another 25 bux.
    >
    > So in total you will have to invest ~$370 to do it.
    >
    > As Jon mentioned, OEM components can save you some money and board
    > space. I have made my own BS2p40 stamps with OEM parts for $30. This
    >
    > may be the way to go for low volume stuff, unless you want to
    > migrate to PIC's in the future with other projects you could learn now
    with
    > this one.
    >
    > I still use Stamps to do the quick and dirty stuff or to try out a
    > new circuit.
    >
    > My homebrew EconoStamp 2p40 and development board:
    >
    > http://myweb.core.com/photos/jbirnsch"at"vbe.com/BasicStamp/
    >
    > replace "at" with @ to make the link work
    >
    > Jason

    [noparse][[/noparse]Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-19 16:51
    On Fri, 2003-09-19 at 11:37, Brady,Steven [noparse][[/noparse]PYR] wrote:
    > It's like sending flight trainers (Cessna's and such) to war.
    > Or maybe more like using a real F18 as a trainer for complete
    > noobies....teach them to fly on the simple stuff....
    > Ok, I can't think of a good analogy...but I'd just hate to waste something
    > so versatile/useful.

    In many cases it really depends on how many of the production items you
    are going to make, your target customer, and price points.

    The Basic Stamp OEM modules and pricing are, IMO, very cost competitive
    with a PIC for project with small/sporadic volume runs. In one regard
    an OEM module is 10 times the cost of a PIC, but in another regard, its
    only $25 more than a PIC, and many 1-off custom products can easily
    support a $25 hit to the BOM.

    Keeping the Stamp in your finished product makes prototyping and
    troubleshooting that much easier. It also reduces the amount of
    programmers/software you need to maintain in order to actually
    create/program your product.
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-19 17:00
    I'll jump in here . . .

    The stamps are great for getting up and running quick and tweaking on
    the fly. I would choose one for low volume high profit jobs. Parallax
    made it easy to program, all the tools are there and the documentation
    is bullet proof.

    The PIC's are great for fast, dedicated jobs that are high volume and
    low profit, with little or no "in field" program changes. There is
    tons of docs to sift through (just look at the 600+ page mid-range
    reference manual, eeks) and twenty ways to do one thing. You better
    like puzzles and have a lot of hair to pull out if you go this route as
    there are many variables to debug when you have a problem.

    You can get going with PIC's for as little as a $20 serial programmer
    and the free MPLab assembler program.

    Regards, John.

    --- amg amg <controlsdude2000@j...> wrote:
    > Another option:
    >
    > There are several free C compilers for PICs. Most, if not all, of
    > them
    > are 'cripple-ware' of the commercial version, but still quite
    > capable.
    >
    > I would certainly check out
    > http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist/begin.htm. This is a link to
    > a
    > bunch of beginner stuff.
    >
    > http://www.voti.nl/swp/index.html is another good starting point.
    >
    > As far as a programmer, I would certainly consider Microchips ICD 2.
    > It
    > is a programmer and also a in-circuit debugger for (some) of the
    > flash
    > parts that. It allows one to set breakpoints, single-step, set
    > watches
    > and other cool stuff. (no more debug statment sprinkling!)
    >
    > amg
    >
    >
    > On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 05:05:48 -0000 "jbirnsch" <jbirnsch@v...>
    > writes:
    > > Steve,
    > >
    > > The migration from Stamp to PIC is not that hard if you use
    > PICBasic
    > > Pro from meLabs(www.melabs.com).
    > >
    > > I have transfered a large multibank program that ran on a BS2p40 to
    >
    > > a PIC16F877. There were a few hurdles to get over but it wasn't
    > that
    > > bad. One of them was setting the registers on the PIC to configure
    > > the onboard 10 bit A/D convertor. Another was for the hardware
    > USART
    > > to set up the correct baude rate. The manual for PICBasic Pro
    > covers
    > > these pretty good. Other issues were oscillator capacitance and not
    >
    > > pulling MCLR high on the PIC.
    > >
    > > Here is the drawback. PicBasic Pro costs $237.45 from
    > > http://www.glitchbuster.com/. You save 13 bux from meLabs website.
    > > Plus glitchbuster has lots of PIC's and other useful IC's.
    > > You will also need a programmer. That is another $100 to $120
    > > depending on which one you select.
    > >
    > > In order to do in circuit programming you will need a bootloader
    > and
    > > have the PIC hardware configured for in circuit programming. The
    > > bootloader is another 25 bux.
    > >
    > > So in total you will have to invest ~$370 to do it.
    > >
    > > As Jon mentioned, OEM components can save you some money and board
    > > space. I have made my own BS2p40 stamps with OEM parts for $30.
    > This
    > >
    > > may be the way to go for low volume stuff, unless you want to
    > > migrate to PIC's in the future with other projects you could learn
    > now
    > with
    > > this one.
    > >
    > > I still use Stamps to do the quick and dirty stuff or to try out a
    > > new circuit.
    > >
    > > My homebrew EconoStamp 2p40 and development board:
    > >
    > > http://myweb.core.com/photos/jbirnsch"at"vbe.com/BasicStamp/
    > >
    > > replace "at" with @ to make the link work
    > >
    > > Jason
    >
    > [noparse][[/noparse]Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject
    > and Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
    > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    >
    >


    __________________________________
    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
    http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-19 18:20
    I have a good analogy for ya...

