Plus for those extra 20 cents you know you have at least a decent customer service, readable datasheets and you don't have to learn Mandarin when having questions about certain functionalities.
This is the specific kind of false FUD argument that pisses me off. Not because I think a Padauk controller would be a nice&easy experience to work with, but because this gives you an impression that the "classic", more expensive alternatives would.
Yes, I use STM32, a reputable Western brand; I have used them extensively for years. No, I don't have a readable datasheet (reference manual to be correct), I need to reverse engineer the shit out of their broken and undocumented, or unintuitive designs, and yes, I have contacted the customer service several times, either to get help (clarification on manual omissions), or to report a silicon bug (with a minimum reproducible test code that I have tested with several chips to rule out unit variance, possibly spending a full day just to make a proper error report) to be included in the errata sheet, but they don't bother replying
at all. There is
no customer service. Or if there is, it's much more than the price you paid for the chip. It probably requires some kind of multi $10k support agreement, I don't know? Or maybe you need to be a massive customer (speaking of volumes).
I have learned to live with this and actually don't want to complain too much about it; I understand they (ST) are making cheap hi-tech shit quickly and that means limiting the resources in documentation and customer service. I do the same sin. I don't have time to document and support everything properly either.
So, I feel myself fairly safe with any kind of a microcontroller, because I can handle it, I'm used to it, and I'm used to slowdowns and can account for them beforehand. I'm positive I'd be just fine with a 3 cent Padauk, if the need ever arises, even if they had STM32-level customer service (this is, no customer service). OTOH, there is a possibility that they
do have English customer service - look at their English documentation for example, they have clearly spent some resources doing it -, how do you know without trying it out?
The power of this chip is in simplicity. Given some
very basic documentation, you can work out the missing details by the same process needed with an STM32 - through revense-engineering and guesstimation. But because it's simple, it's unlikely to be a completely dead end. And if it is, you'll see it very quickly.