Migration from PIC to ARM - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 04:21:17 am
content: I have been mostly working with 8 / 16 bit micro's from various vendors but mostly with Microchip I have also dabbled with PIC32 recently but now I need to have a look at ARM namely theCortex M0 / M0+Cortex M4What level of complexity should I expect on when moving on to ARM?What are the potential gotchas?Which vendor to start with ST seems to be quite aggressive and seem to have quite a range both is regard to cost effectiveness and features but I'm open to your viewsAny starter kit recommendations?Tools? How much would it cost me to get the new toolset? ICE, programmer etc...Last and most important questionWhat features are NOT present in the PIC32 that would really push me to go for ARM? with microchip recently introducing the PIC32MM series even the cost has considerably dropped.. so If I continue to stick to PIC32 what would I be missing?TIA

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 04:35:06 am
content: Thanks blueskull,1. What were your experiences while migrating from 8 / 16 bit to ARM?2. Do you think there are any major differences in MIPS (PIC32) vs ARM that would really need me to consider a migration... or does PIC32 have all the arsenal that an ARM has?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 05:52:11 am
content: Also look at NXP's LPC series! They have a wide range of microcontrollers and use the same peripherals along the entire line which makes re-using existing code which deals with the peripherals easy.

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 08:42:02 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 24, 2016, 05:52:11 amFrom your experience how does LPC compare to the ST32F4?This linkhttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/microcontrollers/where-to-begin-stm32f0-vs-pic32mx-vs-msp432-vs/msg1032207/#msg1032207says that in NXP the software side is a mess, I haven't yet used NXP so cannot comment but would like to hear from a first hand user.

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 08:58:21 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on October 24, 2016, 08:50:07 amThanks blueskull! what ARM vendor do you buy from.. NXP or ST it would be nice to hear your experiences...

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 09:15:18 am
content: Quote from: ZeroResistance on October 24, 2016, 08:42:02 amI don't use NXP's libraries except for their Lufa derived USB host stack. For controlling peripherals I use my own code. I have looked at ST a couple of times but never found a compelling reason to use one of them. I never do high volume stuff so part cost is easely dwarfed by engineering costs.

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 09:44:33 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 24, 2016, 09:15:18 amThanks nctnico, its seems to be a fight between NXP and ST for the ... ARMs1. How are the dev tools that NXP provide..2. What are the tools that I would need to get started and to also debug.3. What NXP starter kits would you recommend for ARM / LPC?4. How good is the documentation?5. How much would it cost to setup program, debug ... etc I mean to get started with an ARM.6. Is there a package that NXP provides that works out of the box?TIA

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 09:54:28 am
content: I'd say the documentation from NXP is very good. I have used Eclipse + GCC from day one so I can't comment on the tools NXP provides. IIRC started with a dev board from Keil about a decade ago so that isn't very relevant today. What I find easy about NXP's ARMs is that they all have a serial port bootloader. A program called Flashmagic can be used to upload the firmware over the serial port (very handy for field updates on products which are already installed!).

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 10:14:18 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 24, 2016, 09:54:28 amI have also read elsewhere on this forum at least on 2 occasions where users have said that go with1. NXP - if you need bugfree silicon2 ST - if you need more featureswould you second that?

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 10:20:54 am
content: Quoteif you are coding in a high level language, the core doesn't matter, for the most part.what matters is the peripheral of individual chips.

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 10:41:32 am
content: Quote from: dannyf on October 24, 2016, 10:20:54 amOk, you what you mean to say is the compiler matters not the core, and how well the compiler translates the high level code for the core to execute.I'm quite happy with the peripherals that the PIC32 has to offer but I was just wondering since ARM has a huge following what am I missing what peripherals and other features that ARM has that a PIC32 doesn't have?

