Single-Source PIC, AVR & Alternatives

Tim Wescott wrote:

> I am currently working with a client who is designing a PIC
> microprocessor into his system.  It may be too late to change, but I am
> being reminded of all the drawbacks to writing software for the PIC.
>
> I heard from a committed PIC booster that "yes, the architecture sucks
> for programming, but the PIC never has delivery problems".  Choosing a
> processor that my client couldn't get down the road would trump any pain
> I may experience with less than beautiful code.
>
> Does anyone have experience with alternatives to the PIC (and 8051
> derivatives) that show that this is not a problem?  The ones that come
> to my mind the soonest are the AVR and the MSP430xxx lines, although I'm
> sure that there are German and Japanese alternatives as well.  The story
> I heard about delivery problems was specifically about "Atmel doesn't
> understand that it's single-source".
>
> Thanks in advance.

Rule 1. make sure you have enough parts in stock before designing them
in.
Rule 2. make sure you keep it that way once you go into production.

On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 16:02:05 +0000 (GMT), the renowned
paul$@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk (Paul Carpenter) wrote:

>On Saturday, in article
>     <KPCdnY4OvJCVNObYnZ2dnUVZ_v3inZ2d@web-ster.com>
>     tim@seemywebsite.com "Tim Wescott" wrote:
>>Paul Carpenter wrote:
>>> On Saturday, in article
>>>      <uY6dnVbOtoHWc-fYnZ2dnUVZ_rjinZ2d@web-ster.com>
>>>      tim@seemywebsite.com "Tim Wescott" wrote:
>>
>>-- snip --
>>
>>>>But I do understand that you can't walk two feet without tripping over 
>>>>an 8051.
>>> 
>>> My worry is how second sourced you want to be with everytime you turn around
>>> and someone else's version runs on different voltages, pinouts, crystal
>>> spec, clocks per cycle etc..
>>> 
>>> This applies to nearly ALL components. Amazing how many parts are actually
>>> made in one batch and by the time most engineers have got to pre-production
>>> manufacturer decided NOT to make anymore as they were not selling enough.
>>> 
>>I understand that if I want to use a microprocessor with peripherals 
>>that I'm saying goodby to second source.  What I want is to know which 
>>microprocessors companies have the best track records of taking care of 
>>their single-sourced customers.
>
>They are all companies, that just like us have finite resources, some have
>different bias to sectors, there is *NO* magic solution (bar having the
>complete raw materials silicon, gasses, metals to final product under
>your own manufacturing control). The same as there is no magic technological
>bullet that solves problems.
>
>What ever company you deal with, will have problems at some time, even if
>Microchip claim a 4week lead time at max, someone comes along and buys
>most the stock of a particular part you want, will add a 4 week delay
>if you hit that delay at the wrong time.

OTOH, if Sanghe's policy is to build enough excess capacity ahead of
the curve, they are more likely to get there. Their costs will be
higher than if they aim to minimize capital expenses, but they may be
able to gain market share among customers who value availability. Make
sense? They can also *decide* not to take all the availability away
from the smaller customers when a large customer comes along and wants
an unexpectedly large quantity. ie. quote the big guy a bit longer
lead time and not screw the smaller guys. It's a business decision,
free will, not some free market crap. They can do whatever they like--
chips are not some fungible commodity.  



Best regards, 
Spehro Pefhany
-- 
"it's the network..."                          "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

cbarn24050@aol.com wrote:

> 
> Rule 1. make sure you have enough parts in stock before designing them
> in.
> Rule 2. make sure you keep it that way once you go into production.
> 

Those rules are not applicable unless your design is using only 7400s, 
LM358s, MAX232s and resistors of 10k. Even if it is so, there still may 
be the issues with ROHS compliance.

Vladimir Vassilevsky

DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant

http://www.abvolt.com

Tim Wescott wrote:
> I am currently working with a client who is designing a PIC
> microprocessor into his system.  It may be too late to change, but I am
> being reminded of all the drawbacks to writing software for the PIC.
>
> I heard from a committed PIC booster that "yes, the architecture sucks
> for programming, but the PIC never has delivery problems".  Choosing a
> processor that my client couldn't get down the road would trump any pain
> I may experience with less than beautiful code.
>

We have been using a PIC16C54 in a design for about 13 years. We really
should update to the 16F54 (it is slightly cheaper!), but we have not
had any problems getting the original part. From Microchip.

Rocky

Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:
> 
> 
> Tim Wescott wrote:
> 
>> But what I'm curious about is which companies have you had good 
>> experiences with over the years, and which ones have left you feeling 
>> like you'll never be dumb enough to design one of their parts into a 
>> product ever again?
> 
> 
> I would keep myself from Maxim. They make awesome ICs and they are 
> really nice in providing the samples. However when it comes to the 
> production quantities, you are stuck for the unknown time period.
> 
> VLV

Yes, Maxim I already know about.  I don't actually bear scars from their 
policies*, but I do suffer some hearing loss from the cries of anguish 
in neighboring cubes.

