TI LaunchPad Development Kit is the quick, low cost introduction to TI MCUs. Lots to choose from.

http://www.ti.com/tools-software/launchpads/launchpads.html

I suggest you start with MSP-EXP430G2. The target MCU is MSP430G2553 available in 20-pin DIP and runs on 3.3V.

http://www.ti.com/tool/MSP-EXP430G2

If you want to use Code Composer Studio on a Mac they suggest other LaunchPads.

I found the Development board very interesting. The issue I've got to understand better regards Mac OS restrictions (http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/Download_CCS). I'll try to check it.

Thank you very much.
Regards...

 

Check out EFM8, free ide, well priced dev boards with demos. 12bit adc, i2c, spi, uart, usb, 100mA 3.3V regulator and capacitive touch options.

It looks like a good option. But I aught to leave it to my next step because of packaging. I'm not prepared to prototype anything else than DIP.

Thank you very much.

 

Dear colleagues, good Afternoon.

In the past (20+ years ago) I've been doing small projects with 8051, Z80 and some PICs. Now I'm coming back to microcontrollers projects and I'd like to ask you some advises. I'm about to choose a platform to work (microcontroller family, programming interface and an IDE).

I've been looking around and I've been finding some hard time here and there. Would you help me with your comments?

1) Microchip PIC would be my favorite, but:
1.1) the IDE is now too big and complicated. I've been trying, but unlike the older MPLabs, the 10th version requires so much "bureaucracy" to open a programming window! I guess I'll always need to watch YouTube tutorials every new project I start!
1.2) Microchip C compillers have no free version anymore! Is it true? If it is, I aught to give it up with Microchip.
1.3) Which hardware programming and debugging interface would be enough for small single processors projects?

2) (Microchip) Atmel AVR:
2.1) No Mac OS Version IDE! Is it true? I'm afraid I'll have to install it in virtual machine.
2.2) Does it offer C/C++ free programming compiller?
2.3) Which hardware programming and debugging interface would be enough for small single processors projects?

3) Texas Instruments?
4) Zilog?
5) NXP?

A very important characteristic is to find DIP and PDIP versions available.

Thank you.
Regards,
Ciro.

Whatever new you start, you will need YouTube tutorials. MPLab is not that bad, but you can always install a lower version if it suits your needs.

PIC ide, compilers and everything has a free version. PIC is the best option for free MCUs, IDE, compilers and is the cheapest MCU probably.

Do not use Arduino!

 

Good to know.

But I've already been to this page and I found nothing about free licensing, except 60-day trial.

Please, would you help me to find it?

Thank you. Regards

The XC compiler is free and perpetual. What the 60-day trial is for is for the PRO optimization utilities.

 

The XC compiler is free and perpetual. What the 60-day trial is for is for the PRO optimization utilities.

Yes, I've seen it yet. Thank you!

 

Whatever new you start, you will need YouTube tutorials. MPLab is not that bad, but you can always install a lower version if it suits your needs.

PIC ide, compilers and everything has a free version. PIC is the best option for free MCUs, IDE, compilers and is the cheapest MCU probably.

Do not use Arduino!

Yes, that's why I've been through PIC earlier. Most projects are price sensitive and development tools must take part on accounting. No way out. I thrust Microchip PICs and I wouldn't say its IDE isn't good, but my concern has to do with the learning process.

But you're right. Youtube tutorials can be a great help. I guess the last time I've tried there were only Microchip's tutorials. They're too formal and sometimes they jump some tricky steps. I'm getting convinced that I should try PIC again.

Thank you very much.
Regards,

 

If your projects are price sensitive, then I would recommend learning multiple MCU platforms. One of the big reasons that there are so many of them is because MCU projects tend to be cost sensitive, so if the volume is above a certain threshold amount you need to be able to target the cheapest MCU that is good enough for that particular project.

If you are doing one-off designs for customers (or very, very small productions) then learning one family that can satisfy all (or nearly all) of your needs at the cost of using a more expensive part in most projects than is necessary may be justified because the NRE is the driving cost factor for the project.

 

If your projects are price sensitive, then I would recommend learning multiple MCU platforms. One of the big reasons that there are so many of them is because MCU projects tend to be cost sensitive, so if the volume is above a certain threshold amount you need to be able to target the cheapest MCU that is good enough for that particular project.

