Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #31053 > unrolled thread

4-bit MCUs

Back to article view | Back to comp.arch.embedded

Contents

  4-bit MCUs Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> - 2022-06-14 08:26 -0700
    Re: 4-bit MCUs Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> - 2022-06-14 08:28 -0700
      Re: 4-bit MCUs David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-14 18:26 +0200
        Re: 4-bit MCUs Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2022-06-14 19:45 +0300
          Re: 4-bit MCUs David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-14 19:02 +0200
            Re: 4-bit MCUs Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> - 2022-06-14 10:27 -0700
              Re: 4-bit MCUs David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-14 22:41 +0200
                Re: 4-bit MCUs Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> - 2022-06-14 21:22 -0700
                  Re: 4-bit MCUs Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-06-15 06:43 +0200
                  Re: 4-bit MCUs David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-15 09:02 +0200
    Re: 4-bit MCUs David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-14 18:24 +0200

#31053 — 4-bit MCUs

Wow!  This group seems to have all but died.  It used to be very vibrant. 

I'm trying to determine how prevalent 4-bit MCUs are in the world.  I know lots of products have used 4-bit devices in the past, coffee-makers, remote controls, microwave ovens, etc.  I believe at one time, in terms of  raw quantity, they outnumbered every other sector.  But I don't find very many at mainstream manufacturers.  I've also only found a couple companies with less visibility who supply these parts.  

Anyone out there work with 4 bit MCUs?  Anyone build products in the quantities of millions where a 4 bit MCU might make a difference price wise?  

-- 

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#31054

On Tuesday, June 14, 2022 at 11:26:30 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
> Wow! This group seems to have all but died. It used to be very vibrant. 
> 
> I'm trying to determine how prevalent 4-bit MCUs are in the world. I know lots of products have used 4-bit devices in the past, coffee-makers, remote controls, microwave ovens, etc. I believe at one time, in terms of raw quantity, they outnumbered every other sector. But I don't find very many at mainstream manufacturers. I've also only found a couple companies with less visibility who supply these parts. 
> 
> Anyone out there work with 4 bit MCUs? Anyone build products in the quantities of millions where a 4 bit MCU might make a difference price wise? 

Sorry, my bad.  I didn't see my other post.  I need to learn how to use my tools.  :( 

-- 

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31058

On 14/06/2022 17:28, Rick C wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 14, 2022 at 11:26:30 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
>> Wow! This group seems to have all but died. It used to be very
>> vibrant.
>> 
>> I'm trying to determine how prevalent 4-bit MCUs are in the world.
>> I know lots of products have used 4-bit devices in the past,
>> coffee-makers, remote controls, microwave ovens, etc. I believe at
>> one time, in terms of raw quantity, they outnumbered every other
>> sector. But I don't find very many at mainstream manufacturers.
>> I've also only found a couple companies with less visibility who
>> supply these parts.
>> 
>> Anyone out there work with 4 bit MCUs? Anyone build products in the
>> quantities of millions where a 4 bit MCU might make a difference
>> price wise?
> 
> Sorry, my bad.  I didn't see my other post.  I need to learn how to
> use my tools.  :(
> 

You need to get proper tools instead of the "google groups" disaster. 
(We've had this discussion before, and I'm not going to try to persuade 
you again - but I can still hope you'll see the light!)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31059

On 6/14/2022 19:26, David Brown wrote:
> On 14/06/2022 17:28, Rick C wrote:
>> On Tuesday, June 14, 2022 at 11:26:30 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
>>> Wow! This group seems to have all but died. It used to be very
>>> vibrant.
>>>
>>> I'm trying to determine how prevalent 4-bit MCUs are in the world.
>>> I know lots of products have used 4-bit devices in the past,
>>> coffee-makers, remote controls, microwave ovens, etc. I believe at
>>> one time, in terms of raw quantity, they outnumbered every other
>>> sector. But I don't find very many at mainstream manufacturers.
>>> I've also only found a couple companies with less visibility who
>>> supply these parts.
>>>
>>> Anyone out there work with 4 bit MCUs? Anyone build products in the
>>> quantities of millions where a 4 bit MCU might make a difference
>>> price wise?
>>
>> Sorry, my bad.  I didn't see my other post.  I need to learn how to
>> use my tools.  :(
>>
> 
> You need to get proper tools instead of the "google groups" disaster. 
> (We've had this discussion before, and I'm not going to try to persuade 
> you again - but I can still hope you'll see the light!)

