Microcontrollers (stamps) capable of?

CFlux said:
I know this is kida off topic but using a microprocessor is infact very possible, I have built systems that were based arround a 8088 a basic system only requires a few IC's and realy arn't that bad to setup. But it's one of those things that require alot of knowlege to accomplish so maybe not realy practicle for hobby work.

If using microprocessors were not possible, none of use would be able to post here right now. :D

You're right though...the difference between a stamp/pic/avr and an x86 or the like is in the number of chips required. Remember, a uproc is useless unless it has instructions to run. The x86 derivatives require a chipset. Such a chipset serves as an interface between the uproc and its memory and I/O. The reason the stamps/pic/avr's are so popular is that the "chipset" is integrated on the uproc. They all have integrated RAM/ROM and flash memory. Using any of those solutions generally only requires one IC to function (assuming it already has power and a clock signal).
 
joecool234 said:
You obviously have never used a stamp before. In no way, shape, or form is a PIC easier to use. It took 3 engineers with degrees from JHU 2 weeks to get our PIC programmed. Intelligence has nothing to with it...the environment for the PIC is incredibly foreign, especially if one isn't proficient in C. The PIC requires C libraries, linking, etc etc...all before you can even put code on a chip. With the stamp, you simply type up a pbasic file, then click a single button - BAM, code is on the chip and the chip is running.

It is not correct to say PIC/AVR is a simpler route. It may just be your preferred route.

Marshmallow: what serial board and lcd are you using? Have you found examples on google for interfacing YOUR lcd to the basic stamp? From what I understand, you should just be able to use the SEROUT command to send text to the LCD, that's it. If the text is garbled, you are more than likely not initializing it correctly.
Not true at all - I used a stamp in highschool. I hated basic with a passion - what an awful, awful programming language.

Can't say anything about PICs (I don't swing that way). But I sure would prefer to program an AVR either in C or assembler any day over programming a stamp.

Are you saying it took your engineers 2 weeks just to figure out how to program a pic? Ummmm - that would be pitiful. Pitiful enough that I think you're just making things up now. Supposedly PICs are simpler than AVRs (this is what I've been told). AVRs are incredibly simple - even a non-engineering type could figure out how to program one.

I'm starting to really think you're full of shit.
 
NleahciM said:
I'm starting to really think you're full of shit.

Anyone care to back me up here? Has anyone actually read the 396 page manual for a 18F452? What about the 200 page document for the tcp/ip stack?

My senior design instrumentation lab required a microcontrolled handicapped assist device for the final project. Of the 14 teams, my team was the only one to use a basic stamp. We had the stamp control 3 sonar transducers, 2 IR transducers, a compass, motion sensor, a voice recording chip, and 2 switches. Other groups were trying to control the following with a PIC 1) the keypad of a cellphone 2) a page turner 3) an array of leds based on the position of the pupils etc. etc. Guess what...my group was the only one to actually finish the project. Did I mention we had 2 weeks from start to finish? What about the fact I learned pbasic and read (and FULLY understood) the stamp manual in a day? We were debugging our device before the other groups even had machine code. Honestly, the toughest part about the project was handling the coordinates from the compass, which required negative arithmetic. Fortunately, we figured out a clever workaround.

Look buddy, calling me full of shit and pitiful is absolutely uncalled for. I said it took 2 engineers two weeks to get started. What I neglected to mention, for those douchbags that need to be told, is that the two engineers were Biomedical Engineers. BMEs with graduate degrees from JHU (yes, the best BME program in the nation). I'm sorry, but uproc programming isn't our forte`. We worked real hard in those two weeks, and every minute was imperative for a complete understanding of the PIC. In fact, I should tell my boss so he can piss down your throat for such blasphemy.

Anyone that dives head first into PIC development is absolutely retarded. You stand a much greater chance of fucking shit up without fully understanding what's going on. You'll probably waste much longer than 2 weeks trying to figure out why your shit don't work.