    Like putting a tool chest of tools in every car you make. When all the customer
    needs is a spare tire, tire iron and a jack.

    They don't even give you a good jack with a new car!!!

    I think the stamp itself is a PIC with some very cool add-ons...

    Tim

    >>> steven.brady2@e... 09/19/03 10:37AM >>>
    Well, I did assume quite the start up cost in getting said hardware/software
    just to start the production run.

    I'm going to show my boss the Stamp kit and if he buys in to it then I
    "think" I could get him to cover the rest of the start up gear.

    I COULD use Stamps but I'd rather use, listen for the boo's, a cheap little
    IC to take care of it (PIC) rather than a STAMP.

    It's like sending flight trainers (Cessna's and such) to war.
    Or maybe more like using a real F18 as a trainer for complete
    noobies....teach them to fly on the simple stuff....
    Ok, I can't think of a good analogy...but I'd just hate to waste something
    so versatile/useful.

    sb

    Original Message
    From: Dave Mucha [noparse]/noparse]mailto:[url=http://forums.parallaxinc.com/group/basicstamps/post?postID=Sb2tvNvMcZOdP1j6SLLaJ2GqVQNYF_Miyt061vYZDzFLgW7bQR5pcpUNuyOK-TVJn172bE3pYinFeg]davemucha@j...[/url
    Sent: September 19, 2003 6:21 AM
    To: basicstamps@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Re: Stamp to PIC migration


    --- In basicstamps@yahoogroups.com, "jbirnsch" <jbirnsch@v...> wrote:
    > Steve,
    >
    > The migration from Stamp to PIC is not that hard if you use
    PICBasic
    > Pro from meLabs(www.melabs.com).
    >
    > I have transfered a large multibank program that ran on a BS2p40 to
    a
    > PIC16F877. There were a few hurdles to get over but it wasn't that
    > bad. One of them was setting the registers on the PIC to configure
    > the onboard 10 bit A/D convertor. Another was for the hardware
    USART
    > to set up the correct baude rate. The manual for PICBasic Pro
    covers
    > these pretty good. Other issues were oscillator capacitance and not
    > pulling MCLR high on the PIC.
    >
    > Here is the drawback. PicBasic Pro costs $237.45 from
    > http://www.glitchbuster.com/. You save 13 bux from meLabs website.
    > Plus glitchbuster has lots of PIC's and other useful IC's.
    >
    > You will also need a programmer. That is another $100 to $120
    > depending on which one you select.
    >
    > In order to do in circuit programming you will need a bootloader
    and
    > have the PIC hardware configured for in circuit programming. The
    > bootloader is another 25 bux.
    >
    > So in total you will have to invest ~$370 to do it.
    >
    > As Jon mentioned, OEM components can save you some money and board
    > space. I have made my own BS2p40 stamps with OEM parts for $30.
    This
    > may be the way to go for low volume stuff, unless you want to
    migrate
    > to PIC's in the future with other projects you could learn now with
    > this one.


    Here is the conumdrum.

    if you spend the $370 or so, you get the ability to do mass boards
    cheaper.

    but you need to program in BOTH PBasic AND PIC Basic if you want to
    develop on a Stamp.

    There is a break even point. and then above that is the time
    invested break even point.

    Dave




    To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    Body of the message will be ignored.


    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


    To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and Body
    of the message will be ignored.


    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-19 18:44
    > Writing assembly code is not that difficult, there's only 35
    > instructions in the mid range PICs.

    Learning assembly language for the PIC is indeed easy, BUT, trying to emulate
    the BASIC Stamps commands & functionality in assembly can be another story.

    SERIN 0, N2400, [noparse][[/noparse]"A"] ' Simple enough.

    Now do something comparable in assembly:
    http://www.rentron.com/PicBasic/serin.htm

    Many years ago Scott Edwards produced a book titled "The PIC Source Book"
    showing
    how to write Stamp equivalent functions or commands for the PIC in assembly
    language.

    Even with only 35 instructions to learn, it still takes a lot of work (and time)
    to do something
    in assembly comparable to even the simplest BASIC Stamp command.

