>Did you notice the 18 month leadtime before *samples* were going to be
>available?  This is the hardware equivalent of vapourware.  I mean, if
>Microsoft stated that their next os, lets call it, um, Washington, would run
>on a 386, would support all 95, 98, and NT 5 features, and offer voice
>recognition and be fully object-oriented, but wouldn't have any betas
>available til 1st 1/4 '99, how much credence would you give them?  Given the
>severe lack of info in 'Future Products', I'd write it off as damage
>control...

Please don't misunderstand me, but as I recall Win95 was originally
supposed to ship in '93.

If "Washington" were scheduled for 1Q99, my guess is they're already "95%
done" in Redmond.  (That's 1999 I presume.  If 2099, they're almost done
with specs <G>)

However, given the relatively low complexity of the PIC line, I'd agree
that 18 months means somebody had a jr engr make a wish list based upon AVR
features, had it sanitized by a more sr engr, and then published it as
future products.

Knowing a little about what's really coming, though, makes me sit here
patiently...

Like most of us, I have my own PIC wish list.  It's been shared in several
places.  Anybody check out the new Scenix PIC clone http://www.scenix.com
or http://www.parallaxinc.com

Andy

==================================================================
Andy Kunz - Montana Design - 409 S 6th St - Phillipsburg, NJ 08865
          Hardware & Software for Industry & R/C Hobbies
        "Go fast, turn right, and keep the wet side down!"
==================================================================