Back on point...a basic stamp is by far the easiest and COMPLETE solution out there. Shortcomings aside (basically arithmetic related), the basic stamp is ideal for anyone with no prior programmable hardware experience.

My $.02
 
joecool234 said:
Anyone care to back me up here? Has anyone actually read the 396 page manual for a 18F452? What about the 200 page document for the tcp/ip stack?

My senior design instrumentation lab required a microcontrolled handicapped assist device for the final project. Of the 14 teams, my team was the only one to use a basic stamp. We had the stamp control 3 sonar transducers, 2 IR transducers, a compass, motion sensor, a voice recording chip, and 2 switches. Other groups were trying to control the following with a PIC 1) the keypad of a cellphone 2) a page turner 3) an array of leds based on the position of the pupils etc. etc. Guess what...my group was the only one to actually finish the project. Did I mention we had 2 weeks from start to finish? What about the fact I learned pbasic and read (and FULLY understood) the stamp manual in a day? We were debugging our device before the other groups even had machine code. Honestly, the toughest part about the project was handling the coordinates from the compass, which required negative arithmetic. Fortunately, we figured out a clever workaround.

Look buddy, calling me full of shit and pitiful is absolutely uncalled for. I said it took 2 engineers two weeks to get started. What I neglected to mention, for those douchbags that need to be told, is that the two engineers were Biomedical Engineers. BMEs with graduate degrees from JHU (yes, the best BME program in the nation). I'm sorry, but uproc programming isn't our forte`. We worked real hard in those two weeks, and every minute was imperative for a complete understanding of the PIC. In fact, I should tell my boss so he can piss down your throat for such blasphemy.

Anyone that dives head first into PIC development is absolutely retarded. You stand a much greater chance of fucking shit up without fully understanding what's going on. You'll probably waste much longer than 2 weeks trying to figure out why your shit don't work.

Back on point...a basic stamp is by far the easiest and COMPLETE solution out there. Shortcomings aside (basically arithmetic related), the basic stamp is ideal for anyone with no prior programmable hardware experience.

My $.02
The fact that there is such a huge hobbyist following for PICs and AVRs should say something loud and clear: they ain't difficult. The summer before my freshman year in college I bought an AT90S8515, an AVRISP, and a couple components, and I had my first program running within about an hour of getting everything in the mail. This is with next to no previous electronics experience. (besides that which we did in physics). Even people with non-technical degrees don't have trouble with them. Speaking of which - you first mention that you hired somebody to do your programming, then you say that you had three engineers doing it... And now you're saying you had two BMEs working on it. Choose a story and stick with it. I still think you're full of shit because you can't even keep your story straight.

Frankly - if it took 1/2/3 engineers 2 weeks to figure out something as simple as a pic - you guys have serious, serious problems. I had my AT90S8515 pretty damn well figured out within a day of messing around with it.

About the datasheet - I normally read about 5 pages woth of any given datasheet. Read a PIC/AVR beginners website - and you'll see that AVRs (and I'm assuming PICs as well) are all built pretty much alike. And there's nothing to difficult about reading them - just read the pertinent parts (ie no need to read about the UART if you aren't going to use it - use common sense)

About the TCP/IP stack - Again I can't speak for PICs - but I know there is a full and I believe free implementation of it for AVRs already made.

And I still 100% disagree about stamps being a good starting place. Once you outgrow the very limited abilities of the stamp you have to completely relearn EVERYTHING. On the other hand - recently I've been running into problems with the speed and processing power of AVRs. I just jumped up to ARMs without a glitch. Very easy and painless transition.
 
Well let me defend myself, yet again...the 3 originally included myself. When I was saying two, I was talking about the other 2 (one of whom was the hired programmer)...ok ma?

You obviously must NOT be an engineer. Only reading 5 pages of a datasheet, HA! And if you are, good luck finding a decent job. I guess reading hasn't been emphasized in your courseload.

