> Doesn't "nanowatt" mean that the chip has a set of features aimed at
> low power operation - switchable clocks, variable WDT, stuff like
> that?  The 12f675 may have very low power consumption, but it
> doesn't have the specific features that make a part "nanowatt"...

Well, I guess it's coming down to semantics. Who, apart from MC
themselves, actually knows what is, or was originally, meant by the
term "nanoWatt". Perhaps they do mean a drastic current reduction
in peripherals. To my mind though, the 12F675 is so close to the
12F683 that it should be classed as nW. Because in truth that is what
it actually consumes. So I don't consider it wrong to call it a nW part.
Some "nW" parts have fewer peripherals than the 12F675. If you don't
use most of those peripherals, as could well be the case, then what
you're left with is base consumption. Whatever, you pick the part that
suits your needs of course, however it's been pigeon-holed

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist