Freescale's new roadmap - 9s12 not looking good?

Oh common. Freescale will never shoot themselves in the foot by just 
"dropping" the HC12 series - they very well know such a move will be
the end 
for them. Customers choose micro processors/controllers based on the 
trustworthyness of the company. For Freescale to just drop the ball on the 
HC12 series will be a disasterous move for them that they know very well - 
please stop the paranoia. Not to mention development tool providers that 
spend hundreds of thousand dollars on the HC12 market.

Rest assure that Freescale would not be that stupid.

Yes, there is a move to 32 bitters but only for the ARM market since it 
provide free dev. tools that  make porting of Linux e TCP/IP stacks easy and 
affordable. Since the future seems to be a TCP/IP stack on each embedded 
micro, a 32 bit seems to be the road to go - at the proverbial 8 bit price.

The road for 8 versus 16 bitters is less clear. There is always the odd 8 
bitter that boast a NEW function that sports some "16 bit" or "32
bit" 
extensions to get ahead of the competition - so why just dont stick to 16 
bits and sell it as a 8 bitter with some "16 bit extensions" .....ha
ha ha.

Seems like the team from India convinced that they can "re-invent" the
micro 
from scratch (and make it better) and that it should have been a RISC 
solution after all. I mean, we can fit so much sram and rom on a micro at 
super clock rates now that, in hinsight cheewiz, a RISC instruction set will 
do the job afterall  -EUREKA!!

On the other hand, if Freescale do drop the HC12 i will drop them for a 
X-scale (Intel) or a ARM 32bit supplier (such as Philips - a big and stable 
company) that support Linux or WindowsCE. For 16 bit solutions i will move 
to another well trusted company TI with their M430 variants.
	----- Original Message ----- 
From: "hc08jb8" <hc08jb8@hc08...>
To: <68HC12@68HC...>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:21 PM
Subject: [68HC12] Re: Freescale's new roadmap - 9s12 not looking good?
	>
> Indeed! The mixed signals are causing worries. I
have a NE64 design
> and possibly looking to use it in a few other designs as well, no one
> seems to know for certain if this is going to stay or dissappear. The
> general opinion seems to be like, use the Coldfire as an upgrade.
>
> The recent supply problems with the S12 hasn't helped much either.
> Given the current situation, Philips LPC or Renesas seem like a
> viable alternative. I would hate to move away from the S12 and I hope
> Freescale comes up with an assuring plan.
>
> Regds
> Jay
>
> --- In 68HC12@68HC..., "Eric Engler" <englere.geo@...>
wrote:
>>
>> --- In 68HC12@68HC..., "edatmot" <edatmot@> wrote:
>>
>> > The S12s are definitely here to stay and will continue to be sold
> and
>> > supported by Freescale into consumer and industrial markets as
> general
>> > purpose products.
>>
>> I'm sure this is true for some time to come, and I certainly
> continue
>> to recommend 9s12 devices because these offer a nice programming
> model
>> and recently introduced members are low-cost and easy to use.
>>
>> But I know that a great deal of attention goes into every word of
>> press releases, and they try to send signals by choosing their words
>> carefully.
>>
>> Since you seem to work for Freescale, can you please tell them that
>> they need to stop sending mixed signals on Coldfire? On one hand,
> they
>> have no forum for Coldfire and third party support for it is waning,
>> but on the other hand they're trying to "talk it up" for
the
> future. I
>> want to see it do well, but the mixed signals have to stop!
> Freescale
>> has to show us they are serious about it, and not just tell us. Why
>> not a forum, and why not a file area? And some more code samples
> that
>> aren't several years old would be good...
>>
>> Eric
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
	

> > He said that ColdFire was pushing down onto the HC12
> > market from the top while the hc08 was
pushing from
> > the Bottom.

The problem with the HC12, IMHO, is that it is way too expensive for
the power it delivers. If you want a low-end chip, you want something
that is very cheap. 

Now, from Freescale's website:

S12DT256 @ 25MHz w/256K FLASH and 12K RAM ~ $13

If you are happy to pay just a bit more:

MAC7101 @ 40MHz w/512K FLASH and 32K RAM ~ $15

or you can go to Philips:

LPC2138 @ 60MHz w/512K FLASH and 32K RAM ~ $9

So why would you use a HC12 with its 16/8-bit architecture running
at 25MHz, struggle with the paged FLASH and all that when you can
have an ARM core with more FLASH and more RAM, linear address space,
supported by every tool company? The new ARM based chips actually
lean heavily even on the 8 bit market, for the LPC2103 with 32K of
FLASH and 8K of RAM is less than $5 (one off) even on DigiKey and 
you can get it for 2.50 in significant quantities - a serious
competitor for a HC08 or an AVR or even for some of the 8051
derivatives out there. An 8-bitter in this world should be less 
than $2 but preferably less than $1 in large quantities. Otherwise 
it is just not worth to use it, to get less computing power for the 
same money. A 16-bit chip would probably be well priced somewhere
around the $5-6 mark but not over $10.

I have always been a Motorola fan and adored their thought-out chips
and all. But I understand that simple economics forces them if not
abandon but at least not to spend much effort to develop further a 
chip that is underpowered and expensive compared to other chips.

Zoltan

Zoltan wrote:

[...]

> The problem with the HC12, IMHO, is that it is way
too expensive for
> the power it delivers. If you want a low-end chip, you want something

100% Ack.

[S12DT256 $13 vs. LPC2138 $9]

Or the low end, LPC2101/2/3 vs. S12GC16, approx. the same ratio.

> So why would you use a HC12 with its 16/8-bit
architecture running
> at 25MHz, struggle with the paged FLASH and all that when you can
> have an ARM core with more FLASH and more RAM, linear address space,
> supported by every tool company? The new ARM based chips actually

The 60MHz LPC2... is not so much faster than a 25MHz S12 and division 
is even slower. It depends on the application.

Probably the ARM7 code is larger than S12 code, you have to take this 
into account when comparing devices. LPC2* still cheaper.

1,8V + 3,6V supply voltage. My "stone age grade" apps often _need_ 5V 
levels, so that's a noticeable disadvantage. At least most I/O is 5V 
tolerant (missing on S08 derivatives!) so I needed only output 
buffers.

The LPC2* have no non-intrusive debugging capability like BDM. For 
me, that's a strong reason, because I have some "hard realtime" 
applications which I can't debug with interrupt driven methods. So I 
needed an emulator...

But all this doesn't justify the much higher prices.

As soon as the application doesn't need 5V and non-intrusive BDM 
debugging, I will check the ARM7 world.

Oliver
-- 
Oliver Betz, Muenchen
	

Eric Engler wrote:

[...]

> This is true, but sad, considering that Coldfire
isn't very popular
> compared to HC12. Here's some examples:
>
>  - Freescale's web site has forums for hc08 and hc12, but not for
> Coldfire.

There is a mailinglist at WildRice.com.

>  - very few companies are making Coldfire
development boards. Ditto
> for third party compilers (although a lot of them claim to support it,
> they aren't making many new releases of the Coldfire tools)

I guess that gcc will produce good code for the Coldfire, while you 
might want to buy Cosmic or Hiware for the HC12 to get the very good 
code.

If there is a market, there will be more BDM solutions.

For me it's worse that the Coldfire has more dedicated pins that the 
S12.

>  - Freescale seems to favor the PowerPC over
Coldfire; a few searches at
> their web site make this clear

I must have been missing the cheap PowerPC microcontroller with 
Flash.

BTW: we didn't talk about 56F8xxx.

[...]

> recent BDM support). The HC12 will wane because of
the RS08. Coldfire

I can't imagine that a further stripped HC08 will be a competition 
for the S12. The S12 is not only fast because he has 24 or 40MHz bus 
clock, but also because of the 16 bit memory interface and the 
instruction set.

