That said, you seem not to be aware of the advantages and power of PlatformIO (and VSCode).
Also, this is 2019 and a few hundred megabytes for an IDE and a platform tool chain are quite common.
The author of ESP32-PaxCounter has deliberately chosen to use PlatformIO. Apparently because having ran into limitations of the Arduino IDE and needing something more flexible and more productive (no pun intended).
I’m sorry to hear that PlatformIO does not run well on your computer, but that is probably more related to your computer than related to PlatformIO and/or Visual Studio Code.
PlatformIO uses many of the same tool chains and Arduino cores as the Arduino IDE. From that perspective I would be surprised to see much difference in size between them.
You complain that you need “few 100MB” software to compile and upload a few kb to an esp32.
Well, the Xtensa toolchain for ESP32 and ESP32 Arduino Core together are about 500MB in size.
This is independent from any IDE, so also independent from whether using the Arduino IDE or PlatformIO (but each installs their own separate copy of them). Your negative remarks regarding software size, lean and efficient therefore seem to be unsubstantiated.
If PlatformIO is not an option for you then the same holds for ESP32-PaxCounter, there is no reason to be negative about that here.
Fine for you. I will not use platformio again or give it another chance.
Software that has a crappy usability is useless in my eyes. Stick with it and be happy with it. This is not the place to discuss about that and I am not interested in discussing about because it is useless.
But it shows that til now, no one had the idea to give the alternative solution that the platformio files could be modified to work with Arduino…THAT would have been helpful instead telling me how great platformio is and my system might be the problem…however.
If you don’t want your system to get “trashed” by software you install, there are various means to isolate installations inside containment units you can later remove without any impact on the rest of your system.
Yes, you are right but as Docker was swallowed by Mirantis we will see how long this will work. Sorry to all for posting my frustrations about platformio and writing too much rubbish in this thread…maybe I will post a workaround how to modify platformio sketches to use it with Arduino if I think this is a suitable workaround.
Its only recently that running PlatformIO on a virtual machine has been useable in my view. I did try it some 18 months ago, on a decent specification desktop PC running VMWare Workstation 14. The VM is Windows 8. At the time VS code, and hence PlatformIO ran like a complete dog in the otherwise OK VM, maybe a minute or so to start, if it started at all.
Whatever the problem with VS code was, it appears now to be solved, and Platform IO is now useable in a VM.
Possibly because your behavior was not inviting to motivate people to spend energy on that and you bash the tools and software from the people that you seek assistance from.
A similar remark:
You seem to have a certain opinion of what other people need to do in order to make your own code (samples) work and try to make that clear in your posts. That is not respectful and is not tolerated on the forum.
Maybe it’s because I am german and not native english speaker. However I share my experiences instead let other people waste their time. What is wrong showing others how to quickly setup a mapping node and avoiding mistakes? Nothing.
There is nothing wrong with showing others how to quickly setup a mapping node and avoiding mistakes. Positive contributions are what the forum is meant for.
What is wrong is negatively hinting/complaining that things have not (yet) been done by other users. “But it shows that til now, no one had the idea to give …” reads like a sneer to other posters that have tried to assist you, and “… but takes time til it works. So I am wondering why nobody did a tutorial for that til now” also does not sound like a compliment either.
While this may be related to English not being your native language, it certainly requires attention and so does language like “inflated, tinkered and user unfriendly software like”, “It is totally ridiculous that” and “I am not interested in spending lifetime in this sketch”.
Discussion closed. Let’s go back on track and stay on topic.
The paxcounter code is open source, so why don’t YOU start a port to Arduino IDE (or maybe the new Plus IDE) instead complaining here? If you want to just consume software, please move on to commercial suites, pay for it and push your complaints to the support hotline.
Ok back on track…
I was wondering why some 868mhz antennas works better then others. Meanwhile I have a few antennas that were delivered with a t-beam.
After removing the plastic you see the differences. The 868mhz tuned one is the right one according to my nanovna. The left one is better tuned at 915mhz for the us market…!
Hello gang !!!
I have issues with TTGO T-Beam. I can’t activate to the TTN. I am using the exampe for our friend DeuxVis and more specifically the Lora-TTNMapper-T-Beam example.
What i did:
I change the keys to config.h file
I saccessful write the code to my board
Integrations is on (TTN Mapper)
Configure the Payload decoder
and still my Status (never seen)
Can someone help me. I can’t find the problem here
Thanks for your time
The best will be to test with LMIC library’s ttn-abp.ino example first, thats is the most basic you can get. If that works try ttn-otaa.ino. If that works you can try more advanced sketches.
What version is your T-Beam?
For version 1.0 with power management chip some additional code is required (see further up this thread).
Hello !!!
I am super excited. I have spend a lot of time on ttgo with advanced sketches and i did activated to the TTN. Now i see me device for first time and i am really happy. Thanks you a lot !!!
I learn something this morning. Learn to walk before you run.
ABP and OTAA exables work fine. I will try again the TTNMapper. If i stuck again i will ask for help again.
My version is T22_V1.0
Have a nice weekend
As a response on their customers requests, LilyGO is keeping production and sales of (older) V0.7 revision of T-Beam board as well: URL of the store item
Probably, not.
I see only one source of V07 and this source is direct LilyGO AE store.
Very likely that they’ve created this exclusive option only for very few of those customers who wanted to order this old variant of the board by some reason.
Vast majority of other links are leading to most recent V1.0 variant of the T-Beam.
One could find it as well on Banggood with the item ID: 1345473
The one I recently got is a v0.7. Note the u.FL (ipex) instead of a fixed SMA connector on the PCB. GPS is NEO-M8N.
