A REALLY accurate clock.

[Charles Linquis]

It is just my continuous jab at those who continue to use 16F parts. There are not many times when a 16F part is the best for an application. 18F parts have advantages in speed, code efficiency, better peripherals, if you run out of program space, there are (usually) larger parts in the same family that you can easily move to.
They can deal with large arrays and you can use LONG integers with PBP.

And, they generally cost no more than their "little brothers".

[Mike, K8LH]

I understand what you're saying and I agree (generally) with your premises but you shouldn't dismiss or exclude the 12F and 16F "enhanced" midrange devices. They're pretty potent with a 32-MHz clock, linear RAM address mapping, an interesting assortment of peripherals (some not found on 'legacy' 18F devices), and an excellent price/performance ratio. In fact, I can think of one case where the new FVR (fixed voltage reference) module is found on some 18F "K" series devices and on some 12F/16F "enhanced" devices, but the "K" series devices can't use the FVR output as the ADC +vref input as can be done on the 12F/16F "enhanced" devices.

[Charles Linquis]

Noted. Those parts have some really nice features, and I do use the 12F parts from time to time for such menial tasks as 555 replacements, but I am still amazed at the huge number of people using 16F parts. In many cases, the solutions would be easier if they simply switched to an 18F part. The reluctance to change baffles me.

[Mike, K8LH]

In many cases, the solutions would be easier if they simply switched to an 18F part.

May I ask, in what context? Are you talking about easier with respect to programming in PBP which may lack some features on the 16F parts?

[Charles Linquis]

The 18Fs have more/better peripherals, allow for LONGs and big arrays and almost all run at 40Mhz. They also allow for near seamless upgrades when your needs exceed 32K of FLASH.

[Mike, K8LH]

Charles, please forgive me for pressing. I've got a Philosophy class this semester and I guess I'm trying to frame your comment into premises and conclusion.

I certainly wouldn't argue that the 18F' parts have "more" of just about everything (flash, RAM, clock speed, peripherals, etc.). I'm just not sure how you would quantify "in many cases", and, unless PBP is missing capabilities or features for 16F targets compared to 18F targets, I'm not sure how writing programs might be "easier" for one or the other. I've got LONG data types for 12F, 16F, and 18F targets with the BoostC compiler I'm using. Is that not the case with PBP?

[Charles Linquis]

PBP does not support LONGs in 16F chips.