Oliver
-- 
Oliver Betz, Muenchen
	

I've thought for years that an HC11F1 with 32K of flash on chip would
have  
been a mega avr killer. There are a few things the hc11 has that the avrs  
dont.... swi, rti, illegal opcode trap, von neuman achetecture so you dont need 

extra const char print librbray functions. It already ran at 20mhz clock... 
darn  avr only runs at 16mhz still.... they havent pushed their 20mhz process 
into  their mega cpus yet....  I bet all you guys would design in a new 32k
flash 
 hc11 next month if it came out wouldnt you?
	
	

Good day Eric,

In response to your comments about the Coldfire, I totally disagree.

> This is true, but sad, considering that Coldfire
isn't very popular
> compared to HC12. Here's some examples:
>

As for popularity, this must be taken with a grain of salt, as the CF is a 
relatively new product compare to the 12.  Remember that the 12's origins 
are with the HC11 which date to the 80s...Obviously a lot of the HC11 
designs migrated to the 12 and so the popularity migrated accordingly.

> - Freescale's web site has forums for hc08
and hc12, but not for
> Coldfire.
>
> - Yahoo has active forums for 6808 and 6812, but not Coldfire

There is a very large and active CF forum located here
http://www.WildRice.com/ColdFire/

It is true that Freescale does not have a dedicated one, but I think the
reason is that the Wildrice is very popular.  In fact many posts are from
Freescale themselves.

> - very few companies are making Coldfire
development boards. Ditto
> for third party compilers (although a lot of them claim to support it,
> they aren't making many new releases of the Coldfire tools)
Again, I think this is false.  There are several vendors who support CF:
http://www.arcturusnetworks.com
http://www.netburner.com
http://www.axman.com
http://www.phytec.com
http://www.emacinc.com/
http://www.steroidmicros.com/
and several others

> I personally like Coldfire, but it seems risky to
use it in new
> designs given its limited popularity at this time.
I again disagree.  Freescale has released so many new CF variances (LCD 
interfaces, etc) in the last year that it is difficult to keep count.  In 
fact, many FAEs I talked to see the CF line to be the dominant growth path 
for Freescale.

Take a look at the MCF5213... This part is priced roughly on par with the 
HC12 and has a lot more functionality, Flash, memory, etc... Not to mention 
a more sophisticated debug environement...

Don't get me wrong, I really like the HC12, but given the functionality and

price points of the CF, most of our and my colleagues designs are migrating 
to the CF.

Cheers,

Sam
	----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eric Engler" <englere.geo@engl...>
To: <68HC12@68HC...>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:09 PM
Subject: [68HC12] Re: Freescale's new roadmap - 9s12 not looking good?
	> --- In 68HC12@68HC..., len burleson <wlenb@...> wrote:
>
>> He said that ColdFire was pushing down onto the HC12
>> market from the top while the hc08 was pushing from
>> the Bottom.
>
> This is true, but sad, considering that Coldfire isn't very popular
> compared to HC12. Here's some examples:
>
> - Freescale's web site has forums for hc08 and hc12, but not for
> Coldfire.
>
> - Yahoo has active forums for 6808 and 6812, but not Coldfire
>
> - very few companies are making Coldfire development boards. Ditto
> for third party compilers (although a lot of them claim to support it,
> they aren't making many new releases of the Coldfire tools)
>
> - Freescale seems to favor the PowerPC over Coldfire; a few searches
> at their web site make this clear
>
> I personally like Coldfire, but it seems risky to use it in new
> designs given its limited popularity at this time.
>
> PowerPC's future is in doubt since the Apple pull-out.
>
> The only 32 bit devices that are booming (aside from x86) is the Arm
> variants. Although Freescale makes Arm devices, they try hard to keep
> it a secret!
>
> In summary, the hcs08 is probably going to wane because of the RS08
> (also terrible because the hcs08 was just coming of age with it's
> recent BDM support). The HC12 will wane because of the RS08. Coldfire
> has been waning for years (although it deserved better), and
> Freescale's Arm efforts are an insider's secret. RS08 is trying
to
> compete with extremely popular chips from Microchip and Atmel, and as
> the new kid on the block it has to play catch-up. Either Freescale has
> to get real serious about Coldfire real quick, or their future will be
> in doubt.
>
> Eric
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
	