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 11:12:38 am
content: For a high level language programmer, "x = y + z;" is always the same whether you are compiling for a lowly avr or a 64bit arm. It makes no difference 99 percent of the time.As to peripherals, it depends on the vendor, application and your code base. Specialty vendors like renesas or freescale or infineon offers chips for particular market segments that a generalist may not Care much, like can bus, motor control, or power conversions.For others, the offerings tend to have more complex peripherals. It is not unusual for a peripherals to have 20 or 30 registers, and sometimes 30 to 40 registers. The gpio modules or the timer modules on a luminary part would be good examples.Your pic32 in comparison would have much simpler peripherals, and they would be quite similar to comparable peripherals on lower end offerings from microchip, making migration or reuse of existing code much easier.In your case, I would say take a look at some of the data sheets and see for yourself.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 02:23:40 pm
content: There are a couple of things to do: First you should look at MIPS if you are concerned about speed. When you say ARM, you are including chips up into the GHz multi-core range as well as much smaller offerings. I have used both the PIC32 and the ARMs (LPC1768, LPC2148 and LPC2106). It is pretty easy to get right down to the peripherals for any of these devices. For me, STM32F4 is a work in progress.Second, you should decide what you want to do with the chip. Do you just want to drop a chip in a project for hobby purposes? If so, cost is not as sensitive. Commercial applications will be driven by cost.Tools are all over the place. Like many, I use Eclipse and GCC and it works well. If you want to start with the STM32, I highly recommend you buy the book "Mastering The STM32" and set up the toolchain EXACTLY the way it is explained. Everything will work fine. I'm not sure I would put Eclipse and its workspace in the STM32Toolchain directory tree but that's a matter of style. I use Eclipse for a lot of things beyond STM.When I want a fairly fast ARM for a project and I plan to drop it into another PCB, I choose the mbed and I use the online toolchain to write the code. I highly recommend the LPC1768 version of the mbed boards. There are some STM32F boards that 'claim' mbed compatibility but the libraries aren't complete. About the only thing that is compatible is the ability to drop code on the device.I like the PIC32 and the Microchip toolchain. No problems at all. I don't know that it would be my first choice for a project but that's just because I have more experience with ARM. If I were current with the PIC32, I'm not sure I would be looking elsewhere unless the PIC32 came up short on necessary features. It's a pretty nice chip family.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 03:16:02 pm
content: "was just wondering since ARM has a huge following what am I missing what peripherals and other features that ARM has that a PIC32 doesn't have?"They generally have comparable peripherals, like timers, serial hardware, ADC, DAC, DMA, interrupts, etc.Pic32 had more consistent peripherals, and stm32 offer a broad spectrum of peripherals. So with a stm32, you can cover a broad spectrum of applications.Puc32 has better pin remapping, and newer stm32 has limited pin remapping.You can find dpid pic32 but rarely dpid arm chips.For me, a big decision factor between those two would be monitizing my skills. It is much easier to market yourself as an arm programmer than a puc32 programmer.

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 07:26:47 pm
content: After evaluating all the answers so far ... I believe (correct be if I'm wrong) that staying with PIC32 would be the best option...Why?1. It seems to have similar peripherals, in some cases it has innovative CIP (core independent peripherals) like CLC, CTMU etc..2. Price has dropped with PIC32MM series entering the fray.3. Has easy to use DIP packages..4. I already have the toolset for PIC32 dev.5. MIPS core is not an issue for me nor is the processor frequency and DMIPS, currently I'm happy with 50Mhz.6. Has decent documentation. ("decent" because I have not read other suppliers docs, so you could take decent as good in this case)7. Has upgrade and downgrade paths. instead of PIC32MX i can use PIC32MZ or the PIC32MM as per the need of the project.8. Has decent power consumption. I don't need xtreme low power as yet.9. People are willing to help in case of being stuck up with an issue on Microchip forums / EEVblog etc...Most of the above points will have ticks for ARM too, but I really need a genuine reason to invest time into ARM which I haven't found yet.The only valid reasons I could find for me to move to ARM1. 2 USB ports - None of the PIC32's have dual USB ports.2. Camera interface.So if I would be doing work on what requires the above 2 I will conisder going in for ARM but until them I guess its seems logical to stick to PIC32.Freely add, remove and correct if you find anything amiss.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 07:52:49 pm
content: How about Microchip's GCC port of the compiler for PIC32? Has it full optimisation in the free version? At some point you'll run into a project which needs either the maximum speed of minimum size the compiler can achieve.

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 08:29:37 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 24, 2016, 07:52:49 pmYes you have a point there the free version does not have full optimization.Your post shook me out of my doldrums...And I started searching the net about what is available in the Microchip GCC compiler free version..and I found this posthttp://www.microchip.com/forums/m789980.aspxIn summary it saysQuoteYes an optimizing compiler is very much needed ... but for C level 1 does the trick the problem arises for C++ at least that is what I understood from that post.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 08:51:00 pm
content: 'Quite usable' is different than usable. For microcontroller work you will want O3 (maximum speed) and Os (minimum size) optimisations. For ARM microcontrollers you can get a fully working GCC toolchain maintained by ARM free fromhttps://launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded.

author: Sal Ammoniac
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 08:59:59 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 24, 2016, 07:52:49 pmIt's based on GCC, so full source is available, and there are several web sites that describe the process of removing the license check and building the compiler. Anyone with half a brain can do this in an hour or less and then there are no limits on which optimization levels you can use.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 09:06:04 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 24, 2016, 07:52:49 pmIf I understood things correctly. From memory, so details may be a bit fuzzy.There is a thread in this forum, which explains that because GCC is open-source, Microchip had to publish the source code, for the full optimization level. So there is a quick (and fully legal, because it was open-source software, all along) fix, which gives you a full featured compiler, with full optimization options. For free.EDIT: I was beaten to it

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 09:23:07 pm
content: BTW I just checked the price of the XC32 pro and its subscription licence costs around USD30 / month.But Many Thanks to MK14 and Sal Ammoniac for identifying unique possibilities!!...

