PIC`s vs Arduino/Sanguino. Why your favorite?

I know the current Reprap`s use Sangs/Arduino. I also know PIC can be lots cheaper. I ALSO know the Arduino default dev kit is fully FOS, which is something I REALLY like. But I don`t like to actually pay for FOS, therefore I use PIC with Jallib v2, which is, if I`m not mistaken, licenced under GPL or LGPL.It has an assembler and compiler and it can handle most microchip pics. Wouldn`t it be a good idea to invent an alternative to the expensive arduino shields with this combination? The most expensive part would be the programmer, but you can use mine if you live nearby Think, you could throw another 50 to 70 euros away (or donate them to me)!
Also, before people start complaining for pic 1/4 mips per MHz compared to the Arduino fulls speed, it`s true with most of them. But do you need full 20 MHz if the stepper nor the printing material cant follow?
Thanks for reading and your response. I'm quite sure somebody already asked for this stuff, if you know an actve thread where they discusse this, let me know

Ruben

... AFAIK the first reprap-controllers were PIC's, so there could be some reasons why it was changed

---

Viktor
--------
Aufruf zum Projekt "Müll-freie Meere" - [reprap.org] -- Deutsche Facebook-Gruppe - [www.facebook.com]

Call for the project "garbage-free seas" - [reprap.org]

I am partial to sanguinololu, but am really getting into PIC32's.

---

Charles Gantt.
Build blog [themakersworkbench.com] <---- my personal site
Build worklong [www.thebestcasescenario.com]

I'm partial to PICs, but I've been working with them for over a decade.
The Arduino and its spin offs are easier to get started with and start programming though.

criswilson10 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm partial to PICs, but I've been working with
> them for over a decade.
> The Arduino and its spin offs are easier to get
> started with and start programming though.


Why should we use a beginners product? Reprap programmers are semi pro`s ;-)
Yes, I`m also partial to pic

VDX Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ... AFAIK the first reprap-controllers were PIC's,
> so there could be some reasons why it was changed
>

AFAIK the first pic programming suites were all closed source and difficult to program... I think that`s the only reason?

Did I also mention Microchip`s working on a FOS IDE?

... when i started with embedded controllers around 1985, my first ones were 6502, then 8031/51, then the first PIC's.

In the main time i was then interchanging between PIC's and C51 cores (dependant of the customers).

Today i have a bunch of different 8-,16- and 32-bit-boards and corresponding IDE's here, but buildups and development of small projects is much easier and faster with the Arduinos (despite the poor IDE)

---

Viktor
--------
Aufruf zum Projekt "Müll-freie Meere" - [reprap.org] -- Deutsche Facebook-Gruppe - [www.facebook.com]

Call for the project "garbage-free seas" - [reprap.org]

Quote

Think, you could throw another 50 to 70 euros away

How that? An ATmega644 costs 6 to 8 Euros depending on the source, so you can only save that much.

Quote

But do you need full 20 MHz if the stepper nor the printing material cant follow?

Yes. Running 1/16 microstepping brings an ATmega to its limits, even with highly optimized firmware like Teacup.

---

Generation 7 Electronics	Teacup Firmware	RepRap DIY

Bang for buck you can't beat ARM atm.