5 ms·

Still calling your new 64-bit chips STM32, just like your 32-bit chips, instead of STM64, feels like your branding/marketing team is asleep at the wheel or just

Still calling your new 64-bit chips STM32, just like your 32-bit chips, instead of STM64, feels like your branding/marketing team is asleep at the wheel or just non-existent. Even Nintendo figured that out ~30 years ago.

tyingq 3y ago
It sounds like maybe they intend this to be the bridge to the next thing? Like this for example: "developers can use the same STM32Cube tools" So maybe they are saving STM64 for something that has more breaking changes, requires a different toolset, etc?
zokier 3y ago
Well its a mixed 32/64 bit core, and I guess they want to emphasize the backcompat with STM32MP1 more than the 64bitness.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago
  AMD Athlon 64 was also backwards compatible to 32 bity yet nobody was confused about that from the 64 in the name, that it would somehow only run 64 bit code.
  - zamadatix 3y ago
    It's more the reverse of that implication. E.g. 2 years from now a 64 bit only STM chip could well be released instead of a hybrid 32 bit and 64 bit that also is fully 32 bit compatible. That's not really a problem on backwards-compatibility focused x86 where ~20 years after AMD64 the newly launched 7950X still supports booting ~30 year old 16 bit MS-DOS (and maybe older, I haven't tried).
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
wslh 3y ago
Or they can spend less in SEO using a similar name and from the same family?
delfinom 3y ago
You have no idea the absolute shit show that semiconductor part naming is And it's because of egos of marketing departments that think they know better than engineers. I shit you not, Microchip has a over 400 page internal PowerPoint that covers decoding their schemes and they keep adding more.
jenadine 3y ago
Like win32?
mort96 3y ago
STM32 is a very strong brand in the MCU space...
- eqvinox 3y ago
  Indeed it is, but maybe they should call it STM3264 :D
  - Mountain_Skies 3y ago
    Partner up with the USB folks and call it STM32.6-Gen4.
    - szundi 3y ago
      STM32-C
      - stratom 3y ago
        They already have an STM32C0 Series at the very other end of the performance spectrum starting @0,24$ per chip.
  - plumeria 3y ago
    Or STM32x2
  - donquichotte 3y ago
    STM64 subsystem for STM32
    - postalrat 3y ago
      You have backwards
- sspiff 3y ago
  But everyone in that space would immediately understand that STM64 are 64 bit designs from the same company, no? Still seems very strange to label 64-bit processors STM32...
Avamander 3y ago
It's like when Microchip bought Atmel they released the XTiny series. And they're not even that similar, so it has caused just a bunch of confusion. I suspect the same will happen with the STM32s that kinda are but also aren't.
not_your_vase 3y ago
What's even more strange is that they have no problem marketing their 8-bit MCUs as STM8
redfern314 3y ago
NXP also has an automotive line of chips called S32. In addition to only some of that line being 32-bit, it's terribly confusing to have those juxtaposed with STM32... would be nice for one of them to change their naming up a bit

tyingq 3y ago

It sounds like maybe they intend this to be the bridge to the next thing? Like this for example: "developers can use the same STM32Cube tools" So maybe they are saving STM64 for something that has more breaking changes, requires a different toolset, etc?

zokier 3y ago

Well its a mixed 32/64 bit core, and I guess they want to emphasize the backcompat with STM32MP1 more than the 64bitness.

FirmwareBurner 3y ago
AMD Athlon 64 was also backwards compatible to 32 bity yet nobody was confused about that from the 64 in the name, that it would somehow only run 64 bit code.
- zamadatix 3y ago
  It's more the reverse of that implication. E.g. 2 years from now a 64 bit only STM chip could well be released instead of a hybrid 32 bit and 64 bit that also is fully 32 bit compatible. That's not really a problem on backwards-compatibility focused x86 where ~20 years after AMD64 the newly launched 7950X still supports booting ~30 year old 16 bit MS-DOS (and maybe older, I haven't tried).
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

wslh 3y ago

Or they can spend less in SEO using a similar name and from the same family?

delfinom 3y ago

You have no idea the absolute shit show that semiconductor part naming is And it's because of egos of marketing departments that think they know better than engineers. I shit you not, Microchip has a over 400 page internal PowerPoint that covers decoding their schemes and they keep adding more.

jenadine 3y ago

Like win32?

mort96 3y ago

STM32 is a very strong brand in the MCU space...

eqvinox 3y ago
Indeed it is, but maybe they should call it STM3264 :D
- Mountain_Skies 3y ago
  Partner up with the USB folks and call it STM32.6-Gen4.
  - szundi 3y ago
    STM32-C
    - stratom 3y ago
      They already have an STM32C0 Series at the very other end of the performance spectrum starting @0,24$ per chip.
- plumeria 3y ago
  Or STM32x2
- donquichotte 3y ago
  STM64 subsystem for STM32
  - postalrat 3y ago
    You have backwards
sspiff 3y ago
But everyone in that space would immediately understand that STM64 are 64 bit designs from the same company, no? Still seems very strange to label 64-bit processors STM32...

Avamander 3y ago

It's like when Microchip bought Atmel they released the XTiny series. And they're not even that similar, so it has caused just a bunch of confusion. I suspect the same will happen with the STM32s that kinda are but also aren't.

not_your_vase 3y ago

What's even more strange is that they have no problem marketing their 8-bit MCUs as STM8

redfern314 3y ago

NXP also has an automotive line of chips called S32. In addition to only some of that line being 32-bit, it's terribly confusing to have those juxtaposed with STM32... would be nice for one of them to change their naming up a bit