Fact of the matter remains...the pics and avrs have a large learning curve relative to stamps. For a noobie, like the person who started this thread, the stamp is a great way to get introduced to the world of microcontrollers. And the comment about having to relearn everything once you make the switch to pics/avrs is bullshit. Yea, pbasic is not even remotely close to C, but the input/ouput principle is close enough. And besides, you've never learned something in a day, only to completely forget it the next?

Look, for someone who has never learned C and needs to have a microcontrolled device...the stamp is your only option for a quick and easy task.

P.S. The PIC has a free implementation of the TCP/IP stack as well. Its just considered best practice in the real world to fully read the documentation for things you know nothing about. And besides, Microchips' implementation was overly bloaded (support for a webserver, ftp, etc. etc.). We had to figure out how to trim it down to the bare minimum.
 
joecool234 said:
Well let me defend myself, yet again...the 3 originally included myself. When I was saying two, I was talking about the other 2 (one of whom was the hired programmer)...ok ma?

You obviously must NOT be an engineer. Only reading 5 pages of a datasheet, HA! And if you are, good luck finding a decent job. I guess reading hasn't been emphasized in your courseload.

Fact of the matter remains...the pics and avrs have a large learning curve relative to stamps. For a noobie, like the person who started this thread, the stamp is a great way to get introduced to the world of microcontrollers. And the comment about having to relearn everything once you make the switch to pics/avrs is bullshit. Yea, pbasic is not even remotely close to C, but the input/ouput principle is close enough. And besides, you've never learned something in a day, only to completely forget it the next?

Look, for someone who has never learned C and needs to have a microcontrolled device...the stamp is your only option for a quick and easy task.

P.S. The PIC has a free implementation of the TCP/IP stack as well. Its just considered best practice in the real world to fully read the documentation for things you know nothing about. And besides, Microchips' implementation was overly bloaded (support for a webserver, ftp, etc. etc.). We had to figure out how to trim it down to the bare minimum.
So - the programmer you chose was a BME? Hmmmmm... That seems a bit illogical.

So are you saying you read every page of every datasheet that you use? Sounds like there's a reason you aren't an EE. In fact - after making a comment that completely stupid - I'm thinking you're probabaly still in school. Fact is that with an AVR - once you know how one works, you know how just about all of them work. It's pointless to read through the datasheet once you have much experience with AVRs because they're all built so much alike.

Yes - there are a couple very basic ideas you'd carry with you if you transitioned from Stamps to a real uC. But the transition with be much, much, much easier if you are transitioning from one real uC to another.

I had never learned C and I was up and running the same day when I got into AVRs. Stamps are NOT the only device.

Look around at professional made products - how many use the stamp? OK now look around and count how many use AVRs/PICs. Yeah.
 
Joe and Nil, can you move your convo to PM? I really see no need for you two to attack eachother. You are both entitled to your opinion, but have no right to force your opinion on anyone else. Thank you for your time and tips everyone, still trying to initialise this damn screen.
 
IT WORKS!!! Woot, what a PITA it was to initialise this LCD (didnt know the exact type it was, so had to do some serious trial and error to get the code right). After finding the correct syntax, I am finding this is alot simpler then I thought it was. Now to try and get it up and running on a pic.
 
using a microprocessor with circuit boards that are made with sharpies and drilled by hand, isnt going to happen.

CFlux said:
I know this is kida off topic but using a microprocessor is infact very possible, I have built systems that were based arround a 8088 a basic system only requires a few IC's and realy arn't that bad to setup. But it's one of those things that require alot of knowlege to accomplish so maybe not realy practicle for hobby work.
 
you really shouldnt mention something like that when you consider that the basic stamp could probably never handle TCP/IP worth a damn,

joecool234 said:
What about the 200 page document for the tcp/ip stack?
 
on defense of the stamp though, i've heard rumors of third party compilers that can give support to negative integer math and half decent floating point operations.
 
marshmallow said:
Joe and Nil, can you move your convo to PM? I really see no need for you two to attack eachother. You are both entitled to your opinion, but have no right to force your opinion on anyone else. Thank you for your time and tips everyone, still trying to initialise this damn screen.
Nil?
 
Whatsisname said:
you really shouldnt mention something like that when you consider that the basic stamp could probably never handle TCP/IP worth a damn,

http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=30005

As for the heated dicussion, I apologize for the rant. All I can say is that my experience with a stamp has been a lot more enjoyable than with the pic. For simple tasks, such as hooking up an LCD (like the original poster intended), the stamp is totally sufficient.

Anyways, congrats on getting the stamp to work with the LCD. How long did it take, start to finish? Keep us posted on how long the PIC will take to get setup.
 
Heh, sorry NleahciM.

It took me about 4 hours to finally track down and implement the correct syntax for the LCD. I was reading off the specs for the wrong LCD... and sending in the boad info incorrectly.

I had original plans for a project, but instead Im going to create a simple digital rolladeck that can dial out. Im thinking getting it to dial out using a speaker and the correct tones for the numberpad. Any suggestions?
 
Here are some projects involving microcontrollers and LCD's I'd be interested in:
-Put in computer to display some cool stuff, like monitoring voltage levels
-Make a room/house control system with a remote controls for fans/lighting/etc with stuff displayed on the LCD
-Use it for something weird, like an inventory controller for your pantry (it should be pretty straightforward to preprogram items, two buttons to scroll up and down, and two buttons to increment or decrement your stock)

Here's my take on the PIC/AVR vs Stamp debate: PIC/AVR's are cheaper overall than Stamps, more complicated, but also more powerful. A 300 page datasheet is a GOOD thing because it means there are 300 pages worth of things the microcontroller can potentially do, even if you won't do any of them.
 
matt's right, i'm glad my AVR's come with datasheets that are hundreds of pages long... it means the datasheet completely explains everything about the inputs and output pins i need to know (such as the ability to sink or source current), as well as every detail on everything within the uC... such as how to set up specific registers, what i can masks, details on the UARTs, the SPI, the ADC, etc...

when i program something on an AVR, i'm always referring to different parts of the datasheet (exspecially when it comes to setting up the interrupt registers), and im glad all that information is there. when you're using assembly, the information found in datasheets is not only commonly used, but extremely valuable... there's just no other way you could sit down and program a uC without it.

it's not like you gotta read the entire data sheet front to back, but the fact that all the information is there for whatever you're trying to do... is extremely reassuring. sometimes i wish the datasheets were longer.... i've never wished they were shorter. (most datasheets you can get a "summary" anyways that are only like 15-20 pages long... wont have details on what you need to code, but will tell everything the chip has and features, so if you're looking for the right uC... it's real easy)
 
First off, it's discontinued. Secondly, it uses to other chips for the ethernet driving. The AVR's only need one ethernet driver chips and can handle everything else on its own, and frequently does the job of the other chip as well.

Back to the linked thing, that is more than just a basic stamp, it's something you have to buy additionally, so I stand by my claim that the basic stamp can't do TCP/IP worth a damn.

joecool234 said:
http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=30005

As for the heated dicussion, I apologize for the rant. All I can say is that my experience with a stamp has been a lot more enjoyable than with the pic. For simple tasks, such as hooking up an LCD (like the original poster intended), the stamp is totally sufficient.

Anyways, congrats on getting the stamp to work with the LCD. How long did it take, start to finish? Keep us posted on how long the PIC will take to get setup.
 
marshmallow said:
I had original plans for a project, but instead Im going to create a simple digital rolladeck that can dial out. Im thinking getting it to dial out using a speaker and the correct tones for the numberpad. Any suggestions?

