I started with PIC32 and loved the performance compared with the old-world 8051/Z80/6809 derivatives I had been used to back in the 80's and 90's. I bought the PIC IDE and compilers for the PIC32 and kicked things along back in 2009. Then (14 years later), I discovered the STM32 range with its FREE tools, including the CUBE IDE (Eclipse) and the MX configuration tool. This was amazing, and I did not have to spend a thousand or more dollars per tool like the PIC32. For a hobbyist like me this was revolutionary. Even the lower M4 series ran at 84 and 100Mhz, and, for a few dollars, I could get some good Chinese boards and the aftermarket STLINK interfaces that have completely replaced all the PIC32 tools for a fraction of the money ANNNND the STM32 peripherals are a snap to configure using the MX tool, which can be integrated with the Eclipse IDE. One gotcha is to understand what gets overwritten by the MX tool. I suffered there originally but I have to say that have become more comfortable with this and finally waved goodbye to PIC. I still have a number of various types of PIC232 uC's but I will probably never use them. STM32 has timer support for incremental encoders out of the box - a real selling point for me, and the ADC was VERY simple to configure and run, even with DMA. The PIC32 on the other hand, was a nightmare to configure. Then I stumbled on the Teensy 4.1, an exciting rabbit hole, but without the peripherals that I really liked in the STM32 series.

@@stephencurtis2282 for what universe you compare pic32 from this decade with 8051 from past 60 years. it is obviously that pic 32 is better light years in front of 8051 or z80 :)))))))

You really shouldn't compare a Z80 to a microcontroller. A Z80 can be used as an intelligent controller with peripheral interface adapters like the 8255 and complex programing, but no microcontroller can a run an OS and function as a computer. They really can't be compared. I used PIC controllers for over 20 years because they were the only game in town except for National Semiconductor's COP 400 series controllers. Make sure you don't become a fan boy, or you're going to miss a lot of opportunities. Try branching out to something else like a raspberry pi pico w. @@KaradevNetLtd

@@KaradevNetLtd Oh Lord I was not COMPARING. as much as I was admiring!! Please read the words. "I started with PIC32, and I loved the PERFORMANCE compared with the old-world 8051/Z80/6809 derivatives I had been used to back in the 80's and 90's." What's your point? (besides some arcane one-upmanship). Having access to the newer chips was great, and I knew what the difference was because I had experienced the old stuff - it's marvellous what you get performance-wise and tool quality that makes it all so easy. Please tell me why you think this is sooooooo obvious?? Am I not allowed to share my pleasure with what we have today? Also, the 8051 is not really 60 years old (quite), and plenty of 8051 derivates are still around. The FREE STM32 tools make it an excellent experience and one reason I waved goodbye to the PIC32. Also, what did YOU contribute to the light-years-aheadness of the modern tools?? - Are these things yours to be proud of? Or are you simply taking advantage of the accident of your time of birth? The universe I was comparing (as you so eloquently put it), was where I had 20 or 30 Eproms laying around the eraser, a 15 minute erase time for about half a dozen Eproms at a time, a C compiler and a batch sequence to compile, link and produce object code. A utility that could be used to load the new program into the Eprom programmer and thence to the erased Eprom, a ZIF socket to lug the new program into, almost no debugging tools except a serial port and some LEDS to blink, a book on the instruction set, an assembly code dump of the program and VERY slow progress. Have YOU actually developed anything in this arrangement? The 8048 development environment we had at work was then worth about $50,000 (in 1986) - completely outside the capability of a hobbyist then, and now it's simply remarkable what you have access to these days - and I like it - and I feel privileged to be able to be involved at all. That's the universe I am comparing with.

