Interesting I was always under the impression that the Java IDE Netbeans is responsible for these issues.
Eclipse is far faster than Netbeans. MPLABX specifically is extremely slow,
What disappoints me the most is that the 64 pin version is not the same pinout as the 64 pin version of the PIC24. I was looking forward to swap the PIC24 on my Digilent Atlys board in order to give it USB 2 host.
So, a year later, the PIC32MZ EF is available. By the looks of it, they fixed most of the Errata. Do you think it is actually fixed, or they just didnt report all the issues so far? Because I would not dare to touch the old MZ in a hazmat suit?
So, a year later, the PIC32MZ EF is available. By the looks of it, they fixed most of the Errata. Do you think it is actually fixed, or they just didnt report all the issues so far? Because I would not dare to touch the old MZ in a hazmat suit?
The EF is much better (as in it behaves like you'd expect a microchip PIC to behave - i.e. a few, well documented, but not show-stopping bugs). I haven't bumped into anything which hasn't worked right yet. I'm pretty close to shipping a new product with the EF in it and don't have any microcontroller concerns at this point. The EC, well that was an entirely different story.
With atmel giving end of life notices on some avr32, I assume the pic32 isn't too far behind.
The Cortex-M8 and A35 were just recently announced, and the A53 is in a higher performance class.
Cortex-M8? When was this announced?
Cortex-M8? When was this announced? Do you mean the R8?
Assuming you are using Harmony how are you finding it nowadays?
With atmel giving end of life notices on some avr32, I assume the pic32 isn't too far behind.
With atmel giving end of life notices on some avr32, I assume the pic32 isn't too far behind.
Microchip doesn't EOL anything. Well very much of anything.
Try to get a pic1650, 1654, 1656, 1663, 1664, 1670
"Microchip doesn't EOL anything. Well very much of anything."
Those are quite contradictory to each other.
Try to get a pic1650, 1654, 1656, 1663, 1664, 1670, etc. From Microchip would be quite difficult, I assume,
"Microchip doesn't EOL anything. Well very much of anything."
Those are quite contradictory to each other.
Try to get a pic1650, 1654, 1656, 1663, 1664, 1670, etc. From Microchip would be quite difficult, I assume,
Let's try to clarify.
Microchip tends to not 'EOL' any part that they're actually still selling - as opposed to other vendors who discontinue when they aren't selling 'enough'. There are few exceptions, AFAIK usually related to acquisitions and fab capabilities.
Based on my understanding, if they can still make it in their current FAB, you can still order it. You may have to buy a wafer full of the parts, or meet some other minimum order (i.e. if it uses a non-standard leadframe or similar).
If you look at the EOL list at:
http://www.microchip.com/mymicrochip/Reports.aspx?type=eol
You'll find they almost all fall under the category of:
1) Discontinuation of parts they acquired from someone else and can't make in-house and don't have volume to continue making them.
2) A discontinuation where there is a direct replacement which requires no design changes. For instance, a SPI memory where they're discontinuing the 10Mhz part and only continuing to sell faster parts which are 100% drop in compatible.
3) Discontinuations necessitated by no longer being able to make a given type of part - for instance, some of the rfPIC's were discontinued because the outside fab which were making these for them quit being able to do the RF process that was needed.
I also didn't see a single 'normal' PIC microcontroller on the list as far as I could go back. The only exception was a dsPIC that they said they were going to discontinue, then a couple months later said 'sorry, we changed our minds, and we're going to continue making it'. (I don't count weird things like the dsPIC and the integrated PIC and MEMS accellerometer as 'normal'. I'm talking a normal processor using normal processes).
Compare that with other vendors...