While trying to find an LCD to hook up to my msp430, I came accross the softbaugh.com site and my jaw dropped when I read the article: TI Validates MSP430 Flight!...

Are there any grounds of truth behind that statement or are they only blowing steam?

Any takes on that?

Thanks for your input.

A

------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Hi,

> While trying to find an LCD to hook up to my msp430, I came accross the
> softbaugh.com site and my jaw dropped when I read the article: TI
> Validates MSP430 Flight!...

No, I believe there are other circumstances. TI didn't "validate"
SoftBaugh moving to STM32 (or Cortex-M3). And a bit of bile about being
delisted as a tool vendor on TI's website means nothing. They threatened
us with tool delisting just because we decided not up upgrade some of our
JTAG adapters with new firmware for new devices because new device support
wouldn't fit. So I told them that it would be just fine to delist us in
that category. Tom's product does not support newer MSP devices, so I
suspect that is the reason for the delisting. We support lots of
non-MSP430 devices and TI have absolutely no problem with us supporting
competitor devices and being listed as an MSP430 3P provider.

> Are there any grounds of truth behind that statement or are they only
> blowing steam?

TI did purchase Luminary to get Cortex-M3, but they did have Cortex-M3
devices in house already. Luminary made a great splash and had good
support; whether this translates in the move to TI has yet to pan out.

-- Paul.
------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Why is using a STM32 a Green design and using s MSP430 not a Green
design? I ask this question as this seems to be one of the reasons Tom
Baugh favors the STM32 over a MSP430.

Howard

Paul Curtis wrote
> Hi,
>
>
>> While trying to find an LCD to hook up to my msp430, I came accross the
>> softbaugh.com site and my jaw dropped when I read the article: TI
>> Validates MSP430 Flight!...
>>
>
> No, I believe there are other circumstances. TI didn't "validate"
> SoftBaugh moving to STM32 (or Cortex-M3). And a bit of bile about being
> delisted as a tool vendor on TI's website means nothing. They threatened
> us with tool delisting just because we decided not up upgrade some of our
> JTAG adapters with new firmware for new devices because new device support
> wouldn't fit. So I told them that it would be just fine to delist us in
> that category. Tom's product does not support newer MSP devices, so I
> suspect that is the reason for the delisting. We support lots of
> non-MSP430 devices and TI have absolutely no problem with us supporting
> competitor devices and being listed as an MSP430 3P provider.
>
>
>> Are there any grounds of truth behind that statement or are they only
>> blowing steam?
>>
>
> TI did purchase Luminary to get Cortex-M3, but they did have Cortex-M3
> devices in house already. Luminary made a great splash and had good
> support; whether this translates in the move to TI has yet to pan out.
>
> -- Paul.
> ------------------------------------

______________________________
Stellaris® MCU Family: New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:21:41 +0100, Howard Hansen wrote:

> Why is using a STM32 a Green design and using s MSP430 not a Green
> design?

There is no reason. MSP430 is more energy-efficient than STM32.

> I ask this question as this seems to be one of the reasons Tom
> Baugh favors the STM32 over a MSP430.

If you want an energy-efficient 32-bit micro, then STM32 isn't exactly a
great choice. The two "mainstream" contenders that I know about which are
due for introduction this year are the Energy Micro EFM32 (Cortex-M3 like
the STM32) and the NXP LPC1100 (Cortex-M0).

I believe either would be better than the STM32, but the STM32 is here In
Real Life rather than on a roadmap.

-- Paul.
------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Paul I thank you for your reply. However, I was wondering if there was
something more to this green design pitch than energy efficiency. Like
using solar panels to charge the power supply battery or using non toxic
chemicals when fabricating the chip.

Howard
Paul Curtis wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:21:41 +0100, Howard Hansen wrote:
>
>
>> Why is using a STM32 a Green design and using s MSP430 not a Green
>> design?
>>
>
> There is no reason. MSP430 is more energy-efficient than STM32.
>
>
>> I ask this question as this seems to be one of the reasons Tom
>> Baugh favors the STM32 over a MSP430.
>>
>
> If you want an energy-efficient 32-bit micro, then STM32 isn't exactly a
> great choice. The two "mainstream" contenders that I know about which are
> due for introduction this year are the Energy Micro EFM32 (Cortex-M3 like
> the STM32) and the NXP LPC1100 (Cortex-M0).
>
> I believe either would be better than the STM32, but the STM32 is here In
> Real Life rather than on a roadmap.
>
> -- Paul.
> ------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Hi,

> Paul I thank you for your reply. However, I was wondering if there was
> something more to this green design pitch than energy efficiency.

