--- In piclist@picl..., "Peter Vincent" <p3t3rv@b...>
wrote:
> product support is great they are in the process
of releasing
version 2 a big update lots of new built in functions bug fixes all
of which came from the forum they asked us what we wanted to see in
version 2 via the forum they put it in , your questions get answerd
by the people that actualy write the code, just because they dont
rip us off with constant charges for updates (pay or get left
behind) is no measure of the quality of customer service just look
at MPLAB from picmicro a very substantional piece of software
constantly updated do they charge ? do they even charge for the
software to begin with ? no and no so dose that meen Microchip gives
crap support ? my PicKit1 flash starter kit was only 20 the
upgrades are free
I don't think the comparison is reasonable:
Microchip is in the business of selling chips. Tens of millions of
chips - they can easily afford to offer development software. They
also need it for their own work. Why would anyone buy a chip if
they couldn't use it?
Xilinx and Altera (among others) are finally offering free
development software for their FPGA offerings. It gets their
products used by more people for more applications. Maybe it adds a
dollar a chip to the cost - not an important consideration.
>
> customer support is more than weather you pay for upgrades or
not , its how the vendor interacts with the customer to provide
help, information or solutions to problems, and on that score i'm
impressed with mikroBasic all i can say is download the trial read
the forum see for yourself :)
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bill Tinsley
> To: piclist@picl...
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 1:50 AM
> Subject: Re: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
> I don't see how the support would be any good if they
don't charge for upgrades for life.
>
> -------Original Message-------
>
> From: p_c_vincent
> Date: 04/28/05 17:52:14
> To: piclist@picl...
> Subject: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
>
> personaly i would say dont get either i tryed them both
and was
> dissapointed i now use mikroBasic by
mikroElektronika its
awesome i
> payed about 86 GBP and thats it, free upgrades
for life
and
> excellent customer service via a forum email etc
they have
a free
> download that only limits the hex code to 2k so
you can
try out all
> the examples there is a good maunal and a free
online book
and
> project downloads you would be mad not to give it
a look,
>
> within an hour i had a 16F877A and a 16F84A hooked up to a
lcd
> displaying the speed of a pwm driven motor, the
code took
10 mins
> the rest was soldering wires etc
>
> They do C, Pascal, basic
>
> http://www.mikroelektronika.co.yu/english/index.htm
>
> im not connected in anyway im just a total fan it realy is
that good
>
>
> --- In piclist@picl..., Malcolm
<malcolm.crabbe@n...> wrote:
> > Try downloading the demos or manuals and
examples for
each product
> and
> > make a decision. I personally couldn't afford to buy
both to
> evaluate,
> > and I don't think many would change one for another.
> >
> > The thing is there are other BASIC compilers out there,
and there
> are
> > other languages that are equally as easy to use (and in
the case
> of JAL
> > are free as well)
> >
> > Personally I like the look of MBASIC, However there are
loads of
> IDE
> > interfaces for PicBASIC
> >
> > Malcolm
> >
> > clayforge wrote:
> >
> > > Has anyone used PicBasic Pro by MeLabs) and MBasic Pro
(by Basic
> > > Micro)? How do the two compare? I can
afford to get
one or the
> > > other, and obviously want the better of
the two
products. By
> better,
> > > I mean easier to use, value for the money, more
powerful.
> > >
> > > Please do not bother listing all of the other
available Basic
> > > compilers. I have compared and
contrasted and these
are the
> front
> > > runners in my search.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Scott
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and
follow the
> > > instructions
> > >
> > >
> > > -------------------
----------
> -------
> > > *>.
> > >
> >
> to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and
follow the instructions
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the
instructions
> -------------------------------
-----------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To
PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
Started by ●April 28, 2005
Reply by ●April 29, 20052005-04-29
Reply by ●April 29, 20052005-04-29
I downloaded mikroboasic and tried some of the sample files, which
seemed to compile poorly (the hex would not work even though the code
compiled without errors) - Yes support is good, and the forums are
active but the problem is that their software is designed to function
with their own development boards and programmers.
I know its going off topic a bit.. but there are other alternatives.
JAL is free and well supported, CH-BASIC has a nice interface and
reputedly produces tight code for a compiler. PicBASIC (pro) is well
supported and there are lots of IDE's available for it, and loads of
example programs.
I think at the end of the day you will never get the "perfect" item as
there will always one or several functions that one has over the
others. Your choice will also depend on the amount and level of
programming you are doing.
Personally I don't write a lot of programs and as most of my stuff is
pretty basic stuff I use JAL.
The choice is yours my friend
Regards
Malcolm
rtstofer wrote:
> --- In piclist@picl..., "Peter Vincent" <p3t3rv@b...> wrote:
> > product support is great they are in the process of releasing
> version 2 a big update lots of new built in functions bug fixes all
> of which came from the forum they asked us what we wanted to see in
> version 2 via the forum they put it in , your questions get answerd
> by the people that actualy write the code, just because they dont
> rip us off with constant charges for updates (pay or get left
> behind) is no measure of the quality of customer service just look
> at MPLAB from picmicro a very substantional piece of software
> constantly updated do they charge ? do they even charge for the
> software to begin with ? no and no so dose that meen Microchip gives
> crap support ? my PicKit1 flash starter kit was only 20 the
> upgrades are free
>
> I don't think the comparison is reasonable:
>
> Microchip is in the business of selling chips. Tens of millions of
> chips - they can easily afford to offer development software. They
> also need it for their own work. Why would anyone buy a chip if
> they couldn't use it?
>
> Xilinx and Altera (among others) are finally offering free
> development software for their FPGA offerings. It gets their
> products used by more people for more applications. Maybe it adds a
> dollar a chip to the cost - not an important consideration.
>
> >
> > customer support is more than weather you pay for upgrades or
> not , its how the vendor interacts with the customer to provide
> help, information or solutions to problems, and on that score i'm
> impressed with mikroBasic all i can say is download the trial read
> the forum see for yourself :)
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Bill Tinsley
> > To: piclist@picl...
> > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 1:50 AM
> > Subject: Re: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
> >
> >
> > I don't see how the support would be any good if they
> don't charge for upgrades for life.
> >
> > -------Original Message-------
> >
> > From: p_c_vincent
> > Date: 04/28/05 17:52:14
> > To: piclist@picl...