--- In 68HC12@68HC..., "Sam Saprunoff" <sams2@...> wrote:

> As for popularity, this must be taken with a grain
of salt, as the
CF is a 
> relatively new product compare to the 12. 
Remember that the 12's
origins 
> are with the HC11 which date to the 80s.

I really don't want to get into a big debate, but Coldfire comes
directly from the mc68000, which came out in the early 80's.

6812 came from the 6811, which came from the 6801, which came from the
6800. So if you want to take this approach the 6800 comes from the
mid-70's (a guy in my micros class in college built one of these in a
shoebox - it was the coolest thing to play with back then).

> There is a very large and active CF forum located
here
> http://www.WildRice.com/ColdFire/

This is good news, but my point is that FREESCALE does not have such a
forum because they think there isn't much interest in 68K/Colfire. At
least that was what the Freescale employee said when someone asked him
why they don't have a Coldfire forum. Granted this was only the
opinion of one employee, but I don't see any serious effort by
Freescale in this regard. 

You might be too young to remember the famous Motorola BBS that was
popular before the Internet became popular. This was largely
responsible for the growth of 6811 and 68k devices back then. They
allowed end-users to upload code to be shared by other users, and that
helped to make the devices popular. Many of us in this forum probably
logged in to that BBS over 1200 or 2400 baud dial-up.

> It is true that Freescale does not have a
dedicated one, but I think the
> reason is that the Wildrice is very popular.  In fact many posts are
from
> Freescale themselves.

Ditto for this forum, but Freescale set up their own hc12 forum, anyway.
 
>  There are several vendors who support CF:
...

How many of these have Coldfire boards that were introduced within the
past 12 months? I'm sure some of them do, but my google searching
showed that most 68K/Coldfire hardware and software in the marketplace
tends to be several years old. I'd love to be wrong on this!

What happened to the cool 68332 chip? It was the best thing going a
few years ago (maybe 5 or 6 - the older I get the faster the calendar
moves for some reason).

> Take a look at the MCF5213... 

I need to do that. It doesn't have any name recognition with me - is
this also something similar to a 68K?

Eric
	

Eric,
 
The MCF5213 is a very new part (appearing late last year). It doesn't
have an external memory interface, but has many of the common
peripherals found in S12 parts. It seemed to me when this part came out
that Freescale had a problem with its own products competing with one
another. This discussion seems to verify that and point in a direction
away from the HC12.
 
For my part, the biggest plus for the HC12 is a wide variety of parts
with useful peripherals and the low cost of development tools. The
biggest negative was that it lacked a "real" 16 bit architecture - to
do
most logical operations and some arithmetic, you are stuck with  a
combination of 8 bit accumulator instructions. If the cost is about the
same, why not work on an architecture that has always had a proper bus
width?
 
Jonathan.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: 68HC12@68HC... [mailto:68HC12@68HC...] On Behalf
Of Eric Engler
Sent: Thursday, 16 March 2006 2:55 PM
To: 68HC12@68HC...
Subject: [68HC12] Re: Freescale's new roadmap - 9s12 not looking good?
 
--- In 68HC12@68HC..., "Sam Saprunoff" <sams2@...> wrote:

> As for popularity, this must be taken with a grain
of salt, as the
CF is a 
> relatively new product compare to the 12. 
Remember that the 12's
origins 
> are with the HC11 which date to the 80s.

I really don't want to get into a big debate, but Coldfire comes
directly from the mc68000, which came out in the early 80's.

6812 came from the 6811, which came from the 6801, which came from the
6800. So if you want to take this approach the 6800 comes from the
mid-70's (a guy in my micros class in college built one of these in a
shoebox - it was the coolest thing to play with back then).

