Top
Best
New

Posted by MilnerRoute 2 days ago

Adafruit: Arduino’s Rules Are ‘Incompatible With Open Source’(thenewstack.io)
427 points | 239 commentspage 2
chaosprint 1 day ago|
I never use Arduino or Arduino IDE anyway; it's incredibly laggy for me, and I hate having these things in the cloud. I mainly use Pico and VS Code now.
jojobas 1 day ago||
Setting up the toolchain that's not Arduino IDE is a prohibitively high bar for a school child that wants to blink leds.
schappim 1 day ago||
There is a version of Thonny[1] designed for use with the Pico that is great for education. Raspberry Pi have some good resources on getting started[2].

If your target audience is school kids, you really can't go past the micro:bit and Makecode[3].

1. https://thonny.org

2. https://projects.raspberrypi.org/en/projects/getting-started...

3. https://makecode.microbit.org

jaustin 1 day ago||
The Micro:bit Educational Foundation also make a web-based Python Editor at https://python.microbit.org which is designed to be a supportive introduction to text-based coding and physical computing with no installation, friendly error messages and device simulation
platevoltage 1 day ago||
Yeah their IDE is basically unusable.
1718627440 1 day ago||
And yet that is the only thing, that they actually produce. Everything is else is from someone else.
platevoltage 1 day ago||
I am endlessly thankful for the Arduino project as it was one of the major gateways to programming for me, but at the same time, I bought an Arduino R4 and have barely even used it. ESP32, Raspberry Pi, and even 8 bit Atmel chips get way more attention from me. I'm guessing that Renesas chip on the R4 won't be getting too much attention anymore.
1718627440 1 day ago||
And if you poke a bit around, not even that was really of their own making: http://arduinohistory.github.io/ . There also has been some discussion about that here on HN, e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46009209, which was less than a month ago.
the__alchemist 1 day ago||
I feel like Arduino has lost its unique place in all but mindshare 5+ years ago. What I would recommend as a default:

  - Wi-Fi: Esp Risc-V (C3 etc)
  - BLE without Wi-Fi (Or ANTD): Nordic. Also a good choice in general for simple devices
  - General-purpose, including high-performance, low-power, and high I/O: Stm32

Use whichever IDE is suitable for the language you're programming in. (Jetbrains, Zed, VsCode etc). Use the specialty IDEs like Cube for viewing pinouts and configuring hardware as a reference.

If using rust, probe-rs + cargo is a "just works" CLI workflow to compile, flash, and debug.

drxzcl 1 day ago||
As an aside, I have never seen a decent license for user generated content. Either they expose the platform to serious liability, or they come across as incredibly predatory.
b112 1 day ago||
That's not needed though. No licensing is required.

Code is copyright without any licensing. The hardware is not licensed, I don't sign a license or agree to one when buying a car or microwave.

You can find edge cases, but the point is no licensing is actually required.

MrJohz 1 day ago|||
In this context, the license is for using the Arduino Studio application. This is hosted by Arduino, and therefore needs to take user input, save it and work with it. As I understand it, this puts them in a complex situation: they don't own the code you've written (obviously), but they do need to do things with it like compile it and run it (when you press the button in the IDE). They're also hosting the code and therefore partly legally responsible for it.

At the very least, you need some sort of user agreement to specify the things you can do with their content, otherwise you can't really do it because it's their content and you're not allowed to mess with it by default. (Like you said, code is copyrighted by default.) You also need to specify the things that are necessary by law because you are hosting that code and therefore in part responsible for it. You also don't want to make the user sign a new agreement every other week if you add some new feature that they need to agree to use, because the cost of all those legal documents is prohibitive, and it's also very bad UX.

Added to this the fact that lawyers are naturally very conservative as a profession (generally only doing things that have been proven successful, rather than avoiding things that have been proven unsuccessful), and it's easy to see why these sorts of agreements tend to be more expansive than they perhaps need to be, in order to ensure the company is fully protected.

1718627440 1 day ago||
Is this actually true? Doesn't the action of directing someone to compile this code, mean they are allowed to compile this code? Of course they are not allowed to do anything else, but this is what I want as a user. I think it is more, that the vendors want to push the user to grant them more rights than what would be strictly necessary for them to do they job they "sell".
MrJohz 1 day ago||
This is what's been explained to me before. The problem is that lawyers don't necessarily work on the basis of "if it seems reasonable that the user allowed this, then this is allowed". Their goal is to make a contract that, if they need to go to court, will make their job as easy as possible. So it's not enough to say "obviously the user pressed the 'compile' button and we needed to do all this stuff to make that happen, here's all my technical experts who agree", instead they would rather say "paragraph 3 subsection 12 clearly allows this behaviour and the user has agreed to it".

