Is Picaxe Dead?

[Jeremy Leach]

I think the ONLY commands that "leverage the capabilities of the chips to the max ..." are those which configure / enable the core-independent peripherals (PWM, timers, etc.) Otherwise, you're running through the interpreter.

That being said, speaking for myself .... 80 - 90% of the projects I've built only really need to be faster than ME, not as fast a lightening ... so PICAXE works. But, I've also had projects where I want things to be much faster ... and I've enjoyed embedded PIC development for that ... I mean ... if you haven't played with Direct Memory Access ... you're missing out!

 

[Jeremy Leach]

I think the ONLY commands that "leverage the capabilities of the chips to the max ..." are those which configure / enable the core-independent peripherals (PWM, timers, etc.) Otherwise, you're running through the interpreter.

That being said, speaking for myself .... 80 - 90% of the projects I've built only really need to be faster than ME, not as fast a lightening ... so PICAXE works. But, I've also had projects where I want things to be much faster ... and I've enjoyed embedded PIC development for that ... I mean ... if you haven't played with Direct Memory Access ... you're missing out!

DMA is fantastic and I've used it quite a lot with my experiments in audio, coupled to SPI, and getting 'frames' of audio to load into memory in the background. Parallel processing in it's truest sense. But I must admit it's sometimes taken ages to get working properly (and a lot of cost with licence renewals to get compiler optimisations!).

 

[bpowell]

But I must admit it's sometimes taken ages to get working properly (and a lot of cost with licence renewals to get compiler optimisations!).

Yeah, the setup was the tricky part ... but it's all there in the datasheet ... you just need to re-read it about 100 times! Still, that's kind of the stuff I find fun about the hobby ... and for me, it's strictly a hobby. I'd be very stressed if I were trying to get DMA working for a work project and I was under a deadline.

Along that hobby track: I haven't had a need to optimize further than the free version of XC8 will give me ... given how much space is on chips now (128KB for code space?!) my humble little projects fit in there nicely.

 

[Jeremy Leach]

Yeah, the setup was the tricky part ... but it's all there in the datasheet ... you just need to re-read it about 100 times! Still, that's kind of the stuff I find fun about the hobby ... and for me, it's strictly a hobby. I'd be very stressed if I were trying to get DMA working for a work project and I was under a deadline.

Along that hobby track: I haven't had a need to optimize further than the free version of XC8 will give me ... given how much space is on chips now (128KB for code space?!) my humble little projects fit in there nicely.

The optimisations I've used are more because of execution speed and getting the highest processing throughout that I can. I've never actually run out of programming space at all.

 

[manuka]

Well retired South Seas old timer "Manuka" here! I still occasionally browse this forum but haven't contributed for years & am now more involved in non electronic activities. Herewith a few e-musings -

I cut my teeth electronically 60+ years ago as a teen in early 1960s ham radio (then -gasp- largely thermionic!), & eventually went on to an associated NZ/Australian & UK technical & educational career.

In this context my PICAXE enthusiasm & promotion was quite recent as it began 2002 (while NZ tertiary teaching) & probably peaked during a long run of PICAXE articles (many 433 MHz data slanted) I penned for the Australian "Silicon Chip" monthly.

Yes -20+ years ago (although recent for an old timer!) & a telling duration given e-tech's white hot progress...

That early Y2k era predates such now common e-tech as BT, WiFi, SD cards, Lithium rechargeables,smartphones & even -gasp- now ubiquitous USB & white LEDs. Of course today's numerous powerful & cheap microcontrollers (& languages like microPython) were still to come.

PICAXE's,although serial programmed, then had few rivals & were superbly "can do" & cost effective beside such offerings as US sourced BASIC Stamps. I recall a degree level student saying he'd achieved more on a project in a few hours with PICAXEs than he'd managed in weeks with raw PICs. That remark rather reminded me of the mid 1970s when HP programmable calculators bypassed the need to program punch card style in Fortran. PRODUCTIVITY!

But it's now 2025 & I've rather lost touch with even NZ/Australian educational micro preferences,although apparently Raspberry Pi based setups tend the norm for senior students. (Refer an Australian MMBASIC Pico 2 based kit just released).

In Britain the BBC micro:bit (V.2) seems popular for 11-12 yo STEM teaching, no doubt boosted by it's self contained design easing classroom setup & "tidy up time" clutter.

All up, & although PICAXEs are/were schools focused, it could be that hobbiests are NOW the majority users...

To help keep things in perspective perhaps those involved with their region's STEM e-education could inform of the actual state of play?

Stan. (Wellington, New Zealand) ZL2APS

 

[Jools]

I've just come back to electronics after a break and want to get back to Picaxe projects again but the programming tools for Linux seem somewhat out of date and picaxecloud.com just times out.

Does anyone have any recommendations? So far, I've been running Axepad in an Ubuntu 14 VM.

Thanks in advance,

Jools

 

[steliosm]

HI Jools. I am using Ubuntu as well and I am running the latest programming editor (PE6) using wine (https://www.winehq.org/). Never had an issue with it. There is also the option to use VS Code on linux: https://picaxe.com/software/third-party/visual-studio-code/

 

[kranenborg]

I don't agree with this ... there are certainly more powerful 8-bit, 8-pin chips than the 12F1840 (PICAXE 08M2) ... some with 2x or 4x the RAM, 2x the flash storage, more UART, configurable logic blocks, etc. The PIC16F17115 for instance. As for the 18F14K22 (PICAXE 20X2), I've started playing with the PIC18F16Q41 which has 4x the storage, 8x the RAM, More timers, CLC, etc. There's even 20-pin chips that are nearly identical to the 20x2, but include a USB module.

Microchip has been marching along.

