• Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

Pic replacement for Pic16F84(A)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Frank G.

New Member
Hi!

It has been a while that I programmed the Pic16F84 or 84A.

Has it been replaced with a new one or is it still being used?

Thanks
Frank G.
 

be80be

Well-Known Member
lots better and cheaper but you can still get them a 16f628 works better.
 

Pommie

Well-Known Member
Most Helpful Member
I prefer the 16F88 as this is pin compatible but with internal oscillator and analogue inputs. Any code will need modifying but if you're writing from scratch it should be fine. There are now much better and cheaper ones but it depends on your needs.

Mike.
 

Nigel Goodwin

Super Moderator
Most Helpful Member
Hi!

It has been a while that I programmed the Pic16F84 or 84A.

Has it been replaced with a new one or is it still being used?
They were replaced long ago, well back in the last century!.

The 16F628 was the replacement for them, but far more modern (and pin compatible) devices are available - personally my PIC of choice now is the 16F1827, a modern enhanced version of the 84.
 

Frank G.

New Member
Thanks, Mike.

Yes, I agree that the 16F88 is better.

I use to use pic a lot, But got hooked on Ardunio uno and now Ardunio Maga 2560.
I want to get back on the pic.

believe it or not, I am not a programmer, but built many robots and electronics stuff with the pic and Ardunio.
Too bad the pic is not supported as well as the Ardunio is.

I currently use the PicBasic Pro Compiler.

Do you know if there is an assembly language converter to 'C' language?

I have a few programs I would like to convert.

Thanks

Frank G.
 

Ian Rogers

User Extraordinaire
Forum Supporter
Most Helpful Member
Do you know if there is an assembly language converter to 'C' language?
I normally do it myself because converting ASM to C is very inefficient..
It's easier to embed the ASM into C...
 

Frank G.

New Member
That is great
You know I've has seen that before now that you mention it.
I learn assembly first, then 'C' to get my project done / but to say I I'm a programmer not really.
To be a programmer you should be able to sit down and start programming.
I have a motor control program that I would like to modify or add to.
I might need some help.

Thanks
Frank G.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest threads

EE World Online Articles

Loading
Top