    Hang onto your Stamps. If you want to get into programming the PIC, then grab
    one of the
    BASIC compilers. You already have experience with Pbasic, and probably tons of
    code
    you can port directly from your Stamp to a PIC. If you just want less expensive
    Stamps,
    I would definitely go the Parallax Stamp OEM ICs. They provide all the
    schematics you'll
    need to roll your own Stamp clones.

    Having both the Stamp & BASIC compilers is really the best of both worlds, but
    you'll still
    probably pull out that Stamp when you're in a hurry to get something up & going
    or roll-out
    a proof-of-concept design quickly.

    A good carpenter could probably build an entire home with nothing but a
    screwdriver & a
    hammer, but I doubt he would want to with tools available to make the job much
    easier
    & faster....;o]


    Regards,

    -Bruce
    tech@r...
    http://www.rentron.com
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-20 04:47
    Have you considerd the SX sold through the parallax web-sight. $200 for the
    SX key, programming software free from parallax.

    Assembly language programming, Not nearly as easy at the stamp

    Lightning fast 20 nano seconds / clock cycle, most instructions 1 or 2 clock
    cycles.

    $10 for IC & resonator


    [noparse][[/noparse]Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-21 00:06
    This is one of those topics that comes up all the time on this list, but
    it's such a good one, so why not. I started with the PIC about a year ago
    and have been pretty happy generally, but I've lost a lot of sleep
    debugging! Just recently I returned to the stamp list to realize what cool
    and easy functionality I missed out on before, like the Trig functions.
    These would likely be a pain in Assembly. It also seems like the knowledge
    base has grown immensely. I was looking for accelerometers and gyroscopes
    for a robot and found information readily available here after searching
    elsewhere for a long time. It seems that due to the ease of use of the
    stamp, so many more projects can be quickly completed. I now use them to
    debug many circuits, because I know the code on a Stamp is not going to be
    the source of an error. A production run is a different matter of course and
    you're thinking about cost. Pics are great for that. Another thing I like
    about Pics/Assembly is that they demonstrate the relationship between code
    and hardware, computing and electronics very well. A topic which can be
    mystifying.
    My 2¢
    Nick
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-09-22 12:09
    I'll put my 2 cents worth...

    I am trying to make the migration myself.

    The PIC does offer some advantages such as true interrupt, and
    internal timers, hardware PWM, hardware UART etc.

    However, the learning curve is more steep.

    With the BS2, I was able to quickly move from flashing LEDs to I2C
    communication in about 1 month.
    For PIC, well, I've been studying PIC for almost 3 months now, and
    just now I'm starting to put together simple programs using
    interrupt, CCP, etc. Yes, these are more complicated concepts, but
    at this moment, I won't even think about doing a whole project in
    assembly.

    I plan to keep my Stamp around for quick proof of concept work. And
    use PIC with BASIC compiler to realize final product.

    Truth is, Stamps are great for learning and quick prototyping.



    --- In basicstamps@yahoogroups.com, "Tech" <tech@r...> wrote:
    >
    > > Writing assembly code is not that difficult, there's only 35
    > > instructions in the mid range PICs.
    >
    > Learning assembly language for the PIC is indeed easy, BUT, trying
    to emulate
    > the BASIC Stamps commands & functionality in assembly can be
    another story.
    >
    > SERIN 0, N2400, [noparse][[/noparse]"A"] ' Simple enough.
    >
    > Now do something comparable in assembly:
    http://www.rentron.com/PicBasic/serin.htm
    >
    > Many years ago Scott Edwards produced a book titled "The PIC Source
    Book" showing
    > how to write Stamp equivalent functions or commands for the PIC in
    assembly language.
    >
    > Even with only 35 instructions to learn, it still takes a lot of
    work (and time) to do something
    > in assembly comparable to even the simplest BASIC Stamp command.
    >
    > Hang onto your Stamps. If you want to get into programming the PIC,
    then grab one of the
    > BASIC compilers. You already have experience with Pbasic, and
    probably tons of code
    > you can port directly from your Stamp to a PIC. If you just want
    less expensive Stamps,
    > I would definitely go the Parallax Stamp OEM ICs. They provide all
    the schematics you'll
    > need to roll your own Stamp clones.
    >
    > Having both the Stamp & BASIC compilers is really the best of both
    worlds, but you'll still
    > probably pull out that Stamp when you're in a hurry to get
    something up & going or roll-out
    > a proof-of-concept design quickly.
    >
    > A good carpenter could probably build an entire home with nothing
    but a screwdriver & a
    > hammer, but I doubt he would want to with tools available to make
    the job much easier
    > & faster....;o]
    >
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    > -Bruce
    > tech@r...
    > http://www.rentron.com
Sign In or Register to comment.