> > Subject: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
> >
> > personaly i would say dont get either i tryed them both
> and was
> > dissapointed i now use mikroBasic by mikroElektronika its
> awesome i
> > payed about 86 GBP and thats it, free upgrades for life
> and
> > excellent customer service via a forum email etc they have
> a free
> > download that only limits the hex code to 2k so you can
> try out all
> > the examples there is a good maunal and a free online book
> and
> > project downloads you would be mad not to give it a look,
> >
> > within an hour i had a 16F877A and a 16F84A hooked up to a
> lcd
> > displaying the speed of a pwm driven motor, the code took
> 10 mins
> > the rest was soldering wires etc
> >
> > They do C, Pascal, basic
> >
> > http://www.mikroelektronika.co.yu/english/index.htm
> >
> > im not connected in anyway im just a total fan it realy is
> that good
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In piclist@picl..., Malcolm
> <malcolm.crabbe@n...> wrote:
> > > Try downloading the demos or manuals and examples for
> each product
> > and
> > > make a decision. I personally couldn't afford to buy
> both to
> > evaluate,
> > > and I don't think many would change one for another.
> > >
> > > The thing is there are other BASIC compilers out there,
> and there
> > are
> > > other languages that are equally as easy to use (and in
> the case
> > of JAL
> > > are free as well)
> > >
> > > Personally I like the look of MBASIC, However there are
> loads of
> > IDE
> > > interfaces for PicBASIC
> > >
> > > Malcolm
> > >
> > > clayforge wrote:
> > >
> > > > Has anyone used PicBasic Pro by MeLabs) and MBasic Pro
> (by Basic
> > > > Micro)? How do the two compare? I can afford to get
> one or the
> > > > other, and obviously want the better of the two
> products. By
> > better,
> > > > I mean easier to use, value for the money, more
> powerful.
> > > >
> > > > Please do not bother listing all of the other
> available Basic
> > > > compilers. I have compared and contrasted and these
> are the
> > front
> > > > runners in my search.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Scott
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and
> follow the
> > > > instructions
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -------------------
> ----------
> > -------
> > > > *>.
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and
> follow the instructions
> > >.
seemed to compile poorly (the hex would not work even though the code
compiled without errors) - Yes support is good, and the forums are
active but the problem is that their software is designed to function
with their own development boards and programmers.
I know its going off topic a bit.. but there are other alternatives.
JAL is free and well supported, CH-BASIC has a nice interface and
reputedly produces tight code for a compiler. PicBASIC (pro) is well
supported and there are lots of IDE's available for it, and loads of
example programs.
I think at the end of the day you will never get the "perfect" item as
there will always one or several functions that one has over the
others. Your choice will also depend on the amount and level of
programming you are doing.
Personally I don't write a lot of programs and as most of my stuff is
pretty basic stuff I use JAL.
The choice is yours my friend
Regards
Malcolm
rtstofer wrote:
> --- In piclist@picl..., "Peter Vincent" <p3t3rv@b...> wrote:
> > product support is great they are in the process of releasing
> version 2 a big update lots of new built in functions bug fixes all
> of which came from the forum they asked us what we wanted to see in
> version 2 via the forum they put it in , your questions get answerd
> by the people that actualy write the code, just because they dont
> rip us off with constant charges for updates (pay or get left
> behind) is no measure of the quality of customer service just look
> at MPLAB from picmicro a very substantional piece of software
> constantly updated do they charge ? do they even charge for the
> software to begin with ? no and no so dose that meen Microchip gives
> crap support ? my PicKit1 flash starter kit was only 20 the
> upgrades are free
>
> I don't think the comparison is reasonable:
>
> Microchip is in the business of selling chips. Tens of millions of
> chips - they can easily afford to offer development software. They
> also need it for their own work. Why would anyone buy a chip if
> they couldn't use it?
>
> Xilinx and Altera (among others) are finally offering free
> development software for their FPGA offerings. It gets their
> products used by more people for more applications. Maybe it adds a
> dollar a chip to the cost - not an important consideration.
>
> >
> > customer support is more than weather you pay for upgrades or
> not , its how the vendor interacts with the customer to provide
> help, information or solutions to problems, and on that score i'm
> impressed with mikroBasic all i can say is download the trial read
> the forum see for yourself :)
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Bill Tinsley
> > To: piclist@picl...
> > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 1:50 AM
> > Subject: Re: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
> >
> >
> > I don't see how the support would be any good if they
> don't charge for upgrades for life.
> >
> > -------Original Message-------
> >
> > From: p_c_vincent
> > Date: 04/28/05 17:52:14
> > To: piclist@picl...
> > Subject: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
> >
> > personaly i would say dont get either i tryed them both
> and was
> > dissapointed i now use mikroBasic by mikroElektronika its
> awesome i
> > payed about 86 GBP and thats it, free upgrades for life
> and
> > excellent customer service via a forum email etc they have
> a free
> > download that only limits the hex code to 2k so you can
> try out all
> > the examples there is a good maunal and a free online book
> and
> > project downloads you would be mad not to give it a look,
> >
> > within an hour i had a 16F877A and a 16F84A hooked up to a
> lcd
> > displaying the speed of a pwm driven motor, the code took
> 10 mins
> > the rest was soldering wires etc
> >
> > They do C, Pascal, basic
> >
> > http://www.mikroelektronika.co.yu/english/index.htm
> >
> > im not connected in anyway im just a total fan it realy is
> that good
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In piclist@picl..., Malcolm
> <malcolm.crabbe@n...> wrote:
> > > Try downloading the demos or manuals and examples for
> each product
> > and
> > > make a decision. I personally couldn't afford to buy
> both to
> > evaluate,
> > > and I don't think many would change one for another.
> > >
> > > The thing is there are other BASIC compilers out there,
> and there
> > are
> > > other languages that are equally as easy to use (and in
> the case
> > of JAL
> > > are free as well)
> > >
> > > Personally I like the look of MBASIC, However there are
> loads of
> > IDE
> > > interfaces for PicBASIC
> > >
> > > Malcolm
> > >
> > > clayforge wrote:
> > >
> > > > Has anyone used PicBasic Pro by MeLabs) and MBasic Pro
> (by Basic
> > > > Micro)? How do the two compare? I can afford to get
> one or the
> > > > other, and obviously want the better of the two
> products. By
> > better,
> > > > I mean easier to use, value for the money, more
> powerful.
> > > >
> > > > Please do not bother listing all of the other
> available Basic
> > > > compilers. I have compared and contrasted and these
> are the
> > front
> > > > runners in my search.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Scott
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and
> follow the
> > > > instructions
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -------------------
> ----------
> > -------
> > > > *>.
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and
> follow the instructions
> > >.
Reply by ●April 29, 20052005-04-29
I use JAL too, because:
1) There are a bunch of nice, helpful people at the Yahoo JALlist
group.
