> I really have a hard time imagining the ARM taking over much of
> the "deep embedded" space (where the finished device doesn't at
> all resemble a computer.)  The chips are too ... inconvenient.

what is inconvenient? packaging, voltage levels, architecture?

> Yeah, the ARM might take over from bigger 16bit chips; things
> like MP3 plays and so on where the CPU power is worth the extra
> infrastructure...
> OTOH, I don't know whether one needs a PIC24 or AVR32 there either.
> I can't see 8-bit controllers disappearing...

It's not one or the other, there is a broad spectrum of (deeply)
embedded applications. When chip price (and maybe long-term
availability!) is important IMHO PIC-12 and PIC-14 are here to stay. I
am not so sure about pic-18, pic-24, and mega-AVR, who are in the same
price region as low-end ARMs and can't deliver the same horsepower.

Think of a low-end ARM as an SX at 60 MHz but with 32-bit instructions,
more RAM, no banking, lots of peripherals, lots of development tools,
JTAG debugging interface, build-in bootloader, etc etc.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: www.voti.nl/hvu
 

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