Software Choices
Archiver
Posts: 46,084
I built a simple Robot which the book recomends Picbasic Pro
software w/Epic programer. About a $300.00+ investment. I can get
the Parallax Radio Shack 79.00 promo pack that includes the Parallax
software and programer. Is the Parallax RS kit going to work like
the Picbasic/Epic recomendation? The book has some programs in it
and I am wondering if the Parallax software will accept the same
commands. The robot is the "Insectronics" walker by Karl Williams.
TIA
rdowellus
software w/Epic programer. About a $300.00+ investment. I can get
the Parallax Radio Shack 79.00 promo pack that includes the Parallax
software and programer. Is the Parallax RS kit going to work like
the Picbasic/Epic recomendation? The book has some programs in it
and I am wondering if the Parallax software will accept the same
commands. The robot is the "Insectronics" walker by Karl Williams.
TIA
rdowellus
Comments
education or at least had this hobby for some years, you probably
can get the PIC work for you. If you only know some basic language
and familiar with some logic circuitry, like myself, jump strait to
Basic Stamp.
Basic Stamp works on your first try, I promise.
Remember to download the last beta version 2.1 of Basic Stamp editor
free from:
[url=Http://www.parallax.com/html_pages/downloads/software/software_basic_]Http://www.parallax.com/html_pages/downloads/software/software_basic_[/url]
stamp.asp
One year ago, I had to use a whole PC to control my robotic and lost
interest due to complexity. But now I do a new project every month,
and they work.
Stein.
--- In basicstamps@yahoogroups.com, "rdowellus" <rdowellus@y...>
wrote:
> I built a simple Robot which the book recomends Picbasic Pro
> software w/Epic programer. About a $300.00+ investment. I can get
> the Parallax Radio Shack 79.00 promo pack that includes the
Parallax
> software and programer. Is the Parallax RS kit going to work like
> the Picbasic/Epic recomendation? The book has some programs in it
> and I am wondering if the Parallax software will accept the same
> commands. The robot is the "Insectronics" walker by Karl Williams.
>
> TIA
> rdowellus
rdowellus@y... writes:
I built a simple Robot which the book recomends Picbasic Pro
software w/Epic programer. About a $300.00+ investment. I can get
the Parallax Radio Shack 79.00 promo pack that includes the Parallax
software and programer. Is the Parallax RS kit going to work like
the Picbasic/Epic recomendation? The book has some programs in it
and I am wondering if the Parallax software will accept the same
commands. The robot is the "Insectronics" walker by Karl Williams.
TIA
rdowellus
It is unlikely the program for the pic will directly translate to a stamp
program. However, MANY people have made robots with the Basic Stamp, and there
is
a ton of documentation on the subject.
[noparse][[/noparse]Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
wrote:
> I built a simple Robot which the book recomends Picbasic Pro
> software w/Epic programer. About a $300.00+ investment. I can get
> the Parallax Radio Shack 79.00 promo pack that includes the
Parallax
> software and programer. Is the Parallax RS kit going to work like
> the Picbasic/Epic recomendation? The book has some programs in it
> and I am wondering if the Parallax software will accept the same
> commands. The robot is the "Insectronics" walker by Karl Williams.
>
> TIA
> rdowellus
I think there is a point of view to be taken into account.
Do you want to learn programming and learn electronics and towards
that end, are willing to troubleshoot and really get the background
of learning electronics ?
Or, are you more interested in seeing your robot move in a short
period of time ?
There are people who get delighted by creating circuits, etching the
boards, drilling the holes, and making the completed board.
There are others who would rather buy a Board of Education and get
the circuit to work this afternoon.
The PIC offers more variety and more complexity than the Stamp.
The Stamp offers a treasure trove of well documented circuits and
applications.
I guess an analogy might be cake.
If you want a cake, do you go out and buy one?
or do you go out and buy flour ?
There a pleanty of people on both sides of the issue, and both are
right for their purposes.
Dave
selling some OEM BASIC Stamps recently, and one of the things I mention in
the ad is that the Stamp is probably the easiest and best-supported way to
start with microcontrollers. And Parallax support is absolutely first
class -- I've been a happy customer since buying my first Stamp in 1993. As
others have already said, they just work.