2) I'm not new to programming; if there's something that needs to be
tweaked with a JAL library, I can pretty much do it. I'm also not
afraid to write my own libraries. Support for inline assembler is
very helpful when you're not a newbie programmer.
3) It does what I need to do. I've run into the code limit of the
free version of CC5X many times and I can't justify spending $250 or
$520 (!!) for the full version.
Mike --- In piclist@picl..., Malcolm <malcolm.crabbe@n...> wrote:
> I downloaded mikroboasic and tried some of the sample files, which
> seemed to compile poorly (the hex would not work even though the
code
> compiled without errors) - Yes support is good, and the forums are
> active but the problem is that their software is designed to
function
> with their own development boards and programmers.
>
> I know its going off topic a bit.. but there are other
alternatives.
> JAL is free and well supported, CH-BASIC has a nice interface and
> reputedly produces tight code for a compiler. PicBASIC (pro) is
well
> supported and there are lots of IDE's available for it, and loads
of
> example programs.
>
> I think at the end of the day you will never get the "perfect" item
as
> there will always one or several functions that one has over the
> others. Your choice will also depend on the amount and level of
> programming you are doing.
>
> Personally I don't write a lot of programs and as most of my stuff
is
> pretty basic stuff I use JAL.
>
> The choice is yours my friend
>
> Regards
>
> Malcolm
1) There are a bunch of nice, helpful people at the Yahoo JALlist
group.
2) I'm not new to programming; if there's something that needs to be
tweaked with a JAL library, I can pretty much do it. I'm also not
afraid to write my own libraries. Support for inline assembler is
very helpful when you're not a newbie programmer.
3) It does what I need to do. I've run into the code limit of the
free version of CC5X many times and I can't justify spending $250 or
$520 (!!) for the full version.
Mike --- In piclist@picl..., Malcolm <malcolm.crabbe@n...> wrote:
> I downloaded mikroboasic and tried some of the sample files, which
> seemed to compile poorly (the hex would not work even though the
code
> compiled without errors) - Yes support is good, and the forums are
> active but the problem is that their software is designed to
function
> with their own development boards and programmers.
>
> I know its going off topic a bit.. but there are other
alternatives.
> JAL is free and well supported, CH-BASIC has a nice interface and
> reputedly produces tight code for a compiler. PicBASIC (pro) is
well
> supported and there are lots of IDE's available for it, and loads
of
> example programs.
>
> I think at the end of the day you will never get the "perfect" item
as
> there will always one or several functions that one has over the
> others. Your choice will also depend on the amount and level of
> programming you are doing.
>
> Personally I don't write a lot of programs and as most of my stuff
is
> pretty basic stuff I use JAL.
>
> The choice is yours my friend
>
> Regards
>
> Malcolm
Reply by ●April 29, 20052005-04-29
--- In piclist@picl..., "upand_at_them" <upand_at_them@y...>
wrote:
> I use JAL too, because:
>
> 1) There are a bunch of nice, helpful people at the Yahoo JALlist
> group.
> 2) I'm not new to programming; if there's something that needs to
be
> tweaked with a JAL library, I can pretty much do it. I'm also not
> afraid to write my own libraries. Support for inline assembler is
> very helpful when you're not a newbie programmer.
> 3) It does what I need to do. I've run into the code limit of the
> free version of CC5X many times and I can't justify spending $250
or
> $520 (!!) for the full version.
The code limit isn't real! Just compile and link separate modules.
The problem I have with cc5x is that it doesn't implement the full
language. I can not put function pointers in arrays and this is a
PITA when I want to write a state driven program. It also doesn't
handle complex expressions.
One of the reasons I am moving from PICs to AVRs is the development
tools. I am playing with the ATmega128 using WinAVR. This setup
includes a full GNU C compiler with a very complete library of
hardware related code. JTAG programming and source level debugging
is another nice feature. >
> Mike > --- In piclist@picl..., Malcolm <malcolm.crabbe@n...>
wrote:
> > I downloaded mikroboasic and tried some of the sample files,
which
> > seemed to compile poorly (the hex would not work even though the
> code
> > compiled without errors) - Yes support is good, and the forums
are
> > active but the problem is that their software is designed to
> function
> > with their own development boards and programmers.
> >
> > I know its going off topic a bit.. but there are other
> alternatives.
> > JAL is free and well supported, CH-BASIC has a nice interface
and
> > reputedly produces tight code for a compiler. PicBASIC (pro) is
> well
> > supported and there are lots of IDE's available for it, and
loads
> of
> > example programs.
> >
> > I think at the end of the day you will never get the "perfect"
item
> as
> > there will always one or several functions that one has over the
> > others. Your choice will also depend on the amount and level of
> > programming you are doing.
> >
> > Personally I don't write a lot of programs and as most of my
stuff
> is
> > pretty basic stuff I use JAL.
> >
> > The choice is yours my friend
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Malcolm
wrote:
> I use JAL too, because:
>
> 1) There are a bunch of nice, helpful people at the Yahoo JALlist
> group.
> 2) I'm not new to programming; if there's something that needs to
be
> tweaked with a JAL library, I can pretty much do it. I'm also not
> afraid to write my own libraries. Support for inline assembler is
> very helpful when you're not a newbie programmer.
> 3) It does what I need to do. I've run into the code limit of the
> free version of CC5X many times and I can't justify spending $250
or
> $520 (!!) for the full version.
The code limit isn't real! Just compile and link separate modules.
The problem I have with cc5x is that it doesn't implement the full
language. I can not put function pointers in arrays and this is a
PITA when I want to write a state driven program. It also doesn't
handle complex expressions.
One of the reasons I am moving from PICs to AVRs is the development
tools. I am playing with the ATmega128 using WinAVR. This setup
includes a full GNU C compiler with a very complete library of
hardware related code. JTAG programming and source level debugging
is another nice feature. >
> Mike > --- In piclist@picl..., Malcolm <malcolm.crabbe@n...>
wrote:
> > I downloaded mikroboasic and tried some of the sample files,
which
> > seemed to compile poorly (the hex would not work even though the
> code
> > compiled without errors) - Yes support is good, and the forums
are
> > active but the problem is that their software is designed to
> function
> > with their own development boards and programmers.
> >
> > I know its going off topic a bit.. but there are other
> alternatives.
> > JAL is free and well supported, CH-BASIC has a nice interface
and
> > reputedly produces tight code for a compiler. PicBASIC (pro) is
> well
> > supported and there are lots of IDE's available for it, and
loads
> of
> > example programs.
> >
> > I think at the end of the day you will never get the "perfect"
item
> as
> > there will always one or several functions that one has over the
> > others. Your choice will also depend on the amount and level of
> > programming you are doing.
