The current lack of UC3A availability is causing me to rethink the advisability of designing the part into our products. The lack of activity on this forum is another negative indicator. The number and kind of problems that keep cropping up in both hardware and software are just creating a really bad impression.
Does anybody else have similar concerns? Has anybody else made the switch away from this architecture? Has anybody made the switch to this architecture?
I'm just wondering.
Yes, it can be a problem.
https://www.avrfreaks.net/index.p...
https://www.avrfreaks.net/index.p...
I spec'd my part when Digikey and Mouser showed large numbers in stock. Then they were gone!
Stock levels at Mouser don't look too bad, depends on your part: http://www.mouser.com/_/?Keyword...
Have a look at the UC3B stock levels: http://www.mouser.com/Search/Ref...
Overall my experience with the UC3B (slightly different to yours) has been 99% good. I really like using the part and the Framework allowed me to start using the part in a very short time. All complex parts have an errata sheet, it's a fact of life I guess. If you don't want errata sheets, then you're usually stuck with 8bit parts. I understand if this isn't an option.
While it isn't my problem that there are huge lead times, it may well become my problem if we have to change to another part ... most likely some ARM based CPU.