...But consider that you are building a robot with multiple PC boards, and
the boards are already set up for the PIC. They already have the 5V
regulator and a crystal in place for the PIC's clock signal. All the rest
of the connections to the PIC are inputs and outputs -- just like you would
connect to a Stamp. It could actually be slightly more challenging to adapt
the pre-designed board to the Stamp, compared to using the PIC as Karl had
intended. If you have the skill and perseverance to get the robot working,
you could probably handle either hardware approach without difficulty. The
PIC vs. Stamp issue won't be the determining factor in whether it ends up
working or not.
How about programming the PIC? I have supplied numerous customers with the
EPIC/PicBasic Pro combination -- some with previous Stamp experience and
some starting from scratch. You write/edit your program in a Windows
editing environment quite similar to the Stamp editor. When you're ready to
program the PIC, one mouse click compiles your BASIC code, launches the EPIC
software, and programs the PIC. Karl provides even more detail about the
process in his second book, Amphibionics, but it's easy enough. There are a
few more details to attend to the first time you set it up, but for someone
building a project like this it should not be a problem. Once you install
and configure the software, working with the PIC is very much like working
with the Stamp.
Like many things, there are pros and cons to either approach. On your first
day, you would get the Stamp up and running a little faster, no doubt. But
you're building a walking robot from scratch, including the electronics. In
that context, neither approach is difficult. Karl used PicBasic Pro because
it is easy to work with -- we're not talking about assembly language here.
Once you invest the cost of several Stamps in the tools, you have the
ability to run your robot (and other projects) with a $3 PIC. Whether that
sounds appealing may depend on your plans for future projects beyond the one
Insectronic robot.
It is not my intention to promote other products on the Stamp list, but the
responses to your question so far were all on one side, and there are
definitely two viable alternatives. I hope this helps you make an informed
decision, and believe you will be successful regardless of your choice.
Have fun with your robot!
Randy
www.glitchbuster.com
PS -- FYI, Karl has a similar but less complex hexapod project in the
November and December issues of SERVO Magazine.
> I built a simple Robot which the book recomends Picbasic Pro
> software w/Epic programer. About a $300.00+ investment. I can get
> the Parallax Radio Shack 79.00 promo pack that includes the Parallax
> software and programer. Is the Parallax RS kit going to work like
> the Picbasic/Epic recomendation? The book has some programs in it
> and I am wondering if the Parallax software will accept the same
> commands. The robot is the "Insectronics" walker by Karl Williams.
>
> TIA
> rdowellus
I picked up from your response that a PIC and a Stamp are not the
same thing and assume from that they probably will not accept the
same commands. Up to this point it had not occured to me that there
was a difference (Duh). I was thinking the Parallax software might
work on the parts I have already installed (PIC). After comparing
screenshots of both software packages I had seen many similarities.
Sounds like I need to stick with the PIC/Epic combo to continue with
this project though. Wish I would have found the Parallax site and
this groop sooner. Karls book was on Stampbuilder.com not
PICbuilder.com. Oooops...My bad. Now I have a minor dilema. Invest
further in PIC or modify/can the project and switch to Stamp and
future Stamp projects.
Thanks to all for excellent responses. This has been a way cool
project so far and a fantastic education so far.
Happy Holidays and I'll be back
--- In basicstamps@yahoogroups.com, "Randy Jones" <randyjones@w...>
wrote:
> There is no question that the Stamp is very easy to get going. I
have been
> selling some OEM BASIC Stamps recently, and one of the things I
mention in
> the ad is that the Stamp is probably the easiest and best-
supported way to
> start with microcontrollers. And Parallax support is absolutely
first
> class -- I've been a happy customer since buying my first Stamp in
1993. As
> others have already said, they just work.
>
> ...But consider that you are building a robot with multiple PC
boards, and
> the boards are already set up for the PIC. They already have the
5V
> regulator and a crystal in place for the PIC's clock signal. All
the rest
> of the connections to the PIC are inputs and outputs -- just like
you would
> connect to a Stamp. It could actually be slightly more
challenging to adapt
> the pre-designed board to the Stamp, compared to using the PIC as
Karl had
> intended. If you have the skill and perseverance to get the robot
working,
> you could probably handle either hardware approach without
difficulty. The
> PIC vs. Stamp issue won't be the determining factor in whether it
ends up
> working or not.
