SX52 End of Life: buy your inventory now, please
Ken Gracey
Posts: 7,401
Dear SXers,
With·dissapointment we announce the end-of-life for the SX52BD microcontroller.·We have worked hard to find a packaging solution for this chip, even travelling to Taipei, Taiwan to solve the problem. Parallax experienced the same difficulty Ubicom had with this chip -·the die·doesn't fit into·a common·10x10mil PQFP package without extensive tooling and high unit costs.
At this point we have·three solutions, neither of which will solve everybody's problem.
Sincerely,
Ken Gracey
Parallax, Inc.
·
With·dissapointment we announce the end-of-life for the SX52BD microcontroller.·We have worked hard to find a packaging solution for this chip, even travelling to Taipei, Taiwan to solve the problem. Parallax experienced the same difficulty Ubicom had with this chip -·the die·doesn't fit into·a common·10x10mil PQFP package without extensive tooling and high unit costs.
At this point we have·three solutions, neither of which will solve everybody's problem.
- Switch to the SX48 and continue to have adequate supply in the future.·The sales data for production uses shows that the·split between the·SX48/52 lies·in favor of·the·SX48 in a 10 to 1 ratio.··
- Buy·the remaining inventory of SX52s from Parallax (as of today, October 31st, 2005 we have only 4,050 units in stock).
- Or, if your company has a volume·use of the SX52·and truly needs the additional 4 I/Os we could investigate·putting the die·in a larger 14x14mil package. This would require a·substantial commitment·from both parties, but could be arranged·under specific circumstances. You would need to contact me directly at kgracey@parallax.com.
Sincerely,
Ken Gracey
Parallax, Inc.
·
Comments
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
---
James Newton, Host of SXList.com
james at sxlist,com 1-619-652-0593 fax:1-208-279-8767
SX FAQ / Code / Tutorials / Documentation:
http://www.sxlist.com Pick faster!
No, the SX48s are not in danger. That's why I suggested them (or any other SX chip, should you desire) as an alternative. We have 75K units on the way each month and marketing/support activities to continue promoting them in the future. This should take care of your needs.
Ken Gracey
Parallax, Inc.
RoboGeek
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
There are 10 kinds of people in the world,
those that know binary and those that don't.
Formerly bugg.
www.goldmine-elec.com
www.parallax.com
www.expresspcb.com
www.startrek.com
·
What about eventually selling other Ubicom micros with appropriate software? Afterall, they do have more.
75 thousand each month! hmmm. Don't worry, be happy.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
"When all think alike, no one is thinking very much.' - Walter Lippmann (1889-1974)
······································································ Warm regards,····· G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse]·黃鶴 ]·in Taiwan
Then the SX18 died.
Now the SX52.
I should be getting scared....
William, don't be concerned, the SX18 was dropped when Ubicom still managed the chip, and that was due to poor sales and not making a profit from the package. As Ken explained, there is a different issue wrt the SX52, if there is enough demand from consumers to justify placing it in a 64-PQFP (with 12 unconnected pins) they'll do it, but most commercial apps use the SX48 because it is in the smaller TQFP footprint and cheaper.
Ken, will the die size of the SX28 run into the same problem if you try to come out with a 8 or 12 SOIC version?
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
·1+1=10
Post Edited (Paul Baker) : 11/1/2005 1:23:17 PM GMT
If you are certain that the SX is going away, I strongly advise you to consider using other processors rather than make your life difficult by continually dealing with the unknown. Honestly, we don't appreciate the ongoing complaints, complaints, complaints. If you had an idea of what we've accomplished to secure the SX's future on your behalf you'd likely be embarrassed by your comments. Halloween is over - but if you're still scared about the SX then please seek out alternatives and utilize them. . . I've never written anything like this to a customer, ever.
Paul, the SX28DP and all other SX chips (SX20, 20SS, SX48) are in packaging now. The SX20/28 are the same die, and they are small enough to fit into a much lower pin-count version.
The remaining stock of our SX52s are now sold.
Sincerely,
Ken Gracey
Parallax, Inc.
We will have 500 SX52 Proto Boards in stock on December 9. After that, we'll have 500 more units coming and then we'll be out permanently (unless we make another 52-pin SX in a new package).
Sincerely,
Ken Gracey
Parallax, Inc.
Ouch, that's no fun at all. Like Paul, I've got some stuff that I was planning on using with parallel SRAM. Looks like that's got to go by the wayside in favor of latches or the slower FRAM from Ramtron. Bummer. Looks like I'll have to survive on my 2 SX52 protoboards and a few loose chips until I can get the changes made for the 48s.
This isn't the first time I've dealt with things like this, and I'm sure it won't be the last. Thankfully it didn't happen a week before production was scheduled to start, like it did to a customer of mine last week. They were ableto secure 20 weeks of stock to manufcature with, but we now have 20 weeks to completely redesign, test, certify, and move into production it's replacement. I'll take my hobbyist designer/distributer issues over that any day of the week.
