Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
???
11/17/03 15:23
Read: times


 
#58842 - RE: Poor example!
Responding to: ???'s previous message
Erik:
It also appears that you are biased by your previous experience. I have found the Cygnal IDE to be quite usable as a "professional" product. The fact that ACC and DPTR are not included in the R0-R7 window is hardly cause to declare a product substandard. Particularly in this case it is just a matter of a metaphor that is different from an ICE product that you have embedded yourself with. Certainly you, at one time, also had to learn this ICE system and its pecularities (and all of these systems have them!).

Michael Karas


List of 28 messages in thread
TopicAuthorDate
8051 with inbuilt I2C hardware engine            01/01/70 00:00      
   RE: 8051 with inbuilt I2C hardware engine            01/01/70 00:00      
   RE: 8051 with inbuilt I2C hardware eng            01/01/70 00:00      
      Philips            01/01/70 00:00      
   RE: 8051 with inbuilt I2C hardware engine            01/01/70 00:00      
   RE: 8051 with inbuilt I2C hardware engine            01/01/70 00:00      
   RE: 8051 with inbuilt I2C hardware engine            01/01/70 00:00      
      RE: 8051 with inbuilt I2C hardware engine            01/01/70 00:00      
         RE: 8051 with inbuilt I2C hardware engine            01/01/70 00:00      
            P89C668 ISP /WIN ISP            01/01/70 00:00      
               RE: P89C668 ISP /WIN ISP            01/01/70 00:00      
               RE: P89C668 ISP /WIN ISP            01/01/70 00:00      
   So whats wrong with Triscend & Cygnal?            01/01/70 00:00      
      RE: So whats wrong with Triscend & Cygnal?            01/01/70 00:00      
         RE: So whats wrong with Triscend & Cygnal?            01/01/70 00:00      
            RE: So whats wrong with Triscend & Cygnal?            01/01/70 00:00      
            RE: So whats wrong with Triscend & Cygnal?            01/01/70 00:00      
         RE: So whats wrong with Triscend & Cygnal?            01/01/70 00:00      
            Poor example!            01/01/70 00:00      
               RE: Poor example!            01/01/70 00:00      
                  RE: Poor example!            01/01/70 00:00      
                     RE: Poor example!            01/01/70 00:00      
                        RE: Poor example!            01/01/70 00:00      
                        RE: Poor example!            01/01/70 00:00      
                           RE: Poor example!            01/01/70 00:00      
                        RE: Work in Progress            01/01/70 00:00      
                           RE: Work in Progress            01/01/70 00:00      
         RE: Triscend & Cygnal?            01/01/70 00:00      

Back to Subject List