>
> How about programming the PIC? I have supplied numerous customers
with the
> EPIC/PicBasic Pro combination -- some with previous Stamp
experience and
> some starting from scratch. You write/edit your program in a
Windows
> editing environment quite similar to the Stamp editor. When
you're ready to
> program the PIC, one mouse click compiles your BASIC code,
launches the EPIC
> software, and programs the PIC. Karl provides even more detail
about the
> process in his second book, Amphibionics, but it's easy enough.
There are a
> few more details to attend to the first time you set it up, but
for someone
> building a project like this it should not be a problem. Once you
install
> and configure the software, working with the PIC is very much like
working
> with the Stamp.
>
> Like many things, there are pros and cons to either approach. On
your first
> day, you would get the Stamp up and running a little faster, no
doubt. But
> you're building a walking robot from scratch, including the
electronics. In
> that context, neither approach is difficult. Karl used PicBasic
Pro because
> it is easy to work with -- we're not talking about assembly
language here.
> Once you invest the cost of several Stamps in the tools, you have
the
> ability to run your robot (and other projects) with a $3 PIC.
Whether that
> sounds appealing may depend on your plans for future projects
beyond the one
> Insectronic robot.
>
> It is not my intention to promote other products on the Stamp
list, but the
> responses to your question so far were all on one side, and there
are
> definitely two viable alternatives. I hope this helps you make an
informed
> decision, and believe you will be successful regardless of your
choice.
>
> Have fun with your robot!
>
> Randy
> www.glitchbuster.com
>
> PS -- FYI, Karl has a similar but less complex hexapod project in
the
> November and December issues of SERVO Magazine.
>
>
>
> > I built a simple Robot which the book recomends Picbasic Pro
> > software w/Epic programer. About a $300.00+ investment. I can get
> > the Parallax Radio Shack 79.00 promo pack that includes the
Parallax
> > software and programer. Is the Parallax RS kit going to work like
> > the Picbasic/Epic recomendation? The book has some programs in it
> > and I am wondering if the Parallax software will accept the same
> > commands. The robot is the "Insectronics" walker by Karl
Williams.
> >
> > TIA
> > rdowellus
wrote:
> Randy,
> I picked up from your response that a PIC and a Stamp are not the
> same thing and assume from that they probably will not accept the
> same commands.
Wow, did we miss mentioning that ? Holly-Cow Bat-man. PBasic is
VASTLY different than PicBasic or (PBP) the languages are not
interchangable bwtween chips. not even close.
<snip>
> Sounds like I need to stick with the PIC/Epic combo to continue
with this project though.
Sure does.
> Now I have a minor dilema. Invest
> further in PIC or modify/can the project and switch to Stamp and
> future Stamp projects.
This may be heressay on this list, but I would advise following thru
on the project with the way it was laid out.
Trying to re-work it would add considderable time and trouble as you
would be breaking new ground.
Also, there are a few free basic compliers for the PIC so PicBasicPro
(although a great product) may be a little heavy on the wallet if all
you want is to finish one project.
Here, I would advise checking with others to see if the kit has been
ported into other languages. Not too far off following the path laid
down.
Also, PIC programmers can be really cheap. (how much does one
resistor cost these days ?) or you can spend big bux !
In the end, if you plan on using the Stamp, don't spend a bunch on
one project.
Dave
used by the Stamps. "PicBasic" is the language
used by the PicBasic compiler. I believe they
are sort-of compatible with each other -- but
PicBasic lets you program in
PIC assembler if you want, which PBasic does
not. And, PicBasic compiles to assembly,
where PBasic compiles to 'tokens'.
Assembly lets you be faster, 'Tokens' allows
you to be larger.
Also, when you use a BS2 based solution, you
have a 24-pin wide-dip module which uses the
PBasic language.
The benefit of the BS2 is that it is a very
robust design, with a robust implementation of
Basic. By 'robust' I mean it will work with
power from 6 volts to 12 volts, ALWAYS comes
up on power-up, sources or sinks 20 mA or so
on its I/O pins, has diode over-voltage
protection on its I/O pins, and has built-in
brown-out protection.