> There is a very large and active CF forum located
here
> http://www.WildRice.com/ColdFire/

This is good news, but my point is that FREESCALE does not have such a
forum because they think there isn't much interest in 68K/Colfire. At
least that was what the Freescale employee said when someone asked him
why they don't have a Coldfire forum. Granted this was only the
opinion of one employee, but I don't see any serious effort by
Freescale in this regard. 

You might be too young to remember the famous Motorola BBS that was
popular before the Internet became popular. This was largely
responsible for the growth of 6811 and 68k devices back then. They
allowed end-users to upload code to be shared by other users, and that
helped to make the devices popular. Many of us in this forum probably
logged in to that BBS over 1200 or 2400 baud dial-up.

> It is true that Freescale does not have a
dedicated one, but I think
the
> reason is that the Wildrice is very popular.  In
fact many posts are
from
> Freescale themselves.

Ditto for this forum, but Freescale set up their own hc12 forum, anyway.

>  There are several vendors who support CF:
...

How many of these have Coldfire boards that were introduced within the
past 12 months? I'm sure some of them do, but my google searching
showed that most 68K/Coldfire hardware and software in the marketplace
tends to be several years old. I'd love to be wrong on this!

What happened to the cool 68332 chip? It was the best thing going a
few years ago (maybe 5 or 6 - the older I get the faster the calendar
moves for some reason).

> Take a look at the MCF5213... 

I need to do that. It doesn't have any name recognition with me - is
this also something similar to a 68K?

Eric
	SPONSORED LINKS 

Fast
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&kt+track&w1t+track&w2=Microco
ntrollers&w3=Technical+support&w4=Intel+microprocessors&w5=Pic+microcont
rollers&c=5&s4&.sig=nA8l9JqNmviNfMI5MX4wNQ>  track 
Microcontrollers
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Microcontrollers&w1t+track&w2=M
icrocontrollers&w3=Technical+support&w4=Intel+microprocessors&w5=Pic+mic
rocontrollers&c=5&s4&.sig=R9keRDMYBnmeZHL4gCczKQ>  
Technical
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Technical+support&w1t+track&w2=
Microcontrollers&w3=Technical+support&w4=Intel+microprocessors&w5=Pic+mi
crocontrollers&c=5&s4&.sig=Sd-HtLKo96IyTEbWeB8nhw>  support 

Intel
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Intel+microprocessors&w1t+track
&w2=Microcontrollers&w3=Technical+support&w4=Intel+microprocessors&w5=Pi
c+microcontrollers&c=5&s4&.sig=VAEnNl74YXlUuN2unFBtsg>
microprocessors 
Pic
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Pic+microcontrollers&w1t+track&
w2=Microcontrollers&w3=Technical+support&w4=Intel+microprocessors&w5=Pic
+microcontrollers&c=5&s4&.sig=qt-XTQmiIr-YEqxb2gGstw>
microcontrollers
	  _____  

>  Terms of Service. 
 
  _____
	
	

Hi all,

There are a bunch of us here in Leduc AB, watching this 
forum with great interest !!
We're still in the preliminary evaluation stage, taking 
lots of notes & trying to figure out what type of cpu to 
use in our future generations of instrumentation.

Haven't spent any "company money" yet... although our 
administrator is itching to go & says he has a 10K budget 
for something :)

Please continue... any and all thoughts are most 
fascinating !!
For whatever my thoughts are worth...

