Is Picaxe Dead?

[Jeremy Leach]

I think the ONLY commands that "leverage the capabilities of the chips to the max ..." are those which configure / enable the core-independent peripherals (PWM, timers, etc.) Otherwise, you're running through the interpreter.

That being said, speaking for myself .... 80 - 90% of the projects I've built only really need to be faster than ME, not as fast a lightening ... so PICAXE works. But, I've also had projects where I want things to be much faster ... and I've enjoyed embedded PIC development for that ... I mean ... if you haven't played with Direct Memory Access ... you're missing out!

 

[Jeremy Leach]

I think the ONLY commands that "leverage the capabilities of the chips to the max ..." are those which configure / enable the core-independent peripherals (PWM, timers, etc.) Otherwise, you're running through the interpreter.

That being said, speaking for myself .... 80 - 90% of the projects I've built only really need to be faster than ME, not as fast a lightening ... so PICAXE works. But, I've also had projects where I want things to be much faster ... and I've enjoyed embedded PIC development for that ... I mean ... if you haven't played with Direct Memory Access ... you're missing out!

DMA is fantastic and I've used it quite a lot with my experiments in audio, coupled to SPI, and getting 'frames' of audio to load into memory in the background. Parallel processing in it's truest sense. But I must admit it's sometimes taken ages to get working properly (and a lot of cost with licence renewals to get compiler optimisations!).

 

[bpowell]

But I must admit it's sometimes taken ages to get working properly (and a lot of cost with licence renewals to get compiler optimisations!).

Yeah, the setup was the tricky part ... but it's all there in the datasheet ... you just need to re-read it about 100 times! Still, that's kind of the stuff I find fun about the hobby ... and for me, it's strictly a hobby. I'd be very stressed if I were trying to get DMA working for a work project and I was under a deadline.

Along that hobby track: I haven't had a need to optimize further than the free version of XC8 will give me ... given how much space is on chips now (128KB for code space?!) my humble little projects fit in there nicely.

 

[Jeremy Leach]

Yeah, the setup was the tricky part ... but it's all there in the datasheet ... you just need to re-read it about 100 times! Still, that's kind of the stuff I find fun about the hobby ... and for me, it's strictly a hobby. I'd be very stressed if I were trying to get DMA working for a work project and I was under a deadline.

Along that hobby track: I haven't had a need to optimize further than the free version of XC8 will give me ... given how much space is on chips now (128KB for code space?!) my humble little projects fit in there nicely.

The optimisations I've used are more because of execution speed and getting the highest processing throughout that I can. I've never actually run out of programming space at all.

 

[manuka]

Well retired South Seas old timer "Manuka" here! I still occasionally browse this forum but haven't contributed for years & am now more involved in non electronic activities. Herewith a few e-musings -

I cut my teeth electronically 60+ years ago as a teen in early 1960s ham radio (then -gasp- largely thermionic!), & eventually went on to an associated NZ/Australian & UK technical & educational career.

In this context my PICAXE enthusiasm & promotion was quite recent as it began 2002 (while NZ tertiary teaching) & probably peaked during a long run of PICAXE articles (many 433 MHz data slanted) I penned for the Australian "Silicon Chip" monthly.

Yes -20+ years ago (although recent for an old timer!) & a telling duration given e-tech's white hot progress...

That early Y2k era predates such now common e-tech as BT, WiFi, SD cards, Lithium rechargeables,smartphones & even -gasp- now ubiquitous USB & white LEDs. Of course today's numerous powerful & cheap microcontrollers (& languages like microPython) were still to come.

PICAXE's,although serial programmed, then had few rivals & were superbly "can do" & cost effective beside such offerings as US sourced BASIC Stamps. I recall a degree level student saying he'd achieved more on a project in a few hours with PICAXEs than he'd managed in weeks with raw PICs. That remark rather reminded me of the mid 1970s when HP programmable calculators bypassed the need to program punch card style in Fortran. PRODUCTIVITY!

But it's now 2025 & I've rather lost touch with even NZ/Australian educational micro preferences,although apparently Raspberry Pi based setups tend the norm for senior students. (Refer an Australian MMBASIC Pico 2 based kit just released).

In Britain the BBC micro:bit (V.2) seems popular for 11-12 yo STEM teaching, no doubt boosted by it's self contained design easing classroom setup & "tidy up time" clutter.

All up, & although PICAXEs are/were schools focused, it could be that hobbiests are NOW the majority users...

To help keep things in perspective perhaps those involved with their region's STEM e-education could inform of the actual state of play?

Stan. (Wellington, New Zealand) ZL2APS

 

[Jools]

I've just come back to electronics after a break and want to get back to Picaxe projects again but the programming tools for Linux seem somewhat out of date and picaxecloud.com just times out.

Does anyone have any recommendations? So far, I've been running Axepad in an Ubuntu 14 VM.

Thanks in advance,

Jools

 

[steliosm]

HI Jools. I am using Ubuntu as well and I am running the latest programming editor (PE6) using wine (https://www.winehq.org/). Never had an issue with it. There is also the option to use VS Code on linux: https://picaxe.com/software/third-party/visual-studio-code/

 

[kranenborg]

I don't agree with this ... there are certainly more powerful 8-bit, 8-pin chips than the 12F1840 (PICAXE 08M2) ... some with 2x or 4x the RAM, 2x the flash storage, more UART, configurable logic blocks, etc. The PIC16F17115 for instance. As for the 18F14K22 (PICAXE 20X2), I've started playing with the PIC18F16Q41 which has 4x the storage, 8x the RAM, More timers, CLC, etc. There's even 20-pin chips that are nearly identical to the 20x2, but include a USB module.

Microchip has been marching along.

​

Going back to the original topic ... motivated by Bpowell's remark,

What I could appreciate as a "compromise" solution (with likely limited implementation effort for Rev-Ed as I suspect) succeeding the 08M2 (based on 12F1840): A new 08M3 (based on PIC16F17114 or 115) implementing both:

1. As a baseline: the current Picaxe BASIC command set for the 08M2 - which definitely will satisfy all educational purposes which is at the core of Rev-Eds venture,
2. Adaptations to the POKESFR/ & PEEKSFR commands, allowing all internal modules of the new PIC16F17114/5 chip to be addressed and configured - as a gift to the "professional hobbyists" seeking to use the full potential of the new device (like the OpAmp, numerical oscillator etc.).

Of course, similar reasoning holds for the 14 - and 20-pin devices in the M2 series, as well as the X2 series devices.
I can imagine that this would be possible with not too much effort since both chips are based on the same Mid-range Enhanced Core architecture, it seems just more exiting modules and increased pin mapping flexibility in the newest chips ... .

Am I a dreamer, or is there some hope ?

/Jurjen

 

[Digisapien]

I just want to remind everyone, just cuz I keep seeing it pop up, there are the X2 chips that are quite a bit more powerful than the M2 versions. Just saying.

 

[nick12ab]

I don't think anyone's mentioned this yet, but what about In Circuit Debug?

PE5 has a 'Connect' feature in the menu which just shows a message box saying that feature is in development.

Did that feature ever get implemented? I can't see it in the latest version of PE6. (The crude 'debug' command doesn't count)

This is one thing a certain 5-letter competitor got right first time out of the gate, using the same serial download cable as PICAXE and no additional external hardware.

It's also a particular weakness of Arduino. Arduino IDE 1.x doesn't have it at all and I believe the newfangled Arduino 2.x IDE has this feature if you have an expensive Atmel ICE, a requirement which is to be expected because it runs compiled code. This is a feature that is very useful in education, a potential advantage over Arduino, and it's good educational experience for students who will eventually use things like the MPLAB ICD in industry (or more likely Segger J-Link on this newfangled 32-bit ARM stuff that is very popular now).

 

[steliosm]

No, we actually never got to see the Circuit Debug functionality supported on Picaxes. Plain 'Debug' functionality, although slow, can give you quite a bit of details of what is happening on your Picaxe and it has indeed been very helpful to me when things didn't go as 'programmed'.
Arduino is (still - I think) using the serial monitor to see what is happening, but this is more of a 'console output' type of debug.

 

[Flenser]

To help keep things in perspective perhaps those involved with their region's STEM e-education could inform of the actual state of play?

