A
asdf
Guest
Hello everybody,
A question that has been bothering me lately is this...
What is the difference in how PICs are programmed. For example, the PICAXE
and Basic Stamps use a simple cable connection (RS-232 or USB) to a PC with
no high dollar "programmer." As opposed to PIC Micro or AVR PICs that use
expensive programmers. Is it that the former has a preprogrammed boot code,
and that the later can write said boot code to the chip. I'm just confused
as to why they all don't use the cheaper (easier?) method of programming.
Also, wouldn't most boot codes be pretty much the same. Why re-invent the
wheel each time. I would think the IC manfacturers would just program the
boot code to begin with. So, in other words, why would one want such access
to the boot code. This is all assuming that my above reasoning is correct.
Thanks,
Scott
A question that has been bothering me lately is this...
What is the difference in how PICs are programmed. For example, the PICAXE
and Basic Stamps use a simple cable connection (RS-232 or USB) to a PC with
no high dollar "programmer." As opposed to PIC Micro or AVR PICs that use
expensive programmers. Is it that the former has a preprogrammed boot code,
and that the later can write said boot code to the chip. I'm just confused
as to why they all don't use the cheaper (easier?) method of programming.
Also, wouldn't most boot codes be pretty much the same. Why re-invent the
wheel each time. I would think the IC manfacturers would just program the
boot code to begin with. So, in other words, why would one want such access
to the boot code. This is all assuming that my above reasoning is correct.
Thanks,
Scott