'Query - Programming the FLASH PIC16F84-04 ?'
William Chops Westfield
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...
|Chops <cisco.com> wrote: billw
> > 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
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 ...."
=== Andrew Warren - ix.netcom.com === fastfwd
=== Fast Forward Engineering - Vista, California ===
=== Custodian of the PICLIST Fund -- For more info, see: ===
=== http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2499/fund.html ===
More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1996
, 1997 only
- New search...