Lynn Richardson <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU> wrote:

> I can't imagine Microchip's product development being constrained to
> creating only new parts still programmable by the Plus.  No money in
> it.

    How do you figure, Lynn?

> If I was calling the shots at Mchip, I'd confine the programming
> support products to the lowest common denominator, DOS programs
> running on XTs with 256k ram and a floppy disk drive, programming
> adaptors on the printer port and still compatible with W95.

    Good thing you're not.

> Another thing I'd do is look at gearing up for masked part
> production ability.  There's no upward migration path at Mchip when
> my quantities are getting obscene.  If I can save $1.50 per part at
> 20000 pcs/yr and mask tooling charges are only $3000-$4000, I can
> easily justify the redesign/program costs to use another brand's
> masked chip.

    Microchip has been offering mask-ROM programming for years and
    years.  20K pieces per year, however, aren't what anyone would
    call "obscene" quantities.

> other companies with good products have gone belly up.  Don't want
> to see it happen to Mchip.

    Don't worry; it won't.

    -Andy

=== Andrew Warren - fastfwd@ix.netcom.com                 ===
=== Fast Forward Engineering - Vista, California          ===
===                                                       ===
=== Custodian of the PICLIST Fund -- For more info, see:  ===
=== http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2499/fund.html ===