ME Labs getting Lazy?

[skimask]

I have in my previews posting that Bascom are more powerfull and not the chip
Regards
Pedro

See and read Post #3...
The power of ANY compiler/assembler/anything is in the keyboard/lever/anything operator...not the chip/engine/whatever.
Bascom may have more functions built into it when it comes from the factory, but is it really 'more powerful'?
It just means that somebody took the time to code more functionality into it (i.e. operated the keyboard better).
Again...Post #3...

You can have 2 out of 3...Fast, Cheap, Good
Fast and Cheap, won't be Good...
Cheap and Good, won't be Fast...
Fast and Good, won't be Cheap...

[Ryan7777]

If you don't innovate your product and you stand behind the whole "here it is, if it isnt good enough, go p*ss up a rope" mentallity, you will get smoked in the end by someone that is willing to innovate. period. the microsofts of the world never innovated, they only bought what someone else had already done and marketed it under the MS brand and now are in the position to charge an outragous price because they now have enough money to sue or buy out their enemies. it isn't because they offer a better product, far from it, they just don't give you a choice. but with micro's you DO have a choice, and I say if MElabs doesn't offer what you like, by all means find something better. and its great that some of us have found a market that they can use PBP in their business, and thats what they do all day, program in PBP, so they understand it top to bottom (and they probably don't know it all either), but some of us have other things to do, this is simply a hobby, and all we ask for is some help now and then from someone who's been there, done that.
Mr. Gates would have never in a million years been able to code windows, he was just smart enough to convice people to do it for him.
PBP like the above poster said was only meant to offer an alternative to basic stamps, which is typically more of a hobby item, so it would stand to reason more people are using PBP as a hobby.. So a message board that offers people help on projects is a great idea, but acting like someone is stupid because they ask for help is kinda lame (the first project in the PBP manual is how to flash a single LED, afterall).. And someone who only programs in assembly could say programming in basic is for people that need their hand held, and just about everyone who loves C do say that! So again, i'd go talk to MElabs, and if they don't see it your way, go fish in another sea!

[skimask]

Well, I agree with you on many levels! (hows that for ya? )
I think it all boils right back to the title of the thread, modified just a bit...
MeLabs gettings lazy?
Maybe it's not MeLabs that's getting lazy...maybe it's the end user...
End User's getting lazy?
Somebody always wanting something for nothing...
If PBP actually had all of those neato built-in functions, and had updates to add all of those new commands and the like everytime Microchip came out with a new PIC with new modules inside, PBP would cost as much as Visual Studio 2008 Enterprise (or whatever that really expensive version is), or the end user would end up paying big $$$ for updates because the updates are just that special.
But with all that in mind, there are a LOT of nifty add-ons right here in the forums that could be added to the core of PBP (i.e. the printstr function I keep talking about, DMXIN/DMXOUT type functions, the BarGraphs, and the list goes on and on...). PBP probably isn't a big enough money maker to be the core of a 2 man team at MeLabs and be the major focus. Who can blame them? Business is business...can't beat on something that ain't gonna make you no money...

[boroko]

Well, I just can't stay out of this... I should know better, but alas...

Even though I make products that I market using PBP, I am still a hobbiest for the most part. I have used PICs as glue for many years, but never really learned them as I should have. When I got started, it was pretty much assembly or nothing. I still remember trying to keep Parallax syntax separate in my mind from microchip. I clung to everything that I could find and struggled to make any sense of it.
What eventually happened was that I just gave up for many years. Dabble for a while and then just get frustrated and let it rest again.

I have seen meLabs come a long way over the years and I have been in another re-birth of learning. Most of the credit goes to Jeff and Charles (and LZ) for making an environment that has allowed me to do incredible things that I never could have accomplished without them.

I realize that things are getting more canned these days, and that is a blessing to us all, but for those that are disappointed in the offerings are free to write your own. You might be a bit suprised to find just how hard it is to keep up with every nuance of a flood of new chips and still keep the thing workable and still keep the doors open.

Their efforts continue to make it possible for me. The unbelievable usefulness of this list and the folks that are patient enough to keep answering mundane questions over and over again amaze me.
Thank You all.
-rant mode off-

Bo

[falingtrea]

BTW, you know what one of the first classes I had to take as an electrical engineer? It was a class where we had to write assembly language code to run a stoplight. Anytime you deal directly with hardware you are going to have do something with assembly code if you want it to work better/faster than what the base code is doing. Unless you are making something for a very small market where you have no competition.

Also here is a post that has a zip file with some CAN code written in what looks like PICBASIC.
http://www.picbasic.co.uk/forum/show...00&postcount=7

[Charles Linquis]

Just my 2 cents -

I think PBP is an incredible bargain. Most compilers cost in the $300 range, and then they
want that same amount each year or so for "upgrades". The fact that MELabs charges so little for upgrades has contributed to their wide user base.
Still, I would like the addition of true procedures and functions, and better string handling, as well as hardware I2C (HI2CIN/HI2COUT ?). A few other items would be nice as well.
I would be prepared to pay a lot for those features, since learning a new compiler at this time would cost me thousands in time and lost productivity.
Is there anyone else out there willing to pay a thousand dollars (or more) for a significant upgrade to PBP?

[krohtech]

Is there anyone else out there willing to pay a thousand dollars (or more) for a significant upgrade to PBP?

I don't know about a thousand dollars but I would pay more for upgrades or high end spinoffs. I think that if MELabs decides to break the platform into 3 products like Standard, Pro and Premium, I would pay considerably more for the premium features knowing that this additional money would help MELabs expand the platform.

That being said I want to reiterate that I believe we are getting a good product for the current price.

[rwskinner]

I was aggrevated and I should know better than to post when I'm aggrevated. ME Labs has always had excellent support and I've had them email me bug fixes same day for bugs I found.

I was a little put off with all the errors I was getting on the 18F devices but after searching, and spending a little time reading this forum I got thru it just fine. It's a great product but yes, it can be better. Is it a good value for the price, well maybe. There are numerous other compilers out there, some reasonably priced and some priced pretty high.

What I miss, when comparing PBP to the others, is the lack of built in Floating point routines, and parameters found in true functions and procedures. It just makes the code so much easier to follow and work with.

Will I keep using PBP, yes, but I do find I'm using it less and less. I guess it has a good fit for it's purpose.

At any rate, sorry for the rant, I should know better by now.

Richard