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 09:39:32 pm
content: Try the free version first. You may be surprised how good it is.

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 09:45:50 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on October 24, 2016, 09:39:32 pmIf you are referring to the PIC32 gcc compiler then yes I have been using the free version but never dabbled with the optimization settings as I never needed to so far, but I really need to play around with those and compare the outputs..

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 09:48:43 pm
content: Then try it.You will be surprised that how difficult thus useless it is to write code that can function through an optimizing compilers. And how little you gain beyond O1.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 09:53:00 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on October 24, 2016, 09:48:43 pmSorry but the optimisation isn't useless! There can be a big difference between size and speed between optimise for size or speed. And yes, sometimes that is necessary to get the job done. The alternative is a different microcontroller which may have a bigger package or other downsides.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 09:59:23 pm
content: I have a PRo version of c32 and can get a copy of xc32 pro too. So if you post your source code, I can compile them with c32 in both modes for you to see.

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 05:25:30 am
content: Just read the datasheet of STM32F301x6 and was blown away by the features..Arm Cortex M472Mhz,DSP instructionsFPU, Interconnect matrix for peripherals ...12bit ADC, 12bit DAC, Ultrafast comparators, OPAmp with PGAand many many more...wo wo wo ... this is too good, I wonder If I would get such features in the PIC32 at the same price point...

author: chickenHeadKnob
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 05:26:38 am
content: Quote from: ZeroResistance on October 24, 2016, 07:26:47 pmI haven't and don't intend to use any PIC however I did consider it once just to get the CTMU which doesn't have any corresponding equivalent in the ARM world that I could find. It is a very nice gadjet.On the reverse argument if you want high resolution PWM then there is stm32f334 (216 picosecond) or select infineon XMC4xxx series (150 ps). The TI c2000 piccolo also has high resolution PWM but it is non ARM, old TMS320 DSP architecture. Don't think any PIC can do this.You might have to be flexible and adapt to another processor and tool chain just to get the specific peripheral or power consumption that you need for a project. Standard reality of engineering.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 11:07:21 am
content: "was blown away by the features.."Do you have an application that requires such features?

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 12:05:23 pm
content: Unless you are doing big volumes ( 10K+) , development time is the biggest factor. 'stick with what you know' is a good policy, as learning the quirks of a new family and toolchain can take a lot of time.

author: bktemp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 01:20:38 pm
content: Quote from: ZeroResistance on October 25, 2016, 05:25:30 amThe downside of all those features is, it takes much time to understand everything.You can use the provided HAL libraries to avoid messing around at register level. It helps much, until you find bugs. And there are bugs. And some of them are hard to find. I used the SD library provided by ST and it worked well, at least for some SD card (mod number 1 required to make it work with all SD cards). After a couple of weeks the filesystem got corrupted, because there is a stupid mistake when calculating the byte adress with the cast to uint64 being outside of the bracket where the multiplication takes place. So whenever there was a write outside of 4GB, it was wrapping around and overwriting the first sectors (mod number 2). There are a couple more mods I have done to their HAL code to make it work.I have used AVRs, PIC24/33, PIC32 and STM32. I don't prefere any of them. I use the one best suited for each project.At register level AVRs are the easiest, so for small projects they are great, because I can set up most peripherals even without looking at the datasheets.PIC24/33 have more processing power and more advanced peripherals, but it is still easy to use them without using any HAL libraries.PIC32 have even more processing power but similar peripherals.I would say the smaller STM32F variants are comparable to PIC24/33/32.When using STM32F4 or F7, you will have a hard time using the complex peripherals without the HAL libraries and it is really annoying finding bugs in HAL libraries.If you need a certain peripheral and STM32F4/7 have it, it is great, but I wouldn't use one for a small project I can do using a PIC24/33/32 or AVR.And by the way: The difference between o1 and o3 on the PIC32 compiler is very small. The code compiled with o3 was around 2% faster than o1.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 01:36:25 pm
content: The real arm winner is not talked on this posthttp://www.cypress.com/products/32-bit-arm-cortex-m3-psoc-5lp

author: autobot
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 02:45:01 pm
content: Quote from: ebclr on October 25, 2016, 01:36:25 pmWhat kind of designs you/people use the Psoc5 for ? at what volume ?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 02:53:00 pm
content: I looked at the Psoc5 a while ago but didn't find it very compelling. IIRC it is pretty limited (read the fine print!).

