Re: TI-H: PIC -vs- AVR programmers

To: ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: TI-H: PIC -vs- AVR programmers
From: Bryan Rittmeyer <bryanr@flash.net>
Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 23:05:40 -0400
Delivered-To: ti-hardware-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
References: <v02110100b16eb8abd8ef@[206.149.127.65]>
Reply-To: ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org


Actually the AVRs are vastly superior, even
though some of the higher-end ones have had
their max clock speed reduced. Search for
'BA1FB' and you'll find the site with a great,
simple AVR programmer (parallel port).

Bryan

Grant Stockly wrote:
> 
> AVRs are not better chips, just like the Mac isn't better than a PC...
> 
> >I know how easy it is to build a PIC programmer (a few resistors...that's
> >it)...so why is it so hard (nearly impossible?) to build a working AVR
> >programmer? I would like to build one instead of buying one for monatery
> >reasons, and because i know that the AVR's are better chips. Although, the
> >PIC is remarkably easy to program for...
> >
> >-- Jon Olson
> >
> >--
> >"Nobody will ever need more than 640k RAM!" -- Bill Gates, 1981
> >"Windows 95 needs at least 8 MB RAM." -- Bill Gates, 1996
> >"Nobody will ever need Windows 95." -- logical conclusion

References:

Re: TI-H: PIC -vs- AVR programmers

From: gussie@alaska.net (Grant Stockly)

Prev: Re: Please Read Bryan: Re: TI-H: Code and schematics and such
Next: Re: TI-H: Tiger Quizwiz
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread