Lpc2000

Dear Richard,

Thank you for raising your displeasure with my references to ATMEL.

I do not advocate any particular device or manufacturer.  I work on
any device from any manufacturer that I am asked to work on.

I developed the AVR boot loader for laboratory use.  It worked so well
that other clients started using it as-is for other purposes.

Different requirements led to I being asked to repeat this for the
LPC. I found problems.  Philips did not respond adequately.  So I
raised the issues in this forum.

I can assure you I have no desire whatsoever to be anywhere in the
vicinity of the "class action" one poster quite vexatiously referred
to.  Neither was it my intentinon to get you or anyone to use ATMEL.

Jaya


--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "rtstofer" <rstofer@p...> wrote:
>
> 
> > While it takes just one test to show a security vulnerability, is not
> > feasible (or valid) to claim a system is secure (or assure quality) 
> by
> > testing alone.
> 
> True, security can never be proven.  So why not review the claims of 
> Philips and make a decision:  I believe therefore I will buy.  I don't 
> believe so I'll use Atmel.
> 
> If you think Philips will post the code or describe the internals on 
> this forum, I think you are mistaken.
> 
> Stay with Atmel.
> 
> Richard
>