Post by thread:Query - Programming the FLASH PIC16F84-04 ?

Microchip is under the (mistaken, I think) impression that "Flash" is a generic term for "electrically-erasable". Nonsense. Microchip is under the impression that "flash" is a more marketable buzzword than EEPROM, and that they can get away with calling their chips "flash microcontrollers" to compete with the likes of Atmel, TI, and Motarola; regardless of the details of the underlying electronics. I think they're probably right. It would be an interesting case of poetic justice if Intel's lawyers showed up on their doorstep claiming infringement of the flash patents... :-) BillW

Chops <spam_OUTbillwTakeThisOuTcisco.com> wrote: > > Microchip is under the (mistaken, I think) impression that > > "Flash" is a generic term for "electrically-erasable". > > Nonsense. Microchip is under the impression that "flash" is a more > marketable buzzword than EEPROM Bill: I agree with your analysis, but I was enunciating Microchip's OFFICIAL position on the matter, not my interpretation of it. In a telephone converstaion with the factory, I was told in so many words that "'Flash' has become a generic term for 'electrically- erasable non-volatile memory'." Later, on the PICLIST, Brian Boles at Microchip said: "As far as we know, the Atmel "Flash" parts use the same basic technology as we do. If it looks like ...., and smells like ...., it must be ...." -Andy === Andrew Warren - .....fastfwdKILLspam@spam@ix.netcom.com === === Fast Forward Engineering - Vista, California === === === === Custodian of the PICLIST Fund -- For more info, see: === === http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2499/fund.html ===