FYI, in the latest beta of AVRStudio, the 32k debugging limit was removed from the $50 AVR Dragon. It can now debug all Atmel 8 bit hips that support JTAG or DebugWire. On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Dave McLaughlin <dave_mclaughlin@nerdshack.com> wrote: > Hi Brian, > > > > I started off with the PIC myself. I chose it because I could buy a cheap > starter kit and start programming it easily. I then started using it in my > work place and we purchased an ICE for it. For hobby use I was finding > debugging a major issue without the ICE and I started to look around for > something else. We had been using the National Semi COP8 and that had a > cheap emulator but the cost of the compiler put me off of it. I then > discovered the AT902313 and I found that I could by a cheapish emulator, the > ICE200 and it could be used with the larger IC's like the 8515 at the time. > I then progressed to the Mega devices and bought the JTAG ICE and then > finally the JTAG ICE Mk II and have never looked back. If you use the AVR > devices without the ICE, then you will not want to do debugging without one > after you have. I know a lot of guys who programme without and put in things > like toggling IO pins to show position of code but when you want to check > the value of a variable and don't have a STDIO to print to, you will soon > see what I mean. What I am trying to say is that the AVR has some excellent > priced emulation tools that cover more devices than the PIC does. > > > > I still use the AVR devices for all the small projects. There are some other > great devices out there but the cost of development is a little on the high > side. For me, the initial cost of the Codevision compiler and the yearly > support has been worth it for over 8 years now. I have looked at the PIC > again and again but the lack of low cost emulation (there are emulators but > they don't cover all the devices, where my JTAG ICE now also covers the XMEG > and the AVR32 devices) has put me off them. Also the fact that the > architecture is not ideal for C and a decent compiler for it is still > expensive. > > > > The PIC has the advantage that nearly all the electronics magazines do > articles on it so that is maybe why it is more popular. > > > > If you look around the web at projects for both, you will probably find that > most PIC projects are in either PIC Basic or assembler, whereas I have seen > a lot more in C now for the AVR. WINAVR is a nice capable free compiler if > you don't need a lot of libraries to get you going. > > > > The above is just my opinion and in the past I have managed to convert a > number of PIC users over to the AVR based on the above. > > > > Dave. > > > > From: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf > Of blue_eagle74 > Sent: 21 December 2009 09:50 > To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [AVR-Chat] magazine > > > > > > I have been reading the circuit celler and nuts and volts. It seems that > alot of projects are for the PIC. Is the PIC better to use? Is there a > magazine mainly for the AVR that I don't know about? I'm not asking which is > best but why all the PIC projects? To me the AVR is alot easier and cheaper > to work with. > > Brian > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
Message
Re: [AVR-Chat] magazine
2009-12-21 by Mike Payson
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.