Looking for Microcontroller Recommendations
in [Design]
|
From: JosephKK on 20 Jan 2010 21:41 On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:09:47 -0600, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: >On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 05:53:54 -0800, >"JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 10:51:31 GMT, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>>On a sunny day (Sun, 17 Jan 2010 22:08:06 GMT) it happened nico(a)puntnl.niks >>>(Nico Coesel) wrote in <4b538770.692296890(a)news.planet.nl>: >>> >>>>>Why move? PICs last as long as the FLASH last, so does your ARM. >>>>>>without rewriting from scratch if you have to. >>>>> >>>>>Product lifetime... think about it. >>>> >>>>Changing product requirements? Products getting obsolete? A lot of >>>>people don't realize it but for companies that do software development >>>>the software is the most valuable asset the company owns in terms of >>>>investment. Having to rewrite and retest known-good-code is a huge >>>>waste of money. >>> >>>That is why PICs are so nice, they have been around for ages, >>>Microchip keeps making them, the old architectures are still around >>>after all this time, very easy to add a feature, I just did that yesterday. >>>Unlike some other manufacturers who obsolete architectures and chips on an almost weekly basis. >>>Or have great chips on paper that you cannot buy anywhere however (Xilinx comes to mind), >>>ridiculously expensive if you have to get low quantities,. >>>No foe me PIC anytime, they are the work horse of industry. >>>ARM is just an obscure idea that has been trying to make mainstream for years, and never succeeded. >>>They have good a PR team perhaps. >>>The next step up after a PIC is a x86 mobo for embedded systems. >> >>Then how come it is still not that common in embedded systems. > >The 80186/8 were quite popular in the embedded space. Nice historical note. At the time there was few 16 bit chips for embedded use. The i860 and i960 were also popular for a time; as was/are some 68K derivatives, which are still in common use. |