I've just completed an application with RS 232 PIC-PC both ways. Found it quite simple and much less painful than I feared. (Lack of knowledge, of course.)

My questions:

For PIC-PC comms:
a ) Am I jumping too late in a train that will disapear soon?

b ) Should I definitely consider USB and forget RS 232?

For PIC-PIC (no PC involved)
c ) Answers for a ) & b ) do they apply here?

d ) Not having handy PIC micros with embedded USB
is it possible to get assembler code able to be adapted in a PIC?

(Am I being crazy, asking for this?)

 

Originally posted by atferrari+Nov 21 2005, 11:03 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(atferrari @ Nov 21 2005, 11:03 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'>I've just completed an application with RS 232 PIC-PC both ways. Found it quite simple and much less painful than I feared. (Lack of knowledge, of course.)

My questions:

For PIC-PC comms:
a ) Am I jumping too late in a train that will disapear soon?

b ) Should I definitely consider USB and forget RS 232?

[post=11795]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b]

The main advantage of RS232 is its simplicity. USB is a lot more complicated to implement. Although lately there has been a surge in USB use in hobbyist electronics, I don't think RS232 going to disappear soon for the above reason. As long as the design doesn't require a high speed transfer or multi points communications then the more complex USB implementation is not justified. However, for commercial reason sooner or later USB will take over because RS232 port is starting to be phased out from newer PCs.

Originally posted by atferrari@Nov 21 2005, 11:03 AM
For PIC-PIC (no PC involved)
c ) Answers for a ) & b ) do they apply here?

d ) Not having handy PIC micros with embedded USB
is it possible to get assembler code able to be adapted in a PIC?

[post=11795]Quoted post[/post]​

For inter uc communications, because it does not depend on the availability of RS232 port like in PC, then it will persist for longer time. The justification of RS232 in this case is distance, if you can live with shorter distance then there are better methods with higher transfer rates, such as I2C.

It is possible to implement the protocols required by USB in software, but it is quite complex and demanding especialy if you require full compatibility. I personally don't think its worth the hassle because uc with USB controllers are widely available and the costs are not to dear.

<!--QuoteBegin-atferrari@Nov 21 2005, 11:03 AM
(Am I being crazy, asking for this?)

[post=11795]Quoted post[/post]​

[/quote]

That is highly subjective and I am not going to volunteer a comment

 

Originally posted by atferrari@Nov 21 2005, 05:03 AM
I've just completed an application with RS 232 PIC-PC both ways. Found it quite simple and much less painful than I feared. (Lack of knowledge, of course.)

My questions:

For PIC-PC comms:
a ) Am I jumping too late in a train that will disapear soon?

b ) Should I definitely consider USB and forget RS 232?

For PIC-PIC (no PC involved)
c ) Answers for a ) & b ) do they apply here?

d ) Not having handy PIC micros with embedded USB
is it possible to get assembler code able to be adapted in a PIC?

(Am I being crazy, asking for this?)

[post=11795]Quoted post[/post]​

that is an old dog from military application it was used and still is used on most of test equipment the lenght of transmission is great. the problem was and [i image this ] is real estate for connection. also the power from an USB is handy to provide perifable components with that power.