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 03:57:15 pm
content: @mikeselectricstuff and @bktempyou guys are talking some real sensible stuff here maybe I got too carried away.Yes development time would come into play... that's agreed! Especially when you have never used the chip or that particular family before it could get really frustrating if something doesn't work as intended.As I said before I heard it on this forum quite a number of times1. ST focuses on features.2. NXP focuses on bugfree silicon.yes I know I said bugfree silicon for NXP but what about their HAL's would there be as many frustrating moments with NXP ?QuoteDid you mean the Arm Cortex M0 / M0+ ?QuoteYes rightly said, but on another note I have recently started using the PIC32 so I would have to contend with the quirks of the MIPS core too but on the brighter side possible the experience with PIC18 / PIC24 would stand me in good stead.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 04:01:13 pm
content: Quote from: ZeroResistance on October 25, 2016, 03:57:15 pmbased on a very small sample size, the only time I ever used an NXP CMSIS library, I spent a day figuring out it was setting the PLL up wrong in a way that meant it would sometimes hang at startup. The code looked like it was fixing an errata issue for a previous chip.I avoid using peripheral library stuff unless it's for somethnig complicated like USB. It's just another bunch of stuff to learn, and another layer of things to go wrong.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 04:52:16 pm
content: Quote from: ZeroResistance on October 24, 2016, 09:23:07 pmwhy on earth? you re-compile the sources (available from microchip) and you can leave out the licensing part so you don't have a silly lock to a GCC compiler optimization.And i don't think the subscription comes with better support than the microchip forum or a business-email support account

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 05:49:29 pm
content: The best chip is the one that you use for something, don't try to find the best one , they don't exist, it's the application, the developer the logistics and the product market are the points, Every chip has a place

author: asgard20032
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 06:19:01 pm
content: By the way, a new version of mastering the stm32 was release yesterday. I am always surprise to see how this book is updated. Each month, near the end of the month, it is updated by its author. Would be a great start for your migration. Without even using the chip, just by reading this book, you shall get an overview of the workflow of working with arm.

author: westfw
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 09:23:00 pm
content: QuoteSo this keeps being mentioned. What does it buy you beyond using a generic mips-gcc compiler from elsewhere? (Presumably you can copy .h files and linker scripts from the Microchip distribution, and they have no impact on opimization...)

author: Karel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 09:47:28 pm
content: Quote from: JPortici on October 25, 2016, 04:52:16 pmWhy on earth? Just follow the directions here:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/microcontrollers/pic32-evolution/msg1007099/#msg1007099Much easier & quicker.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 09:59:07 pm
content: Quote from: Karel on October 25, 2016, 09:47:28 pmyes, even better.my point being: i don't see any advantage in paying a subscription for a compiled binary of some code, knowing that i will not get anything more that i would if i compiled/patched it myself.he won't get better support from microchip, sadly.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 10:10:21 pm
content: This is where morality comes into play. I wouldn't do anything mentioned earlier. If someone provides me with a tool that I find useful, I think it is the right thing to do to reward, not punish, that person.Obviously it is up to each and everyone of us to help uphold morality for a society that we all collectively live in.

author: ogoun
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 10:26:41 pm
content: Here is one suggestion not from the usual suspects (st, nxp, ti)..renesas synergy. m4+ based, 200 MHz clk, cheap evkits, lots of on chip periphs, short silicon errata list.These were nowhere near my radar as a player as little as 2 months ago... Seems they realised they needed to compete, and worked out what many of us wanted.The big thing about what they offer with this chip is IAR embedded workbench (!), and threadx rtos.. all free, unlimited and ok for commercial use. the HAL/ drivers are actively maintained, there is a forum with lots of traffic (most posts are.. i cant make x work, please help, followed a few hours later by renesas expert with solution, then thanks heaps, that fixed it). also lots of ready to go sample projects/source. most appear easy to adapt in many casesi know i sound like a fanboy here, but i have yet to see a more integrated and supported embedded arm solution. closest i have seen is pairing st with chibios, which we were going to go with until this.time from concept to market with this little guy looks to be potentially the shortest, at least for us. i will report back when we are further down the track.l8r,o

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 10:32:51 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on October 25, 2016, 10:10:21 pmI agree which is why my first question is when someone wants to sell me a microcontroller: "Are the tools free? If not then don't bother and let's talk about the weather".

