Rob, Please contact me directly at email@example.com with specific problems or complaints. I am directly involved in projects to make our tools easier to use. But "tools" is a broad term, so I'm not sure what tool or part of a tool you're talking about, what version, etc. Maybe I can help. Maybe it's something we've already fixed. If nothing else, I will certainly listen, and perhaps I can do something about it. I genuinely consider feedback a gift, if you're willing to give it.
Dylan, it is all in the nomenclature / term used to describe the part. Take Broadcom for example, their 10Gig products like BCM87xxxxx are actually quite popular with the end users. If Freescale feels their names are a hit with the end users, I see no problem here!
Maybe the name is a bit difficult to pronounce, especially to non-English speaker, I think the most important thing is to have distinct features on each series so that people can say "ahhah" and really feel good to use them. I hope Freescale can go on the right track to provide easy to use while good performance processor/controller seires in those target markets.
So Freescale is also in the strong competition for the general purpose micro-controllers with PIC, TI and Intel. General purpose micro-controllers series are the most used electronic components in the smaller electronic products and projects. Efficient controllers are the most wanted things and that's where the FC's focus is.
That's because all of the new management does know the old names. PowerPC, PowerQuicc, ColdFire, StarCore, and yes its a part number, but who doesn't know 68000? I'm sure you'll find these at the core of these 'new' products. I think its cheeper to make new powerpoints than new cores, busses, and software infrastructure.
I admit I had the same thought. Henri Richard made the point that what Freescale/ Motorola used to have were part numbers, rather than product names. Part numbers don't really stick in the mind, unless you are using them or otherwise dealing with them all the time. But, like you, I agree that QorIQ Qonverge (pronounced, I only recently learned, "Core IQ Converge" seems kind of clunky. At the very least the spelling is not something you are going to remember initially. After a while I suspect that we will all get used to the names and it will seem no big deal. But for now, reading that name and then trying to say it... I suspect it's not something that many people will understand intuitively.
What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Are the design challenges the same as with embedded systems, but with a little developer- and IT-skills added in? What do engineers need to know? Rick Merritt talks with two experts about the tools and best options for designing IoT devices in 2016. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.