> >
> > Personally I don't write a lot of programs and as most of my
stuff
> is
> > pretty basic stuff I use JAL.
> >
> > The choice is yours my friend
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Malcolm
Reply by ●April 29, 20052005-04-29
> The code limit isn't real! Just compile and link separate
modules.
I'm not familiar with this. Is there an example somewhere?
Mike --- In piclist@picl..., "rtstofer" <rstofer@p...> wrote:
> --- In piclist@picl..., "upand_at_them"
<upand_at_them@y...>
> wrote:
> > I use JAL too, because:
> >
> > 1) There are a bunch of nice, helpful people at the Yahoo JALlist
> > group.
> > 2) I'm not new to programming; if there's something that needs to
> be
> > tweaked with a JAL library, I can pretty much do it. I'm also
not
> > afraid to write my own libraries. Support for inline assembler
is
> > very helpful when you're not a newbie programmer.
> > 3) It does what I need to do. I've run into the code limit of
the
> > free version of CC5X many times and I can't justify spending $250
> or
> > $520 (!!) for the full version.
>
> The code limit isn't real! Just compile and link separate
modules.
> The problem I have with cc5x is that it doesn't implement the full
> language. I can not put function pointers in arrays and this is a
> PITA when I want to write a state driven program. It also doesn't
> handle complex expressions.
>
> One of the reasons I am moving from PICs to AVRs is the development
> tools. I am playing with the ATmega128 using WinAVR. This setup
> includes a full GNU C compiler with a very complete library of
> hardware related code. JTAG programming and source level debugging
> is another nice feature. > >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > --- In piclist@picl..., Malcolm <malcolm.crabbe@n...>
> wrote:
> > > I downloaded mikroboasic and tried some of the sample files,
> which
> > > seemed to compile poorly (the hex would not work even though
the
> > code
> > > compiled without errors) - Yes support is good, and the forums
> are
> > > active but the problem is that their software is designed to
> > function
> > > with their own development boards and programmers.
> > >
> > > I know its going off topic a bit.. but there are other
> > alternatives.
> > > JAL is free and well supported, CH-BASIC has a nice interface
> and
> > > reputedly produces tight code for a compiler. PicBASIC (pro)
is
> > well
> > > supported and there are lots of IDE's available for it, and
> loads
> > of
> > > example programs.
> > >
> > > I think at the end of the day you will never get the "perfect"
> item
> > as
> > > there will always one or several functions that one has over
the
> > > others. Your choice will also depend on the amount and level
of
> > > programming you are doing.
> > >
> > > Personally I don't write a lot of programs and as most of my
> stuff
> > is
> > > pretty basic stuff I use JAL.
> > >
> > > The choice is yours my friend
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Malcolm
I'm not familiar with this. Is there an example somewhere?
Mike --- In piclist@picl..., "rtstofer" <rstofer@p...> wrote:
> --- In piclist@picl..., "upand_at_them"
<upand_at_them@y...>
> wrote:
> > I use JAL too, because:
> >
> > 1) There are a bunch of nice, helpful people at the Yahoo JALlist
> > group.
> > 2) I'm not new to programming; if there's something that needs to
> be
> > tweaked with a JAL library, I can pretty much do it. I'm also
not
> > afraid to write my own libraries. Support for inline assembler
is
> > very helpful when you're not a newbie programmer.
> > 3) It does what I need to do. I've run into the code limit of
the
> > free version of CC5X many times and I can't justify spending $250
> or
> > $520 (!!) for the full version.
>
> The code limit isn't real! Just compile and link separate
modules.
> The problem I have with cc5x is that it doesn't implement the full
> language. I can not put function pointers in arrays and this is a
> PITA when I want to write a state driven program. It also doesn't
> handle complex expressions.
>
> One of the reasons I am moving from PICs to AVRs is the development
> tools. I am playing with the ATmega128 using WinAVR. This setup
> includes a full GNU C compiler with a very complete library of
> hardware related code. JTAG programming and source level debugging
> is another nice feature. > >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > --- In piclist@picl..., Malcolm <malcolm.crabbe@n...>
> wrote:
> > > I downloaded mikroboasic and tried some of the sample files,
> which
> > > seemed to compile poorly (the hex would not work even though
the
> > code
> > > compiled without errors) - Yes support is good, and the forums
> are
> > > active but the problem is that their software is designed to
> > function
> > > with their own development boards and programmers.
> > >
> > > I know its going off topic a bit.. but there are other
> > alternatives.
> > > JAL is free and well supported, CH-BASIC has a nice interface
> and
> > > reputedly produces tight code for a compiler. PicBASIC (pro)
is
> > well
> > > supported and there are lots of IDE's available for it, and
> loads
> > of
> > > example programs.
> > >
> > > I think at the end of the day you will never get the "perfect"
> item
> > as
> > > there will always one or several functions that one has over
the
> > > others. Your choice will also depend on the amount and level
of
> > > programming you are doing.
> > >
> > > Personally I don't write a lot of programs and as most of my
> stuff
> > is
> > > pretty basic stuff I use JAL.
> > >
> > > The choice is yours my friend
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Malcolm
Reply by ●April 29, 20052005-04-29
--- In piclist@picl..., "upand_at_them" <upand_at_them@y...>
wrote:
> > The code limit isn't real! Just compile and link separate
modules.
>
> I'm not familiar with this. Is there an example somewhere?
>
> Mike
Not that I can find. It was discussed one time on another forum. I
gave up on cc5x and went to PIC C Lite when I found I couldn't have
function pointers in arrays.
It should be pretty easy to make up a program with a couple of
source files and give it a try. >
>
> --- In piclist@picl..., "rtstofer" <rstofer@p...> wrote:
> > --- In piclist@picl..., "upand_at_them"
> <upand_at_them@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > I use JAL too, because:
> > >
> > > 1) There are a bunch of nice, helpful people at the Yahoo
JALlist
> > > group.
> > > 2) I'm not new to programming; if there's something that needs
to
> > be
> > > tweaked with a JAL library, I can pretty much do it. I'm also
> not
> > > afraid to write my own libraries. Support for inline
assembler
> is
> > > very helpful when you're not a newbie programmer.
> > > 3) It does what I need to do. I've run into the code limit of
> the
> > > free version of CC5X many times and I can't justify spending
$250
> > or
> > > $520 (!!) for the full version.
> >
> > The code limit isn't real! Just compile and link separate
> modules.
> > The problem I have with cc5x is that it doesn't implement the
full
> > language. I can not put function pointers in arrays and this is
a
> > PITA when I want to write a state driven program. It also
doesn't
> > handle complex expressions.