The first thing you should do is google DTMF. That is the protocol the telco's use to transmit number tones. Each number has a low and high frequency associated with it. As for implementing your design, it depends on exactly what you want to do. Do you want your design to be universal, ie. do you want to be able to use the device with any phone? That will probablly be the hardest to implement. There are two ways, that I can think of, to do this. One method is to actually output the correct frequencies to an audio amplifier. Once connected to a speaker, you can just put the speaker right on the handset. Another method would be to get a voice recorder chip. Simply record all the tones from the keypad, then hook the chip up to a speaker. Once again, just connect the speaker to the headset.

If you don't need to make this universal, I would highly recommend this route...cannibalize a phone. Simply hook the I/O pins of your uproc to the actual buttons of a phone. Then you can use the uproc to electrically dial a phone. Assuming you wire everything correctly (and your code is bullet-proof), this method will work ALL the time.

As far as the uproc selection, this is a little beyond the scope of the stamp. It simply doesn't have enough memory to store info in a database (you can get external memory, but this will raise the cost). If you want to go the PIC route, I would highly recommend the PIC18F452 as it has like 30 I/O pins and 32K of memory.

As for the rest of you stamp bashers...suck it.

P.S. When I mentioned the size of the PIC manual, I simply was trying to emphasize the PIC's complexity. I agree, the longer the documentation...the more feature-rich the device. And when I started using the PIC, I did check the enthusiast sites. One such site, microchipc.com, has a "quick start" guide (a 7.8MB, 298 page .pdf document). No matter how you slice it, the stamp is the simplest implementaion of a programmable microcontroller.
 
DTMF encoder is just a means of generating the tone. You still need to use a telephone. Can the output of the encoder simply be hooked up to the telephone line, and a phone (on the same line) picked up after the dialing occurs?

EDIT: The only in-stock encoder/generator I could find was the NTE1690. While it is intended to be hooked up directly to a keypad (it has row and column inputs), you could easily interface it a uproc. It also comes in a dip package, so it will be pretty easy to deal with. Mouser sells it for $10:

http://www.mouser.com/index.cfm?han...uctid=293980&e_categoryid=131&e_pcodeid=52617
 
Wow, thanks guys. Yeah, the easiest method for me would be to just take a speaker and put it next to a phone with the correct tones... but I still have all semester with this project so why not go for the challenge? Ill be looking into that decoder now. Thanks again, Ill keep you posted on what I do!
 
marshmallow said:
Wow, thanks guys. Yeah, the easiest method for me would be to just take a speaker and put it next to a phone with the correct tones... but I still have all semester with this project so why not go for the challenge? Ill be looking into that decoder now. Thanks again, Ill keep you posted on what I do!

If it wasn't a typo, make sure you look for an encoder or generator. The decoder does the opposite of what you want.

Also, I've been trying to see if someone else has done something like this. This is the closest I found:

http://www.sparkfun.com/tutorial/Port-O-Rotary/portable-rotary.htm
 
Update 2/15/05

So grueling through the pbasic syntax, I finally got something basic up that itterates through 3 names/numbers backwards and forwards and then loops on itself (this was a huge huge huge huge pita).

Code:
' {$STAMP BS2sx}
' {$PBASIC 2.5}
'Stamp Project
'Rolladeck


INPUT 1                 'rolladeck next instance
LOW 1
INPUT 2                 'rolladeck previous instance
LOW 2
W2 = 30000              'timer count
W1 = 0                  'timer
W3 = 0                  'initial position
W4 = 0                  'token

n9600 CON $40F0          'baud mode
clrLCD CON 12            'LCD command to clear the screen
rtnLCD CON 13
BCKLITON CON 14
BCKLITOF CON 15
posSPACE CON 160


START:
  W1 = 0
  SEROUT 0,n9600,[clrLCD]
  SEROUT 0,n9600,[BCKLITOF]
  PAUSE 1000
  SEROUT 0,n9600,[posSPACE]              'centers label
  SEROUT 0,n9600,["Digital Rolladeck"]   'label

