AVR, PIC or ...

Started by Stef Mientki February 25, 2004
I just received the engeneering review from Maxim.
If I only take a look at the pictures,
we should immediatly stop using PICs and AVRs and go for Maxim.
Judge yourself:
  http://pdfserv.maxim-ic.com/en/ej/MER_3.pdf

Stef Mientki

This looks good what kind's of programming languages can you use??
----- Original Message -----
From: Stef Mientki
To: p...@yahoogroups.com ; pic microcontroller discussion list ; JAL-list
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 4:37 PM
Subject: [piclist] AVR, PIC or ..

I just received the engeneering review from Maxim.
If I only take a look at the pictures,
we should immediatly stop using PICs and AVRs and go for Maxim.
Judge yourself:
  http://pdfserv.maxim-ic.com/en/ej/MER_3.pdf

Stef Mientkito unsubscribe, go to http://www.yahoogroups.com and follow the instructions
--- In , Stef Mientki <s.mientki@m...> wrote:
> I just received the engeneering review from Maxim.
> If I only take a look at the pictures,
> we should immediatly stop using PICs and AVRs and go for Maxim.
> Judge yourself:
> http://pdfserv.maxim-ic.com/en/ej/MER_3.pdf
>
> Stef Mientki


Microchip put out a comparison of the two chips and ignored all the
strong points of the AVR and any bad points of the PIC.

Each can do some things the other cannot, or has some other benefits.

Programming is with C or Basic or Asm like most micros.

Bottom line is that it is just another tool and one should have the
tools to do the job.

Dave



I agree with Dave. It all depends on your needs.
--- Dave Mucha <> wrote:
> --- In , Stef Mientki
> <s.mientki@m...> wrote:
> > I just received the engeneering review from Maxim.
> > If I only take a look at the pictures,
> > we should immediatly stop using PICs and AVRs and
> go for Maxim.
> > Judge yourself:
> > http://pdfserv.maxim-ic.com/en/ej/MER_3.pdf
> >
> > Stef Mientki > Microchip put out a comparison of the two chips and
> ignored all the
> strong points of the AVR and any bad points of the
> PIC.
>
> Each can do some things the other cannot, or has
> some other benefits.
>
> Programming is with C or Basic or Asm like most
> micros.
>
> Bottom line is that it is just another tool and one
> should have the
> tools to do the job.
>
> Dave >


__________________________________



Heh heh, reminds me of "lies, damned lies and benchmarks".

Seriously, I welcome Maxim to the fray but have faint hopes for
them. Its pretty clear to me that having the best architecture is
meaningless when it comes to broad market success. The computer
world is rife with examples. Microchip isn't the dominant player
because they have the best - far from it. They have a broad
selection (vast, more like it), incredibly broad range of development
tools and a brilliant "let 1000000 flowers bloom" philosophy.

So when I see some one touting their "beats all comers" micro, I look
for the section on support, sampling, cost of entry, sw dev tools,
proto boards, ... If that's not at least half of their
pitch, "NEXT!".

--- In , "Dave Mucha" <davemucha@j...> wrote:
> --- In , Stef Mientki <s.mientki@m...> wrote:
> > I just received the engeneering review from Maxim.
> > If I only take a look at the pictures,
> > we should immediatly stop using PICs and AVRs and go for Maxim.
> > Judge yourself:
> > http://pdfserv.maxim-ic.com/en/ej/MER_3.pdf
> >
> > Stef Mientki > Microchip put out a comparison of the two chips and ignored all the
> strong points of the AVR and any bad points of the PIC.
>
> Each can do some things the other cannot, or has some other
benefits.
>
> Programming is with C or Basic or Asm like most micros.
>
> Bottom line is that it is just another tool and one should have the
> tools to do the job.
>
> Dave





I have not found any hardware specs. Instruction set is only 1/2 of a
microcontroller. How much glue is required? --- Dave Mucha <> wrote:
> --- In , Stef Mientki <s.mientki@m...> wrote:
> > I just received the engeneering review from Maxim.
> > If I only take a look at the pictures,
> > we should immediatly stop using PICs and AVRs and go for Maxim.
> > Judge yourself:
> > http://pdfserv.maxim-ic.com/en/ej/MER_3.pdf
> >
> > Stef Mientki > Microchip put out a comparison of the two chips and ignored all the
> strong points of the AVR and any bad points of the PIC.
>
> Each can do some things the other cannot, or has some other benefits.
>
> Programming is with C or Basic or Asm like most micros.
>
> Bottom line is that it is just another tool and one should have the
> tools to do the job.
>
> Dave >


=====
My software has no bugs. Only undocumented features.

