Which uController to learn?
in [Design]
|
Prev: 1000V high side gate drive
Next: Micpre of Graham
From: Eeyore on 15 Mar 2007 20:01 Anthony Fremont wrote: > Eeyore wrote: > > "John E." wrote: > > > >> PIC is king, I'm sure. But I'd like to hear from those who are using > >> all brands. Whichever you use, what do you like about it? > > > > 8051 family. You can't keep a good chip down. It's been going since > > 1981 IIRC. NXP's (formerly Philips) variants do all sorts of useful > > stuff with the 8051 core plus their RAM is static now so you can > > reduce the clock to zero to save power. And the 8051 is multi-sourced > > ! > > > > > >> What don't you like about others? > > > > PICs are indifferently documented so I've heard. I also heard > > something about dodgy compilers. > > Oh gawd. The biggest problem I've seen with PIC documentation is that > people won't read it. Almost every quirk and pitfall now gets fancy shaded > background balloons complete with code examples. > > The only "dodgy" compiler I ever dealt with was SDCC for the 8052, what a > POS. It may be better now, but a few years ago it sucked bad. Of course I > don't even bother trying to use C on a PIC, it's just not desiged for it. > The 18Fs are different though, they do C ok. FWICT, everyone seems happy > with Microchip's ever-lasting "trial" C compiler for the 18Fs. > > Multisourced, that's another misrepresentation. For the most part, chips > from different vendors are just similar archetectures, not "compatible" > chips insofar as actually being able to drop one in place of another. Not > to mention how vastly incompatible the code internals are for anything but > the most basic peripherals. > > But that's just my opinion. ;-) Eh ? The various 8051 clones from various manufacturers are completely compatible in every respect. That's one of the joys of the part. Such changes as have been made are backwardly compatible even with no code change too. Graham
From: linnix on 15 Mar 2007 20:03 > if you do *really* low power stuff then the MSP430 series is very > popular. You can also clock an Avr slowly and runs on uW. The butterfly runs in stand-by mode for months on a single button cell. > If you want seamless migration from Flash to OTP to Mask ROM > then PIC might be the way to go. If you want fast processing with a > reasonable number of options then AVR might be the best bet. But I would not call an Avr fast, not comparing to an Arm. I have a 20MHz(50 Mhz max) Arm talking to a 8Mhz(16MHz max) Avr. The Arm is around 5 to 10 times faster than the Avr. They are roughly the same size, cost and complexity.
From: mpm on 15 Mar 2007 20:04 On Mar 15, 3:52?pm, John E. <incogn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: Hey John. We're an "8051" Shop mostly. And almost everything we do is in Assembler. Right now, we're using Atmel and Phillips (NXP or whatever they call themselves now). What I like about Atmel is: A - They're very responsive when you need them (which isn't often because their documentation is some of the best I've seen.) B - For programming their newer devices, all you need is $25 for their AT89ISP adapter (and a target board - which you can make yourself or just butcher one of your production boards and dedicate it as your new "bench programmer" - which is what we did. No more spending $1,000's on EPROM burners!! C - Their product mix is varied enough (i.e., A/D conversion, # of ports, Serial, etc..) that you can make most designs work. And "Yes." it is a fine line between "hobbist" and "serious volume production" sometimes. Or so we would all wish.....!! For Phillips - I like their smaller stuff. 89LPC90x series. They're a little flaky to get programmed (due mostly to poor documentation and IMHO too many hobbiest in the mix), but we do use them in production volumes. The Keil EPM900 board is a good development board for the above, and runs about $200. Plus the cost of many, many, many phone calls to Keil to get an order placed. (Note: This company THRIVES on Voice Mail.) But good stuff once you get it, and get it working. The EPM900 will come with a 4K code limited Assembler, C-Compiler and Debugger (in addition to the hardware emulator). All in all, a pretty good value. I looked at PIC's a few times and didn't like them. Hard to say exactly why, I guess. Their basic stamp stuff seemed overpriced and underpowered. And really, I think those are out there for experimenters and hobbyist, not serious production. (Now everyone will beat up on me for saying that..?) But I hope this (and the comments of others) gives you something to ponder while making your choices. COBOL, huh?! Good for you! Eventually all the other COBOL programmers will die out and you can name your price!! -mpm
From: John E. on 15 Mar 2007 20:13 > I got my Rigol scope today. Oh man this is just way too cool. :-))) Just looked at their web site. Top of the line is only EUR1800 (how the heck do I make a Euro symbol...?), US$2376. Not bad. FInally a DSO the average guy can afford. Keep us informed... -- John English
From: John E. on 15 Mar 2007 20:15
> http://www.dontronics-shop.com/pages.php?pageid=23 > http://www.dontronics-shop.com/pages.php?pageid=58 > > should provide a few pointers > Don... Many thanks, Don. Much good first-timer info there. A "rich" resource. -- John English |