​

Going back to the original topic ... motivated by Bpowell's remark,

What I could appreciate as a "compromise" solution (with likely limited implementation effort for Rev-Ed as I suspect) succeeding the 08M2 (based on 12F1840): A new 08M3 (based on PIC16F17114 or 115) implementing both:

1. As a baseline: the current Picaxe BASIC command set for the 08M2 - which definitely will satisfy all educational purposes which is at the core of Rev-Eds venture,
2. Adaptations to the POKESFR/ & PEEKSFR commands, allowing all internal modules of the new PIC16F17114/5 chip to be addressed and configured - as a gift to the "professional hobbyists" seeking to use the full potential of the new device (like the OpAmp, numerical oscillator etc.).

Of course, similar reasoning holds for the 14 - and 20-pin devices in the M2 series, as well as the X2 series devices.
I can imagine that this would be possible with not too much effort since both chips are based on the same Mid-range Enhanced Core architecture, it seems just more exiting modules and increased pin mapping flexibility in the newest chips ... .

Am I a dreamer, or is there some hope ?

/Jurjen

 

[Digisapien]

I just want to remind everyone, just cuz I keep seeing it pop up, there are the X2 chips that are quite a bit more powerful than the M2 versions. Just saying.

 

[nick12ab]

I don't think anyone's mentioned this yet, but what about In Circuit Debug?

PE5 has a 'Connect' feature in the menu which just shows a message box saying that feature is in development.

Did that feature ever get implemented? I can't see it in the latest version of PE6. (The crude 'debug' command doesn't count)

This is one thing a certain 5-letter competitor got right first time out of the gate, using the same serial download cable as PICAXE and no additional external hardware.

It's also a particular weakness of Arduino. Arduino IDE 1.x doesn't have it at all and I believe the newfangled Arduino 2.x IDE has this feature if you have an expensive Atmel ICE, a requirement which is to be expected because it runs compiled code. This is a feature that is very useful in education, a potential advantage over Arduino, and it's good educational experience for students who will eventually use things like the MPLAB ICD in industry (or more likely Segger J-Link on this newfangled 32-bit ARM stuff that is very popular now).

 

[steliosm]

No, we actually never got to see the Circuit Debug functionality supported on Picaxes. Plain 'Debug' functionality, although slow, can give you quite a bit of details of what is happening on your Picaxe and it has indeed been very helpful to me when things didn't go as 'programmed'.
Arduino is (still - I think) using the serial monitor to see what is happening, but this is more of a 'console output' type of debug.

 

[Flenser]

To help keep things in perspective perhaps those involved with their region's STEM e-education could inform of the actual state of play?

I think that manuka has identified something that us forum members should keep firmly in mind when discussing how great it would be if there were faster M3/X3 chips with more program memory and more variable storage.

Rev-Eds PICAXE chips are a child of the technology that was being used when they were first created. I did see a forum thread that described the early history of Rev-Ed but I was unable to find it with a search. The pinned "READ ME FIRST" post in the active forum is dated 2007 so it was before 2007.

This means it is now nearly 20 years on since PICAXE chips using BASIC were released and the first languages being taught in schools may have moved on from BASIC.

This certainly appears to be the case in Australian schools were my google search came up with an Australian Govt Education web site which:
- gave an example of using visual programming in years 5-6 where the example was Scratch
- described one of the objectives for years 7-8 as "code and test programs in a general-purpose programming language such as Python or JavaScript"
- and described one of the objectives for years 9-10 as "explore the object-oriented paradigm for organising code"

The site I found did not discuss teaching the use of microcontrollers so I don't know what is used in Australian schools.

 

[kranenborg]

I think that manuka has identified something that us forum members should keep firmly in mind when discussing how great it would be if there were faster M3/X3 chips with more program memory and more variable storage.
...
Rev-Eds PICAXE chips are a child of the technology that was being used when they were first created. ... This means it is now nearly 20 years on since PICAXE chips using BASIC were released and the first languages being taught in schools may have moved on from BASIC.

So true.

And there might be some truth in Manuka's statement below as well:

...
All up, & although PICAXEs are/were schools focused, it could be that hobbiests are NOW the majority users...
...

This is the reason why I proposed in this discussion (item #48) an approach where M2/X2-level Picaxe BASIC would be implemented on newer silicon (hence the M3/X3) with POKESFR/PEEKSFR opportunities offered to hobbyists to configure the new modules themselves, whilst for educational purposes one can stick with the already excellent M2/X2 functionality. I see this as a way for RevEd to cater to both communities with very limited extra efforts from their side.

Regarding the main topic, I see similar things happening to other comparable microcontroller platforms like Parallax's Stamp, NetMedia's BasicX and - sadly - also to my other favorite microcontroller platform for more advanced and demanding projects, namely ZBASIC. The latter's forum has grown practically silent (which luckily is not yet the case of PICAXE).

But I think there is still a case to make for excellent microcontroller platforms like PICAXE and ZBASIC since the value of them lies in so much more than just the chips themselves: Through their excellent forums, the motivated and helpful userbase and excellent documentation, these platforms can bring much value and sometimes may still be the best options in many projects for years to come. But how to make this value visible?

I think is it is the rapid pace of technology development that both enables the conception of new powerful tools, but also inevitably bears with it the impression of rapidly dwindling added value as new concepts emerge and overtake the previous ones.
But value is not just based on conceptual strength but primarily created by thorough experience with the platform and leveraging on it in actual projects, i.e. really designing and making things. This value remains for very long times for the crafted individual (like so many forum members involved in this discussion), but I feel that many newcomers in the field may simply not observe this and thus miss a great opportunity.

I have messaged the owners of both the PICAXE and ZBASIC platforms on my scenario proposals for including newer silicon with limited efforts (I think) from their side, we'll see, this is the maximum useful effort I could think of … .

Best regards,
Jurjen