Silicon isn't solid like bedrock. That's a good thing for the advancement of technology I think, but it does put folks in a bind when things get EOL'd. It's the way of the world though. Unless someone steps up with an enormous order guaranteed in perpetuity, things will be always get discontinued. It's inevitable.
I do sincerely appreciate the things you guys have done to keep the majority of the SX line solvent. Unlike some, I've had (admittedly peripherial) involvement in moving a production chip from one manufacturer to another, and the task is herculean on the best of days. I can only imagine what it's been like combining that with a move from an integrator to a fabricator (despite being fabless, if I remember correctly).
I didn't shy away from Parallax when the EPROM programming business went away. I won't now. This is a small inconvenience in the grand scheme.
All of that said, if the SX52 did come back in, say, a 64 pin package, I don't think I'd complain. It'd require a really good market study on the part of Parallax though. I'll miss my 4 I/Os, but I'll live.
-dave
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
This is not a sig. This is a duck. Quack.
Post Edited (Dave Paton) : 11/1/2005 4:18:40 PM GMT
The fact that you are angry about this leads me to guess (only a guess) that you feel guilty about not being able to keep the 52 in production. I don't think you have any reason to be. Parallax has done a fine job of making the sx chips available and based on the inventory fluctuations I see on your order page, I can feel sure your sales volumn is enough to keep the remaining chips around for a good long time.
Paring off the 18 and the 52 to focus on the core 28 and 48 chips is a good thing, not bad.
On another subject: The need for more IO is something that every developer faces at some point. That SRAM application has been a royal pain and a great example of this for a good long time. The thing is, most of the time, you don't need every single pin comming right into the uC. For the SRAM, the address lines are generally needed only to load a starting point, then you just want to be able to increment them.
Rather than try to bring the 52 back in some other package, may I suggest that you focus on offering a range of IO expansion chips for ALL the remaining SX versions? There are some nice counter / latch chips out there that would complement your existing line of shift registers, etc...
And I personally think more hobbyests should be using CPLD and other programmable logic devices when they have large IO needs or for ultra high speed applications. The big problem with these for the time being is that programming them has a massive learning curve. Why not offer pre-programmed chips with common logic needs? This SRAM addressing thing is one good example. One chip, with different programs for each type of SRAM and different widths of data... One could even be made to support DRAM... Video generation is another area. Graphic LCD drivers (direct, replacing the LCD controllers). DSP audio and video effects. Image processing.
Or at the least, look in to offering something like the lower end Altera chips and start a forum to allow us to learn and support each other in thier use. A library of stock programs will develop over time (especially if you get John Williams interested [noparse]:)[/noparse] ) and before you know it, you will be solving more problems for customers and providing more things for SX chips to control. There is some information (possibly out of date) at
http://www.sxlist.com/techref/logics.htm
The marketing of the SX as a CPLD killer has had the effect of ignoring the opportunities for cooperation in these areas. An SX28 with a CPLD is better than an SX52 in more cases than I care to count.
To the fearful: Every chip out there gets end-of-lifed at some point. Something else comes along to take its place and manager and PCB designers grumble, then do some work and get over it. Someday, Parallax may be offering the IP2K (which IS binary code compatible with the SX; if you check the data sheets and look at the opcode values, you will see this) in place of the 48/52. Life goes on.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
---
James Newton, Host of SXList.com
james at sxlist,com 1-619-652-0593 fax:1-208-279-8767
SX FAQ / Code / Tutorials / Documentation:
http://www.sxlist.com Pick faster!
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Jon Williams
Applications Engineer, Parallax
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
·1+1=10
There _is_ a learning curve. Rummaging through the piles of sample code will help. I don't know if there are user groups for Xilinx - mostly, I just get on with it. Learning VHDL is well worth the effort - it's just a programming language, and the free version of modelsim will tell you where you're going wrong...
I suspect that other siicon manufacturers have similar deals - if not, then vote with your feet...
Steve
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
·1+1=10
Post Edited (Paul Baker) : 11/1/2005 8:27:34 PM GMT
The Xilinx Webpack stuff is pretty darn good. I use it to knock out widgets for the lab, without excessive hassles. It's possible I've just been beaten into submission, but I don't think so. Note - I have _no_ idea how well any schematic tools work for CPLDs. The ease of debug, reusability, and possibility of a project still working when I dig it out 5 years later mean that VHDL, despite its verbose and sometimes insanely nitpicky nature, is the method of choice for me, for everything from a tiny led flasher to a million-gater.
Steve
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
·1+1=10
Steve
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
·1+1=10
Not only does this dotNetBB forum software not support mid-thread relocation to a new forum, most of our forum moderators let discussion take its due course. Very minimal moderation is our goal, though you will occasionally see threads modified with a more description subject.
Therefore, you can continue your CPLD talk without concern about having it moved. The only problem with talking about CPLDs so much in this thread is that you are constantly reminding me of our failure to keep the SX52 in tact (and advertising this sad EOL story)! And that's not a problem either, because as James pointed out I'm only angry with myself and I've already calmed down after I turned William Chan into my outlet. Sorry, William.
Sincerely,
Ken Gracey
Parallax, Inc.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
---
James Newton, Host of SXList.com
james at sxlist,com 1-619-652-0593 fax:1-208-279-8767
SX FAQ / Code / Tutorials / Documentation:
http://www.sxlist.com Pick faster!
RE: CPLD discussion, it's best we start a new thread with further talk on the subject, while it isn't a issue at this point, ocassionally I will go back to an old thread to get some info, if it is hidden in another thread, it makes it almost impossible to locate. On a related but still offtopic point, hows the new search engine coming along?
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
·1+1=10
Post Edited (Paul Baker) : 11/1/2005 9:41:00 PM GMT
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Jon Williams
Applications Engineer, Parallax
William,
I think it was not an easy job for Ken publishing the problems concerning the SX52 packaging in the forum. On the other hand (and I hope I'm posting this on the behave of the majority of the SX user's community), I'm thankful that Ken did give us this information in time. It helps us to understand the reason for this problem, but also makes us feel comfortable that Parallax continues to support the SX devices at it's very best in the future. Although I never needed the full amount of the 40 SX52 I/O pins for any of my projects, I can understand that some users with applications that need these pins to address external parallel RAM are going to have some trouble now.
Besides this, I would like to know from you - William - how many SX-based applications you have developed until now, how many SX devices you have bought so far, and how many SX-based applications you could not finish due to the lack of availability of SX18 or SX52 devices. In case your answer is "close to zero", you better stop complaining about component pricing and availability in this forum. As Ken suggested, there are some other manufacturers of MCUs around in the market, offering a "myriard" of different devices with a "myriard" of different features. IMO, the time you will need to find out the device that meets your requirements best will take longer than the time for writing an appropriate application for the SX.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Greetings from Germany,
G
I was not complaining, merely saying that I was worried which is just the truth.
I also did not complain about prices, I only asked why the SMTs are more expensive that the DIPs, and whether there will be a price review when the new Parallax chips arrive.
Besides the problem with 4 less pins, the SX48 is too small for us to handle with manual soldering.
Ken, can I request that Parallax also sell the solder paste as well.
Ok, for the list of SX projects our engineers have designed and commercialized, ok let me see,
1. Door Access Reader ( SX28)
2. Intelligent Serial LCD ( SX18)
3. USB LCD Interface (SX20SS and FTDI )
4. MiniCallShop System ( SX28 and SX18 )
5. IR Remote Controller (SX18)
6. Alarm System ( SX28 )
7. SX Keyphone ( SX52, in progress )
8. iCar Immobilizer ( SX18 )
9. Fixed Line SMS Box ( SX28 and SX18)
10. LED Display Board Controller ( SX28 )
11. Simple Home Automation System ( SX18 )
12. TinyDialer ( SX18)
13. DTMF Detector and Viewer ( SX28 )
14. Coil Gun ( SX28 )
15. ChatGate SMS Gateway System ( SX 28 )
Plus many more projects that got stuck at prototype stage.
Guenther mentioned that Parallax informed us early, I am not complaining, but I wish to point out that Ken gave us about 5 days warning before the SX52 stock ran out.
Lets not allow emotions get the better of us. I feel no anger or sadness at the moment.
Ken you mentioned about the SX20...., is the SX20 DIP coming back?
Also to those worried about the cost of a custom PCB www.4pcb.com will sell you a single PCB for $50 shipped, 60 sq inches, solder mask, two layers and silkscreen if you are in college. If you are not, simply find a reletive and have it shipped to his school where he can pick it up for you. BTW: I havn't had to do that yet, but you could. I still have about 6 yrs yet before then.
Also I can buy the PCBs myself and ship them to you, kind of cheating but we're all poor hobbyists anyway.
Quote this web page (still on the parallax site as of Nov 2, 2005): http://www.parallax.com/sx/sx_update.asp
"Parallax SX part numbers will stay the same, as shown below.
"
I'm not upset about the SX52 going away per-se. But rather Parallax's handling of informing us of such a change.
Now, I have to go to some of my customers, who I assured the SX52 would be around, and inform them that they will have to pay to redesign products that have been designed and redo circuit boards and that have been bought and paid for.
If the production of the SX52 had not been guaranteed at the time of the Parallax announcement to take over production, why were we informed (or not informed) of the difficulties and possibility of the 52 package going away?
-Dan
·
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
·1+1=10