PICAXE & Arduino (code size comparisons - just for fun)

[hippy]

I have been slightly critical of Rev.Ed. recently because I like working with the PICAXEs but I am not seeing the advances in their products (primarily the PE and toolchain) that is happening in the Arduino free-market...

Fair criticism is always acceptable, and that is always taken on board even if it doesn't seem to be immediately acted upon - For the Programming Editor there are plans in the pipeline which are actively being progressed, VSM now supports X2 and M2 parts, somewhat later than we had hoped for but the simplicity of use of PICAXE within VSM hides the complexities behind it all.

One must however bear in mind that the primary target audience for the PICAXE is the educational sector and often that's students with little or no prior programming experience, so a lot of what we do is focused towards that, rather than competing directly with systems which are aimed at users who are more experienced or more capable. That said, we do however hope to cater for a wide range of users with diverse experiences and capabilities, but it has to be recognised that it's difficult to have any product which is ideally suited to everyone's tastes.

[graynomad]

it's difficult to have any product which is ideally suited to everyone's tastes.

Just implement in-line assembler, then everyone will be covered

[westaust55]

Just implement in-line assembler, then everyone will be covered

As soon as an in-line assembler is implemented someone will try to download/"dump" the firmware to create their own "PICAXE". Then the clones will be on Ebay and elsewhere.

The firmware is Rev Ed's Intellectual Property (IP) and keeping it securely guarded is their only way to stay in business.
The do not charge a fee for the Programming Editor and their mark up between the raw/native PIC cost and the Rev Ed selling price is their source of income to develop new firmware and pay employees.

Having dis-assembled the tokenized BASIC so I could splice in my own extra functions (such as speech using the SC-01 Speech chip, and low 128x128 pixel resolution graphics) on early microprocessors (mid 1970’s) through to OSI and TRS-80’s (Late 70’s) and Commodore 64 (early 80’s) before my experiments in such when into abeyance, I am fairly conversant in how they work. From my work mrburnette mentioned at post 7, I know a lot more than I will ever disclose to protect Rev Ed’s IP (and myself).

[mrburnette]

You need to get out more

Yea, I hear that (often.) I did accompany a friend to Microcenter to buy parts for a new home-built PC... it's fun spending other folks money.

I think my "problem" is that with the exception of one year in research after college in the School of Electrical Engineering as an employee, the rest of my working career was pretty terse; added to the normal issues and time constraints of raising a family, etc. Now retired, I am really having a blast again... like being a teenager in my old garage workshop back when I was in high school... before my military service days except the PICAXE is the new CK722. There is just so MUCH to do and too few hours! Today's project is putting a RTOS on my Arduino uC... really! http://chibios.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=start One of the Arduino forum senior members has ported the RTOS to the ATmega328... I may be in my laboratory for a long time (fortunately, pizza delivery is convenient since the workshop has its own door.

- Ray

[mrburnette]

Fair criticism is always acceptable, and that is always taken on board even if it doesn't seem to be immediately acted upon - For the Programming Editor there are plans in the pipeline which are actively being progressed, VSM now supports X2 and M2 parts, somewhat later than we had hoped for but the simplicity of use of PICAXE within VSM hides the complexities behind it all.

One must however bear in mind that the primary target audience for the PICAXE is the educational sector and often that's students with little or no prior programming experience, so a lot of what we do is focused towards that, rather than competing directly with systems which are aimed at users who are more experienced or more capable. That said, we do however hope to cater for a wide range of users with diverse experiences and capabilities, but it has to be recognised that it's difficult to have any product which is ideally suited to everyone's tastes.

I sincerely hope that my words were viewed as 'fair' - that was my intent. I have argued in many threads that Rev.Ed. has a business model and has to be true to that charter... it take lots of time to morph good ideas into a currently successful endeavor.

However, I think you may be underestimating the Arduino audience of 1st time users, non-technical in large majority, this group seems to 'grasp' the programming constructs of a structured language approach very quickly. I taught professionally in industry for 3 years and did adult course development and I am amazed since this 'bucks' hard against what my perceptions would have been...

I am glad RevEd is evolving; it is healthy. But do not undersell the ability of your users to grasp advanced concepts and utilize them effectively - even if it is only cut&paste. Arduino 1.0 provides structure and concept and a template approach; not unlike some of the PICAXE concepts, but the vocabulary used is more attuned and harmonious with advanced computing concepts; which is to say that real functions and procedures and objects and libraries exist naturally and therefore absorbed gradually through the introductory and example period of a student's introduction to the Arduino environment... not concepts that must be learned and applied separately at some later time after learning through the BASIC language. With no disrespect meant, it may be that BASIC stifles some users from advancing since it is so darn easy to use; which is not bad if that user is simply a hobbyist and are comfortable and happy in their comfort zone. But for students that must advance in the engineering sciences and even the creative arts, I have come to believe that perhaps the Arduino team has hit on a real winning concept. I learned BASIC after learning Fortran in college engineering and struggled with the lack of functionality. I learned BASIC again with the BASIC Stamp. So, when I started to play with the PICAXE devices, there were no concepts I needed to learn, I just needed to find my way around the environment and associate old ideas with new implementations. Even for this oldfart, it was an easy transition. But, I do have an assembler background of a few years and I do have formal training of OOP and even contributed to some Delphi work at one time in the Enterprise. So... here is the bottom line for me... I love the PICAXE and it is fun to solder up a little project and even post ideas to the community here and have some light word-play from time to time. But the Arduino has a "natural" draw to the entire environment and the environment is rich is current technology, implementation, diversity, and most importantly flexibility. It is also fun and features advance concepts that are naturally right in the prototyping of every naked sketch. Amazingly, the introductory price in the U.S. for the authentic, assembled Arduino Uno is $23 with the 328P chip which features embedded USB. Peter Anderson sells the AXE401 kit with the 28X2 for $17.95 ... The $5 for a completely soldered and tested board is warranted in my opinion - especially for a novice assembler.

Just food for thought ... but I believe that such things as LCD and CPU boards probably should not be assembled by a novice... but let the experienced kit builder buy all of the parts for a discount. Sorry... not to imply that I'm telling RevEd how to run their business, but I see so much frustration here on the PICAXE forum by beginners trying to get their first board to work correctly - I do not believe in baptism by fire... especially when the ignition device is a 300W soldering iron!

- Ray

do you want Alfred building his first PICAXE kit ... or, would buy one assembled and tested?
alfred-e-newman-how-to-solderc.jpg

[mrburnette]

As soon as an in-line assembler is implemented someone will try to download/"dump" the firmware to create their own "PICAXE". Then the clones will be on Ebay and elsewhere.

The firmware is Rev Ed's Intellectual Property (IP) and keeping it securely guarded is their only way to stay in business.
The do not charge a fee for the Programming Editor and their mark up between the raw/native PIC cost and the Rev Ed selling price is their source of income to develop new firmware and pay employees.
<...>

All true my friend and I have said similar in many threads. But the 'rub' we are dealing with at this point in uC evolution is that alternative open-source products exist and an entire industry is developing to supply wanted goods... even RevEd sells the PICAXE-28X2 AXE401-KIT Shield Kit in the U.S.

So, if Arduino is gaining momentum, how does the PICAXE product respond? In all respect to RevEd and all of the great employees that assist with this forum, I an pretty sure that a proprietary firmware is not the right way. When the BASIC Stamp tried that approach, Scott Edwards and others created assembler libraries and published books on how to bypass the interpreter for fun and profit. Arduino has a footprint that is scary big. I have worked with the environment long enough now that I have 2 UNO boards and 2 breadboard Arduino in my own lab and several ATtiny project boards that I have programmed from the GUI directly without the need for an AVRISP or even the bootloader. Darn stuff works great and assembly is available as is C and C++. What is not to like? But...

My biggest argument is that RevEd BASIC simply is not object oriented. It is powerful and a beautiful work of art but it is stuck inside the darn chip and protected like the Coke Cola formula. When the PICAXE thing began, open source software did not have the footprint it does now and liberal arts people were just beginning to think about using technology in art... today, they are doing lots more than thinking about incorporating technology, they are driving the technology ... and they are sucking in technical folk and software architects and the products are mushrooming and the capabilities are awesome. I mentioned in this thread today that I have the afternoon scheduled to play with ChibiOS on the Arduino.

I do not think in-line assembly is a requirement in the PICAXE market, but for those that want to do it... they have to change product. I am sure RevEd assumes that such attrition is the norm since they focus on education. But here is an analogy... schools in the U.S. have a driver education program for new drivers. Dealers provide new, free automobiles to the schools for the instructors to use because they want to create model affinity with hopes that when the young driver buys a new automobile they will migrate to the dealership providing the automobiles and purchase automobiles that are similar to what the student learned to drive. I have no idea if this plan works, but the dealers need to be reimbursed (somehow) for the expenses associated with this program- maybe a little higher profit margin on new car sells and maybe by some subsidy from the manufacturer. So, the kids are paying just a wee too much for that new car and the manufacturer MAY be slipping a few bucks under the table to support the retail market. And this is the way business has been done for years.

The Arduino marketplace does not work that way. The Linux marketplace does not work that way. Who knows how the Andriod market will work after Oracle? Point is... things are evolving. Remember the proprietary Microsoft Office file format? The European Union move to open document sure changed that, ugh? The market place is fickle and proprietary code can be very valuable one day and completely worthless another. I want to see RevEd succeed - and thrive - but I have no answers for the mess created by Arduino... I just know I like it (Arduino, not the mess.)

- Ray

[srnet]

So, if Arduino is gaining momentum, how does the PICAXE product respond?

Do they have to ?

[IronJungle]

I'm so happy with the PICAXE vs the Arduino I can't see straight.

Just my opinion, but.... the PICAXE is both easier and most difficult to program at the same time. Let me explain...

There is a module, code, shield, breakout board, etc. for most Arduino applications. Makes things easier, but do you really learn anything and what is the fun and chalenge in that. The PICAXE is 'friendlier' if you want to create a uC project and walk away with a better satisfaction of creating something and not just replicating.

Now that said, I so wish Rev-Ed would step up their Mac support... I find for more detailed SW debug I have to go through the long and painful boot process from my old Windows machine. (I hate that).

Still, I don't see any Arduino purchases or recommendations in my future.

[mrburnette]

Do they have to ?

They are privately owned, so the decision is theirs...

@RevEd: I have edited (deleted) the vast portion of this post because it occurs to me that to continue down this thread is not a productive exercise - which is to say, there is no vanishing point to be seen. Playing devil's advocate on either side simply acts to accent the differences and that alone will play to someone's idea of an endorsement for a product / technology.

Regards,

- Ray

[john hauton]

Hi Ray, where in the datasheet does it say that the 328p has embedded usb, because I cant seem to find it.
Maybe you meant the extra 16u2 that converts usb to serial. It would be nice if they did.
regards john