From: -jg on
On Jun 10, 4:44 am, D Yuniskis > Had you seen the *original* PICs
(General Instruments) *and*
> compared them to what was available from other vendors at
> the time, you would have found it amusing:
>    "Is this a joke?  You know, one of those April Fool's Day
>    bogus advertisements?"
> (I had a similar reaction when Motogorilla later introduced
> their *one* bit "ICU")

Does anyone know someone who actually _used_ that one-bit ICU ?
[MC14500B]

I remember doing a CPLD version, as a teaching exercise.

I see there is even an opencores page (no code yet)
http://opencores.org/project,icu

-jg
From: D Yuniskis on
Hi Jim,

-jg wrote:
> On Jun 10, 4:44 am, D Yuniskis > Had you seen the *original* PICs
> (General Instruments) *and*
>> compared them to what was available from other vendors at
>> the time, you would have found it amusing:
>> "Is this a joke? You know, one of those April Fool's Day
>> bogus advertisements?"
>> (I had a similar reaction when Motogorilla later introduced
>> their *one* bit "ICU")
>
> Does anyone know someone who actually _used_ that one-bit ICU ?
> [MC14500B]

Dunno. I recall the small *red* pamphlet. Looked like
someone had invested *just* enough effort to make a good
April Fool's Joke out of the thing (like Signetics' WOM...
I particularly liked the 2% tolerance on Vdd :> )

(sigh) No more clever hackers. :<

> I remember doing a CPLD version, as a teaching exercise.
>
> I see there is even an opencores page (no code yet)
> http://opencores.org/project,icu
From: Joe Chisolm on
On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 07:37:07 -0600, hamilton wrote:

> On 6/9/2010 12:51 AM, Meindert Sprang wrote:
>> "Grant Edwards"<invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:huljbj$aft$2(a)reader1.panix.com...
>>> In my experience, "yuck!" is what anybody trying to use C on a PIC
>>> ought to expect. [IMO, "yuck!" is what you get using asm on a PIC as
>>> well, but that's probably a little more subjective.]
>>
>> "Yuck" is what you get when using a PIC at all..... Whoever designed
>> this architecture should be crucified!!
>
> Yes, and they are laughing all the way to the bank.
>
> Not bad for a "Yuck" design.
>
> hamilton
>
>
>
>> Meindert
>>
>>

Not bad indeed. 6 billion microcontrollers shipped. The latest
financial report says they are close to 950K development systems.
They shipped 45,000 this last quarter alone. Record revenues and
dividend increased to 34.2c/share. Plus now I can order small qty
parts pre-programmed. One time setup fee of $60 and something like
10 or 20 cents per part to program. Just like any other microcontroller
the PIC series have a sweet spot for solving particular problems.
If your requirements are to run a full blow RTOS or Linux then dont
spec a PIC.

Frankly I dont worry too much about the compiler. I can spend my time
in better ways. If I'm so code size constrained that I'm worried about
the compiler using 8 instructions instead of 4, or performance
constrained that looping 16 times is a killer, then code the function
in asm, spend the big bucks for a different compiler or choose a
different microcontroller. Hell, the X86 architecture sucks but it
aint going away any time soon.

I've done several projects using a PIC. My current project wont be
a PIC, the PIC is not a correct fit for the problem set. The next
project on the horizon probably will be a PIC, different set of
requirements.


--
Joe Chisolm
Marble Falls, Tx.
From: Walter Banks on


-jg wrote:

> Does anyone know someone who actually _used_ that one-bit ICU ?
> [MC14500B]

It was used as far as I know for essential one application area
low speed switching and sequential applications. The only application
I know for sure was traffic light control. At the time it was a low cost
solution replacing mechanic timers and relay sequencers.

Regards,


w..
--
Walter Banks
Byte Craft Limited
http://www.bytecraft.com