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 10:57:15 pm
content: Quotethey make great chips - there are reasons those guys absolutely dominate everyone else in the mcu market.One word of caution though: they are set to support (very very) large customers. and their support there is superb.I'm not sure to what extent that they are geared up to support small customers - actually I do but I think it is best that you find it out for yourself.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 11:28:17 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 25, 2016, 10:32:51 pmIf I was a big manufacturer, and the first question was "are the tools free", I'd immediately know they weren't interested in serious volumes and they go to the bottom of the priority list.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 11:35:10 pm
content: Quote from: ogoun on October 25, 2016, 10:26:41 pmTotal about 500 in stock at Digikey across all lines. Standard leadtime 20 weeks.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 11:43:52 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on October 25, 2016, 11:28:17 pmI see it the other way around: if they can't provide tools for their products then they are not serious about support to begin with. In the past 20+ years it has been rare for me to use a paid compiler at various employers or while being a contractor. It was either provided for free through the distributor or we used gcc. There is a good reason ARM has taken up maintaining a fully functional microcontroller targeted version of ARM-gcc!

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 11:54:43 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 25, 2016, 11:43:52 pmIt's not about whether tools are free or not, but the customer's priority - If you are buying serious volumes the cost of the tools is insignificant. Tool quality and productivity are far more important, so a customer who cares more about cost than these aspects isn't going to get taken as seriously.It's quite possible they would give free tools to serious customers, once they've been qualified as serious.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2016, 12:21:59 am
content: Again the other way around: if you are serious about selling microcontrollers in big volumes then the tooling costs are insignificant

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2016, 01:10:41 am
content: Avoid renesasWorst optionExtremely expensive development kitsPoor availability, is the last one you must choseOnly chose Renesas if you a million dollar account to buy processors, otherwise you are wasting your timeCypress, STM, NXP , Texas are all better than renesas on customers service and productDon't go with renesas even for free

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2016, 02:10:31 am
content: And yet the Hitachi (now Renesas) H8/300 and H8/3000 (IIRC) where quite popular in the late 90's / early 00's.

author: Karel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2016, 06:40:14 am
content: Quote from: dannyf on October 25, 2016, 10:10:21 pmI don't get it. Since when is modifying GPL'ed software unmoral?Do you think that everybody who download GPL'd software and don't click on the "donate" button are unmoral??Microchip knows that they are using and modifying GPL'd software and they don't pay for it. Why should I pay to Microchip?

author: ZeroResistance
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2016, 07:14:53 am
content: Quote from: ebclr on October 26, 2016, 01:10:41 amHuh? And I though they were the kings of the micrcontroller industry!

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2016, 07:59:05 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on October 26, 2016, 02:10:31 amOnly for high volume customers.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2016, 08:16:45 am
content: Just do a search for the Synergy part prefix R7FS on Findchips to see how bad an idea it would be to design these in, at least at the moment. Few parts even available in hundreds, let alone thousands. they clearly aren't aiming at customers who buy through distributors.http://www.findchips.com/search/r7fs

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2016, 11:19:07 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on October 26, 2016, 07:59:05 amNo, not really. I have used them at various employers in low volume products. The distributors in the NL where pushing them quite hard (even provided the compilers for free). I liked the datasheets and user manuals because they where very clear. The biggest downside was that you needed NDAs and an expensive programmer to enable the code read protection.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2016, 01:01:32 pm
content: You're lucky, It's not the experience that most people have with Renesas, Why use a product known for large corporations. That is not a product for small and medium enterprises. Also do not have any advantage over products from other vendors who are really interested in this public as ST, Texas, Cypress. Renesas must be avoided until they change the target market. It's not the product itself is the company sales structure the problem

author: ElektroQuark
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 26, 2016, 01:12:33 pm
content: There are no problems there: it's another market where they work.

author: BloodyCactus
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2016, 01:17:31 pm
content: If I were switching from PIC32 to ARM, I'd choose Kinetis, they have some nice chips and their Kinetis Design Studio runs on Linux which is a win for me

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2016, 04:27:33 pm
content: Yes and the freedom boards are very nice and cheap, have a extensive range of product widely available, easy to get samples, nice support,and also mbed compatible, is for sure a much better option than renesas and all the major arm tools have support

author: Sal Ammoniac
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2016, 04:33:28 pm
content: Quote from: ebclr on October 26, 2016, 04:27:33 pmThe chips are not bad. The documentation, however, sucks big time.