ResetLoop:
  IF IN1=0 AND IN2=0 AND W1=W2 THEN START   'timer
  IF IN1=1 THEN Case_UP                     'forward through rolladeck
  IF IN2=1 THEN Case_Down                   'reverse through rolladeck
  W1 = W1 + 1                               'loop iterations for timer
GOTO ResetLoop

Case_up:
  IF W3=2 THEN
    GOTO Name0
  ELSE
    GOTO Case_1
  ENDIF

Case_down:
  IF W3=0 THEN
    GOTO Name2
  ELSE
    GOTO Case_2
  ENDIF

Case_1:
  W3 = W3 + W4
  BRANCH W3, [Name0,Name1,Name2]


Case_2:
  W3 = W3 - 1
  BRANCH W3, [Name0,Name1,Name2]

Name0:
  SEROUT 0,n9600,[clrLCD]
  SEROUT 0,n9600,[rtnLCD]
  SEROUT 0,n9600,[BCKLITON]
  SEROUT 0,n9600,["Brian B",rtnLCD,"1 217 345 5555"]
  W1 = 0 'timer reset
  PAUSE 500
  W3 = 0
  W4 = 1
  GOTO ResetLoop

Name1:
  SEROUT 0,n9600,[clrLCD]
  SEROUT 0,n9600,[rtnLCD]
  SEROUT 0,n9600,[BCKLITON]
  SEROUT 0,n9600,["Greg K",rtnLCD,"1 217 463 5555"]
  W1 = 0 'timer reset
  PAUSE 500
  W3 = 1
  W4 = 1
  GOTO ResetLoop

Name2:
  SEROUT 0,n9600,[clrLCD]
  SEROUT 0,n9600,[rtnLCD]
  SEROUT 0,n9600,[BCKLITON]
  SEROUT 0,n9600,["David Bergunder",rtnLCD,"1 217 581 5555"]
  W1 = 0 'timer reset
  PAUSE 500
  W3 = 2
  W4 = 1
  GOTO ResetLoop

So, any BASIC junkies out there that can help me with doing this a better way? I know the token/itteration is a bit screwy, and parts may be un needed. This is the code at the end of the day today though and it works.

My next step is to either canabolize a phone or pick up that decoder.
 
<--IDIOT

Im using the basic stamp 2sx which I can use the FREQOUT command to generate from 0 Hz to 81,917 Hz. I dont need a encoder after all. Now to find the protocol info and see what I can do.
 
marshmallow said:
<--IDIOT

Im using the basic stamp 2sx which I can use the FREQOUT command to generate from 0 Hz to 81,917 Hz. I dont need a encoder after all. Now to find the protocol info and see what I can do.

Its not as simple as that. The freqout will only output a 5V signal. You may have to drop the voltage down a bit to actually work.
 
Can the BASIC Stamp generate more than one sine wave on a pin at the same time?

Yes, the BASIC Stamp II, IIe and IIsx’s FREQOUT command can generate two
frequencies at the same time, on the same pin. This can be used to create harmonics,
which greatly improve the sound output.
 
Ok, all the basics are done, it even dials out (woot). I cleaned up the code and this is the project pretty much finished.

' {$STAMP BS2sx}
' {$PBASIC 2.5}
'Stamp Project
'Rolladeck


INPUT 1 'rolladeck next instance
LOW 1
INPUT 2 'rolladeck previous instance
LOW 2
INPUT 3 'rolladeck dial out
LOW 3

lcdTime CON 30000 'timer count
lcdTimer VAR Word 'timer
token VAR Byte 'token
token = 0
positionUpDown VAR Byte 'initial position
positionUpDown = 0

n9600 CON $40F0 'baud mode
clrLCD CON 12 'LCD command to clear the screen
rtnLCD CON 13
BCKLITON CON 14
BCKLITOF CON 15
posSPACE CON 160

phone PIN 5 ' Output to pin 5 for dialtone.
phoneNum VAR Byte(11) ' Variable to store the phone numbers
phoneNumCount VAR Byte
phoneNumCount = 0
pulseOn CON 500
pulseOff CON 100