I think that manuka has identified something that us forum members should keep firmly in mind when discussing how great it would be if there were faster M3/X3 chips with more program memory and more variable storage.

Rev-Eds PICAXE chips are a child of the technology that was being used when they were first created. I did see a forum thread that described the early history of Rev-Ed but I was unable to find it with a search. The pinned "READ ME FIRST" post in the active forum is dated 2007 so it was before 2007.

This means it is now nearly 20 years on since PICAXE chips using BASIC were released and the first languages being taught in schools may have moved on from BASIC.

This certainly appears to be the case in Australian schools were my google search came up with an Australian Govt Education web site which:
- gave an example of using visual programming in years 5-6 where the example was Scratch
- described one of the objectives for years 7-8 as "code and test programs in a general-purpose programming language such as Python or JavaScript"
- and described one of the objectives for years 9-10 as "explore the object-oriented paradigm for organising code"

The site I found did not discuss teaching the use of microcontrollers so I don't know what is used in Australian schools.

 

[kranenborg]

I think that manuka has identified something that us forum members should keep firmly in mind when discussing how great it would be if there were faster M3/X3 chips with more program memory and more variable storage.
...
Rev-Eds PICAXE chips are a child of the technology that was being used when they were first created. ... This means it is now nearly 20 years on since PICAXE chips using BASIC were released and the first languages being taught in schools may have moved on from BASIC.

So true.

And there might be some truth in Manuka's statement below as well:

...
All up, & although PICAXEs are/were schools focused, it could be that hobbiests are NOW the majority users...
...

This is the reason why I proposed in this discussion (item #48) an approach where M2/X2-level Picaxe BASIC would be implemented on newer silicon (hence the M3/X3) with POKESFR/PEEKSFR opportunities offered to hobbyists to configure the new modules themselves, whilst for educational purposes one can stick with the already excellent M2/X2 functionality. I see this as a way for RevEd to cater to both communities with very limited extra efforts from their side.

Regarding the main topic, I see similar things happening to other comparable microcontroller platforms like Parallax's Stamp, NetMedia's BasicX and - sadly - also to my other favorite microcontroller platform for more advanced and demanding projects, namely ZBASIC. The latter's forum has grown practically silent (which luckily is not yet the case of PICAXE).

But I think there is still a case to make for excellent microcontroller platforms like PICAXE and ZBASIC since the value of them lies in so much more than just the chips themselves: Through their excellent forums, the motivated and helpful userbase and excellent documentation, these platforms can bring much value and sometimes may still be the best options in many projects for years to come. But how to make this value visible?

I think is it is the rapid pace of technology development that both enables the conception of new powerful tools, but also inevitably bears with it the impression of rapidly dwindling added value as new concepts emerge and overtake the previous ones.
But value is not just based on conceptual strength but primarily created by thorough experience with the platform and leveraging on it in actual projects, i.e. really designing and making things. This value remains for very long times for the crafted individual (like so many forum members involved in this discussion), but I feel that many newcomers in the field may simply not observe this and thus miss a great opportunity.

I have messaged the owners of both the PICAXE and ZBASIC platforms on my scenario proposals for including newer silicon with limited efforts (I think) from their side, we'll see, this is the maximum useful effort I could think of … .

Best regards,
Jurjen

 

[kranenborg]

Spring has come, so new creatures start to emerge from the winter time ... . Maybe this could apply to the PICAXE devices as well, therefore this public request to Rev.Ed.:

To expand a bit on the idea I floated in post #48 above (implementing current PICAXE Basic for M2 chips directly on newer, recently released silicon - with POKESFR for use by advanced hobbyists to themselves unlock the potential of newer modules in the new silicon): I researched a bit more regarding differences between newer PIC devices (in particular the 8-pin PIC17115) and the (likely) preceding M2-device (PIC12F1840).

As I see it, the biggest challenge would be to implement a changed memory map, since more memory banks have been added, and also the position of specific SFR's in the older M2 device have changed in the new map. To me it seems that this is the only real relevant change (as a precondition for my proposal, in which the BASIC language itself would not change/expand, as an easy way to enable a device update/modernization without a significant BASIC language change), since both the older and newer silicon are based on the Enhanced Mid-Range Core architecture.