__________________________________



> So when I see some one touting their "beats all comers" micro, I look
> for the section on support, sampling, cost of entry, sw dev tools,
> proto boards, ... If that's not at least half of their
> pitch, "NEXT!".

Just imagine how popular the PICs would be noew if AN598 (the mother of
all parallel-port PIC programmers) had never been available.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products




yup yup yup. With out this sort of support, the PIC would just be
another wierd also-ran micro in the dust bin like the COP or various
NEC micros. Low cost of entry does not just mean hobbiest. when an
engineer can try something out with out cutting a purchase request
and getting layers of mgt sign it there is a strong chance that it
will wind up in a design.

--- In , "Wouter van Ooijen" <wouter@v...>
wrote:
> > So when I see some one touting their "beats all comers" micro, I
look
> > for the section on support, sampling, cost of entry, sw dev
tools,
> > proto boards, ... If that's not at least half of their
> > pitch, "NEXT!".
>
> Just imagine how popular the PICs would be noew if AN598 (the
mother of
> all parallel-port PIC programmers) had never been available.
>
> Wouter van Ooijen
>
> -- -------
> Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
> consultancy, development, PICmicro products





> yup yup yup. With out this sort of support, the PIC would just be
> another wierd also-ran micro in the dust bin like the COP or various
> NEC micros. Low cost of entry does not just mean hobbiest. when an
> engineer can try something out with out cutting a purchase request
> and getting layers of mgt sign it there is a strong chance that it
> will wind up in a design.

And (referring to Maxim/Dallas policy of free samples but (often) no
chips for sale): the fact that a chip can actually be bought,
preferrable around the corner but otherwise over the internet will do,
is also important!

A customer asked me for some Cypress chips. I contacted the distributor,
I expected to pay and get the chips. No, no, you have to sign up a
customer request form, we will research your credit record, and then
maybe you can be a customer. Paying in advance was not an option. A few
weeks later the customer decided to buy from DigiKey. Some more weeks
later I still have no confirmation of being an accepted customer with
the distributor :( Exit Cypress untill I realy need one of their chips.
Funny: I have a box of pSOC samples, generously sent by a guy who tried
to make me build a Jal and/or programmer for these chips. But what use
are samples, Jal or a programmer when you can't easily buy the chips in
real numbers?

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products



I sure hope Maxim/Dallas is listening to this. I went to their site
and could not find a *SINGLE* reference to the MaxQ architecture.
Search came up empty. nothing in new products or "news". Unless
maxq is just an 8051 retread. this is inspite ot the pdf in the
original post coming off of the maxim site. Not a very good sign.

Hey, maxq product manager - get on the ball. put the doc's on your
web site. provide simple to copy designs. send me an EV Kit (hell,
I throw in some free consulting for you). show me how to build an el
cheapo programmer. sow the seeds and the flowers will bloom.

Oh, yeah, one other thing - release dip versions. they are very easy
to prototype with.

--- In , "Wouter van Ooijen" <wouter@v...>
wrote:
> > yup yup yup. With out this sort of support, the PIC would just
be
> > another wierd also-ran micro in the dust bin like the COP or
various
> > NEC micros. Low cost of entry does not just mean hobbiest. when
an
> > engineer can try something out with out cutting a purchase
request
> > and getting layers of mgt sign it there is a strong chance that
it
> > will wind up in a design.
>
> And (referring to Maxim/Dallas policy of free samples but (often) no
> chips for sale): the fact that a chip can actually be bought,
> preferrable around the corner but otherwise over the internet will
do,
> is also important!
>
> A customer asked me for some Cypress chips. I contacted the
distributor,
> I expected to pay and get the chips. No, no, you have to sign up a
> customer request form, we will research your credit record, and then
> maybe you can be a customer. Paying in advance was not an option. A
few
> weeks later the customer decided to buy from DigiKey. Some more
weeks
> later I still have no confirmation of being an accepted customer
with
> the distributor :( Exit Cypress untill I realy need one of their
chips.
> Funny: I have a box of pSOC samples, generously sent by a guy who
tried
> to make me build a Jal and/or programmer for these chips. But what
use
> are samples, Jal or a programmer when you can't easily buy the
chips in
> real numbers?
>
> Wouter van Ooijen
>
> -- -------
> Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
> consultancy, development, PICmicro products