In SX Microcontrollers, SX/B Compiler and SX-Key Tool, dkemppai wrote: [quote="Guenther Daubach"] William, I think it was not an easy job for Ken publishing the problems concerning the SX52 packaging in the forum. On the other hand (and I hope I'm posting this on the behave of the majority of the SX user's community), I'm thankful that Ken did give us this information in time. [/quote] [2] I don't agree that the warning was in time. Unfortunately, I've been designing with the SX52 believing that the SX52 will be around for a long time. At least, according to what parallax had been saying, the change to parallax production would be transparent. Having to drop, or being forced to drop the SX52 is not a transparent change. [/2] Quote this web page (still on the parallax site as of Nov 2, 2005): [url=http://www.parallax.com/sx/sx_update.asp]http://www.parallax.com/sx/sx_update.asp[/url] "Parallax SX part numbers will stay the same, as shown below. " [2] I'm not upset about the SX52 going away per-se. But rather Parallax's handling of informing us of such a change. Now, I have to go to some of my customers, who I assured the SX52 would be around, and inform them that they will have to pay to redesign products that have been designed and redo circuit boards and that have been bought and paid for. If the production of the SX52 had not been guaranteed at the time of the Parallax announcement to take over production, why were we informed (or not informed) of the difficulties and possibility of the 52 package going away? [/2] -Dan ---------- End of Message ---------- You can view the post on-line at: http://forums.parallax.com/forums/default.aspx?f=7&p=2&m=94091#m94379 Need assistance? Send an email to the Forum Administrator at forumadmin@parallax.com The Parallax Forums are powered by dotNetBB Forums, copyright 2002-2005 (http://www.dotNetBB.com)