5 ms·

> I've been saying it for ages, but a decent easily available western equivalent to the ESP32 (meaning easy WiFi) needs to happen - Texas Instruments SimpleL

> I've been saying it for ages, but a decent easily available western equivalent to the ESP32 (meaning easy WiFi) needs to happen - Texas Instruments SimpleLink CC32xx (CC3220 / CC3235) - TI CC3235MODA module - Renesas DA16200 - Microchip PIC32MZ-W1 - Microchip WFI32 module family - Silicon Labs SiWx917 / SiWG917 - Silicon Labs SiWx917Y module - Nordic Semiconductor nRF7001/7002 WiFi 6 IC - Use with nRF52, nRF53 or nRF91 series SoCs - STMicroelectronics STM32 with ST67W series pre-certified WiFi modules These solutions are priced well for commercial and industrial solutions at scale. If necessary one can use any cheap hobby solution for initial development and then port to an industrial-class SoC solution. We've done this a few times during pandemic era shortages; using the RP2040 to get through prototyping and development and then switching the design to an industrial-grade chip.

bradfa 9mo ago
What's missing from these parts which makes people reach for ESP32 by default instead? (I don't have any experience with ESP32.) The TI parts seem a bit expensive in small quantities, but the Microchip and SiliLabs parts are like $6-7 in single units from Digi-Key. Is it just that the dev kits are in the >$50 price range which puts people off compared to ESP32?
- robomartin 9mo ago
  > The TI parts seem a bit expensive in small quantities, but the Microchip and SiliLabs parts are like $6-7 in single units from Digi-Key. Is it just that the dev kits are in the >$50 price range which puts people off compared to ESP32? It helps to separate hobbyist use from professional product development. The hobby market is driven by quick, cheap, and easy: low up-front cost, abundant tutorials, and inexpensive dev boards. In that context, ESP32 shines, and expensive dev kits can be a real psychological barrier. For commercial, industrial, or professional products, however, small-quantity pricing is often irrelevant. Sample or single-unit prices rarely reflect real production costs. Without getting into specifics, it’s common for the ratio between sample pricing and volume pricing to be 10× or more. A part that costs $20 in onesies can easily be a $2 part at scale. This doesn’t apply universally, but it does mean that judging a device’s suitability for mass production based on Digi-Key single-unit pricing is usually a mistake. There are also system-level considerations beyond the MCU’s line item price. For example, the RP2040 could be very inexpensive (around $0.50 in modest volumes when we used it), but that ignores the required external flash, which adds cost, board space, and supply-chain complexity. More importantly for many products, it offers no meaningful code security (the external flash can simply be read out—which can be a non-starter in commercial designs). Guaranteed long-term availability can be crucially important as well; with design support requirements in commercial/industrial settings often extending past ten year timelines. Tooling and ecosystem maturity also matter. At the time, the RP2040 toolchain was notably hostile to Windows, and Raspberry Pi support reflected that attitude. In reality, most product development (EE, MCAD, manufacturing, test, PLM/ERP) is Windows-centric. Asking an organization to bolt a Linux-only toolchain onto an otherwise Windows-based workflow just to save a dollar on an MCU is rarely a winning argument. So while cost absolutely matters, it’s often not the dominant factor in professional design. Security, tooling, vendor support, long-term availability, and integration into existing workflows frequently outweigh a few dollars of MCU price, particularly once production pricing enters the picture.
- robomartin 9mo ago
  > What's missing from these parts which makes people reach for ESP32 by default instead? I didn’t directly answer that question before. Strictly speaking, nothing essential is missing from many of these other parts. In fact, in professional contexts they often have better documentation, support, longevity guarantees, or security features than ESP32. One of the biggest differentiators is simply pricing strategy. Espressif has used aggressively low pricing (what many would reasonably call predatory pricing) to capture mindshare and market share. That playbook is hardly new; it’s been used successfully across industries for decades. Ultra-cheap silicon, combined with inexpensive dev boards, dramatically lowers the barrier to entry and makes ESP32 the default choice, especially for hobbyists and startups. Price pressure also creates a feedback loop: more users means more tutorials, libraries, examples, and community support, which in turn makes the platform feel easier and safer to choose, even when alternatives might be technically superior. For teams operating in cost-driven markets, this can become unavoidable. If your product lives or dies on BOM cost, reaching for the cheapest viable part may not be optional. I spent several years in that environment myself, and while it’s a valid constraint, it tends to push decisions toward short-term cost optimization rather than long-term engineering value. So the answer isn’t that these parts lack features, it’s that ESP32 combines good-enough capabilities with exceptionally aggressive pricing and a massive ecosystem, which together make it the default choice in many contexts.
fidotron 9mo ago
> These solutions are priced well for commercial and industrial solutions at scale. Translation: they're expensive, and getting them working involves jumping through hoops more complex than simply getting boards off Amazon and launching VS Code. They aren't equivalent, and the sneering isn't helping. It is failing to understand this that opens the door to DJI and Bambu, who unsurprisingly prioritize user experience and predictability, which is a major factor in why in open competition they keep wiping the floor with everyone.
- robomartin 9mo ago
  > Translation: they're expensive, and getting them working involves jumping through hoops more complex than simply getting boards off Amazon and launching VS Code. They aren't equivalent, and the sneering isn't helping. Who's sneering? Complexity is a relative assessment. Bringing up 8, 16 and 32 bit MCUs/SoC's has never in history been easier. Decades ago we used to have to bring up our boards from nothing, sometimes even having to write our own RTOS, boot code, firmware update code, etc. Today? A high school kid could do it with most chips. Go check out the STM32 Cube ecosystem for a glimpse. I do understand that this is still likely daunting for hobbyists. I am not talking about arduino-level hobby users. That is not my world at all. However, understand that the commercial/industrial market is orders of magnitude larger than the hobby markets, and the rules and requirements are different. > It is failing to understand this that opens the door to DJI and Bambu, who unsurprisingly prioritize user experience and predictability, which is a major factor in why in open competition they keep wiping the floor with everyone. Are you responding to someone else's comment? This has nothing to do with what I was addressing. I am talking about chips, and, in particular, SoC (System on Chip) solutions for WiFi applications. These are components used by engineers to design products. You are talking about finished products. You might as well add blender and microwave oven manufacturers to that list.
  - fidotron 9mo ago
    You're missing the point: the line between hobbyist and prototype now doesn't exist - there is a continuum where devices are made in single digits, tens of units, and progressively scaled up. This isn't the 80s/90s where you make none or thousands. Even those Amazon made wall socket relay things are ESP based after all. In this universe the old way of doing things makes no sense. > Who's sneering? Your comment was, and you still are like: > However, understand that the commercial/industrial market is orders of magnitude larger than the hobby markets, and the rules and requirements are different. In fact the hobby market now has _tougher_ requirements (particularly for software support, which Wifi necessitates) than the commercial and industrial one, and would not tolerate the level of random hacks/erratum that are spat out by the major chip providers. This is classic bottom up disruption.