Oh come on David, their web interface is good enough to monitor/read
the groups. I do it all the time. When I post I do use thunderbird
so I can have a reasonable predictability of what my post will look
like, but for just looking at "what's up" the browser via google
groups is just fine.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31060

On 14/06/2022 18:45, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
> On 6/14/2022 19:26, David Brown wrote:
>> On 14/06/2022 17:28, Rick C wrote:

>>> Sorry, my bad.  I didn't see my other post.  I need to learn how to
>>> use my tools.  :(
>>>
>>
>> You need to get proper tools instead of the "google groups" disaster. 
>> (We've had this discussion before, and I'm not going to try to 
>> persuade you again - but I can still hope you'll see the light!)
> 
> Oh come on David, their web interface is good enough to monitor/read
> the groups. I do it all the time. When I post I do use thunderbird
> so I can have a reasonable predictability of what my post will look
> like, but for just looking at "what's up" the browser via google
> groups is just fine.

This is one of the first on-topic threads we've had for a while, so 
let's not get side-tracked (my apologies for taking it in that 
direction).  GG is great for searching and looking at old posts - I'm 
sure anything I might want to say about it, I have already said before :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31061

On Tuesday, June 14, 2022 at 1:02:59 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
> On 14/06/2022 18:45, Dimiter_Popoff wrote: 
> > On 6/14/2022 19:26, David Brown wrote: 
> >> On 14/06/2022 17:28, Rick C wrote: 
> 
> >>> Sorry, my bad.  I didn't see my other post.  I need to learn how to 
> >>> use my tools.  :( 
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> You need to get proper tools instead of the "google groups" disaster. 
> >> (We've had this discussion before, and I'm not going to try to 
> >> persuade you again - but I can still hope you'll see the light!) 
> > 
> > Oh come on David, their web interface is good enough to monitor/read 
> > the groups. I do it all the time. When I post I do use thunderbird 
> > so I can have a reasonable predictability of what my post will look 
> > like, but for just looking at "what's up" the browser via google 
> > groups is just fine.
> This is one of the first on-topic threads we've had for a while, so 
> let's not get side-tracked (my apologies for taking it in that 
> direction). GG is great for searching and looking at old posts - I'm 
> sure anything I might want to say about it, I have already said before :-)

What part of -this post was an accident- do you not understand???  The OTHER thread is the post people are replying to.  This thread needs to be ignored.  We don't need two on the same topic. 

-- 

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31062

On 14/06/2022 19:27, Rick C wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 14, 2022 at 1:02:59 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
>> On 14/06/2022 18:45, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>> On 6/14/2022 19:26, David Brown wrote:
>>>> On 14/06/2022 17:28, Rick C wrote:
>> 
>>>>> Sorry, my bad.  I didn't see my other post.  I need to learn
>>>>> how to use my tools.  :(
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> You need to get proper tools instead of the "google groups"
>>>> disaster. (We've had this discussion before, and I'm not going
>>>> to try to persuade you again - but I can still hope you'll see
>>>> the light!)
>>> 
>>> Oh come on David, their web interface is good enough to
>>> monitor/read the groups. I do it all the time. When I post I do
>>> use thunderbird so I can have a reasonable predictability of what
>>> my post will look like, but for just looking at "what's up" the
>>> browser via google groups is just fine.
>> This is one of the first on-topic threads we've had for a while,
>> so let's not get side-tracked (my apologies for taking it in that 
>> direction). GG is great for searching and looking at old posts -
>> I'm sure anything I might want to say about it, I have already said
>> before :-)
> 
> What part of -this post was an accident- do you not understand???
> The OTHER thread is the post people are replying to.  This thread
> needs to be ignored.  We don't need two on the same topic.
> 

Usenet is for chatter - and it is anarchy in practice.  You have no 
control of what people post here, who posts what, or in which threads. 
Starting a thread gives you exactly /zero/ special rights or privileges.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31065