Microchip never targeted or marketed towards hobbyists (especially in the past). It is absolutely normal that you pay a price for industry standard tools, tooling and a platform that is intended to fulfill regulations, safety standards and some important certifications ( are you guys comedians, comparing Arduino ... a learning tool, a toy ... which is a great platform ... with that? RTFM!). You also get product support and industry standard education for those products, availability of the supply chain and replacement parts ... guaranteed for typical professional time periods. Also: What clown compares whole product families against each other? PIC, AVR, STM32 all provide a wide spectrum of specialized types and I/O or processing capabilities, even DSP and customer tailored applications. I tell you: That clown isn't even funny ... he has just no expertise and no clue on the matter, which is rather embarrassing. Anyways, no one is forced to use something. The market is diverse and ... why I am even explaining this ... for someone who doesn't appreciate a wide variety of MCUs available and sees this instead as his childish opportunity to "grade" something that he doesn't understand, you cannot explain that you USE THE RIGHT TOOL FOR THE RIGHT JOB (this applies also to your design and choice of MCU). Although the best in this thread is the crying. Like: "Mummy .... maaaaaah ... a Porsche is sooooo expensive that I cannot afford it. They are a bad bad company". Imagine that this is even a specialized emergency car construction, which of course costs an arm and a leg. And in fact, you can't even do anything with it, because this is not your use case (I'm not talking about delusions to be an emergency doctor), but you still complain that it isn't useful for you ... and you "totally abandoned" it. Which is maybe the only action you've done so far that made sense. MPLAB X IDE is based on the Net Beans platform - effectively a competing open source platform to Eclipse. So now we know your preferences. Do you need another tissue? Really guys, what do you hope for when you write such useless comments? Someone who listens to you, because Microchip doesn't (which they told you before, that they do not care about you 1000$ customer). Do you search for fellow sufferers so you can form a crybaby club together? Well its just that: "Hey, THIS platform is better than that (who would've guessed it ... the platform YOU use?!) ... ", is so embarrassing and tells that someone does not even know that he knows nothing. Anyways, who cares. At least you learn something which is good. And if it be only that wasting money hurts you. (I do not address this "I WANT EVERYTHING FOR FREE"- guy here, obviously). Edit: Oh and of course, ST Microelectronics has no professional tools, customer support programs and (for the clueless hobbyist) "overpriced" development environments (including plugins) ... yes? NO! They have exactly the same horrors for you in the backhand. But you would know that if you had the energy to look it up. However, I admire your self-confidence. How can someone with such great ignorance and lack of knowledge allow themselves to criticize or evaluate something? My respect! **facepalm**

I had a very similar experience! I tried to make the jump to a PIC and programming in C++ after using a Basic Stamp 2 for a couple years, and that killed it for me. I think trying to learn C++ by myself from a book as a 12 year old was a tall order. It's so much fun nowadays! We have so many interesting and cheap microcontrollers to play with.

There were datasheets and books published by the chip makers back in the day. There was no barrier to understanding the devices. I developed a piece of equipment using a PIC chip decades ago.

There was another competitor, a great little company called Atmel which had the AVR line of chips. Well long story short, you were able to program an AVR with regular open source tools with really cheap requirements to get started. Enter the era of Arduino and they basically killed it for the hobby market. Microchip, whilst having a superior line of chips, kept their ecosystem closed, required expensive tools and ended up buying Atmel because that is what you do with a competitor if they threaten your business. While PIC may have been the bomb back in the day (I will agree to that), it was Atmel and the Arduino framework that unleashed the hobbyist market that it is today. The basicstamp was a nice try, but the pricepoint at 39 dollars was too high anyway for far too few capabilities. I also agree that the basic stamp provided the idea for arduino, but I personally feel that the open source part really killed it, even though it also meant that cloning boards was equally easy. Anyway, once I learned about the AVR line-up and the easiness of programming those microcontrollers, it was really easy to turn my back to the PIC.

@@patrickd9551 Yes I agree Ardunino kill the PICs .because their management cant see straign. PIC was my first microcontroller.. and I study it just by reading manual for the chip.. it was really good.. really good assmbler and backcompability in family.. perifiral.. easy to program.. actually for programm AVR you have to have programmer or use tricky thing on LPT port thich was suck, but for PIC was really easy programmers for COM port..(no debugging of course) . Microchip even do send free samples to me few times..So it was great time.. but in nowadays Arduino just wins..

I'll have a listen to that interview :)

If you think this was easy you should look at AVR chips as this seems overly complicated to me but I have no experience with PICS :)

Thanks for watching!

Coming soon!

Thank you for watching the video :)

Thank you for giving advice along the way :)

Thanks for watching!

Linux is the way to go :)

The picit 3 debacle tho…

What are you trying to say? You like PIC's or you've just discovered interrupts?

@@icarossavvides2641 Microcontrollers in general. The interrupt is always fascinating. I should be focusing on my coding however.

Have fun :)

@@SineLab I just received 3 AT89S52-24PU.s from digikey today. I'm gunna need help.

There are PIC32.

It took me forever to wean my boss off of the Atmel 8-bit microcontrollers. I finally convinced him to move to a 32-bit Raspberry Pi Pico which has Arduino support. I couldn’t convince him to get away from the Arduino IDE. I like the Arduino IDE but the latest IDE has limited debug capabilities. I did get the Raspberry Pi Picoprobe working with a special version of OpenOCD in Visual Studio Code.