bradfa 9mo ago

What's missing from these parts which makes people reach for ESP32 by default instead? (I don't have any experience with ESP32.) The TI parts seem a bit expensive in small quantities, but the Microchip and SiliLabs parts are like $6-7 in single units from Digi-Key. Is it just that the dev kits are in the >$50 price range which puts people off compared to ESP32?

robomartin 9mo ago
> The TI parts seem a bit expensive in small quantities, but the Microchip and SiliLabs parts are like $6-7 in single units from Digi-Key. Is it just that the dev kits are in the >$50 price range which puts people off compared to ESP32? It helps to separate hobbyist use from professional product development. The hobby market is driven by quick, cheap, and easy: low up-front cost, abundant tutorials, and inexpensive dev boards. In that context, ESP32 shines, and expensive dev kits can be a real psychological barrier. For commercial, industrial, or professional products, however, small-quantity pricing is often irrelevant. Sample or single-unit prices rarely reflect real production costs. Without getting into specifics, it’s common for the ratio between sample pricing and volume pricing to be 10× or more. A part that costs $20 in onesies can easily be a $2 part at scale. This doesn’t apply universally, but it does mean that judging a device’s suitability for mass production based on Digi-Key single-unit pricing is usually a mistake. There are also system-level considerations beyond the MCU’s line item price. For example, the RP2040 could be very inexpensive (around $0.50 in modest volumes when we used it), but that ignores the required external flash, which adds cost, board space, and supply-chain complexity. More importantly for many products, it offers no meaningful code security (the external flash can simply be read out—which can be a non-starter in commercial designs). Guaranteed long-term availability can be crucially important as well; with design support requirements in commercial/industrial settings often extending past ten year timelines. Tooling and ecosystem maturity also matter. At the time, the RP2040 toolchain was notably hostile to Windows, and Raspberry Pi support reflected that attitude. In reality, most product development (EE, MCAD, manufacturing, test, PLM/ERP) is Windows-centric. Asking an organization to bolt a Linux-only toolchain onto an otherwise Windows-based workflow just to save a dollar on an MCU is rarely a winning argument. So while cost absolutely matters, it’s often not the dominant factor in professional design. Security, tooling, vendor support, long-term availability, and integration into existing workflows frequently outweigh a few dollars of MCU price, particularly once production pricing enters the picture.
robomartin 9mo ago
> What's missing from these parts which makes people reach for ESP32 by default instead? I didn’t directly answer that question before. Strictly speaking, nothing essential is missing from many of these other parts. In fact, in professional contexts they often have better documentation, support, longevity guarantees, or security features than ESP32. One of the biggest differentiators is simply pricing strategy. Espressif has used aggressively low pricing (what many would reasonably call predatory pricing) to capture mindshare and market share. That playbook is hardly new; it’s been used successfully across industries for decades. Ultra-cheap silicon, combined with inexpensive dev boards, dramatically lowers the barrier to entry and makes ESP32 the default choice, especially for hobbyists and startups. Price pressure also creates a feedback loop: more users means more tutorials, libraries, examples, and community support, which in turn makes the platform feel easier and safer to choose, even when alternatives might be technically superior. For teams operating in cost-driven markets, this can become unavoidable. If your product lives or dies on BOM cost, reaching for the cheapest viable part may not be optional. I spent several years in that environment myself, and while it’s a valid constraint, it tends to push decisions toward short-term cost optimization rather than long-term engineering value. So the answer isn’t that these parts lack features, it’s that ESP32 combines good-enough capabilities with exceptionally aggressive pricing and a massive ecosystem, which together make it the default choice in many contexts.

fidotron 9mo ago

> These solutions are priced well for commercial and industrial solutions at scale. Translation: they're expensive, and getting them working involves jumping through hoops more complex than simply getting boards off Amazon and launching VS Code. They aren't equivalent, and the sneering isn't helping. It is failing to understand this that opens the door to DJI and Bambu, who unsurprisingly prioritize user experience and predictability, which is a major factor in why in open competition they keep wiping the floor with everyone.

robomartin 9mo ago
> Translation: they're expensive, and getting them working involves jumping through hoops more complex than simply getting boards off Amazon and launching VS Code. They aren't equivalent, and the sneering isn't helping. Who's sneering? Complexity is a relative assessment. Bringing up 8, 16 and 32 bit MCUs/SoC's has never in history been easier. Decades ago we used to have to bring up our boards from nothing, sometimes even having to write our own RTOS, boot code, firmware update code, etc. Today? A high school kid could do it with most chips. Go check out the STM32 Cube ecosystem for a glimpse. I do understand that this is still likely daunting for hobbyists. I am not talking about arduino-level hobby users. That is not my world at all. However, understand that the commercial/industrial market is orders of magnitude larger than the hobby markets, and the rules and requirements are different. > It is failing to understand this that opens the door to DJI and Bambu, who unsurprisingly prioritize user experience and predictability, which is a major factor in why in open competition they keep wiping the floor with everyone. Are you responding to someone else's comment? This has nothing to do with what I was addressing. I am talking about chips, and, in particular, SoC (System on Chip) solutions for WiFi applications. These are components used by engineers to design products. You are talking about finished products. You might as well add blender and microwave oven manufacturers to that list.
- fidotron 9mo ago
  You're missing the point: the line between hobbyist and prototype now doesn't exist - there is a continuum where devices are made in single digits, tens of units, and progressively scaled up. This isn't the 80s/90s where you make none or thousands. Even those Amazon made wall socket relay things are ESP based after all. In this universe the old way of doing things makes no sense. > Who's sneering? Your comment was, and you still are like: > However, understand that the commercial/industrial market is orders of magnitude larger than the hobby markets, and the rules and requirements are different. In fact the hobby market now has _tougher_ requirements (particularly for software support, which Wifi necessitates) than the commercial and industrial one, and would not tolerate the level of random hacks/erratum that are spat out by the major chip providers. This is classic bottom up disruption.