On Tuesday, June 14, 2022 at 4:41:55 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
> On 14/06/2022 19:27, Rick C wrote: 
> > On Tuesday, June 14, 2022 at 1:02:59 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote: 
> >> On 14/06/2022 18:45, Dimiter_Popoff wrote: 
> >>> On 6/14/2022 19:26, David Brown wrote: 
> >>>> On 14/06/2022 17:28, Rick C wrote: 
> >> 
> >>>>> Sorry, my bad. I didn't see my other post. I need to learn 
> >>>>> how to use my tools. :( 
> >>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> You need to get proper tools instead of the "google groups" 
> >>>> disaster. (We've had this discussion before, and I'm not going 
> >>>> to try to persuade you again - but I can still hope you'll see 
> >>>> the light!) 
> >>> 
> >>> Oh come on David, their web interface is good enough to 
> >>> monitor/read the groups. I do it all the time. When I post I do 
> >>> use thunderbird so I can have a reasonable predictability of what 
> >>> my post will look like, but for just looking at "what's up" the 
> >>> browser via google groups is just fine. 
> >> This is one of the first on-topic threads we've had for a while, 
> >> so let's not get side-tracked (my apologies for taking it in that 
> >> direction). GG is great for searching and looking at old posts - 
> >> I'm sure anything I might want to say about it, I have already said 
> >> before :-) 
> > 
> > What part of -this post was an accident- do you not understand??? 
> > The OTHER thread is the post people are replying to. This thread 
> > needs to be ignored. We don't need two on the same topic. 
> >
> Usenet is for chatter - and it is anarchy in practice. You have no 
> control of what people post here, who posts what, or in which threads. 
> Starting a thread gives you exactly /zero/ special rights or privileges.

We have total control over who we ignore. 

-- 

Rick C.

-+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31066

Am 15.06.22 um 06:22 schrieb Rick C:

> 
> We have total control over who we ignore.
> 

Apparently, there is now a killfile plugin for Firefox that works with 
google groups; real newsreaders had that feature for a long time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31068

On 15/06/2022 06:22, Rick C wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 14, 2022 at 4:41:55 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
>> On 14/06/2022 19:27, Rick C wrote:

>>> What part of -this post was an accident- do you not understand???
>>> The OTHER thread is the post people are replying to. This thread
>>> needs to be ignored. We don't need two on the same topic.
>>>
>> Usenet is for chatter - and it is anarchy in practice. You have no
>> control of what people post here, who posts what, or in which threads.
>> Starting a thread gives you exactly /zero/ special rights or privileges.
> 
> We have total control over who we ignore.
> 

Then exercise that control - ignore the people, posts or threads that 
you dislike.  If Dimiter and I want to discuss newsreaders on a thread 
you started by mistake, that's up to us.  If you want to ignore it, 
that's up to you.  Of course you are also free to yell at people for 
making posts you don't want to see, if that's the path you want to take.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31057

On 14/06/2022 17:26, Rick C wrote:
> Wow!  This group seems to have all but died.  It used to be very
> vibrant.
> 

Sad, but true.  Few new people join Usenet - most technical groups are 
either destroyed by vandals, migrated to mostly non-technical (such as 
sci.electronics.design), or haunted by greybeards.  c.a.e. has always 
been quite small, and most of the people here seem to be quite happy 
doing their work without having to ask many questions.  But when someone 
/does/ ask a question, there are a fair number of lurkers who crawl out 
of the woodwork to join in.

So it's nice to see a thread like this!

> I'm trying to determine how prevalent 4-bit MCUs are in the world.  I
> know lots of products have used 4-bit devices in the past,
> coffee-makers, remote controls, microwave ovens, etc.  I believe at
> one time, in terms of  raw quantity, they outnumbered every other
> sector.  But I don't find very many at mainstream manufacturers.
> I've also only found a couple companies with less visibility who
> supply these parts.
> 

That matches my understanding.

> Anyone out there work with 4 bit MCUs?  Anyone build products in the
> quantities of millions where a 4 bit MCU might make a difference
> price wise?
> 

Not me.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.arch.embedded

csiph-web