??? 04/19/05 22:10 Read: times |
#91965 - overhyped - no, misapplied - yes Responding to: ???'s previous message |
The reality of the matter, however, is that a number of 8051-based applications being developed today are using exotic, high performance derivatives like the Silicon Labs C8051F120 or the Dallas Semiconductor DS80C400. Making a claim that the 8051 architecutre being multisource makes your product independent of Silicon Labs' or Dallas' agenda is exaggerated at best.
The bottom line here is that "multisource" is something of an overhyped buzzword. Sure, if you use a F120 and SILabs pull the plug, you are screwed BUT If you ever have worked with a chipmakers "proprietary" tools you REALLY get to appreciate multisource. Had the '51 not been multisourced we would not have had Keil, Raisonance, HiTech, SDCC, IAR etc to choose from. Multisource gives us an environment where competition keep the toolmakesrs on their toes. so HIP HIP HORRAY for multisource Erik |
Topic | Author | Date |
8 bit , 16 bit 32 bit 8051 - A thought | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Philips XA | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
32 bit is better. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I strongly Agree. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
other 32 bit mcu | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
ARM is there already | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Comments on multisource | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
overhyped - no, misapplied - yes | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Only slightly overhyped | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Yes, multisource is good | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
name one | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Yes, it is the reason | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Look at the tools for Motorola HC08 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
CodeWarrior | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Originally it wasn't![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
perfect protection | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
a bit late with that thought | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
belated | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
subliminal | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
1 bit MCUs | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
1 bit MCUs - SATA | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
revolutionary idea | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
any -current- ones? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Single bit processors | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Bit-Slice? | 01/01/70 00:00 |