If you are doing one-off designs for customers (or very, very small productions) then learning one family that can satisfy all (or nearly all) of your needs at the cost of using a more expensive part in most projects than is necessary may be justified because the NRE is the driving cost factor for the project.

Yes, they are cost sensitive, but while working in small scale, tools, prototyping and development time become as important as the part price itself.

There's another aspect: I live in Brazil and here we can easily buy PIC and Atmega, also some TI, NXP and ST in internal market. But Cypress or Zilog, for example, require direct purchasing from abroad. It ads post costs and end user taxes (over posting inclusively).

These ways would worth if they could help me developing easily and fast in a wide catalog range. That's why I'm tryin to balance my choice with Mac OS compatibility and abundance of DIP enclosure offering, things I can handle effortless.

Of course I'm open to use a Windows platform (Virtual Machine) and SMD in case of large scale projects or added value applications.

I guess Microchip might be good enough for the moment. I bought your idea of trying to navigate in MPLab X with the help of YouTube. It sounds efficient.

 

I understand what you call Draconian when I look at Microchip's MPLab X... That's why I'm looking for an alternative.

I have done quite a few projects with various PICs but recently have been working with Arduino (Uno and Nano).

The Arduino IDE is much easier to use than MPLABX but I feel this is largely because it is much less capable.
MPLABX has a simulator where you can set unlimited breakpoints, single step, and view, and change RAM and registers. On the actual hardware you have a single brealpoint but all those other things are still available. On Arduino you have the ability to add code which will flash an LED or write values to a serial terminal but that is it. It is MUCH harder to debug on Arduino.

 

I have done quite a few projects with various PICs but recently have been working with Arduino (Uno and Nano).

The Arduino IDE is much easier to use than MPLABX but I feel this is largely because it is much less capable.
MPLABX has a simulator where you can set unlimited breakpoints, single step, and view, and change RAM and registers. On the actual hardware you have a single brealpoint but all those other things are still available. On Arduino you have the ability to add code which will flash an LED or write values to a serial terminal but that is it. It is MUCH harder to debug on Arduino.

Yes, I've been playing with Arduino as well. But I want to move quickly to a Standalone setup. I don't think Arduino board layout helps when we've got to attach it to a second PCB. Moreover, I'm sure the Atmega has many other resources which are not available in Arduino environment, such as embedding small asm routines. Last week I've been trying to place info in internal EEPROM and it seems that's only one way: writing a sketch full of byte arrays and poking the data via runtime loop! There should be a memory editor, shouldn't it?

 

We see/hear your wish lists. Everyone wants to use DIP chips. That is going to limit your choices severely, now and into the future. Go ahead and use DIP for prototyping but don't limit yourself to DIP for production. There are many more serious advantages to start using SMT chips once you begin doing PCB layout.

Atmel, Microchip and TI all have various choices of MCU in DIP.

For Mac OS, you simply have to try it and see if it works for you. Many times it is hit or miss using a Windows virtual machine. If you are serious about it, get an inexpensive Windows machine and avoid that issue.

 

You have a few problems here. If you need cost efficiency, you can consider Assembler for programming small PIC MCUs, where MPLAB is good according to me. PIC and unfortunately Arduino are both a part of Proteus now, where you can check some functionalities, without using MPLAB. MPLab and xc8 can be used separately.

PICs are pretty much the cheapest famous brand. Microchip bought Atmel, so they are the same company.

Prototyping can be done in a few ways: order the PCB with smd technology and wait for the prototype of the PCB plus soldered components (400 USD) or make the PCBs by yourself or at least only solder the components by yourself.

In any case Pic is famous with a lot of info and well made data sheets. Others are not, especially Arduino where we have pretty pictures in the datasheet but no real technical data. Sometimes the datasheet does not exist for Arduino.

 

MPLab X is a cross platform IDE, it works on Windows, Mac and Linux. And so are the "XC" compilers.

 

We see/hear your wish lists. Everyone wants to use DIP chips. That is going to limit your choices severely, now and into the future. Go ahead and use DIP for prototyping but don't limit yourself to DIP for production. There are many more serious advantages to start using SMT chips once you begin doing PCB layout.

Atmel, Microchip and TI all have various choices of MCU in DIP.

For Mac OS, you simply have to try it and see if it works for you. Many times it is hit or miss using a Windows virtual machine. If you are serious about it, get an inexpensive Windows machine and avoid that issue.

