> As embedded developers attempting to teach others, they're not enamored of Arduino's burgeoning, and dominant, market of "people who want to do embedded devel

> As embedded developers attempting to teach others, they're not enamored of Arduino's burgeoning, and dominant, market of "people who want to do embedded development but not learn anything about embedded development" sucking up all the oxygen. I don't think oxygen is the finite resource your colleagues think it is in this metaphor. Why in the world would they not want something that lowers the barrier to getting more people involved with things like embedded development? Some of those people may even go on to start learning more about embedded development. It's so much better than keeping the barrier to entry high, thus discouraging people to get into it and learning more about how the world around them works. Would we rather people continue to have no context about what we do and treating electronics like a black box? And who cares if they don't actually want to learn more than they need to about embedded development? Just as your colleagues spent their lives becoming experts and doing embedded development for a living (I'm presuming), others chose rather to spend their careers elsewhere. Everyone has different priorities and tradeoffs to consider vying for their time. Any time we can allow people to accomplish more with less, possibilities open up with the time we do have.