Assuming we want a new module to retain compatibility with PSIM programs, I
believe that limits us to the Hitachi/Renasas and PIC microcontrollers
suppported by BASIC ATOM and BASIC ATOM PRO. BASIC ATOM PRO is compatible
with BASIC ATOM, according to the Basic Micro site, even though two
different processors are used.
As Gary mentioned, I can see where having programmable functions embedded in
otherwise analog modules is very desirable. I assume PICs would be better
for this task since they come in hundreds of flavors and are very
inexpensive. The PIC in the BASIC ATOM system is fairly expensive though,
as PICs go...
Here's the microcontroller info I dug out of the Basic Micro docs:
Basic Atom 24/28/40 Micro: Microchip PIC16F876, 20 MHz DIP part is $7.70
from Digi-Key
Basic Atom Pro 24/28 Micro: Hitachi/Renasas 3664, 16 MHz 64 LQFP part is
$9.50 from Digi-Key
John Loffink
The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
http://www.microtonal-synthesis.comThe Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
http://www.wavemakers-synth.com > -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of john
>
> This raises what I see as the big decision: Which microprocessor to use?
>
> I've been programmaing for over 25 years but I admit to confusion over
> the array of MPUs available. PICs, Basic Stamps, AVRs, BasicATOMs, oh
> my!
>
> One major factor that I see is this: Is a development kit required to
> program the MPU? I gather that PICs are really cheap but they require a
> dev kit/programmer. The BasicATOMPRO needs no such kit but it costs
> much more than a typical PIC.
>
> One has to decide (i.e. make a guess at) how many of these puppies s/he
> will be using. If the answer is a very small number then the no-dev-kit
> units are more attractive. Beyond a certain number, though, and the dev
> kit pays for itself. This is why cheap little PICs are great for
> production devices (including small volume "cottage" production); one
> programming device yields many programmed PICs.
>
> Of course there's also the performance issue. The BasicATOMPRO blows
> away the PIC, there.
>