> If they did, they would be using a "bare" microcontroller better suited for their needs and costing one tenth the price.

Where do you get something like an ESP that's one tenth the price? ESPs are cheap and you can run Arduino, ESP-IDF directly, or fringe environments (I had some ESP8266 running NodeMCU because Lua made more sense to me than Arduino).

You can run Arduino code on anything, since it's mostly just a bit of syntactic sugar around C. But I'm sure you know what I mean.

My point is that people who are attracted to Arduino are, by and large, not the kind of people who want to geek out about the inner workings of the MCU, and there's nothing wrong with that.

There's always a few of us. ;-)

I'm pretty familiar with the microprocessor architecture of the 8-bit era that I grew up in, and have done a fair amount of hardware hacking. As things have gotten more complex, I've let some things slide, such as the complexity of pipelined architectures.

Arduino is not even syntactic sugar any more. All it retains of its origins, that I'm aware of, is the weird setup() and loop() schtick. And you have limited control over what happens before your code starts. But with most Arduino compatible boards, you have full access to the vendor supplied libraries, and can go as deep as you want. These days my preferred platform at work is Teensy 4, and at home, the wireless enabled boards. I think Paul Stoffgren is some kind of 100x engineer.

But life is short. Over my 61 years, I've carefully rationed the brain cells that I devote to innards of technologies that will soon be obsolete. I read the Turbo Pascal manuals cover to cover, and The Art Of Electronics, but I never cracked Inside Macintosh. I've decided that I will simply not learn anything about any OS that is not Linux, and superficially at that.

I program desktop computers in high level languages, despite total abstraction of the innards.

I think the relative portability of Arduino code has been a huge boon for hobbyists because it encourages the formation of a community of people who can share code and knowledge, even if they're not all using the same processors, and despite sometimes needing to tweak code when porting it from one platform to another. This was also the case with early FORTRAN. Portability across processors revolutionized scientific computing.

The problem isn't with the artist doing a one-off project involving a microcontroller. It's the Arduino "experts" who write blogs, create videos, and dominate forums with their accumulated nonsense. They posit themselves as authorities in the space, newbies adopt and echo whatever rubbish they make up, and the cycle continues. They get very defensive if you try to correct them, even linking directly to documentation supporting it.

If you're going to write a blog about how the ESP32 doesn't connect to the strongest AP so you need to pin it to a specific BSSID in your router settings... Maybe you shouldn't be writing that blog. If you haven't taken at least a moment to check documentation and see that the behaviour you want is already an option that can be selected by changing literally one line in your ESP32's WiFi config. Instead this pseudoscience proliferates.

I know what you mean haha.

Instead of spending x2 the initial effort to fix the root cause, you spend x1 the initial effort to implement jank and then spend x10 the effort down the line maintaining the jank.

Who wants to deal with writing that logic for a hobby project? That doesn't sound fun at all.

Sounds like a "good enough" shitty solution to me, which is kind of the whole point of DIY.

Deal with what? I would argue that if you're going to the effort of writing a blog post on the topic then you should at least go to the effort of skimming the docs to make sure there isn't already a solution for the common problem you're experiencing.

It's literally one word to change in his WiFi config to get the behaviour he wants. It's already implemented. Who can't "deal" with that?

Personally, I don't use multiple APs with overlapping SSIDs, but if I did than I can see how it would be easier to deal with the logic from the AP management side rather than the client. It's also nice to not have to re-connect IoT things if/when you add or change your APs.

I'm not sure we're understanding each other so just to be clear, my suggestion is to change from this (pseudo) C:

  wifi_connection_config_t config = {
    .ssid = "my_home_wifi",
    .password = "secret123",
    /*
      implicitly initialised to default:
      .method = CONNECT_TO_THE_FIRST_AP_THAT_RESPONDS,
    */
  }

to

  wifi_connection_config_t config = {
    .ssid = "my_home_wifi",
    .password = "secret123",
    /* explicitly initialise: */
      .method = CONNECT_TO_THE_AP_WITH_THE_STRONGEST_RSSI,
  }

It's that simple.

I think I understand you. That functionality doesn't exist in ESP32 Arduino tool chain without more work/more code. Their hobby level perspective is valuable to other hobby level engineers who want a solution.