There seem to be alot of applications that don't require 168MHz and the PSoC parts have been around long enough to make the Triscend disease unlikely. I do like the fact that the tools are integrating TOWARD the IDE and away from the FPGA place and route flows.
There are also downsides to the 'all things to all users' approach :
The PSoC Creator build times are glacial - there are so many software jugglers involved.
The IP components may be flexible, but sadly they too are rather slow. Their specs give 15MHz for 16 bit counters. This beta (select customers only) release of v2.0 claims 20% better routing, but that's only 18MHz...
Contrast that with a STM32F4, which claims 168MHz 32 bit counters (and much more Flash/Ram/CPU/FPU for similar prices...)
There also seems to be a significant silicon cost to the 'all things' approach. PSoC parts are not cheap, and may yet suffer the FPSlic/Triscend disease.
It is looking faster and cheaper, to deploy two focused parts.
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.