ARM7 with longevity of supply

Jim Granville wrote:
> rickman wrote:
> >
> > I don't get your position.  You think the PSOC devices are not of much
> > value and the PLD in the ADUC is a valuable thing?
>
>   No, I think the PSoC is somewhat overhyped, and I observed that
> the hyped elements have been morphing 'simpler', over time, and
> more STD HW blocks are being added (not the opposite trend)
> and gave a recent Cypress PSoC example.

I think you are smoking the weed!  Your "trend" is one new device.  Any
time a significant market exists, it is better to address it with a
dedicated design than a programmable one.  I don't get why you are
criticizing the PSOC.  The fact that they offer other, slightly
different devices does not detract from the PSOCs flexibility.


>   I like the High voltage features of the PSoC device I was quoting.

Ok, so then you like it.


>   All I said of the ADUC was that it has a "small 'PLD'" - just two words.

Yes, two words.  I am saying it is nearly worthless and is not really
useful in this discussion.

>   I will look at the ARM PSoC, when released, as one big drawback of the
> present ones, is the orphan core.

Yes, and the dated, chip based emulator is another drawback.


>   My overall opinion of mixing Microcontrollers and Logic on one "System
> on a Chip" is luke-warm.
>
>   The problem is matching the respective uC:CPLD powers, and tools.
> Anyone remember Triscend ? - or Atmel's FPslic ?

I remember the V2Pro with multiple PowerPC in the FPGA. So clearly the
combination can be a commercial success.

For a lot of the designs I work on, the PSOC concept is perfect.  A
better core would be good, but the peripherals is what the PSOC is
really about.  Heck even chips like the MSP430 are going with more
flexible peripherals. Their newest chips use flexible peripherals that
can be configured for different protocols, similar to the flexibility
of the PSOC.

I think you are going in the wrong direction when you compare the PSOC
to an FPGA or CPLD.  It is more like a flexible peripheral.  Heck the
programming doesn't take Mbits or even Kbits, it is done through a few
registers for each section.

rickman wrote:
> I think you are going in the wrong direction when you compare the PSOC
> to an FPGA or CPLD.  

Let's see - oh, yes, here it is, earlier in this thread... :)

rickman wrote:
> Cypress has been talking to me about their planned ARM parts that will
> have the PSOC peripherals.  That will be an amazing combination, almost
> as good as an MCU and a CPLD!

rickman wrote:
 > It is more like a flexible peripheral.  Heck the
> programming doesn't take Mbits or even Kbits, it is done through a few
> registers for each section.

  A while ago I went looking for the detail, of the claimed 
"programmable" - seems that's actually marketing spin for "configurable".

  Something that is setup thru a few registers is not quite a 
"programmble system on a chip" to me, better called a "configurable 
peripheral".

  I see your words are "flexible peripheral", so we are closer in 
agreement; neither of us uses the Cypress hype "Programmble System on a 
Chip PSoC".

  Can it do something simple, like a quadrature U/D counter ?
Or maybe an IrDA UART ?

-jg