gnupic: Thread: What's the PIC-chip type supply status ?

Originally I thought PIC's minimal DIL package idea was great.
Later it seemed that they were morphing a wheelbarrow to a 
locomotive, with eg. their 32-bit 'version'.

Now I want to look at the 16C84 again.
Is this chip still expeted to be supplied for some years?

==TIA.

On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 08:00:00PM -0400, Chris Glur wrote:
> Originally I thought PIC's minimal DIL package idea was great.
> Later it seemed that they were morphing a wheelbarrow to a
> locomotive, with eg. their 32-bit 'version'.
> 
> Now I want to look at the 16C84 again.
> Is this chip still expeted to be supplied for some years?

Byron Jeff wrote:-
> I think that you may have rolled the wheel a bit back too far.
> Might I suggest you compromise and settle on the 16F88. It comes in the
> same 18 pin DIP package, but contains enough memory and a bunch of useful
> peripherals that can unload the code and management hassles of trying to
> get multiple things done at once. And it's cheaper than the 16C84/16F84.
> 
> There's more discussion of this subject on my page here:
> 
> http://www.finitesite.com/d3jsys/16F88.html

OK, got it.

Xiaofan wrote:-
> Why do you want to use such an old PIC? Even the new
> variant 16F84A is very old. You can always count on
> 16F628A, 16F88, or the new 16F88x. Microchip is quite
> good in terms of product life support and they seldom
> obsolete parts.
> 
Hardware is cheap, software is expensive; the most valuable
is YOUR data/knowledge ?
I want to just plonk-in a DIL and not do another 'training
course'.

> As for PIC32, they have to be there since the competitors
> are there already. Some customers like to go
> for one-stop-shopping (8bit, 16bit, 32bit and analog)
> and that is where Microchip is going to. And Microchip
> is no long the Microchip 5 years before, it is now much
> a bigger company, they can no longer stay there.
> 

Thanks,

==Chris Glur