I have no doubt I'll have to migrate toward SMT/SMD. Through hole is the 60's technology and makes sense just for those suppliers that still hold the DIY markets. I guess the next market movement is to offer at most only SMD components in small through holes PCBs for DIY.

Now I think about advancing a step at once. First counting on DIP to restart and choosing a good platform for the next two years at least. Then, as soon as possible, investing something on a set of adapters for a variety of packagings. When I have a demand for medium scale, I order it ready from China, PCB with SMD components included.

I just have to make appropriate movements every step. No search for perfect solutions and no problem on stepping back when required.

That's why I'm enjoying every comment you all give here. I'm up to take some decisions, and, with your help, I can already see alternative paths for some difficulties.

Thank you all.

 

MPLab X is a cross platform IDE, it works on Windows, Mac and Linux. And so are the "XC" compilers.

Yes, this is a very strong factor to weight in the decision. Portability is key!

I'm considering the advice given by MrChips regarding an inexpensive PC to run such things. Any small cube will do the job. Nevertheless, I'd like to grab some routines in my Mac as well to make small improvements in free time.

 

You have a few problems here. If you need cost efficiency, you can consider Assembler for programming small PIC MCUs, where MPLAB is good according to me. PIC and unfortunately Arduino are both a part of Proteus now, where you can check some functionalities, without using MPLAB. MPLab and xc8 can be used separately.

PICs are pretty much the cheapest famous brand. Microchip bought Atmel, so they are the same company.

Prototyping can be done in a few ways: order the PCB with smd technology and wait for the prototype of the PCB plus soldered components (400 USD) or make the PCBs by yourself or at least only solder the components by yourself.

In any case Pic is famous with a lot of info and well made data sheets. Others are not, especially Arduino where we have pretty pictures in the datasheet but no real technical data. Sometimes the datasheet does not exist for Arduino.

I agree Arduino is very poor on documentation. Professional work is not what it is intended for. The "Arduino Way" is a community interactivity for making fancy things. I wouldn't expect much of it.

I've already developed for PIC and the documentation is really superb. Except in the field of C programming. There are many outdated information, including syntax mistakes that make us take hours trying solutions. Some times it turns the development schedule simply unpredictable! But, anyway, the whole picture is very good.

I'll be back to PIC, MPLabX and XC to grab updated impressions.

And about the small MCUs as peripherals, I couldn't agree most: small ASM routines, internal clock, internal pullup resistors, etc. With good documentation, I don't even have to care what's inside anymore. Just place it, burn it and interface with a larger MCU.

Thank you.
Regards

 

I agree Arduino is very poor on documentation. Professional work is not what it is intended for. The "Arduino Way" is a community interactivity for making fancy things. I wouldn't expect much of it.

I've already developed for PIC and the documentation is really superb. Except in the field of C programming. There are many outdated information, including syntax mistakes that make us take hours trying solutions. Some times it turns the development schedule simply unpredictable! But, anyway, the whole picture is very good.

I'll be back to PIC, MPLabX and XC to grab updated impressions.

And about the small MCUs as peripherals, I couldn't agree most: small ASM routines, internal clock, internal pullup resistors, etc. With good documentation, I don't even have to care what's inside anymore. Just place it, burn it and interface with a larger MCU.

Thank you.
Regards

I think PIC is the best option, but I do not fully agree. Its best to understand what is inside. That way like we are discussing in another thread, you will know what you are doing and be able to solve the problem if there is one.

You should download datasheets only from microchip.com. They should be all right.

 

If you start right here http://microchipdeveloper.com/
You'll be well ahead of the game with MPlab-X and pic chips it's the best thing out there to start with
and you can use this don't even need to install anything really but some bowers plugins
https://www.microchip.com/mplab/mplab-xpress
You export the hex for your programmer works on anything that you programmer software for.

 

If you start right here http://microchipdeveloper.com/
You'll be well ahead of the game with MPlab-X and pic chips it's the best thing out there to start with
and you can use this don't even need to install anything really but some bowers plugins
https://www.microchip.com/mplab/mplab-xpress
You export the hex for your programmer works on anything that you programmer software for.

True, this is from the newest functions, but I have not tested it.

 

I guess Microchip might be good enough for the moment. I bought your idea of trying to navigate in MPLab X with the help of YouTube. It sounds efficient.

I use MPLAB IDE mainly because it seems friendlier to Assembly.
There is the tutorials by Gooligum in Assembly and C for the Picmicro.
Max.