|----------------| | STOP | | USING | | MICROCHIP | | PICS | | IN | | INTERNET | | CONNECTED | | DEVICES | | | | OK | |----------------| (\__/) || (•ㅅ•) || / づ
-
Literally no metric? Power consumption, DIP availability, analog peripheral selection, cross-platform vendor-supported tooling, interrupt latency, code density, ease of programming, pin remappability, short-run factory programming, code-gen tools, low-cost debuggers...
> cross-platform vendor-supported tooling Since when is "vendor-supported" a positive? PICs have *horrible* C support and the vendor compilers are a complete joke. AVRs have excellent support in gcc. > ease of programming Have you *ever* written PIC asm vs, like, anything else?
-
-
> pin remappability What? At least in my age, you got one (1) pin per special function most of the time, if two clashed, sorry, sucks to be you. Look at modern ARM chips for proper remappability. > short-run factory programming Who cares? Everyone should use in-circuit prog.
-
> low-cost debuggers Seriously, have you tried any other micros? PICs were historically on the *expensive* side of debuggers (ugh ICD2, nevermind the ICE era), until PICkit came along. By then other micros had cheap debuggers too.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.