I don't think so. I believe Green =3D=3D Designed with the goal of minimiz=
ing
energy consumption.

> Like using solar panels to charge the power supply battery
> or using non toxic chemicals when fabricating the chip.

I would think the STM32 is much like any other chip, I don't think they'd
refit a fab just to claim "greenness", but what do I know? ST are not in
the best shape, like so many in the industry...

--
Paul Curtis, Rowley Associates Ltd=A0=A0 http://www.rowley.co.uk
CrossWorks V2 is out for LPC1700, LPC3100, LPC3200, SAM9, and more!

------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Nothing at all. Tom decided to support the STM32 more than the MSP430,
Ti delisted him, it seems he got a snot on with Ti and has been vocally
downplaying the MSP430 and the importance of low power ever since, while
pushing his companies books. His major claim is that the MSP is only of
use if you need ultra low power, and if you don't absolutely need ultra
low power then you might as well use the STM32, which his company has
written several books about and can sell you lots of tools and kits for.
Of course this is absolute bullshit. There are many reasons to choose
any given micro. I happen to like the peripheral set of the very tiny
parts, for example. I haven't found a 20 pin STM32 that can let me build
a wireless transceiver in 1cm squared for example. Most devices these
days are Rohs compatible. Tom just has his knickers in a twist with Ti I
think.

Cheers
Al

Howard Hansen wrote:
> Paul I thank you for your reply. However, I was wondering if there was
> something more to this green design pitch than energy efficiency. Like
> using solar panels to charge the power supply battery or using non toxic
> chemicals when fabricating the chip.
>
> Howard
> Paul Curtis wrote:
>> On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:21:41 +0100, Howard Hansen wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Why is using a STM32 a Green design and using s MSP430 not a Green
>>> design?
>>>
>> There is no reason. MSP430 is more energy-efficient than STM32.
>>
>>
>>> I ask this question as this seems to be one of the reasons Tom
>>> Baugh favors the STM32 over a MSP430.
>>>
>> If you want an energy-efficient 32-bit micro, then STM32 isn't exactly a
>> great choice. The two "mainstream" contenders that I know about which are
>> due for introduction this year are the Energy Micro EFM32 (Cortex-M3 like
>> the STM32) and the NXP LPC1100 (Cortex-M0).
>>
>> I believe either would be better than the STM32, but the STM32 is here In
>> Real Life rather than on a roadmap.
>>
>> -- Paul.
>> ------------------------------------

______________________________
Stellaris® MCU Family: New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 02:03 +0100, Paul Curtis wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > While trying to find an LCD to hook up to my msp430, I came accross the
> > softbaugh.com site and my jaw dropped when I read the article: TI
> > Validates MSP430 Flight!...
>
> No, I believe there are other circumstances. TI didn't "validate"
> SoftBaugh moving to STM32 (or Cortex-M3). And a bit of bile about being
> delisted as a tool vendor on TI's website means nothing. They threatened
> us with tool delisting just because we decided not up upgrade some of our
> JTAG adapters with new firmware for new devices because new device support
> wouldn't fit. So I told them that it would be just fine to delist us in
> that category. Tom's product does not support newer MSP devices, so I
> suspect that is the reason for the delisting. We support lots of
> non-MSP430 devices and TI have absolutely no problem with us supporting
> competitor devices and being listed as an MSP430 3P provider.
>
> > Are there any grounds of truth behind that statement or are they only
> > blowing steam?
>
> TI did purchase Luminary to get Cortex-M3, but they did have Cortex-M3
> devices in house already. Luminary made a great splash and had good
> support; whether this translates in the move to TI has yet to pan out.
>
> -- Paul.
> ------------------------------------
Hi Paul,

> suspect that is the reason for the delisting. We support lots of
> non-MSP430 devices and TI have absolutely no problem with us supporting
> competitor devices and being listed as an MSP430 3P provider.

Lucky you :-)
When Chipcon approached me in 2001 to become a design partner, TI seemed to be a bit
sore all right (being listed as a 3P myself). I almost landed in a "it's one or the other scenario".
(But that was Chipcon actually, they wanted me to "dump" TI... )
I ended up not signing up with Chipcon. In the long run, no problem of course, since TI bought Chipcon anyway...
Still bizarre though, considering I was also listed as 3P with Microchip and Atmel, none of those 3 parties
(incl. TI) were bothered by that...

Best regards,
Kris
--
Best regards,
Kris
------------------------------------



(You need to be a member of msp430 -- send a blank email to msp430-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )