TI MSP430 voted most popular MCU? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2013, 01:45:05 am
content: http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/systems-interface/4420230/MCU-popularity-perceptionsSurely I would have thought AVR or PIC would have been most popular. Here are the results:MSP430 - 53%MC6800- 19%PIC16 - 10%AVR - 6%Other - 6%STM32 - 4%Cypress PSoC - 1%Silicon Labs C8051F33x - 1%They said 8051 was not included because Intel no longer makes them, but they are still made by everyone else pretty much.I also think that AVR was a bit low, maybe because most people don't think of Arduinos as AVRs.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2013, 01:55:13 am
content: The article is a shining example on how to create statistical nonsense! If internet had a delete button I'd use it on that article.

author: c4757p
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2013, 02:03:32 am
content: QuoteWow.

author: adam1213
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2013, 02:06:28 am
content: The poll is meant to be about what is perceived to be the most popular, as opposed directly looking into which is the most popular. e.g. the poll could be influenced by publications about which MCU is the most popular.Coincidently7 days earlier edn published an article on this topichttp://www.edn.com/electrical-engineer-community/industry-blog/4419922/1/Slideshow--The-most-popular-MCUs-ever

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 05, 2013, 02:40:11 am
content: I believe that EDN viewership is very non-hobbyist and very upper crust big company industry centric. Lots of old time fuddy-duddies been at the same company for 30 years, hence big numbers on the likes of the freescale 6800.They also don't get huge engagement on their online stuff, so I reckon the poll result numbers would be low, which they don't publish. Wouldn't surprise me if they only got a few dozen people voting total.

author: PA0PBZ
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2013, 02:26:32 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on September 05, 2013, 02:40:11 amHow would you end up with 1% if that was the case?

author: mrflibble
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2013, 02:49:09 pm
content: For sufficiently large values of "a few" ... by blatantly rounding up/down. I was pleasantly surprised that at least it added up to 100%.

author: PA0PBZ
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2013, 02:56:43 pm
content: Quote from: mrflibble on September 05, 2013, 02:49:09 pmOk, but 1% of 'a few dozen' would be something like 0.3 votes

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2013, 03:11:35 pm
content: Quote from: PA0PBZ on September 05, 2013, 02:56:43 pma few is less than 10, dozen is 12. So you can perfectly have 9 x 12 which is more than 100 which is necessary to get 1% step and it is still within "few dozen"

author: PA0PBZ
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2013, 03:59:03 pm
content: Quote from: tinhead on September 05, 2013, 03:11:35 pmIf that is the definition of 'a few' I stand corrected, my idea was it is around 3. But then I'm not native English, so...

author: Dongulus
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2013, 04:00:18 pm
content: Quote from: tinhead on September 05, 2013, 03:11:35 pmActually, I think this is the official definition of "a few":http://xkcd.com/1070/

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2013, 10:11:40 am
content: Quote from: Dongulus on September 05, 2013, 04:00:18 pmofficial? i prefer something like :http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/fewthat said, few means small amount and it is not 'numeric' defined. However from logical point of view with combination of dozen the 'few dozen' need to be smaller than 'ten dozen' therefore 9 x 12 is max. However, he said already 'around 3', which can be ... (ok, i stop here and now)^^Quote from: PA0PBZ on September 05, 2013, 03:59:03 pm