Talk:PICAXE

message: I deleted the term "PBASIC" from the line ...
* The language used to program PICAXE chips, PBASIC ...
PBASIC is the language used by Parallax and is a trademark applicable to them, not to Rev-Ed. The term PBASIC has mistakenly been used to describe the PICAXE Basic, but that's never been officially used by Rev-Ed to describe the PICAXE language. The term PBASIC doesn't appear at all in any of the three PICAXE Manuals.
hippy 14:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: PBASIC

message: I deleted this line ...
* NB PICAXE's are sensitive to noise on mains supplies, so these MUST be very well smoothed.
PICAXE's are no more sensitive to noise on mains supply than any other processors in my experience. The whole phrase puts the PICAXE in a much more negative light than it deserves, and I believe is unfair comment.
hippy 14:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: PICAXE Reliability / Quality

message: I changed the following ...
* typically 2000 commands per second
* execution speed ... typically this will be ~500 microseconds
From measurements I made, the basic instruction timing was around 250uS at 4MHz, and that equates to 4000 commands per second. Rev-Ed claim 10,000 per second in their documentation.
hippy 14:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Measurements you make are original research and should not appear in a Wikipedia article.  (The whole article has this feel.) -- David Woolley (talk) 12:11, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Execution Speed

message: I changed the price to pounds, as PICAXEs are made by a British company. It is irrelevant for the price to be in US dollars.
: Please sign your posts using four ~ (~ ~ ~ ~) Thanks NightFalcon90909 01:58, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Currency for price

message: This article is shit. --66.109.248.114 21:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can find areas that it needs to be improved in, please feel free to change it yourself. Or if you would like to leave constructive criticism, you can tell us what you would like done. NightFalcon90909 01:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wow.

message: I replaced the following statement to reflect the availability of the USB download cable:
* A serial port must be available to download programs; modern USB-only PCs will need a USB-serial adaptor.
Serial port availability is no longer a concern for new PICAXE users (or existing ones)
Also - I feel the article could use more information on the history of the PICAXE, such as when the first model was released.
SmokeySteve 10:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: USB Download Cable

message: The PICAXE firmware provides some neat features, but it has, nevertheless, significant disadvantages. The PIC micro is amazingly quick, but running interpreted code on a microcontroller is not efficient! Typically, the execution speed is 1000 times slower. There is also much less space for your own code, though this is partly compensated by having a large built-in library. 
Can anyone explain why the PICAXE (and STAMP) take this approach, rather than simply having a compiler?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.171.29 (talk) 13:47, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison with a "Native" PIC 

message: This seems to me to be a very poorly organised article. In particular it seems rather obsessed with how things are now even including "current" prizes! Picaxe chips have been around for a bit now and this article should attempt to give balance coverage of their history. "Now" in an encyclopaedia is not more important than "then".86.140.5.33 (talk) 13:49, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor Article