Well this started regarding the page modes of the DS series.

Connecting the latch differently may violate a std. 8051 sensibility but does payback neatly in decreased access time which folks who reference data structures will find quite refreshing.

The extended functionality of the DPTR found in the DS'4x0 series couples with this decreased memory access time to allow many algorithms to execute quite quickly. A side note, the source can get confusing so i always advise commenting the routines to reference that these alternate modes are in effect.

I have seen somewhere (and cannot quickly recall) an 8051 variant with some form of address range explicit stretch cycles, will continue looking.

As to the DS series being "quirky" this might be so for folks who haven't been using the DALLAS series from it's inception. If you are a DS'320 programmer the DS'4x0 is the logical evolution and an appreciated increase in functionality naturally extending the DS product vector.

Can't say i've ever had much problem in acquiring either samples or production of the DS series that is in any way eccentric to the standard IC marketplace that is ATMEL/TI/Analog and the rest.

Dallas has always been a wonderful support org. and this is eccentric compared to say ATMEL where i've had to crowbar errata and info from. A side note, BurrBrown nee' TI is also wonderful in this regard.

Other than from a Fabian point of view i find it hard to complain that after deciding to implement a peripheral explicit stretch implementation that i would find it a product failing.

Part of design is implementing device compatibility. If you must force such, due to device choices (intended or happen-stance), i would instead be glad i had the capability.

RE: Drop in form factor. This is of course, wonderful. Very useful. I have a few 8051 eval boards, dev boards that i have used for years and the ability to pop in anything from an ATMEL to a Dallas has been a very useful and often exploited. Since i was paid in the course of doing this, it wasn't an amateur exercise.

As to this "amateur" business, this is probably an alternate word to implicate "hobbyist". I'm sure this wasn't meant to be construed as derogatory as a great number of professionals are also hobbyists. Often jobs start on someones bench and later blossom into full production programs. Other times these hobby projects are educational experiences which directly benefit on a skill or experiential basis which increases ones capability for paid work.

regards,
p