> >
> > One of the reasons I am moving from PICs to AVRs is the
development
> > tools. I am playing with the ATmega128 using WinAVR. This
setup
> > includes a full GNU C compiler with a very complete library of
> > hardware related code. JTAG programming and source level
debugging
> > is another nice feature.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In piclist@picl..., Malcolm <malcolm.crabbe@n...>
> > wrote:
> > > > I downloaded mikroboasic and tried some of the sample files,
> > which
> > > > seemed to compile poorly (the hex would not work even though
> the
> > > code
> > > > compiled without errors) - Yes support is good, and the
forums
> > are
> > > > active but the problem is that their software is designed to
> > > function
> > > > with their own development boards and programmers.
> > > >
> > > > I know its going off topic a bit.. but there are other
> > > alternatives.
> > > > JAL is free and well supported, CH-BASIC has a nice
interface
> > and
> > > > reputedly produces tight code for a compiler. PicBASIC
(pro)
> is
> > > well
> > > > supported and there are lots of IDE's available for it, and
> > loads
> > > of
> > > > example programs.
> > > >
> > > > I think at the end of the day you will never get
the "perfect"
> > item
> > > as
> > > > there will always one or several functions that one has over
> the
> > > > others. Your choice will also depend on the amount and
level
> of
> > > > programming you are doing.
> > > >
> > > > Personally I don't write a lot of programs and as most of my
> > stuff
> > > is
> > > > pretty basic stuff I use JAL.
> > > >
> > > > The choice is yours my friend
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > Malcolm
wrote:
> > The code limit isn't real! Just compile and link separate
modules.
>
> I'm not familiar with this. Is there an example somewhere?
>
> Mike
Not that I can find. It was discussed one time on another forum. I
gave up on cc5x and went to PIC C Lite when I found I couldn't have
function pointers in arrays.
It should be pretty easy to make up a program with a couple of
source files and give it a try. >
>
> --- In piclist@picl..., "rtstofer" <rstofer@p...> wrote:
> > --- In piclist@picl..., "upand_at_them"
> <upand_at_them@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > I use JAL too, because:
> > >
> > > 1) There are a bunch of nice, helpful people at the Yahoo
JALlist
> > > group.
> > > 2) I'm not new to programming; if there's something that needs
to
> > be
> > > tweaked with a JAL library, I can pretty much do it. I'm also
> not
> > > afraid to write my own libraries. Support for inline
assembler
> is
> > > very helpful when you're not a newbie programmer.
> > > 3) It does what I need to do. I've run into the code limit of
> the
> > > free version of CC5X many times and I can't justify spending
$250
> > or
> > > $520 (!!) for the full version.
> >
> > The code limit isn't real! Just compile and link separate
> modules.
> > The problem I have with cc5x is that it doesn't implement the
full
> > language. I can not put function pointers in arrays and this is
a
> > PITA when I want to write a state driven program. It also
doesn't
> > handle complex expressions.
> >
> > One of the reasons I am moving from PICs to AVRs is the
development
> > tools. I am playing with the ATmega128 using WinAVR. This
setup
> > includes a full GNU C compiler with a very complete library of
> > hardware related code. JTAG programming and source level
debugging
> > is another nice feature.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In piclist@picl..., Malcolm <malcolm.crabbe@n...>
> > wrote:
> > > > I downloaded mikroboasic and tried some of the sample files,
> > which
> > > > seemed to compile poorly (the hex would not work even though
> the
> > > code
> > > > compiled without errors) - Yes support is good, and the
forums
> > are
> > > > active but the problem is that their software is designed to
> > > function
> > > > with their own development boards and programmers.
> > > >
> > > > I know its going off topic a bit.. but there are other
> > > alternatives.
> > > > JAL is free and well supported, CH-BASIC has a nice
interface
> > and
> > > > reputedly produces tight code for a compiler. PicBASIC
(pro)
> is
> > > well
> > > > supported and there are lots of IDE's available for it, and
> > loads
> > > of
> > > > example programs.
> > > >
> > > > I think at the end of the day you will never get
the "perfect"
> > item
> > > as
> > > > there will always one or several functions that one has over
> the
> > > > others. Your choice will also depend on the amount and
level
> of
> > > > programming you are doing.
> > > >
> > > > Personally I don't write a lot of programs and as most of my
> > stuff
> > > is
> > > > pretty basic stuff I use JAL.
> > > >
> > > > The choice is yours my friend
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > Malcolm
Reply by ●April 29, 20052005-04-29
> It should be pretty easy to make up a program with a couple of
> source files and give it a try.
If I knew what I was doing, which I don't. It's not just using an
include file, right?
Mike --- In piclist@picl..., "rtstofer" <rstofer@p...> wrote:
> --- In piclist@picl..., "upand_at_them"
<upand_at_them@y...>
> wrote:
> > > The code limit isn't real! Just compile and link separate
> modules.
> >
> > I'm not familiar with this. Is there an example somewhere?
> >
> > Mike
>
> Not that I can find. It was discussed one time on another forum.
I
> gave up on cc5x and went to PIC C Lite when I found I couldn't have
> function pointers in arrays.
>
> It should be pretty easy to make up a program with a couple of
> source files and give it a try.
>
> source files and give it a try.
If I knew what I was doing, which I don't. It's not just using an
include file, right?
Mike --- In piclist@picl..., "rtstofer" <rstofer@p...> wrote:
> --- In piclist@picl..., "upand_at_them"
<upand_at_them@y...>
> wrote:
> > > The code limit isn't real! Just compile and link separate
> modules.
> >
> > I'm not familiar with this. Is there an example somewhere?
> >
> > Mike
>
> Not that I can find. It was discussed one time on another forum.
I
> gave up on cc5x and went to PIC C Lite when I found I couldn't have
> function pointers in arrays.
>
> It should be pretty easy to make up a program with a couple of
> source files and give it a try.
>
Reply by ●April 29, 20052005-04-29
--- In piclist@y
ahoogroups.com, "upand_at_them" <upand_at_them@y...> wrote:
> > It should be pretty easy to make up a program with a couple of
> > source files and give it a try.
>
> If I knew what I was doing, which I don't. It's not just using an
> include file, right?
>
> Mike
No, it's more like partitioning a project. The multiple file
example I have for PIC C Lite has 3 files: POWERUP.AS (the startup
file required for use with a bootloader), Alarm.c and Tasks.c (a
multitasking library). This was an overdesigned high water alarm
system for my boat. It was to be connected to an autodialer and
phone home when the bilge level got above a certain point. It's a
great alarm system but I fixed the leaks instead.
