22 Jan
2012
22 Jan
'12
11:58 p.m.
On 23 Jan 2012 at 0:54, Jim Brain wrote:
I'd prefer a small OTG-capableuC that didn;t cost
$8.00, but either
ARM or AVR will work. I don't know much aboiut PIC32, but I'm shying
away from AVR32 and PIC32 and such in favor of ARM. In the spirit of
Tony's philosophy on having all the material on hand to fix things, I
think the AVR32/PIC32/etc. uCs are too niche. ARM is all over the
place, and the likelihood that one could get a compiler and a
programmer 10 years from now on ARM is probably better than for some
of the other families.
The MX2 is OTG-capable and comes in packages as small as 28 pins.
I've got a soft spot for PIC32 in that it's basically a MIPS R4000
core with peripherals tacked on. Microchip does their own silly
thing, programming it with their proprietary ISP programmer (PICkit),
even though they employ an on-chip ISP-to-JTAG converter (which is
what really does the programming). I believe their toolchain has its
roots in the GCC R4000 compiler as well, so it isn't as if that's
going bye-bye anytime soon. Think of it as an SGI workstation on a
chip.
Some of the PIC32 family has 5v-tolerant inputs, which is a plus in a
lot of cases. No EEPROM, however, which is too bad. But you're
right--without some second sources, it's probably doomed in the long
run competing against the ARM.
ARMs are everywhere and comparatively cheap. I like the low-end 8-
bit AVRs, but with the 32-bitters, you might as well use an ARM.
--Chuck