We are running a survey to help us improve the experience for all of our members. If you see the survey appear, please take the time to tell us about your experience if you can.
I actually had a question for Atmel chip users.
I've seen a number of posts for people using Atmel chips and was curious as to why you use Keil. I've used their AVR Studio tool and found it to be a very good tool and their support at AVR Freaks is second to none (no offense, Keil forum people). So my question is why would you choose to pay money to buy Keil (or even if you have that tool already) rather than use AVR Studio, which is specifically designed for use with Atmel chips?
I was just curious.
Unless I'm completely understanding what you're saying. Are you saying that not all Atmel chips are supported by AVR Studio and that's why people use Keil?
I apologize if I'm completely misunderstanding your point.
It's not what I was saying, but it is true!
Note that it's not called "AVR Studio" any more - because it now also supports their ARM chips. But it does not support their 8051 chips!
"...and that's why people use Keil?"
I'm saying nothing about why people make their choices!
The point for AVR is that there is no choice - Keil is not an option.
You're right, it's called Atmel Studio now. I actually didn't notice that until now.
Thanks for your explanation!
"Atmel Studio" consists of both compiler/assembler/linker toolchains, and a GUI (or "IDE"): The toolchain is GCC; The GUI is MS VisualStudio.
Similarly, "Keil" consists of compiler/assembler/linker toolchains, and the uVision IDE.
And "IAR" consists of compiler/assembler/linker toolchains, and the Embedded Workbench IDE.
For ARM, there are plenty of other choices of IDE using GCC tools...