On 1/30/06, Bob Axtell wrote: > > I am not sure you should. The "C" chips are more rugged, the EEPROM > section actually works without dropping bits, and the 'C's are less > susceptible to EMI. I totally agree that the "C" chips are more rugged. We used 16C72A and 16C621A/662A and other "C" chips in previous designs and they have better EMC performance than the newer chips like PIC16F819. > Production cut? > It would kill a LOT of Microchip's income, so I doubt it will happen > anytime soon. A lot of the automotive companies are using the 16C parts and Microchip will not cut the production for those parts. My 16C72A based design has been running for 5 years and I will count on Microchip to supply it for another 5 years or more. Of course, the flash parts are recommended in the new designs. PS+ clones will be a good choice to program C based chips. Simple programmers also supports many C parts using software like WinPIC 800. But PIC14000 is a rare specie so that I am not sure about any software which supports it. Regards, Xiaofan -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist