Favorite Micro? I get bored.

Hey guys. I want to learn something new or help other learn if I have the knowledge. I know some of a lot of things.

My knowledge includes: PIC10F to PIC32, ARM(NXP, ST, AVR. TI, Silicon Labs), ESP8266, ESP32, .
Ive dabbled with VHDL on some Xilinx CPLDs and FPGAs. Ive played with XMOS, parallax propeller, Arduino, Rasp PI.

i'm sure there are more but i'm old and my memory is shoddy.. When i say i know some... i mean... if I was tasked to create something with
said device, I wouldn't get lost and i'm about 90% sure id be able to remember the process and complete the task.

I would love to share what I know and help. If I don't know something I'll try and learn it. That's the fun part.


Any how........
I want to know what's your favorite micro-controller. Do you have a specific reason for your pick? As for me...

I love the PIC18F14K50, Small size but with a strong heart @ 48 MHz and 16KB is good enough for tons of applications, Only issue is the debug header.
My second choice would be the PIC18F27J53 ... it has more memory than i do

For a non pic choice id have to say the LPC2103. I love the fact it has a built in bootloader and i can still JTAG it if debugging is needed.. if i go the non pic route like ive done a few times. This is my fav. Even tho you need to supply 1.8v for the core. Its still a pretty fast and stable MCU. Has all you can ask for.. SPI, I2C, UART, ADC, PWM etc.. all the good stuff,

AtomSoft said:

I love the PIC18F14K50, Small size but with a strong heart @ 48 MHz and 16KB is good enough for tons of applications, Only issue is the debug header.

Click to expand...

What PICkit? Buy a 4 and forget.

Stop with micros for a while unitl you need them

Go for something unusual. I am wondering if in my case fiber optics is not the right thing to try.

Hmm Sounds interesting. Going to have to look into it. If it doesn't break my wallet i might play with it.

I was in love with the pic18F452.. Then the update pic18F4520.. BUT.. The update pic18f14k20 killed me as it was 3v only.. BUT!! the pic18f4k22 was 5v and had 2 serial ports...

Since then my new babe was the pic32mx575f512h... BUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The teensy 3.6... MK66 has piggin opened my eyes somewhat!!

My favorite (small) micro is the pic12f1840 and the larger pic16f1825... How they cram it all in is beyond belief..

Hey Ian! im glad to see im not the only one who loves the PIC... Teensy is great. I just hate that other IC that needs to be there fir the bootloader or USB... not sure what it was but i think its like something you have to source from them only.. Not too sure.. im old remember lol

atferrari, fiber optics looks dead simple once you have the right tools and hardware (connectors and such) . It's a bit pricey tho. For what can be accomplished with good old copper right now. Even if you go with fiber after a while you need power for amplification or what I would just call repeaters. But that's after like 1000 meters I think. It looks like fun to be honest and if I had the money I'd go crazy and build an entire fiber optic intercom or something.

AtomSoft said:

I want to know what's your favorite micro-controller. Do you have a specific reason for your pick? As for me...

Click to expand...

Seems rather a loaded question, I would think it all depends on the job you have in mind?
I don't really have a favorite, but would select one that will do exactly the job in mind, and never think of using a 28pin when a 8 pin 12F will do the job. Obviously!
As Ian Rogers said.!
Also I only program in Assembly, By choice!.
Max.

Fiber is really fun to mess with you can get
A transmitter and receiver for about free
I removed them from a old tuner I got for a dollar at a yard sale .

MaxHeadRoom78
I used to think like that but there are times where i am the one who is bored and want to make something and think... which PIC can i use to test out my idea and once it has been completed and memory usage and pin usage is all gathered. I can then determine what PIC to use for final. Assembly is nice... fast... but a headache unless you have time or pre made or easy to port stuff. I would hate to have to make a simple loop for a multi-dimensional array in ASM ... ugh

be80be - Burt
You lucky son of a gun. I actually didnt think of that. I had access to a nice Verizon thing.. it was like 30 inches Tall and 16 inches wide with a depth of about 4 inches. It had so much fiber optic stuff in it. I left it in my old , one of the basements. I guess ill have to ask some friends if they see it to let me know.

Damn! i could have been having fun. I used to think it was a crazy complex system but it turns out to be not that difficult.

There is a 2m section of an old network here at home waiting to be used. Sooner or later I will.

atferrari
I hope you have fun. If possible post the process or results or anything on it so i can at least dream for now ...

My long-term favourites have always been the Motorola 6800 - 6809 - 68000 etc. family.
The first working computer I ever built was based on a 6800, then the next on a 6809, plus quite a few commercial designs using 6809, 68000 & 68HC11

My present go-to MCU is the DSPIC33EP512MC502; they are fast, with vast amounts of RAM & program space plus just about every peripheral you could wish for, plus very low cost.


