| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
alfaec
Joined: 26 Jul 2012
Posts: 5
Location: pistoia
|
| PIC18 and ENC464J600 |
 Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 9:14 am |
 |
|
Hi
I'm searching source code for CCS PIC18 compiler that will be able to interface Microchip ENC464J600 10/100 Ethernet Interface.
Is there anyone who has developed for this chip?
Thank you very much
_________________
_______________________
Alessio Fabbri |
|
 |
oxo
Joined: 13 Nov 2012
Posts: 219
Location: France
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 11:51 am |
|
|
| Code for the enc28j60 is supplied with the ccs Ethernet Dev kit. |
|
|
asmallri
Joined: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 1635
Location: Perth, Australia
|
| Re: PIC18 and ENC464J600 |
| Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 10:29 pm |
|
|
| alfaec wrote: | Hi
I'm searching source code for CCS PIC18 compiler that will be able to interface Microchip ENC464J600 10/100 Ethernet Interface.
Is there anyone who has developed for this chip?
Thank you very much |
I have developed with this controller. There is no PIC18F family member today capable of fully utilizing 10M Ethernet capacity today let alone 100M Ethernet. This is one reason you rarely see the ENCx24J600 family used with PIC18F processors.
_________________
Regards, Andrew
http://www.brushelectronics.com/software
Home of Ethernet, SD card and Encrypted Serial Bootloaders for PICs!! |
|
|
hemnath
Joined: 03 Oct 2012
Posts: 242
Location: chennai
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:17 am |
|
|
hi asmallri,
I'm interfacing enc28j60 with pic18.
Can you please share your enc28j60 code.
It will help me a lot.
Thanks in advance. |
|
|
RF_Developer
Joined: 07 Feb 2011
Posts: 839
|
| Re: PIC18 and ENC464J600 |
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:39 am |
|
|
| asmallri wrote: | | There is no PIC18F family member today capable of fully utilizing 10M Ethernet capacity today let alone 100M Ethernet. |
True... but these days its getting increasingly common to find network infrastructure that doesn't support 10M Ethernet. For these applications 100M is the minimum requirement. This is my motivation for using ENC424J600 with PIC 18F: to update a LAN interface for a product where some customers can't cope with 10M anymore.
The 18F series will support 100M, but clearly cannot utilise anywhere near that bandwidth. That doesn't rule out 18Fs for 100M use, any more than it did for 10M use, which they also cannot fully utilise. It just limits the range applications for to which they can be put. |
|
|
oxo
Joined: 13 Nov 2012
Posts: 219
Location: France
|
| Re: PIC18 and ENC464J600 |
| Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 2:47 am |
|
|
| RF_Developer wrote: | | asmallri wrote: | | There is no PIC18F family member today capable of fully utilizing 10M Ethernet capacity today let alone 100M Ethernet. |
True... but these days its getting increasingly common to find network infrastructure that doesn't support 10M Ethernet. For these applications 100M is the minimum requirement. This is my motivation for using ENC424J600 with PIC 18F: to update a LAN interface for a product where some customers can't cope with 10M anymore. |
Hi RFDev,
Does the current CCS library support the ENC424J600? I have the library from 2012, and I understand it's been updated.
Oxo |
|
|
RF_Developer
Joined: 07 Feb 2011
Posts: 839
|
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 3:41 am |
|
|
| I can't say. I've always used the Microchip stack. The CCS stack lags many, many versions behind the Microchip offering. I hear the CCS stack has recently (for some version 5.0XX) been updated, but I haven't tried it. |
|
|
oxo
Joined: 13 Nov 2012
Posts: 219
Location: France
|
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 3:43 am |
|
|
| RF_Developer wrote: | | I can't say. I've always used the Microchip stack. The CCS stack lags many, many versions behind the Microchip offering. I hear the CCS stack has recently (for some version 5.0XX) been updated, but I haven't tried it. |
Thanks,
Is it straightforward to use? |
|
|
asmallri
Joined: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 1635
Location: Perth, Australia
|
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:36 am |
|
|
| RF_Developer wrote: | | I can't say. I've always used the Microchip stack. The CCS stack lags many, many versions behind the Microchip offering. I hear the CCS stack has recently (for some version 5.0XX) been updated, but I haven't tried it. |
However to be fair, the Microchip stack is unstable. Features without code stability == No value
_________________
Regards, Andrew
http://www.brushelectronics.com/software
Home of Ethernet, SD card and Encrypted Serial Bootloaders for PICs!!
Last edited by asmallri on Mon Oct 20, 2014 7:39 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
RF_Developer
Joined: 07 Feb 2011
Posts: 839
|
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 2:18 am |
|
|
| asmallri wrote: | | RF_Developer wrote: | | I can't say. I've always used the Microchip stack. The CCS stack lags many, many versions behind the Microchip offering. I hear the CCS stack has recently (for some version 5.0XX) been updated, but I haven't tried it. |
However to be fair, the Microchip stack is very very unstable. Features without code stability == No value |
I didn't make or imply any statement about stability or features. My usage of the Microchip stack is through inheritance not my positive choice. There again, I have not experienced any significant instability with it. So, while it would not ordinarily be my first choice - I prefer CCS C to any Microchip C - I do not have any positive reason to change, especially when one or two of those "dodgy" features (web page related) that I am required to use, are, to the best of my knowledge, not available in the CCS version of the stack. |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in