* I once sat in a room with a couple of Maxim sales guys who said "we 
never obsolete parts".  I think that's true -- they just don't start 
turning the crank until they have 10000 on order.

-- 

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Posting from Google?  See http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/

"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" came out in April.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html

Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> wrote:

>I am currently working with a client who is designing a PIC 
>microprocessor into his system.  It may be too late to change, but I am 
>being reminded of all the drawbacks to writing software for the PIC.
>
>I heard from a committed PIC booster that "yes, the architecture sucks 
>for programming, but the PIC never has delivery problems".  Choosing a 
>processor that my client couldn't get down the road would trump any pain 
>I may experience with less than beautiful code.

Choosing a processor which can run 'standard' C code will make life a
lot easier in the long run (for example: when moving to a new CPU
after a few years).

>Does anyone have experience with alternatives to the PIC (and 8051 
>derivatives) that show that this is not a problem?  The ones that come 
>to my mind the soonest are the AVR and the MSP430xxx lines, although I'm 
>sure that there are German and Japanese alternatives as well.  The story 
>I heard about delivery problems was specifically about "Atmel doesn't 
>understand that it's single-source".

Picking something that is carried by 'next day delivery companies'
(Digikey and Farnell to name a few) is usually safe. You can also look
at the STR7 series from SGS-Thompson.

-- 
Reply to nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.)
Bedrijven en winkels vindt U op www.adresboekje.nl

On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 16:23:59 GMT, Vladimir Vassilevsky
<antispam_bogus@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>Tim Wescott wrote:
>
>> But what I'm curious about is which companies have you had good 
>> experiences with over the years, and which ones have left you feeling 
>> like you'll never be dumb enough to design one of their parts into a 
>> product ever again?
>
>I would keep myself from Maxim. They make awesome ICs and they are 
>really nice in providing the samples. However when it comes to the 
>production quantities, you are stuck for the unknown time period.
>
>VLV

FedEx Truck Containing Maxim Parts Hijacked in Philippines

http://www.maxim-ic.com/company/hijackedparts/

Hope Fedex had a lojack installed in the truck.

"Tim Wescott" <tim@seemywebsite.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:INKdneSyzuED9-HYnZ2dnUVZ_t2tnZ2d@web-ster.com...
> Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:
> >
> >
> > Tim Wescott wrote:
> >
> >> But what I'm curious about is which companies have you had good
> >> experiences with over the years, and which ones have left you feeling
> >> like you'll never be dumb enough to design one of their parts into a
> >> product ever again?
> >
> >
> > I would keep myself from Maxim. They make awesome ICs and they are
> > really nice in providing the samples. However when it comes to the
> > production quantities, you are stuck for the unknown time period.
> >
> > VLV
>
> Yes, Maxim I already know about.  I don't actually bear scars from their
> policies*, but I do suffer some hearing loss from the cries of anguish
> in neighboring cubes.
>
> * I once sat in a room with a couple of Maxim sales guys who said "we
> never obsolete parts".  I think that's true -- they just don't start
> turning the crank until they have 10000 on order.

Try MAX038 !

- Henry

--
www.ehydra.dyndns.info

Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> writes:

> I am currently working with a client who is designing a PIC
> microprocessor into his system.  It may be too late to change, but I
> am being reminded of all the drawbacks to writing software for the
> PIC.
>
> I heard from a committed PIC booster that "yes, the architecture sucks
> for programming, but the PIC never has delivery problems".  Choosing a
> processor that my client couldn't get down the road would trump any
> pain I may experience with less than beautiful code.
>
> Does anyone have experience with alternatives to the PIC (and 8051
> derivatives) that show that this is not a problem?  The ones that come
> to my mind the soonest are the AVR and the MSP430xxx lines, although
> I'm sure that there are German and Japanese alternatives as well.  The
> story I heard about delivery problems was specifically about "Atmel
> doesn't understand that it's single-source".

Unless the application is cost sensitive, nowadays I use an ARM7
variant for most things (e.g. LPC2000, AT91, ADUC7000, see
<http://www.gnuarm.com/ArmDevices_frame.html>.

If it is cost sensitive, perhaps one of the low-end AVRs.

All the above have good gcc support, and seem to be easily available
from e.g. Digikey.

-- 

John Devereux

John Devereux wrote:
> Unless the application is cost sensitive, nowadays I use an ARM7
> variant for most things (e.g. LPC2000, AT91, ADUC7000, see
> <http://www.gnuarm.com/ArmDevices_frame.html>.
>
> If it is cost sensitive, perhaps one of the low-end AVRs.
>
> All the above have good gcc support, and seem to be easily available
> from e.g. Digikey.

Heck, I recently had an AVR designed out in favor of an ARM7, initially
because of the price advantage of the SAM7S64 vs. the ATmega128, but
once we compared in detail the SAM7 also used less power at the same
clock speed!  

I am surprised that no one else recommended an ARM.