I do a lot of work on machine tools and some of those use fiber optic links between various sections of the system.
Some use glass fibre & SMA style connectors or duplex plugs, others just use TOSLINK connectors & plastic fibre, the same as used with HiFi gear, PCs and home theatre stuff..

The parts for that are quite easy to get and they are simple to use, just 5V logic in and out of the transmitters & receivers.
Ready made cables are dirt cheap, though it is getting harder to get loose plugs to make up your own cables to a specific length, for some reason.
That system is OK for data rates up to 5 - 10Mbit, depending on parts and cable length.

rjenkinsgb said:

My long-term favourites have always been the Motorola 6800 - 6809 - 68000 etc. family.
The first working computer I ever built was based on a 6800, then the next on a 6809, plus quite a few commercial designs using 6809, 68000 & 68HC11

Click to expand...

Weird... I used 8080 MCU's and Z80 MCU's....When I did a project using the 6809 I couldn't believe the lack of registers.. Then I went to pic.. Well! I mean, one register.... I had a stint with the Hitachi H8 series... 8 data and 8 address registers.. Programming heaven..

I always admire the way we just accept and keep going..

Ian Rogers said:

Weird... I used 8080 MCU's and Z80 MCU's....When I did a project using the 6809 I couldn't believe the lack of registers.. Then I went to pic.. Well! I mean, one register.... I had a stint with the Hitachi H8 series... 8 data and 8 address registers.. Programming heaven..

Click to expand...

I think it's different designers concepts and different addressing modes?
eg. The 6809 has "direct" mode, which gives access to any location in a changeable 256 byte memory with a short instruction, so you can use that space in a similar way to internal registers. Plus a couple of index registers.

I thought PICs were strange to start with, but I saw it as them having all the internal RAM space as "registers"!

I've not user the H8but that sounds similar to the 68000, with 8+8 32 bit registers.

rjenkinsgb said:

I've not user the H8but that sounds similar to the 68000, with 8+8 32 bit registers.

Click to expand...

I believe its the same designer that worked on both systems..

Right now my favorite micro is the PIC16F15323 ... (PIC16F15313 if I don't need as many I/O's) Then there is the PIC10F200, 202, 204, and 206 for really tiny stuff

I too only program in Assembly, By choice !

Beau Schwabe said:

I too only program in Assembly, By choice !

Click to expand...

I was lucky in that regard... I learnt C using PC's much earlier than stating with the micro.... But as I started with the 8080and the 8088/86 and the C compiler was a freebee from a good friend, it was a good start... When I moved to micro's I just used the 8085 and the Phillips 16 bit the XA using assembler... The MC6809 using assembler and the Hitachi H8 532 using assembler.. But as the C compiler became that bit cheaper ( and Hitech releasing a free version ) Made it even easier for me...

Believe it or not.. I started with pascal on the dos platform… Great today as Lazarus is free....

Ian Rogers said:

I was lucky in that regard... I learnt C using PC's much earlier than stating with the micro.... But as I started with the 8080and the 8088/86 and the C compiler was a freebee from a good friend, it was a good start... When I moved to micro's I just used the 8085 and the Phillips 16 bit the XA using assembler... The MC6809 using assembler and the Hitachi H8 532 using assembler.. But as the C compiler became that bit cheaper ( and Hitech releasing a free version ) Made it even easier for me...

Believe it or not.. I started with pascal on the dos platform… Great today as Lazarus is free....

Click to expand...

I started with 6502 assembler, then Microsoft BASIC (10K of ROM), then once the PC days appeared used Turbo Pascal, a wonderful language and an incredibly fast compiler, I then used Delphi V1.0 for Windows in which I wrote the worlds first Windows PIC programming software. I once had occasion to use Microsoft Pascal, and that was so slow compiling it was dreadful to use.

Still love Pascal, but I've had to try and move to C, as Pascal is pretty well dead

Started on Z80, then 6502, then 6809 and then 68000, all in assembly . Moved to Pics and stuck with assembly. Eventually moved to C and never looked back. C works very well and just takes away the tedium of banking. Is anyone able to program the latest chips with asm? The pin allocations must be a nightmare.

Mike.

Pommie said:

Started on Z80, then 6502, then 6809 and then 68000, all in assembly . Moved to Pics and stuck with assembly. Eventually moved to C and never looked back. C works very well and just takes away the tedium of banking. Is anyone able to program the latest chips with asm? The pin allocations must be a nightmare.

Mike.

Click to expand...

As most people here probably know, I've always been a big supporter of assembler - and I still think it's where you should start if you're beginning PIC programming, as it forces you to understand the hardware and what you're doing. However, the never ending complexity of enhanced devices, and the fact that many application notes are now written in C, means that it makes more sense to use C, once you're past the 'hardware learning' from assembler.