On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Mike Singer wrote:

> Jinx wrote:
> >
> > Apart from the tx, everything else is pretty much sorted. A couple of
> > days ago someone mentioned the 340 as a better choice for a very
> > low-power sleeping micro. Is that true it's better than the PIC ?
> >
>
> You mean TI MSP430? I think Dale Botkin would be quite
> right not to encourage this sort of question. He is not paid
> by us. (Or he is paid not by us). Spending his time supporting
> PICs he would expect us "Take It or Leave It".

Quite the contrary, I use PICs but it's not a religion or anything.  The
only reason I stick to PICs exclusively is pure laziness & cheapness - I
can get them from several sources dirt cheap, and development tools are
cheap or free (and I already own them).  If I could program other devices
without investing time and money into new tools, I'd try them - assuming
they do something I need that the PIC won't.

Anyway, I don't object to the discussion of non-PIC processors at all, as
long as the messages are properly tagged and it doesn't turn into a mini
non-PIC list long term.  And I'm employed in a non-PIC-using role, my PIC
use is for hobby and the occasional hired job.  I just admin the list for
fun.

Dale

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads