There is little reason to 'switch', but there are good reasons to
broaden your skills, tools, and experience.  Learning another processor
does not mean giving up on PIC - it simply means more options.

Once the flash microcontroller genie was out of the bottle lots of large
established manufacturers got into the game.  To be quite frank, it
appears that Microchip is falling behind the
price/performance/peripherals/etc curve.

I'm using the MSP430 for an  extremely low power project which would not
be possible using Microchip or Atmel products.  I keep looking at it,
and wondering why I'm still sticking to the PIC?  The JTAG Fet tool
allows full on-chip debugging (much better than the ICD2) even on the
low end chips.  The chips are cheap.  It's a 16 bit processor.  Lots of
neat peripheral enhancements (such as being able to tell the A/D to
capture 16 samples according to the timer.  Retrieve all 16 at once -
you don't have to be interrupted nearly as frequently as with a PIC or
Atmel A/D).

There's no imperative reason to learn a new processor architecture and
set up a new set of tools.  As the cliche goes, though, "If you only
have a hammer you tend to see every problem as a nail."  Eventually
you'll run into a project which would be better/easier with one of these
other processors, but you'll spend as much time hammering a PIC into it
as you would learning a new processor.  You can do nearly anything you
need to do with a hammer, but driving screws and rivets is a lot easier
with a different tool.

Besides, getting started is cheap.  You can get a dev board and JTAG for
Atmel or TI for $50 or so (olimex.com).

There's little reason not to play with them.

-Adam

Byron A Jeff wrote:

>David,
>
>As a longtime Linux user, and a pusher for the newer PIC chips over the 16F84
>I know where you're coming from with alternative technologies. So I'll play
>devil's advocate today coming from the camp of firm entrenchment. In a simple
>question:
>
>Why switch?
>
>BTW a quick look at the Mega-8 there seems to be no comparison. The Mega-8 is
>a much more capable part though it cost less than the 16F88. Specifically is
>has more RAM, runs faster (1 instruction/clock) and cost less though it's in
>a bigger package with more I/O. BTW Is there a similar part in a 20 pin or
>less DIP package?
>
>But back to the discussion. I have 10 years of PIC development and usage
>under my belt. My development environment, languages, programmer, and
>understanding of the infrasructure are all in place. I have parts sitting
>on my desk. In short, I have an investment of time and infrastructure
>getting to this point. So after switching infrastructure where's my win?
>
>I don't have the same problems with PIC and microchip that I have with
>Windows and Microsoft. PICs are capable, low cost, easily available, and
>extremely reliable.  My linux box has all the tools for development and an
>active PIC tool development community thanks to folks like Scott Dattalo,
>Craig Franklin and Wouter can Ooijen (JAL runs fine here thank you very
>much).  I've even put in my two or three pennies.
>
>So while I agree that the ATMEGA is a very capable line of parts and I've
>even found a couple of Linux tools pages like this one:
>
>http://www.theiling.de/avr.html
>
>I have an investment of infrastructure and expertise in a similar line of
>PIC parts. So I ask one last time:
>
>Why switch?
>
>BAJ
>
>--
>http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
>ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.
>
>
>
>
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.