Cost

The ATtiny later series 0,1,2 are very nice too, with the easy to use UPDI flashing interface. I like the 824/1624, but I am doing very generic things.

And just like that I was hooked and wanted back into the game ... but ... mpasm is designed to be really impolite to 64-bit systems. Not sure, but probably a trash can near me is going to be full of PIC mcus really soon. Damn, Microchip has all the tact of Apple supporting diy's and tinkering. I'll have a test run with xc and c, but I think this is over for me as unpaid xc injects tripwire blobs (doesn't "optimize") - also done with upgrading programmers every time someone at Microchip gets the urge for a new one.. goddammit! what a mess... Perhaps RiscV can do something for us?

I'm now 19 and learned assembly a few years ago on the stone age version MPLAB IDE 8.10 and it's one of the best working software I have ever known. I tested the IDE X this weekend and it's unusable total junk. I can't understand why they tried to improve something that worked really well and now it's broken

@@KetilDunaXC8 comes with an assembler- pic-as- really just a renamed mpasm. You can check the output- no tripwires, etc. You don't have to touch the C compiler/optimization at all. Writing a C compiler for the 8 bit pic is pretty hard- it doesn't really fit within the conventions of traditional C. IIRC, the AVR started out as a project to make an 8 bit device that worked well with C. Microchip has a "tradition" of supporting all the way back. Since nobody else was doing it (for free), Microchip had to do it internally. Those programmers wanted to get paid. pic-as supports current parts and back to the PIC16C54! Over 30 years old.

I agree, the PIC peripherals are really the biggest selling point.

I agree, those pro programmers are really only within reach for corporations.

@@SineLab with my bootloader system and software for win10+ will not need programmer. just usb cable and C# software for win 10. libs included inside

I'll take a look at the GUI tool.

There's not much that can beat Arduino's prototyping speed. :)

@@SineLab we can argue with this, and i am shore that will beat any argument with just one of my simple project with my bootloader system and pcb design ;) be sure about it

Interesting to hear about the lack of support for legacy chips.

the optimizations stuff is kinda shitty, might fuck around and write an assembler for this instead

Nice work avoiding MPLAB :) Assembler seems to be popular with these PICs because of the compiler.

USB and DIP don't often go together.

I'm working on an electrical engineering major.

The peripherals really are the PIC selling point.

USB 2.0 is already supported on for example the ATmega32.

I like STM32 myself and I’m not sure why anybody would want to write firmware in anything but C as it’s way too easy for developers to bloat the code using C++. If you prefer C++, I suggest that you use the Arduino IDE with STM32 support. The libraries are written in C++ but I am not sure how much support for STM32 exists since I normally use STM32CubeIDE for development and debugging.

Of course the alternative is to power it separately but I'm used to powering from the programmer, and that's a bit of a faff given it's supposed to support it. Really all the problems are poor quality software.

I agree, AVR is definitely a better place to start.

@@SineLab for kids yes. for industrial and automation home/office/villa/yard pic is 100 better then any sum of atmel mixture :) be sure about it

may just be a debugging header. and the 8 pin chips need a special debugging 14pin device to physically debug. took me years to track one down for my favourite pic chip, 12f683... doubt i will ever use it. theres a debug/simulator in mplab anyway... takes some fiddling, but yeah. seems to work.

That would be handy :)

Indeed, Great video but I can't be bothered with all that I'll stick with AVR.

The PIC I showed in the video is a microcontroller.

@SineLab Yep because it had internal peripherals. That makes sense. Thank you.

@SineLab Please, is it possible to demonstrate how to connect and program a stepper motor using a PIC? I am working with a PIC16F877A and PIC16F887 for a school project...

Do you have a stepper motor driver IC?

@SineLab Yes, we do have stepper motor driver circuits in the college lab. I have an assignment that requires me to control a stepper motor using dip switches. We can use the PIC16F877/PIC16F877A or the PIC16F887 microcontrollers.

Why ?

You mean for a hobbyist? Sometimes there are excellent reasons for one platform or another.

I'm not sure how you want me to help you. Which part of the process are you struggling with?

Ok sir

I don't actually drink coffee, it's just the name of the service. :)

That's what the video said. The hardware is great, but MPLAB is not.

The CCS PIC C compiler was a godsend. I think I paid for it, back when pirating everything was the norm..

It can be trash for lazy people who can't read a datasheet.🙄

Several years ago, I interviewed for a firmware development position at a large HVAC manufacturer. I asked them why they are still using PICs for their latest projects. I think their response had something to do with code leverage. Apparently, PIC developers don’t make very much at that company.