On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 00:50:30 GMT, you wrote: >In message <43BDB7E5.5030601@cotse.net> > Bob Axtell wrote: > >> But it has never shaken my confidence in PIC controllers, and certainly >> time has >> proven me right. PIC controllers are at the heart of some really superb >> products. > >It's no small wonder. In my experience, SX development tools are dire at >best. My ICD2 has never missed a beat, but my SV-TEHS "SX-DEV" SX ICD likes >nothing more than to interrupt a debugging session with a generic >"Communications error". The Microchip stuff "just works". > >Then you have Atmel. "You'll get the chips in about ten weeks, if you're >lucky". And once you do get into production, chances are they'll obsolete them in a few years. In contrast, you can still buy PIC1654XT's if you want to. Their devtools are also a sorry mess. Umpteen different emulation systems depending on the chips being used, mostly using generic FPGA based cores with peripheral emulation tacked on the side using discrete devices that approximate the function of the actual chip. Took them several years to improve their assembler with such "innovative" features as conditional assembly, macros and proper checking of relative branch ranges. Tools are a bit better now (although assembler syntax is still somewhat quirky), but the track record does not look good for the future. -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist