PICs??

[steve ravet]

Bruce Plecan wrote:
> 
> Well I thought I had my mind made up about using a PIC,
> and Popular Electronics was starting a series on them, so
> I figured I was all set.  Got the new issue, and they changed
> horses midstream, and decided to go with a AT90S1200.
> Supposed to be better!?.
>   They mentioned two web sites.
>   www.atmel.com
>   www.star.net/people/~mvs
> The atmel has spec sheets.  I'm totally lost on chosing
> between the two, any suggestions.  Again the use would be
> for EFI enhansments, ie TPS enrichments, WOT Metering
> TIA  Bruce    The warm, orange glow of the radio, a Cone
>         Shaped Hat, and some spec sheets, life is good.....

I'm doing a project right now that uses a PIC with A/D converters and a
couple analog devices accelerometers.  It's my first microcontroller
project.  I'd give PIC a thumbs up for ease of use and programming. 
They have an integrated package that includes an editor, simulator, and
programmer that you can download for free.  You can write and simulate
all you want just with it.  The picstart plus programmer hardware is
about $150, hooks to your serial port.  I got a picstart lite kit, don't
bother with them.  They don't support all the parts, and the software
only runs under DOS.  not a DOS box in windows, plain old dos.  The PIC
language is pretty simple, only 20 or so assembler instructions to
learn, and they aren't "bizarre" like 8051.

One caveat is that none of their programming software runs under NT. 
It's 95 only for now.  I am trying to rig something for now since I use
NT.  Also, the windowed (erasable) parts are kinda pricey, ~$20 each.

obCSH: re SMT parts, your cone shaped hat is probably too dull for
probing fine pitch devices

obCSH2:  I'm on the CSH (cone shaped hat) list, once in a while there's
some good engine management info posted there...

--steve

--
Steve Ravet
International Meta Systems
http://www.imes.com
steve at imes.com