Lpc2000

Hi, 

> I think it more likely to be the other way around.  I 
> envision a scenario where, if you want to use the ARM core 
> efficiently, you HAVE to buy their compiler.

That's nonsense--why else do 3Ps exist if not to compete with ARM's
compiler?  I reckon IAR and Green Hills, and probably others, would
vehemently defend their position as worthy competitors to ARM's tools.
I choose those two simply because their prices are comparable with ARM's
pricing model.

> Otherwise, for a company that exists solely to license 
> Intellectual Property, it doesn't make sense to buy a 
> compiler company.  Unless they figure they can make the 
> compiler more competitive through other means.

I do not believe that ARM purchased Keil to get the Keil ARM compiler.
Far from it.  My reading of the situation is that ARM needed something
more than they have now and went out shopping for it.  Keil provided an
opportunity to get some simulation technology together with an IDE and
debugger, and the 8051 and C166 came for free and can be cast out in
some fashion in the future.  You have to realise that ARM worked with
Metrowerks to get CodeWarrior integration.  I'm no great fan of
CodeWarrior, I find it confusing at best, so I expect ARM's indirect
customers told them they needed to refresh their tools.

> I never see the optimistic side of anything.  But, Lily 
> Tomlin had it right: "No matter how cynical I get, I can't keep up!".

Optimism, pessimism, or cynicism has nothing to do with why ARM
purchased Keil.

If I were a Keil customer for C166 and 8051, I'd be looking at my
options to move to another toolset because I think that these will
wither away in the long term.

Well, that's my reading of the situation.

--
Paul Curtis, Rowley Associates Ltd  http://www.rowley.co.uk
CrossWorks for MSP430, ARM, AVR and now MAXQ processors