--- In basicstamps@yahoogroups.com, "rdowellus" <rdowellus@y...>
wrote:
> Randy,
> I picked up from your response that a PIC and a Stamp are not the
> same thing and assume from that they probably will not accept the
> same commands. Up to this point it had not occured to me that there
> was a difference (Duh). I was thinking the Parallax software might
> work on the parts I have already installed (PIC). After comparing
> screenshots of both software packages I had seen many similarities.
> Sounds like I need to stick with the PIC/Epic combo to continue
with
> this project though. Wish I would have found the Parallax site and
> this groop sooner. Karls book was on Stampbuilder.com not
> PICbuilder.com. Oooops...My bad. Now I have a minor dilema. Invest
> further in PIC or modify/can the project and switch to Stamp and
> future Stamp projects.
>
> Thanks to all for excellent responses. This has been a way cool
> project so far and a fantastic education so far.
> Happy Holidays and I'll be back
>
> --- In basicstamps@yahoogroups.com, "Randy Jones" <randyjones@w...>
> wrote:
> > There is no question that the Stamp is very easy to get going. I
> have been
> > selling some OEM BASIC Stamps recently, and one of the things I
> mention in
> > the ad is that the Stamp is probably the easiest and best-
> supported way to
> > start with microcontrollers. And Parallax support is absolutely
> first
> > class -- I've been a happy customer since buying my first Stamp
in
> 1993. As
> > others have already said, they just work.
> >
> > ...But consider that you are building a robot with multiple PC
> boards, and
> > the boards are already set up for the PIC. They already have the
> 5V
> > regulator and a crystal in place for the PIC's clock signal. All
> the rest
> > of the connections to the PIC are inputs and outputs -- just like
> you would
> > connect to a Stamp. It could actually be slightly more
> challenging to adapt
> > the pre-designed board to the Stamp, compared to using the PIC as
> Karl had
> > intended. If you have the skill and perseverance to get the
robot
> working,
> > you could probably handle either hardware approach without
> difficulty. The
> > PIC vs. Stamp issue won't be the determining factor in whether it
> ends up
> > working or not.
> >
> > How about programming the PIC? I have supplied numerous
customers
> with the
> > EPIC/PicBasic Pro combination -- some with previous Stamp
> experience and
> > some starting from scratch. You write/edit your program in a
> Windows
> > editing environment quite similar to the Stamp editor. When
> you're ready to
> > program the PIC, one mouse click compiles your BASIC code,
> launches the EPIC
> > software, and programs the PIC. Karl provides even more detail
> about the
> > process in his second book, Amphibionics, but it's easy enough.
> There are a
> > few more details to attend to the first time you set it up, but
> for someone
> > building a project like this it should not be a problem. Once
you
> install
> > and configure the software, working with the PIC is very much
like
> working
> > with the Stamp.
> >
> > Like many things, there are pros and cons to either approach. On
> your first
> > day, you would get the Stamp up and running a little faster, no
> doubt. But
> > you're building a walking robot from scratch, including the
> electronics. In
> > that context, neither approach is difficult. Karl used PicBasic
> Pro because
> > it is easy to work with -- we're not talking about assembly
> language here.
> > Once you invest the cost of several Stamps in the tools, you have
> the
> > ability to run your robot (and other projects) with a $3 PIC.
> Whether that
> > sounds appealing may depend on your plans for future projects
> beyond the one
> > Insectronic robot.
> >
> > It is not my intention to promote other products on the Stamp
> list, but the
> > responses to your question so far were all on one side, and there
> are
> > definitely two viable alternatives. I hope this helps you make
an
> informed
> > decision, and believe you will be successful regardless of your
> choice.
> >
> > Have fun with your robot!
> >
> > Randy
> > www.glitchbuster.com
> >
> > PS -- FYI, Karl has a similar but less complex hexapod project in
> the
> > November and December issues of SERVO Magazine.
> >
> >
> >
> > > I built a simple Robot which the book recomends Picbasic Pro
> > > software w/Epic programer. About a $300.00+ investment. I can
get
> > > the Parallax Radio Shack 79.00 promo pack that includes the
> Parallax
> > > software and programer. Is the Parallax RS kit going to work
like
> > > the Picbasic/Epic recomendation? The book has some programs in
it
> > > and I am wondering if the Parallax software will accept the same
> > > commands. The robot is the "Insectronics" walker by Karl
> Williams.
> > >
> > > TIA
> > > rdowellus