Kindest regards all,
JP

> On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 03:55:10 -0000
> "Eric Engler" <englere.geo@engl...> wrote:
>    --- In 68HC12@68HC..., "Sam Saprunoff" 
><sams2@...> wrote:
> 
> > As for popularity, this must be taken with a grain of 
>salt, as the
> CF is a 
> > relatively new product compare to the 12.  Remember 
>that the 12's
> origins 
> > are with the HC11 which date to the 80s.
> 
> I really don't want to get into a big debate, but 
>Coldfire comes
> directly from the mc68000, which came out in the early 
>80's.
> 
> 6812 came from the 6811, which came from the 6801, which 
>came from the
> 6800. So if you want to take this approach the 6800 
>comes from the
> mid-70's (a guy in my micros class in college built one 
>of these in a
> shoebox - it was the coolest thing to play with back 
>then).
> 
> > There is a very large and active CF forum located here
> > http://www.WildRice.com/ColdFire/
> 
> This is good news, but my point is that FREESCALE does 
>not have such a
> forum because they think there isn't much interest in 
>68K/Colfire. At
> least that was what the Freescale employee said when 
>someone asked him
> why they don't have a Coldfire forum. Granted this was 
>only the
> opinion of one employee, but I don't see any serious 
>effort by
> Freescale in this regard. 
> 
> You might be too young to remember the famous Motorola 
>BBS that was
> popular before the Internet became popular. This was 
>largely
> responsible for the growth of 6811 and 68k devices back 
>then. They
> allowed end-users to upload code to be shared by other 
>users, and that
> helped to make the devices popular. Many of us in this 
>forum probably
> logged in to that BBS over 1200 or 2400 baud dial-up.
> 
> > It is true that Freescale does not have a dedicated 
>one, but I think the
> > reason is that the Wildrice is very popular.  In fact 
>many posts are
> from
> > Freescale themselves.
> 
> Ditto for this forum, but Freescale set up their own 
>hc12 forum, anyway.
>  
> >  There are several vendors who support CF:
> ...
> 
> How many of these have Coldfire boards that were 
>introduced within the
> past 12 months? I'm sure some of them do, but my google 
>searching
> showed that most 68K/Coldfire hardware and software in 
>the marketplace
> tends to be several years old. I'd love to be wrong on 
>this!
> 
> What happened to the cool 68332 chip? It was the best 
>thing going a
> few years ago (maybe 5 or 6 - the older I get the faster 
>the calendar
> moves for some reason).
> 
> > Take a look at the MCF5213... 
> 
> I need to do that. It doesn't have any name recognition 
>with me - is
> this also something similar to a 68K?
> 
> Eric
>
	

Irrespective of HCS12's roadmap, Coldfire seems to be the recomended 
upward path should one need more juice or 32-bits for some reason, 
especially the newer low cost MC52xx. Is this because of the cost 
reason? Freescale also seem to have some ARM9s (i.MXS) around the 
same price point, but these are targetted at PDA and personal 
entertainment devices. So was the infamous Dragonball during its 
days, but it was still used in some of the IP telephony and I/O 
controller designs. If given a choice between ColdFire and the ARM9s 
which would be a safe bet?

