pic or avr programmer? / Computer Science / Forums

Forums

4hv.org :: Forums :: Computer Science

« Previous topic | Next topic »

pic or avr programmer?

1 2 next

Move Thread

LAN_403

Solidacid

Thu May 22 2008, 09:05AM

Registered Member #1430 Joined: Sun Apr 06 2008, 11:12AM
Location: Ã…rhus, Denmark
Posts: 102

hey all.
i recently got interested in microcontrollers and now im wondering if i should buy a pic or an avr programmer or even better, build one myself. if i want to program simple things like electronic dice and led flashers and such, what chips should i use?

Bjørn

Thu May 22 2008, 09:59AM

Registered Member #27 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 02:20AM
Location: Hyperborea
Posts: 2058

Use Picaxe:

It can't get any simpler or cheaper.

reign

Thu May 22 2008, 11:18PM

Registered Member #260 Joined: Sun Feb 26 2006, 09:51PM
Location:
Posts: 17

You may also want to give Arduino a shot. It's based off of an Atmel AVR.

Avi

Fri May 23 2008, 01:16AM

Registered Member #580 Joined: Mon Mar 12 2007, 03:17PM
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 410

link seems to be down

Solidacid

Fri May 23 2008, 07:05AM

Registered Member #1430 Joined: Sun Apr 06 2008, 11:12AM
Location: Ã…rhus, Denmark
Posts: 102

BjÃ¸rn BÃ¦verfjord wrote ...

Use Picaxe:

It can't get any simpler or cheaper.

it says on the site that you need 95, 98, ME, NT, 2000 or XP, i have vista :P
and i don't have a seriel or parralel plug on my computer, only usb

Bjørn

Fri May 23 2008, 10:42AM

Registered Member #27 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 02:20AM
Location: Hyperborea
Posts: 2058

According to this it should work fine:

"All the software described above is for Windows operating systems (95, 98, ME, NT, 2000, XP, Vista) "

"USB Download Cable (part AXE027)
(Vista / XP users - ensure you are using the correct XP specific driver (also valid for Vista), available from the software page at

)"

Remember that XP and vista shares the same driver model so almost all XP drivers will work on Vista as long as they are correctly written. Just bypass those horrific install programs and find the XP .inf file and the driver files and install from there. Then devices like 10 year old 3Com network cards and Canon LiDE scanners will work without any problem.

In addiftion there are probably USB <--> RS-232 converters that will work fine.

Capper

Fri May 23 2008, 12:37PM

Registered Member #914 Joined: Fri Jul 20 2007, 06:22PM
Location: South Bend, IN
Posts: 85

what chips should i use?

Once you start playing with micros, you'll find that both Microchip and Atmel have good products. I've used both, and it's nice to have the choice when you need it - so you may want to invest in both programmers.

The AVRISP MKII USB programmer for Atmel parts works the best for me ($36 at Digikey part number ATAVRISP2). I have a Dragon, and a STK500, but only used each once, and only purchased them because Atmel had a special 2-for-1 sale.

I use the MPLab ICD2 for Microchip parts. The cost was about $100 with a Circuit Cellar contest coupon.

There are a lot of available demo boards out there to play with for either manufacturer, and everyone is getting into the design contest game - so check their forums and web sites for deals on programmers, demo boards and such. Some give out free ones if you enter their contests. Renesas is running one right now.

I will say that the AVRFreaks forums are more helpful than the Microchip forums, but there are some embedded system forums that will help you with either chip set.

The programming software for Atmel is all free (AVR Studio, WINAVR), the free C compiler from Microchip is only a "student" version with some limitations. Stay away from Keil uVision if possible - I've had the most problems with their software, and the full versions are very expensive.

For the hobby group, parts in DIP packages are nice, and Atmel has more selection for 40-pin parts with lots of I/O pins. Microchip has some 28-pin parts that are faster with configurable I/O pins, and they will send out samples without a vendor calling on you.

So.....

Check the forums for contests with free demo boards and coupons for discounts on programmers, then just pick one and start programming. There really isn't too much trouble switching back and forth, and most of your code that's not hardware specific will work with both compilers.

Have fun.

Scott

Steve Ward

Tue May 27 2008, 06:04AM

Registered Member #146 Joined: Sun Feb 12 2006, 04:21AM
Location: Austin Tx
Posts: 1055

I started out with Atmel AVRs and found it very easy (and relatively cheap) to get going. After over a year of using AVRs, i used a dsPIC for a project, i found the documentation for the PIC stuff to be awful compared to the AVR. The PIC had some performance features the AVR didnt, though it did cost more (nothing special there). In general i look for an AVR that will work first, if it doesnt exist i look elsewhere.

GeordieBoy

Tue May 27 2008, 09:39AM

Registered Member #1232 Joined: Wed Jan 16 2008, 10:53PM
Location: Doon tha Toon!
Posts: 881

The dsPIC is quite a leap from the normal 8-bit PICs though Steve. It helps if you are already familiar with DSPs if that is the route you want to take for your application. I have used dsPICs for commercial, research and hobby projects and have also found the documentation quite heavy going.

Dr Who

Fri Jun 13 2008, 09:34PM

Registered Member #1540 Joined: Fri Jun 13 2008, 08:49PM
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3

Well I started off with a Sharc DSP and would absolutely not recommend that to anyone starting out for the first time. I then got involved with the AVR's and they seemed like a piece of cake. I got a little involved with Steve's dsPic and I gotta say that documentation is confusing as all get out. In fact, the Sharc was actually easier

I think I was using the STk500 when playing with the AVR's? Programmer's Notepad and this website will get you rolling real fast:
http://www.nongnu.org/avr-libc/user-manual/index.html

Btw, I wouldn't recommend building your own programmer at first. There are always going to be quirks with the micro you choose and it's already hard enough to get things working with hardware that you know should work outta the box. Besides, it's not like you're going to gain any convenience by making your own...especially when you don't know what features you might want in your programmer...

1 2 next

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob