Connect with us

Question about pic16f676

Discussion in 'Electronic Basics' started by capitano, Jul 25, 2003.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. ---------------
    Success perhaps, but a limited form of it without a grounding in the
    fundamentals. You're pretending that the PIC is some "Royal Road"
    to bypass real learning and achieve success, and while one might
    catch such a wave on the crest and make money, later they have to
    backtrack and go back and REALLY learn it.

  2. Byron A Jeff

    Byron A Jeff Guest

    -> R. Steve Walz wrote:
    -> > Rich Grise wrote:
    -> >>

    -> Why do you bother using logic chips? Wouldn't it be more
    -> craftsman-like to build your logic from discretes?
    -I have done that numerous times, just so we didn't have to do voltage
    -level-shifting constantly. But that's not the point, even that has its
    -uses. The point is what his QUESTION was, and that he wanted primarily

    I respectfully disagree Steve. The OP made it clear that he needed to build 4
    of these tools and that he didn't want to talk about microcontrollers solely
    because he wasn't familiar with them.

    So despite his protestations, we collectively should present the best options
    for success.

    -> If you don't like micros, no
    -> problem, but don't assume that you are correct in your opinions and
    -> attempt to force them upon the world.
    -You're assuming I don't like micros, and to anyone who knows me you
    -look quite stupid.

    I have to admit Rich that you do seem quite silly here. Because if you've been
    hanging around Steve for the last 10 years or so you would know that Steve
    actaully does know everything about electronics.

  3. Well...I agree with that....but I'm not the one that made that
    particular comment. I try not to just say abrupt things like that when
    suggesting that someone learn to use micros. I try to motivate them
    with the promise of how much more they'll be able to do when they make
    the effort to use them. I just get really preterbed by some people's
    attitudes about micros.
    I probably would, but I'm dinking with ultrasonic ranging right now.
    ;-) I may go back and review his requirements and offer up a decent
    suggestion for him though. I would probably be willing to help him
    debug his code if he were so inclined to write some. What I wouldn't
    want to do is do the whole project for him, and that's what I'd be doing
    if I drew a plug-n-play schematic and wrote/debugged all the code.

    A while back I did write the code for someones project and give it to
    them, all they had to do was get a PIC and program it. I don't think
    they ever tried.
    Not me, but I do have the easily obtainable 8052 BASIC rom images and
    source code used in a previous project if you could use that.

  4. "they hide their ignorance behind "PICs" " I guess that's where the beef

    Newbie status, moi? Hardly Maybe new to this group I guess, but
    certainly not new to the hobby.

    No, but from that comment I'm guessing your some kind of god?
    Please show me where I did anything like that. It happens that the OP's
    project is a glove fit for a micro, but I guess you know that already.
    What with being a legend and all.
    Someone should tell all those DSP doofs that, they're wasting allot of
    time aren't they? BTW, my first micro was an 1802, but that was a while
    ago. I don't think there's any need to feel threatened by a PIC chip.
    There will likely always be a place for gates, discretes, and even
    vacuum tubes. If you can't tell "it's fudging", then it really doesn't
    matter does it? ;-)
    Right. In 1950 it would have been done with tubes, in the 70's it would
    have been done with a bunch of 74xx logic, now it's done with a micro
    99% of the time. That's if
    cost/simplicity/accuracy/reliability/advancement account for anything.
    I'm not saying a PIC is right for every job, but it's at least as good
    as duct tape when it comes to attaching the real world to some

    Perhaps you should make yourself a bit more clear then when referring to
    the "digitally untrained". I guess some of us can't hear as well whilst
    hiding our ineptitude behind our PIC chips.
  5. ---------------------------------
    That's NOT a PIC!! And he didn't ASK for that, he asked SPECIFICALLY!

    So you elected to make him another brain-dead PIC-plodder begging for
    "spare code" on street corners, instead of teaching him digital

    You and *I* know that, but without him STARTING there, he NEVER will!

    Precisely so that he doesn't stay FOREVER an electronics beginner,
    dogged by spurious successes at coding PICs, and without the most
    basic grasp of what Boolean constructs are!

    It's not that, it's another entirely, whether one who asks to learn
    electronics, should be taught software instead, cheating them.

    I agree that all should learn them, but they should not be handed
    that as "digital electronics".

    Not on sci.electronics.basics, when a newbie SPECIFICALLY asks how to
    do it electronically, rather than in software.

    The less hardware, the less learning of electronics.

    I am a former teacher, indeed.

    If that's all he had asked for, then I'd have ignored the thread
    because I know it is well-covered by gaggles of brain-limited PIC

  6. -----------------------
    That's not informative. That's a "kit of parts".

    Everything? Well no...

    Wrong attribution, I believe, Rich Grise knows me.

  7. --------------------------
    Yes, I have found this to be sadly true.

    Physicist-engineer, 12 years on the Net, renown ftpsite/website.
    You may kiss my ass now.

    Of course it is, but you answer people's questions here, this is
    s.e.basics afterall. We teach electronics.

    Don't be silly, but DSPs are out of the purvey of s.e.basics, let us
    all admit.

  8. Lord Garth

    Lord Garth Guest

    Thanks for the offer, can you attach it in a posting on A.B.S.E.?

  9. I've been reading your replies to this thread, and it looks like you really
    care a lot about the original poster's problem and how our microcontroller
    suggestions may affect his learning of digital electronics. So, since you
    claim to be an expert in this area, why not offer your help to the OP by
    actually replying to *his* post with a detailed solution.

    Come on Steve, get those counters running, let's see some schematics.

  10. Perhaps you haven't looked in all the right places, there are some
    pretty sharp engineers that happen to use micros. If a PIC is the right
    tool, it's the right tool even if it does seem too easy and doesn't use
    allot of parts. ;-)

    12 years on the net, wow. You may have beat me by a year there. I've
    seen your web site, you should divide it up into what's yours and what's
    from others. It would be easier to see your contribution to the world.
    As for me, >20 years professional (paid ;-) software development
    including mainframe low-level OS stuff along with 15 years of PC/network
    guruing, and >25 years generally tinkering with electronics and micros.
    Only been a HAM for about 14 years though. I set up my first production
    Linux server in the spring of 1995.
    I think I'll pass if you don't mind.

    Wouldn't part of that be to mention the fact that a micro WAS a viable
    solution to his problem, and probably the best one at that? After
    reading some of your other posts in this thread, I can see where you're
    coming from. However, you wouldn't recommend that he solve the problem
    with tubes just to gain a full appreciation of electronic theory.

    Perhaps they are for now, but will it always be that way?

    Now that's really stretching it. You seem to think that using micros is
    creating some kind of perpetual dumbing down in electronics. I think
    the real problem is that someone can obtain a degree having never held a
    soldering iron. Now that should worry you.
    I don't disagree with that. I don't think it precludes using something
    more advanced to solve a problem, even if it doesn't align with your
    planned curriculum. This is simply not a classroom, it's a public forum
    and everyone is on there own page.

    I'm not "trying on" any "shoes", but if I shouldn't be here if I'm not a
    newbie, then why are you allowed? I like to try to help people too, I
    don't see why that should be a problem.
  11. It's sent, but I don't see it yet.

  12. -------------------------
    Yes, of course, and no, I'm not talking about engineers. There are
    a bunch of hobbyists who have so far avoided learning more than just
    about that one little trick, however.

    It's a resource, and the few that have complained I have told to
    send me their art with their "beloved's" attribution on it, and none
    but one EVER did. When you want to squawk about art *I* can reproduce
    in ten minutes and put MY name on it, and tell them that's what I'll
    do if they want to harrass me, they all give up. Most of them have
    copied these same schematics from derivative work elsewhere or from
    databooks, and *I* KNOW it!

    I charge for most of MY contribution to the world, and my website
    is just a free hobbyists' resource.

    I figured you had SOME experience.

    Why did I know that!? ;->

    Yes, but on an EL:ECTRONICS ng, that's a bit like publishing the same
    PIC schematic for everything with a notation that the code varies!!

    I recommend at least one tube excercise to everyone in electronics.

    Basics, is basics. It's hard to tell people even what a DSP does
    without the fundamentals behind them.

    No, not for engineers, but for hobbyists, yes.

    Indeed it does, in my physics labs we had Brahmin youth from India,
    who, as members of that caste had felt dirtied by contact with tools
    and had never used them, physics was taught them on a chalk board in
    India!! This was partly the caste system and partly a lack of equipment
    of course. You should see them in lab and how they destroy equipment
    using the wrong tool for everything. Only Japanese girls are worse off

    Sure, but standards have to come in as standards can, and by those
    willing and capable of defending them.

    Okay, you speak your piece of poop, and I'll speak mine. I'm sure we
    both have things to say, just note that I'm a gonna crab at you at
    times, as I did THIS time, as a way of being illustrative of my point.

    Nothing personal.
  14. -------------
    I'm not going to "fix it for him", I'd lead him to it, and offer the
    resources. Handing it to people never helps them. That's why I don't
    offer "kits" online, just resources.

  15. Lord Garth

    Lord Garth Guest

    Thanks...I'll look...
  16. Lord Garth

    Lord Garth Guest

    I asked you about it last year and you didn't have the TDL version howerver,
    all are accepted!!!!

    Recall I sent you a BASIC that ran on a Mostek Z-80 system at that time...
    BTW, my ISP is altered since then.
  17. Lord Garth

    Lord Garth Guest

    Not yet...
  18. Maybe, but using micros has made a world of difference for me. I can
    now get things to work that were only pipedreams in the past.
    We all have to eat. I charge for my work as well, but I don't mind
    throwing a few bones.

    A wee bit. Every thing I learn only serves to make me more aware of how
    much I don't know.

    That's not far from the truth. It's unavoidable when the solution
    consists of only one active device.

    I never built anything from scratch using tubes, but I've poked around
    some older equipment and read some about them. They actually seem like
    they'd have been fun to tinker with as they have some unusual
    Man oh man.

    I tend to prefer my standards from places like ANSI, ISO, SAE, defacto
    etc.... ;-) Are you sure you're not confusing standards with personal
    opinions? ;-)

    Oh, don't worry, my skin thickened up a long time ago. ;-) Be
    forewarned, when poked I tend to poke back. ;-D
    Of course not, it's usenet. ;-)

  19. It's showing up at my ISP (houston rr) finally. They're a mess of an
    operation anymore when it comes to usenet, I can e-mail it if it doesn't
    show up for you soon.

  20. Lord Garth

    Lord Garth Guest

    Thanks, still not here in Dallas via sbcglobal.....

    come to think of it, I'm using their Houston news server.
    It seems the Dallas server like to have me retype my password
    every time I scan for posts.

    I'll check in the morning..
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day