Regds
Jay

--- In 68HC12@68HC..., "Jonathan Masters" <jon@...> wrote:
>
> Eric,
>  
> The MCF5213 is a very new part (appearing late last year). It 
doesn't
> have an external memory interface, but has many of
the common
> peripherals found in S12 parts. It seemed to me when this part came 
out
> that Freescale had a problem with its own products
competing with 
one
> another. This discussion seems to verify that and
point in a 
direction
> away from the HC12.
>  
> For my part, the biggest plus for the HC12 is a wide variety of 
parts
> with useful peripherals and the low cost of
development tools. The
> biggest negative was that it lacked a "real" 16 bit architecture
- 
to do
> most logical operations and some arithmetic, you
are stuck with  a
> combination of 8 bit accumulator instructions. If the cost is about 
the
> same, why not work on an architecture that has
always had a proper 
bus
> width?
>  
> Jonathan.
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 68HC12@68HC... [mailto:68HC12@68HC...] On 
Behalf
> Of Eric Engler
> Sent: Thursday, 16 March 2006 2:55 PM
> To: 68HC12@68HC...
> Subject: [68HC12] Re: Freescale's new roadmap - 9s12 not looking 
good?
>  
> --- In 68HC12@68HC..., "Sam Saprunoff" <sams2@> wrote:
> 
> > As for popularity, this must be taken with a grain of salt, as the
> CF is a 
> > relatively new product compare to the 12.  Remember that the 12's
> origins 
> > are with the HC11 which date to the 80s.
> 
> I really don't want to get into a big debate, but Coldfire comes
> directly from the mc68000, which came out in the early 80's.
> 
> 6812 came from the 6811, which came from the 6801, which came from 
the
> 6800. So if you want to take this approach the
6800 comes from the
> mid-70's (a guy in my micros class in college built one of these in 
a
> shoebox - it was the coolest thing to play with
back then).
> 
> > There is a very large and active CF forum located here
> > http://www.WildRice.com/ColdFire/
> 
> This is good news, but my point is that FREESCALE does not have 
such a
> forum because they think there isn't much
interest in 68K/Colfire. 
At
> least that was what the Freescale employee said
when someone asked 
him
> why they don't have a Coldfire forum. Granted
this was only the
> opinion of one employee, but I don't see any serious effort by
> Freescale in this regard. 
> 
> You might be too young to remember the famous Motorola BBS that was
> popular before the Internet became popular. This was largely
> responsible for the growth of 6811 and 68k devices back then. They
> allowed end-users to upload code to be shared by other users, and 
that
> helped to make the devices popular. Many of us in
this forum 
probably
> logged in to that BBS over 1200 or 2400 baud
dial-up.
> 
> > It is true that Freescale does not have a dedicated one, but I 
think
> the
> > reason is that the Wildrice is very popular.  In fact many posts 
are
> from
> > Freescale themselves.
> 
> Ditto for this forum, but Freescale set up their own hc12 forum, 
anyway.
> 
> >  There are several vendors who support CF:
> ...
> 
> How many of these have Coldfire boards that were introduced within 
the
> past 12 months? I'm sure some of them do, but
my google searching
> showed that most 68K/Coldfire hardware and software in the 
marketplace
> tends to be several years old. I'd love to be
wrong on this!
> 
> What happened to the cool 68332 chip? It was the best thing going a
> few years ago (maybe 5 or 6 - the older I get the faster the 
calendar
> moves for some reason).
> 
> > Take a look at the MCF5213... 
> 
> I need to do that. It doesn't have any name recognition with me - is
> this also something similar to a 68K?
> 
> Eric
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SPONSORED LINKS 
> 
> Fast
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&kt+track&w1t+track&w2=Microco
> 
ntrollers&w3=Technical+support&w4=Intel+microprocessors&w5=Pic+microco
nt
>
rollers&c=5&s4&.sig=nA8l9JqNmviNfMI5MX4wNQ>  track 
> Microcontrollers
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Microcontrollers&w1t+track&w2=M
> 
icrocontrollers&w3=Technical+support&w4=Intel+microprocessors&w5=Pic+m
ic
>
rocontrollers&c=5&s4&.sig=R9keRDMYBnmeZHL4gCczKQ>  
> Technical
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Technical+support&w1t+track&w2> 
Microcontrollers&w3=Technical+support&w4=Intel+microprocessors&w5=Pic+
mi
>
crocontrollers&c=5&s4&.sig=Sd-HtLKo96IyTEbWeB8nhw>  support 
> 
> Intel
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Intel+microprocessors&w1t+track
> 
&w2=Microcontrollers&w3=Technical+support&w4=Intel+microprocessors&w5Pi
>
c+microcontrollers&c=5&s4&.sig=VAEnNl74YXlUuN2unFBtsg>
> microprocessors 
> Pic
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Pic+microcontrollers&w1t+track&
> 
w2=Microcontrollers&w3=Technical+support&w4=Intel+microprocessors&w5=P
ic
>
+microcontrollers&c=5&s4&.sig=qt-XTQmiIr-YEqxb2gGstw>
> microcontrollers 
>  
>  
>   _____  
> 
> >  Terms of Service. 
>  
>   _____  
> 
> 
> 
> 
>