It's also, as I understand it, the reason why law has so much of an emphasis on seemingly magic phrases that you copy and repeat in all sorts of different places. These are phrases that have already been tested and have a meaning that has been made clear in a court of law, so if you need to go to court to defend them, you can pull up the existing case law on the subject and rely on that, rather than having to analyse exactly what the new wording means. Hence why these T&C documents tend to have a lot of fairly standard phrases that don't obviously mean what you expect them to mean.

notarobot123 1 day ago|||
One of the big difference between technology and law is how significant edge-cases are considered to be.
1718627440 9 hours ago||
I don't even know which you imply takes edge-cases to be more important.
OhSoHumble 1 day ago||
What do you feel is a good approach to licensing user generated content?
bigfishrunning 1 day ago||
Allow the user to license the content that they generate. I can write a novel with Microsoft Word, and Microsoft has no claim over it -- why should any IDE tools be different?
rcarmo 1 day ago||
Hobbyists don’t get full exposure to this, but the reality is that the embedded space is still very much a binary blob landscape. Even relatively popular SDKs like Expressif and Nordic’s are full of weird proprietary stuff, and it just gets worse as you go into beefier hardware (Rockchip, I’m looking at you).

But yeah, Arduino is in a weird place right now. I knew people there (kind of lost track), quite liked their IDE and how accessible it made a lot of things, but the recent turn on events is just… weird.

embeddedbert 1 day ago|
For Espressif it's only their radio blob. And and community is on a good way for a open source replacement for this.

Everything else is top notch open.

pabs3 11 hours ago|||
Link: https://github.com/esp32-open-mac/

Other open firmware: https://wiki.debian.org/Firmware/Open

rcarmo 1 day ago|||
You get two blobs if you use ZigBee :)
embeddedbert 1 day ago||
Ugh. Haven't touched this yet.

But for low power sensor stuff the ESP32 is far away from being my favorite anyway. That's almost all-in Nordic for me.

tete 1 day ago||
That has been a long way coming. Only a couple of months ago I was looking at alternatives and "Arduino compatible" products. The reason being simply that so many "for fun projects" are built with it and I wondered what good alternatives there are.

I kind of drifted off. So curious about what people here think is the best "Arduino when it still was open source" contender. Preferably something Arduino compatible because of the sheer amount of projects already out there.

That said I've heard a fair bit about Adafruit criticism as well, but that's more on the company level and no personal experience there.

neilv 1 day ago||
I'd like to see HN generally take a stance that a hacking-ish education platform like Arduino should be open source and hacking-friendly.

(Disclosure: I know the Adafruit founder, but haven't discussed this matter with her.)

ErroneousBosh 1 day ago|
It is entirely opensource and hacking-friendly.

Why do you think it isn't?

potato-peeler 1 day ago||
Isn’t arduino completely open source including its PCB, firmware, IDE, etc, even accessible for commercial use?
stackghost 1 day ago||
These days I don't think Arduinos are meaningfully more accessible than, say, an ESP8266 or ESP32. If I was starting a new hobby project today I'd choose the latter.
jxdnnd 1 day ago||
Don't the latter require separate board support in the Arduino IDE? That was at least the case in the past
Liftyee 1 day ago||
That's only if you're using the Arduino IDE though, and it's so commonplace that instructions are widespread. Many are using MicroPython/CircuitPython which are independent from Arduino.
xxs 1 day ago||
esp32 with 'free' (built-in) wifi/bluetooth is just so much easier to work with. That was my experience a few years back.
askvictor 1 day ago||
The first esp8266 I bought was as a dedicated wifi chip for an arduino (or something) project. I discovered after getting it, that it came with a 'free' MCU (that was default flashed with a UART/AT-command firmware to allow other MCUs to get wifi)
xxs 7 hours ago||
funny indeed, as the add-on card (esp8266) is a lot more powerful than an Arduino.
londons_explore 1 day ago|
This seems dumb from Qualcomms point of view...

T&C's preventing reverse engineering of an online platform seems to have no real business value. Serious hackers will ignore the T&C's, whilst serious competitors will not need to do any reverse engineering to build an online compiler.

More comments...