For this project in MPLAB, the PIC C Language Suite is selected and
the project file knows that these three source files, plus a couple
of .h files are to be compiled and linked together.
Each file is compiled separately and produces relocatable output
which would be limited to 2k if this project used cc5x. But there
are two files so each could grow to 2k.
A larger project might have several files and each would have the
compiler size limit but, in aggregate, the total project can fill
the PIC.
>
>
> --- In piclist@picl..., "rtstofer" <rstofer@p...> wrote:
> > --- In piclist@picl..., "upand_at_them"
> <upand_at_them@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > > The code limit isn't real! Just compile and link separate
> > modules.
> > >
> > > I'm not familiar with this. Is there an example somewhere?
> > >
> > > Mike
> >
> > Not that I can find. It was discussed one time on another
forum.
> I
> > gave up on cc5x and went to PIC C Lite when I found I couldn't
have
> > function pointers in arrays.
> >
> > It should be pretty easy to make up a program with a couple of
> > source files and give it a try.
> >
ahoogroups.com, "upand_at_them" <upand_at_them@y...> wrote:
> > It should be pretty easy to make up a program with a couple of
> > source files and give it a try.
>
> If I knew what I was doing, which I don't. It's not just using an
> include file, right?
>
> Mike
No, it's more like partitioning a project. The multiple file
example I have for PIC C Lite has 3 files: POWERUP.AS (the startup
file required for use with a bootloader), Alarm.c and Tasks.c (a
multitasking library). This was an overdesigned high water alarm
system for my boat. It was to be connected to an autodialer and
phone home when the bilge level got above a certain point. It's a
great alarm system but I fixed the leaks instead.
For this project in MPLAB, the PIC C Language Suite is selected and
the project file knows that these three source files, plus a couple
of .h files are to be compiled and linked together.
Each file is compiled separately and produces relocatable output
which would be limited to 2k if this project used cc5x. But there
are two files so each could grow to 2k.
A larger project might have several files and each would have the
compiler size limit but, in aggregate, the total project can fill
the PIC.
>
>
> --- In piclist@picl..., "rtstofer" <rstofer@p...> wrote:
> > --- In piclist@picl..., "upand_at_them"
> <upand_at_them@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > > The code limit isn't real! Just compile and link separate
> > modules.
> > >
> > > I'm not familiar with this. Is there an example somewhere?
> > >
> > > Mike
> >
> > Not that I can find. It was discussed one time on another
forum.
> I
> > gave up on cc5x and went to PIC C Lite when I found I couldn't
have
> > function pointers in arrays.
> >
> > It should be pretty easy to make up a program with a couple of
> > source files and give it a try.
> >
Reply by ●May 3, 20052005-05-03
Nonsense, i do not use their development boards
i make my own with vero strip board and i do not use their programmers i have
used my pickit1 programmer and my DIY-K149B programmer they both work fine i
just compile it load the hex file into my programmer and its done, i have
had no problems, Seems to compile poorly ??? i think maybe the problem is with
your hardware design not with microbasic i tryed All the examples before i
purchased it they all worked fine thats one reason i got my wallet out
hope this thread dont turn into a basic war but
i am glad i seem to have stimulated a big intrest :)
----- Original Message -----From: MalcolmTo: p...@yahoogroups.comSent: Friday, April 29, 2005 4:32 PMSubject: Re: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...I downloaded mikroboasic and tried some of the sample files, which
seemed to compile poorly (the hex would not work even though the code
compiled without errors) - Yes support is good, and the forums are
active but the problem is that their software is designed to function
with their own development boards and programmers.
I know its going off topic a bit.. but there are other alternatives.
JAL is free and well supported, CH-BASIC has a nice interface and
reputedly produces tight code for a compiler. PicBASIC (pro) is well
supported and there are lots of IDE's available for it, and loads of
example programs.
I think at the end of the day you will never get the "perfect" item as
there will always one or several functions that one has over the
others. Your choice will also depend on the amount and level of
programming you are doing.
Personally I don't write a lot of programs and as most of my stuff is
pretty basic stuff I use JAL.
The choice is yours my friend
Regards
Malcolm
rtstofer wrote:
> --- In p...@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Vincent" <p3t3rv@b...> wrote:
> > product support is great they are in the process of releasing
> version 2 a big update lots of new built in functions bug fixes all
> of which came from the forum they asked us what we wanted to see in
> version 2 via the forum they put it in , your questions get answerd
> by the people that actualy write the code, just because they dont
> rip us off with constant charges for updates (pay or get left
> behind) is no measure of the quality of customer service just look
> at MPLAB from picmicro a very substantional piece of software
> constantly updated do they charge ? do they even charge for the
> software to begin with ? no and no so dose that meen Microchip gives
> crap support ? my PicKit1 flash starter kit was only 20 the
> upgrades are free
>
> I don't think the comparison is reasonable:
>
> Microchip is in the business of selling chips. Tens of millions of
> chips - they can easily afford to offer development software. They
> also need it for their own work. Why would anyone buy a chip if
> they couldn't use it?
>
> Xilinx and Altera (among others) are finally offering free
> development software for their FPGA offerings. It gets their
> products used by more people for more applications. Maybe it adds a
> dollar a chip to the cost - not an important consideration.
>
> >
> > customer support is more than weather you pay for upgrades or
> not , its how the vendor interacts with the customer to provide
> help, information or solutions to problems, and on that score i'm
> impressed with mikroBasic all i can say is download the trial read
> the forum see for yourself :)
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Bill Tinsley
> > To: p...@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 1:50 AM
> > Subject: Re: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
> >
> >
> > I don't see how the support would be any good if they
> don't charge for upgrades for life.
> >
> > -------Original Message-------
> >
> > From: p_c_vincent
> > Date: 04/28/05 17:52:14
> > To: p...@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
> >
> > personaly i would say dont get either i tryed them both
> and was
> > dissapointed i now use mikroBasic by mikroElektronika its
> awesome i
> > payed about 86 GBP and thats it, free upgrades for life
> and
> > excellent customer service via a forum email etc they have
> a free
> > download that only limits the hex code to 2k so you can
> try out all
> > the examples there is a good maunal and a free online book
> and
> > project downloads you would be mad not to give it a look,
> >
> > within an hour i had a 16F877A and a 16F84A hooked up to a
> lcd
> > displaying the speed of a pwm driven motor, the code took
> 10 mins
> > the rest was soldering wires etc
> >
> > They do C, Pascal, basic
> >
> > http://www.mikroelektronika.co.yu/english/index.htm
> >
> > im not connected in anyway im just a total fan it realy is
> that good
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In p...@yahoogroups.com, Malcolm
> <malcolm.crabbe@n...> wrote:
> > > Try downloading the demos or manuals and examples for
> each product
> > and
> > > make a decision. I personally couldn't afford to buy
> both to
> > evaluate,
> > > and I don't think many would change one for another.
