@AmpBenzScientist i realise this is how it works but that doesn't mean i'm not allowed to bitch about it and point out examples of it being done better
@AmpBenzScientist i have this rant whenever i have to work with embedded systems, really. but i gotta say, it felt a lot less chaotic to work with the Microchip PIC series of chips.
@lore Microchip PIC was used in The Stamp I think. The Stamp was used to teach Embedded Systems Programming before the Arduino came along. The lower cost of the UNO and realistic language choice of C made for a more realistic experience if one would go on to work for a company that specialized in Embedded Systems.
The reality, especially for open source developers, is that they have next to no documentation and have to essentially wait for Reverse Engineering of the hardware, firmware and software to be completed so they can use these tools to do what they wanted or learn that they can't do it.
FLOSS developers might seem like pricks in many ways from how they tend to explain things to using a license like the GPLv3. The reality is that every step of the journey was a struggle and companies love to sue. So when something is reverse engineered and released, the GPLv3 is the choice of someone who endured the mountain of red tape, threats and hardship. No one will be able to steal their code because of the GPLv3 Superior Clause which means that the company has to stop use of the code or they will be required to release all of it under the same license.
@AmpBenzScientist what the Arduino community has pulled off is pretty impressive. it's even made enough of a dent that most evaluation kits these days seem to come with an Arduino-compatible headers. even experienced engineers see the value in having such a rapid tool for prototyping. they don't make the most powerful chips and you do have to poke around with HW registers if you have niche needs, but free software has the way of making software development a better experience for everyone. is it always the right choice for the end product? not at all. but it's changed things, and even big corporations like Microsoft have understood this. that certain parts of the ecosystem are better off if they're opened up to the developer community.
@lore Microsoft saw that they were losing developers to Linux and had to come up with something. Essentially they had to look friendly because they were losing ground. This is where something called WSL allowed people to "use Linux" so they wouldn't actually use Linux. They are still the company that made computer manufacturers implement UEFI and only allow Windows to boot. It was claimed to be for security but the only secure device they have made is the Xbox One. It has still not been broken. It would be a nice little Linux box because of the 8 cores and fast ram but they are content with E-Waste.
