Cory Spackman wrote:
-------------------------------
Do you think that the scenario I mentioned with the micro sleeping while converting would make an internal 12-bit converter viable.

<hr>
That's an interesting observation because the micro is usually the worst offender. I suspected the reason for the feature was that PIC ADCs are slow and are often used in battery systems where the power must be saved, but you might be correct about the additional benefit.
<p>

Cory Spackman wrote:
-------------------------------
You made your previous message sound slightly like the failure of your competitors product was the fault of the PIC.

<hr>
Well that was my mistake then. The failure was entirely with the design team. That shop is great with analog but they don't know microprocessors - hence they never could figure out the right micro for the project. They eventually just switched to the microprocessor my products used figuring I must have figured something out they hadn't (which annoyed me greatly).


Besides the ADC parameters which they never really understood, the application (unmentioned) required a lot of mathematical capability in the micro. It was destined to fail when the team was assembled, in my opinion.


PICs are great for their niche but this wasn't one of them.
<p>

Cory Spackman wrote:
-------------------------------
I think that their decision to use the internal low resolution converter rather than an external high resolution converter was the problem.


<hr>
Yes. And the killer was that they never figured out how they were going to compute their answers before they designed the circuit. I know the programmer they used... he loves loading prewritten libraries for anything and I knew a math library wouldn't be able to compute accurate answers at the required data rates. I think the PIC progression was due to his library accumulation more than anything. They switched to a big PIC once they finally started looking at the mathematics required. :)
<p>
aka j