3 ms·

I would like to once more criticize the fact that BBC re-invented the wheel (and micro:bit) at a time where $5 Raspberry Pi 0 is widely available. It would have

I would like to once more criticize the fact that BBC re-invented the wheel (and micro:bit) at a time where $5 Raspberry Pi 0 is widely available. It would have been much better to spend the effort of producing better learning software and ecosystem for Raspberry Pi instead. Someone boasted about the lengths it took to make Python run on micro:bit and it still isn't full Python and no chance for anything graphically intensive, whereas you can code Minecraft on Raspberry Pi and actually plug it to your TV.

timthorn 10y ago
The RPi Zero was not available when the micro:bit project kicked off - indeed, the micro:bit was planned for release last September. This is about ease of development (in particular in terms of not requiring any toolchain setup) and immediate interaction with physical things.
foenix 10y ago
I somewhat agree, but would like to counter by saying that the micro:bit has been an invaluable tool for me personally to teach fundamental hardware programming. The pi zero, while a great tool for more advanced programming, still requires some boilerplate knowledge of electrical engineering that surpasses what one would want to teach someone who just wants to make some lights flash. The micro:bit has, built in: a 5×5 array of leds, an accelerometer, a digital compass, 2 push buttons, a set of piezo / touch io, and a low-power bluetooth radio — all of which have api libraries and documentation that a user doesn't need to write themselves. While there are a multitude of awesome things that can be done with the pi zero, there's still a non-trivial amount of setup required to program basic hardware features.
ChuckMcM 10y ago
I continue to believe its a bit more nuanced than that. I agree that if you just want to teach Python programming that a RasPi (original model is fine), a TV and a keyboard is really all you need. I also believe that some folks are more systems oriented and would like to learn about "computers" as opposed to "programming computers". Much of the success in the embedded world comes from people who want to understand the way the computer starts from scratch and then runs its completed program. It is more difficult to serve those folks by starting with a Cortex-A architecture device.
curioussavage 10y ago
I know everybody already got on your case about this but just want to say its all about narrowing the scope. The microbit is much more accessible. It has a narrow range of use cases that really makes it easy to choose projects. It is plug and play, no flashing, no other parts required (no mini Hdmi adapter, everybody has a microUSB cable around). PiBakery has helped make setting up a pi easier though.

timthorn 10y ago

The RPi Zero was not available when the micro:bit project kicked off - indeed, the micro:bit was planned for release last September. This is about ease of development (in particular in terms of not requiring any toolchain setup) and immediate interaction with physical things.

foenix 10y ago

I somewhat agree, but would like to counter by saying that the micro:bit has been an invaluable tool for me personally to teach fundamental hardware programming. The pi zero, while a great tool for more advanced programming, still requires some boilerplate knowledge of electrical engineering that surpasses what one would want to teach someone who just wants to make some lights flash. The micro:bit has, built in: a 5×5 array of leds, an accelerometer, a digital compass, 2 push buttons, a set of piezo / touch io, and a low-power bluetooth radio — all of which have api libraries and documentation that a user doesn't need to write themselves. While there are a multitude of awesome things that can be done with the pi zero, there's still a non-trivial amount of setup required to program basic hardware features.

ChuckMcM 10y ago

I continue to believe its a bit more nuanced than that. I agree that if you just want to teach Python programming that a RasPi (original model is fine), a TV and a keyboard is really all you need. I also believe that some folks are more systems oriented and would like to learn about "computers" as opposed to "programming computers". Much of the success in the embedded world comes from people who want to understand the way the computer starts from scratch and then runs its completed program. It is more difficult to serve those folks by starting with a Cortex-A architecture device.

curioussavage 10y ago

I know everybody already got on your case about this but just want to say its all about narrowing the scope. The microbit is much more accessible. It has a narrow range of use cases that really makes it easy to choose projects. It is plug and play, no flashing, no other parts required (no mini Hdmi adapter, everybody has a microUSB cable around). PiBakery has helped make setting up a pi easier though.