Mike has hit the main points. It is easy to prototype and cheap as
there are many variants in the market. At some level Arduino/Atmel=20
does have very good C compiler support. It boils down to your needs.

One off prototyping, Arduino excels. But to some customware like
Nikon IR controller, PIC wins hands down. PIC is easier to count the cycles=
..

I use ATMEL and PIC exchangeably. Still it does not end there. There are ti=
mes when different MCUs are used due to existing system integration. PIC is=
 my choice for new products. Easy to get and the support is decent.=20

John


--- On Sun, 12/19/10, Mike Hord <mike.hord@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Mike Hord <mike.hord@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [OT] Arduino was pointless
> To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <piclist@mit.edu>
> Date: Sunday, December 19, 2010, 9:36 AM
> Wow.
>=20
> Frankly, I can't imagine NOT being able to do something
> with the Arduino.
> The wild ease of use of the IDE, the incredible
> (over?)simplification of the
> C language, library support, shield structure, sample
> projects, wide
> project base and bootloader capacity have made it my go-to
> for quickly
> deploying simple projects.
>=20
> At work, I buy them by the bushel. They go into projects
> that once would
> have used a PC with LabVIEW or costly custom programs.
>=20
> At home, they factor high on my tool list- I can get code
> running and
> parts programmed and interacting with hardware on a
> breadboard so
> much more easily that it has significantly broadened my
> hacking.
>=20
> Microchip really missed the boat on this one- I was (am?) a
> hardcore
> PIC devotee who saw no point in switching to AVR UNTIL the
> Arduino
> came along.=A0 Now, AVR gets all my attention.
>=20
> Mike H.
>=20
> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 3:41 PM, V G <x.solarwind.x@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>=20
> > I bought an Arduino several months ago. I haven't done
> anything at all with
> > it. It feels useless. Everything I've wanted to do, I
> did successfully with
> > a PIC or an MSP430. PIC16 for very simple, easy, low
> level control of
> > stuff,
> > PIC18 for slightly more complicated stuff requiring
> more flash/memory, and
> > PIC32 for everything else, specifically with the
> UBW32. I used MSP430 for
> > very low power stuff (clock, watch, simple
> calculator). I KNOW that putting
> > "MSP430" and "low power" in the same sentence will
> anger SOMEONE on the
> > list
> > as PICs can be just as low power, but it was too easy
> with the MSP430,
> > especially with the $4.30 launchpad. Can't go wrong
> there.
> >
> > Biggest thing for me was the price and availability.
> AVRs are hard to come
> > by and very expensive compared to PICs and MSP430s.
> Also, I like TI and
> > Microchip a lot.
> >
> > End random babbling.
> > --
> > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> > View/change your membership options at
> > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
> >
> --=20
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>=20


     =20

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.