I would really love to see RevEd take this step, since:

• The newer silicon is more than 10 years younger than the M2-based silicon, with significant improvements and additions regarding modules (including the ADCC, Opamp, NCO, improved DAC etc.).
• Still key knowledgeable enthousiasts (like Allycat, Inglewoodpete etc.etc, also including me ) are active on the forum and giving support to new members, so it would be highly motivational for all of us as enthousiasts to see new devices being introduced and to not loose a critical mass of supporters (which many other platforms have)

For newer silicon I would propose the PIC16F17114-15-24-25-44-45 family as they seem to me to have the most attractive combination of modules, allowing sensor signal conditioning and processing.

Rev.Ed, I sincerely hope you are willing to consider something like this as your product is a source of great joy to many of us hobbyists, and I feel the Picaxe platform is still very relevant. I am willing to support as well (within reach of my opportunities).

Thanks! /Jurjen Kranenborg

 

[Baker Steve]

What an interesting thread, which I have read almost in its entirety.

In my case, my programming lay in the distant past, but PICAXE's unique combination of hardware and approachable programmability has allowed me to undertake a complex project in later life that I would never have been able to get my head around if I'd had to learn a more modern development environment.

Fortunately this project, a novel musical clock with many complications, has no specific speed requirements, but in fact it was RevEd's hardware offerings, such as the sound kit and the OLED display, that made me realise that the whole idea was feasible.

I can well understand why the whole scene seems a little stale, but my sincere hope is that it endures, as it provides a very easy route to automation of lightweight projects.

 

[hex]

Quote Baker Steve "I can well understand why the whole scene seems a little stale, but my sincere hope is that it endures, as it provides a very easy route to automation of lightweight projects."

I agree 100 %

I used to love the simplicity of Mikroelektronica compilers - then they froze support and moved to Necto and ruined everything

... no problem - move to Microchip XC8 - no nice libraries (that I could find) but powerful and straight forward as long as you avoid MCC and Harmony. Now VScode is the future. Not the future I want.

Love PICAXE ecosystem for simple projects. Simple, quick and little BS. Would love to see a revival, but don't hold out much hope. Still very useful though.

Don't miss any PIC16 based PICAXES other than newer 8 pin PIC16 varieties. Would love to see support for PIC18 Q series.

My 2 cents

 

[Bill.b]

I still use picaxe for my motor control systems but where I need control of LED strip - WS2812 - or LCD and vga monitors I use picMX32 series chips or Raspberry pico / pico2 modules programmed in MMBasic.

 

[GAP]

As a small time user I think picaxe is the best. It is small, robust and is really not fussy about it power requirements give it 5 V and it's happy. I'm using them to drive servo controlled points and semaphore signals on a garden railway. Teamed with ESP01 boards I can use wifi to do this. The lack of wifi is a drawback. The one thing I would really like to do is to be able to read the program on a picaxe back into the editor to debug it. That is the one thing Arduino has over picaxe. As I said small time user so I may be wrong. With the use of the dreaded AI for programming (70 years old with no computer experience) I'm using them for just about everything in fact I tried Arduino gave up and went back to old faithful.
I will sorely miss it if it goes.

 

[Flenser]

The one thing I would really like to do is to be able to read the program on a picaxe back into the editor to debug it.

The bear suggested a simple way to deal with this issue in this post.
Simply add a sertxd command that reports the file name and date using ppp_filepath, ppp_filename and ppp_datetime as the first line of every program.
e.g.
sertxd(ppp_filepath, ": ", ppp_datetime, cr, lf)

Hookup PE, power the PICAXE off and back on and it will report the program file and the date (for the version) to PE

That is the one thing Arduino has over picaxe.

My understanding of Arduino is that you write your program in the "C" language which the Arduino IDE compiles into the binary machine code that the microcontroller used and downloads that binary.

You choose whether the machine code that is downloaded into the microcontroller is "read-protected" in flash so if you didn't "read-protect" your program then you can read it back but that downloaded binary machine code is not the original "C" program source code.

But I don't use Arduino, so I could be wrong. Do you have a link describing how to read the original "C" program from the microcontroller using Arduino?
.