Start:
lcdTimer = 0
FOR phoneNumCount = 0 TO 10
phoneNum(phoneNumCount) = 0
NEXT
SEROUT 0,n9600,[clrLCD]
SEROUT 0,n9600,[BCKLITOF]
PAUSE 1000
SEROUT 0,n9600,[posSPACE] 'centers label
SEROUT 0,n9600,["Digital Rolladeck"] 'label

ResetLoop:
IF IN1=0 AND IN2=0 AND IN3=0 AND lcdTimer=lcdTime THEN Start 'timer
IF IN1=1 THEN Case_UP 'forward through rolladeck
IF IN2=1 THEN Case_Down 'reverse through rolladeck
IF IN3=1 THEN Case_Dial 'dials phone number
lcdTimer = lcdTimer + 1 'loop iterations for timer
GOTO ResetLoop

Case_up:
IF positionUpDown=2 THEN
GOTO Name0
ELSE
GOTO Case_1
ENDIF

Case_down:
IF positionUpDown=0 THEN
GOTO Name2
ELSE
GOTO Case_2
ENDIF

Case_dial:
IF phoneNum(0)=0 THEN GOTO ResetLoop 'Check to make sure its not null
FOR phoneNumCount = 0 TO 10 'Phone number dial
DTMFOUT phone, pulseOn, pulseOff, [phoneNum(phoneNumCount)]
NEXT
GOTO Start

Case_1:
positionUpDown = positionUpDown + token
BRANCH positionUpDown, [Name0,Name1,Name2]


Case_2:
positionUpDown = positionUpDown - token
BRANCH positionUpDown, [Name0,Name1,Name2]

Name0:
SEROUT 0,n9600,[clrLCD]
SEROUT 0,n9600,[rtnLCD]
SEROUT 0,n9600,[BCKLITON]
SEROUT 0,n9600,["Brian B",rtnLCD,"1 217 345 5555"]
lcdTimer = 0 'timer reset
token = 1
positionUpDown = 0
phoneNum(0) = 1
phoneNum(1) = 2
phoneNum(2) = 1
phoneNum(3) = 7
phoneNum(4) = 3
phoneNum(5) = 4
phoneNum(6) = 5
phoneNum(7) = 2
phoneNum(8) = 3
phoneNum(9) = 0
phoneNum(10) = 3
PAUSE 500
GOTO ResetLoop

Name1:
SEROUT 0,n9600,[clrLCD]
SEROUT 0,n9600,[rtnLCD]
SEROUT 0,n9600,[BCKLITON]
SEROUT 0,n9600,["Greg K",rtnLCD,"1 217 463 5555"]
lcdTimer = 0 'timer reset
positionUpDown = 1
phoneNum(0) = 1
phoneNum(1) = 2
phoneNum(2) = 1
phoneNum(3) = 7
phoneNum(4) = 4
phoneNum(5) = 6
phoneNum(6) = 3
phoneNum(7) = 8
phoneNum(8) = 1
phoneNum(9) = 1
phoneNum(10) = 6
PAUSE 500
GOTO ResetLoop

Name2:
SEROUT 0,n9600,[clrLCD]
SEROUT 0,n9600,[rtnLCD]
SEROUT 0,n9600,[BCKLITON]
SEROUT 0,n9600,["David B",rtnLCD,"1 217 581 5555"]
lcdTimer = 0 'timer reset
token = 1
positionUpDown = 2
phoneNum(0) = 1
phoneNum(1) = 2
phoneNum(2) = 1
phoneNum(3) = 7
phoneNum(4) = 5
phoneNum(5) = 8
phoneNum(6) = 1
phoneNum(7) = 8
phoneNum(8) = 0
phoneNum(9) = 0
phoneNum(10) = 9
PAUSE 500
GOTO ResetLoop

Now, I have a Pic Stick 4Q sitting here that wants to be played with now. Anyone have advice on using this?
 
Back
Top