> But the real driver was the I/O.  The '84 has 13 I/O pins, 12
> of which are
> nothng more than straight I/O, and the remaining one behaves
> like the others
> until you configure it to do something else.  All of the
> newer parts have
> three or four uses per pin.  The prospect of explaining that
> right out of
> the chute to folks who are very, very green with this stuff was not
> appealing.

IMHO the 16F630 is at least as easy as the F84 in this respect, plus you
would not need to explain about a crystal, capacitors, and reset
pull-up. And it is half the price of an F84 or less.

> The widespread availability of ham related '84
> projects also played into it,

Can't argue with that

> but it was really the complexity of the newer
> parts that drove the decision.

It was probably the complexity of the Microchip product line that made
you overlook the simple chips?

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body