> > >
> > > The thing is there are other BASIC compilers out there,
> and there
> > are
> > > other languages that are equally as easy to use (and in
> the case
> > of JAL
> > > are free as well)
> > >
> > > Personally I like the look of MBASIC, However there are
> loads of
> > IDE
> > > interfaces for PicBASIC
> > >
> > > Malcolm
> > >
> > > clayforge wrote:
> > >
> > > > Has anyone used PicBasic Pro by MeLabs) and MBasic Pro
> (by Basic
> > > > Micro)? How do the two compare? I can afford to get
> one or the
> > > > other, and obviously want the better of the two
> products. By
> > better,
> > > > I mean easier to use, value for the money, more
> powerful.
> > > >
> > > > Please do not bother listing all of the other
> available Basic
> > > > compilers. I have compared and contrasted and these
> are the
> > front
> > > > runners in my search.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Scott
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and
> follow the
> > > > instructions
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -------------------
> ----------
> > -------
> > > > *>.
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and
> follow the instructions
> > >.
to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the instructions
Reply by ●May 3, 20052005-05-03
I too use the PicKIT1 - the sample code for flashing LEDs simply would
not work when programmed using the PicKIT1 programmer - This programmer
works fine using code produced with JAL and other compilers.
A friend who also has the same programmer also tried the examples and
got the same result !!
Peter Vincent wrote:
> Nonsense, i do not use their development boards i make my own with
> vero strip board and i do not use their programmers i have used my
> pickit1 programmer and my DIY-K149B programmer they both work fine i
> just compile it load the hex file into my programmer and its done,
> i have had no problems, Seems to compile poorly ??? i think maybe the
> problem is with your hardware design not with microbasic i tryed All
> the examples before i purchased it they all worked fine thats one
> reason i got my wallet out
>
> hope this thread dont turn into a basic war but i am glad i seem to
> have stimulated a big intrest :) >
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Malcolm <mailto:malcolm.crabbe@malc...>
> *To:* piclist@picl... <mailto:piclist@picl...>
> *Sent:* Friday, April 29, 2005 4:32 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
>
> I downloaded mikroboasic and tried some of the sample files, which
> seemed to compile poorly (the hex would not work even though the code
> compiled without errors) - Yes support is good, and the forums are
> active but the problem is that their software is designed to function
> with their own development boards and programmers.
>
> I know its going off topic a bit.. but there are other alternatives.
> JAL is free and well supported, CH-BASIC has a nice interface and
> reputedly produces tight code for a compiler. PicBASIC (pro) is well
> supported and there are lots of IDE's available for it, and loads of
> example programs.
>
> I think at the end of the day you will never get the "perfect"
> item as
> there will always one or several functions that one has over the
> others. Your choice will also depend on the amount and level of
> programming you are doing.
>
> Personally I don't write a lot of programs and as most of my stuff is
> pretty basic stuff I use JAL.
>
> The choice is yours my friend
>
> Regards
>
> Malcolm
>
> rtstofer wrote:
>
> > --- In piclist@picl..., "Peter Vincent" <p3t3rv@b...> wrote:
> > > product support is great they are in the process of releasing
> > version 2 a big update lots of new built in functions bug fixes all
> > of which came from the forum they asked us what we wanted to see in
> > version 2 via the forum they put it in , your questions get answerd
> > by the people that actualy write the code, just because they dont
> > rip us off with constant charges for updates (pay or get left
> > behind) is no measure of the quality of customer service just look
> > at MPLAB from picmicro a very substantional piece of software
> > constantly updated do they charge ? do they even charge for the
> > software to begin with ? no and no so dose that meen Microchip gives
> > crap support ? my PicKit1 flash starter kit was only 20 the
> > upgrades are free
> >
> > I don't think the comparison is reasonable:
> >
> > Microchip is in the business of selling chips. Tens of millions of
> > chips - they can easily afford to offer development software. They
> > also need it for their own work. Why would anyone buy a chip if
> > they couldn't use it?
> >
> > Xilinx and Altera (among others) are finally offering free
> > development software for their FPGA offerings. It gets their
> > products used by more people for more applications. Maybe it adds a
> > dollar a chip to the cost - not an important consideration.
> >
> > >
> > > customer support is more than weather you pay for upgrades or
> > not , its how the vendor interacts with the customer to provide
> > help, information or solutions to problems, and on that score i'm
> > impressed with mikroBasic all i can say is download the trial read
> > the forum see for yourself :)
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Bill Tinsley
> > > To: piclist@picl...
> > > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 1:50 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't see how the support would be any good if they
> > don't charge for upgrades for life.
> > >
> > > -------Original Message-------
> > >
> > > From: p_c_vincent
> > > Date: 04/28/05 17:52:14
> > > To: piclist@picl...
> > > Subject: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
> > >
> > > personaly i would say dont get either i tryed them both
> > and was
> > > dissapointed i now use mikroBasic by mikroElektronika its
> > awesome i
> > > payed about 86 GBP and thats it, free upgrades for life
> > and
> > > excellent customer service via a forum email etc they have
> > a free
> > > download that only limits the hex code to 2k so you can
> > try out all
> > > the examples there is a good maunal and a free online book
> > and
> > > project downloads you would be mad not to give it a look,
> > >
> > > within an hour i had a 16F877A and a 16F84A hooked up to a
> > lcd
> > > displaying the speed of a pwm driven motor, the code took
> > 10 mins
> > > the rest was soldering wires etc
> > >
> > > They do C, Pascal, basic
> > >
> > > http://www.mikroelektronika.co.yu/english/index.htm
> > >
> > > im not connected in anyway im just a total fan it realy is
> > that good
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In piclist@picl..., Malcolm
> > <malcolm.crabbe@n...> wrote:
> > > > Try downloading the demos or manuals and examples for
> > each product
> > > and
> > > > make a decision. I personally couldn't afford to buy
> > both to
> > > evaluate,
> > > > and I don't think many would change one for another.
> > > >
> > > > The thing is there are other BASIC compilers out there,
> > and there
> > > are
> > > > other languages that are equally as easy to use (and in
> > the case
> > > of JAL
> > > > are free as well)
> > > >
> > > > Personally I like the look of MBASIC, However there are
> > loads of
> > > IDE
> > > > interfaces for PicBASIC
> > > >
> > > > Malcolm
> > > >
> > > > clayforge wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Has anyone used PicBasic Pro by MeLabs) and MBasic Pro
> > (by Basic
> > > > > Micro)? How do the two compare? I can afford to get
> > one or the
> > > > > other, and obviously want the better of the two
> > products. By
> > > better,
> > > > > I mean easier to use, value for the money, more
> > powerful.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please do not bother listing all of the other
> > available Basic
> > > > > compilers. I have compared and contrasted and these
> > are the
> > > front
> > > > > runners in my search.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Scott
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and
> > follow the
> > > > > instructions
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> -------------------
> > ----------
> > > -------
> > > > > *>.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and
> > follow the instructions
> > > >.
> >
> > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the
> instructions >
> to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the
> instructions >
> *>.
not work when programmed using the PicKIT1 programmer - This programmer
works fine using code produced with JAL and other compilers.
A friend who also has the same programmer also tried the examples and
got the same result !!
Peter Vincent wrote:
> Nonsense, i do not use their development boards i make my own with
> vero strip board and i do not use their programmers i have used my
> pickit1 programmer and my DIY-K149B programmer they both work fine i
> just compile it load the hex file into my programmer and its done,
> i have had no problems, Seems to compile poorly ??? i think maybe the
> problem is with your hardware design not with microbasic i tryed All
> the examples before i purchased it they all worked fine thats one
> reason i got my wallet out
>
> hope this thread dont turn into a basic war but i am glad i seem to
> have stimulated a big intrest :) >
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Malcolm <mailto:malcolm.crabbe@malc...>
> *To:* piclist@picl... <mailto:piclist@picl...>
> *Sent:* Friday, April 29, 2005 4:32 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
>
> I downloaded mikroboasic and tried some of the sample files, which
> seemed to compile poorly (the hex would not work even though the code
> compiled without errors) - Yes support is good, and the forums are
> active but the problem is that their software is designed to function
> with their own development boards and programmers.
>
> I know its going off topic a bit.. but there are other alternatives.
> JAL is free and well supported, CH-BASIC has a nice interface and
> reputedly produces tight code for a compiler. PicBASIC (pro) is well
> supported and there are lots of IDE's available for it, and loads of
> example programs.
>
> I think at the end of the day you will never get the "perfect"
> item as
> there will always one or several functions that one has over the
> others. Your choice will also depend on the amount and level of
> programming you are doing.
>
> Personally I don't write a lot of programs and as most of my stuff is
> pretty basic stuff I use JAL.
>
> The choice is yours my friend
>
> Regards
>
> Malcolm
>
> rtstofer wrote:
>
> > --- In piclist@picl..., "Peter Vincent" <p3t3rv@b...> wrote:
> > > product support is great they are in the process of releasing
> > version 2 a big update lots of new built in functions bug fixes all
> > of which came from the forum they asked us what we wanted to see in
> > version 2 via the forum they put it in , your questions get answerd
> > by the people that actualy write the code, just because they dont
> > rip us off with constant charges for updates (pay or get left
> > behind) is no measure of the quality of customer service just look
> > at MPLAB from picmicro a very substantional piece of software
> > constantly updated do they charge ? do they even charge for the
> > software to begin with ? no and no so dose that meen Microchip gives
> > crap support ? my PicKit1 flash starter kit was only 20 the
> > upgrades are free
> >
> > I don't think the comparison is reasonable:
> >
> > Microchip is in the business of selling chips. Tens of millions of
> > chips - they can easily afford to offer development software. They
> > also need it for their own work. Why would anyone buy a chip if
> > they couldn't use it?
> >
> > Xilinx and Altera (among others) are finally offering free
> > development software for their FPGA offerings. It gets their
> > products used by more people for more applications. Maybe it adds a
> > dollar a chip to the cost - not an important consideration.
> >
> > >
> > > customer support is more than weather you pay for upgrades or
> > not , its how the vendor interacts with the customer to provide
> > help, information or solutions to problems, and on that score i'm
> > impressed with mikroBasic all i can say is download the trial read
> > the forum see for yourself :)
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Bill Tinsley
> > > To: piclist@picl...
> > > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 1:50 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't see how the support would be any good if they
> > don't charge for upgrades for life.
> > >
> > > -------Original Message-------
> > >
> > > From: p_c_vincent
> > > Date: 04/28/05 17:52:14
> > > To: piclist@picl...
> > > Subject: [piclist] Re: PicBasic Pro v. MBasic...
> > >
> > > personaly i would say dont get either i tryed them both
> > and was
> > > dissapointed i now use mikroBasic by mikroElektronika its
> > awesome i
> > > payed about 86 GBP and thats it, free upgrades for life
> > and
> > > excellent customer service via a forum email etc they have
> > a free
> > > download that only limits the hex code to 2k so you can
> > try out all
> > > the examples there is a good maunal and a free online book
> > and
> > > project downloads you would be mad not to give it a look,
> > >
> > > within an hour i had a 16F877A and a 16F84A hooked up to a
> > lcd
> > > displaying the speed of a pwm driven motor, the code took
> > 10 mins
> > > the rest was soldering wires etc
> > >
> > > They do C, Pascal, basic
> > >
> > > http://www.mikroelektronika.co.yu/english/index.htm
> > >
> > > im not connected in anyway im just a total fan it realy is
> > that good
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In piclist@picl..., Malcolm
> > <malcolm.crabbe@n...> wrote:
> > > > Try downloading the demos or manuals and examples for
> > each product
> > > and
> > > > make a decision. I personally couldn't afford to buy
> > both to
> > > evaluate,
> > > > and I don't think many would change one for another.
> > > >
> > > > The thing is there are other BASIC compilers out there,
> > and there
> > > are
> > > > other languages that are equally as easy to use (and in
> > the case
> > > of JAL
> > > > are free as well)
> > > >
> > > > Personally I like the look of MBASIC, However there are
> > loads of
> > > IDE
> > > > interfaces for PicBASIC
> > > >
> > > > Malcolm
> > > >
> > > > clayforge wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Has anyone used PicBasic Pro by MeLabs) and MBasic Pro
> > (by Basic
> > > > > Micro)? How do the two compare? I can afford to get
> > one or the
> > > > > other, and obviously want the better of the two
> > products. By
> > > better,
> > > > > I mean easier to use, value for the money, more
> > powerful.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please do not bother listing all of the other
> > available Basic
> > > > > compilers. I have compared and contrasted and these
> > are the
> > > front
> > > > > runners in my search.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Scott
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and
> > follow the
> > > > > instructions
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> -------------------
> > ----------
> > > -------
> > > > > *>.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and
> > follow the instructions
> > > >.
> >
> > to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the
> instructions >
> to unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the
> instructions >
> *>.
