View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Ttelmah
Joined: 11 Mar 2010 Posts: 19195
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:06 am |
|
|
It is very sad.
The older MPLAB IDE, was at times a remarkably good program. The simulator (though it should not be trusted for everything), was sometimes a useful tool, and it 99% 'just worked'.
Microchip then decided they had to go for a new 'look and feel', using the NetBeans Java 'background', but seemed to forget when they did so, that the program ought to work. I have MPLAB-X (alongside MPLAB 8.92), and have tried probably 10+ releases of it, since it came out. The first few dozen releases were appalling. It has slowly got better, but I have yet to see a release that isn't bug ridden. It also seems to forget that people actually want to develop code, and be more worried about how the windows look, than getting the functionality correct. |
|
|
temtronic
Joined: 01 Jul 2010 Posts: 9081 Location: Greensville,Ontario
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:50 am |
|
|
Seems Microchip 'programmers' have lost their way. It's inconceivable to me WHY you'd need a 1/2 GIGABYTE of program to 'play with PICs'. Yes, I'm old school where you could and DID cut code. Stuff like a good word processor (with nice features) in 2048 BYTES of memory, a COMPLETE wired ULC AA grade central monitoring station, hardwired to MILES of copper, and more features than today's stuff all in 8192 bytes of EPROM.
Makes me wonder just how many 'software designers' there actually use the programs they create, let alone 'play with PICs'. I know one their that couldn't understand that I wanted the 'option' to default the build option to 'release'. I could almost see his puzzled look when I explained I'm 'old school'. I cut code, compile, burn PIC, test in the REAL World as NO debugger/ICD/xyz san simulate the real World.
As for needing the newest versions...I have to ask WHAT features of a new PIC can't be done in 'old' ones? Ones that are already supported ?
Also, if uC won't 'upgrade' MPLAB, then they should 'open source' it so others can edit the databases, tables, ??? to allow it to work with the 'new' PICS.
Jay |
|
|
gjs_rsdi
Joined: 06 Feb 2006 Posts: 468 Location: Bali
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 3:15 pm |
|
|
The question to everybody:
HAVE ANY WAY TO INFLUENCE MICROCHIP?
Best wishes
Joe |
|
|
drolleman
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 Posts: 116
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 1:48 am |
|
|
When I tried I was told that there is some proprietary code in it. So no open code will available. Is it true or false, I don't know. |
|
|
temtronic
Joined: 01 Jul 2010 Posts: 9081 Location: Greensville,Ontario
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 5:25 am |
|
|
Even if 'we' could add new PICs to the 'database' would keep it alive !
I had to get a PICkit3 when they dropped support for the PICstart Plus.
Sigh, I have 2 of them here collecting dust.
Guess I'm a rare bird as I only use MPLAB/PICKit3 to download code into PICs ?
Jay |
|
|
gjs_rsdi
Joined: 06 Feb 2006 Posts: 468 Location: Bali
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 1:25 pm |
|
|
I just don't understand why Microchip pushing hard to use MPLABX
Jay.
You need additional power supply when programming with PICkit3, no?
I still have it for emergency, but don't like to work with it.
I bought the CCS ICD-U64 and very pleased with it.
Best wishes
Joe |
|
|
|