My first test with Blynk 2.0 with example Blink code using ESP8266 board

Exactly like in blynk 1.0 - EDIT MODE

That’s a new view because it’s a template, and multiple devices can inherit it. We have no idea for which device we should show the data for (if you have let’s say 50 of them)

Exactly like in Blynk 1.0 - PLAY MODE

So we added one new view, and it broke everything? :smile:

Yes, it can be improved (and we are already working on it), but I think the whole idea of comparing something very new, to something old is not very correct.

Yes, we don’t see horses in front of the cars anymore, but does it make cars worse?

1 Like

Ok got it. This is useful info. I would still like to see an “Online” connection status if possible. Thanks.

On the old Blynk it takes me 3-4 minutes to add a board and create an app to toggle an LED or relay on and off. The new Blynk 2.0 has me baffled. I got a board and a virtual Pin. What happened to the support for all the other boards? You use to be able to select your board, select a digital Pin and DONE! Now its a painstaking task it seems.

1 Like

They are planning on bringing the digital pin control back in the near future. But not sure. But its not a good practise to control a digital pin directly, rather use a virtual pin to do the same… yes it was very simple for noobs to get started ! But that way there will be no learning curve !!!

1 Like

I use only virtual pins. For example use the function callback scheme(i.e BLYNK_WRITE) where you direct the software(capture the virtual pin data) and direct the data into hardware control (digital pin). Works amazingly well.

Virtual pins are much more powerful than digital pins, and even if Blynk re-introduce the ability to use digital pins you would be far better learning how to use virtual pins instead…

Pete.

2 Likes

I know how to use V pins. My point was that some of the simplicity is gone. Whether you use virtual or digital pins, in the end result is the same… it is either on or off… High or low…

I have Particle Photon and Argon Boards, Arduino Nano 33 IoT, Seeed Studio W600. None of them work… Get compile errors. So far only seems to work on ESP based boards. Even setting parameters correctly in Settings.h files is a no go. :frowning:
The old Blynk works on them with no problem. For some new Blynk is step in the right direction. It’s backwards for me.

I agree, but let’s face it, the time taken to create a project is tiny compared to the time you spend using that project.
Datastreams are much more powerful than simply using virtual or digital pins, and make life simpler when it comes to remembering the function of the pins you use because you give the datastreams logical names. Features like data invalidation are also extremely useful, and that wasn’t possible in the old version.
As new features are added, such as voice assistant integration, then they become even more powerful.
If you’re new to Blynk then there is a much steeper learning curve, and there’s lots of switching between web portal and app to achieve the exults, but I guess that’s the cost of progress towards a more powerful and business orientated product. Ultimately that makes the product more saleable and profitable, and ultimately that’s good for us as we get a reliable product that costs a fraction of what it would cost to develop that ourselves.

Pete.

Please add more details around that. @vshymanskyy could you please take a look?

I’m just a DIY Maker. Not a business. Just need to turn some relays on and off to control some things around the home. It used to be super simple to do that. Not looking to sell anything. The old Blynk was appealing to folks like me because it was super simple and super inexpensive. I know its the corporate and industrial IoT that pays the bills so we take a back seat.

1 Like

The library does not seem to work with these devices. At least that is what I can tell from my bit of knowledge. I have only been able to get it to work with an ESP32 board. That means to continue using it I am going to have to invest $$$ in completely different hardware. That is if I want to make the switch now to the new Blynk. I will ride out the old for as long as I can.

Exactly which devices are you talking about?

Pete.

Being a heavy basic user of blynk 1 ,Im not loving this new version , I control most of my house with basic digital commands set up on a Arduino Mega connect using the Arduino IDE which meant no real coding , but great interface, functionality and reliability not to mention ability to set timers from the phone. Ive been using cayenne for my analogue data and some switching and I like way you can alter triggers anytime without re writing code.For me was the advantage of Blynk 1 ,it was so simple and always worked , even with Google home.
So far I have managed to connect a couple of WeMos D1 boards with blynk 2 , but they go off line after 10 minutes and the job of replacing the code on my Arduino Mega with roughly 30 outputs and sketchy connection questions is a worry .

2 Likes

I am the same and agree. The new version is no doubt more powerful. But the simplicity and ease of setup is gone for folks like us. And way more expensive now. Out of reach for me unfortunately.

You must not have seen my earlier post. I have a bunch of Particle boards. (Argon, Boron, and Photon). The new Blynk library is not liking them. Also the Arduino IoT 33 Nano. I get a ton of compile errors to a point that goes over my head to figure out. Before it all just “worked” which was great so troubleshooting compile errors was simply a syntax error in the code. Simple stuff to fix a typo.

1 Like

I’m wondering how many noobs like myself are actually using and prefer blynk 1 compared to more business oriented users.
I have helped lots of friends set up simple light controls etc with blynk 1 using digital pins and it works very reliabley also using Google assistant to switch any of these pins. Being able to add and remove buttons and timers directly from your phone is very useful and would almost seem more of a end product you might design with the new version.
Seems to me I’m being told what I use now is to simple and convenient and I need to change to a system that is way more complex , difficult to set up and in the end won’t look as good or be as flexible , and of course I get to pay for it now . why not offer a payment option for users of Blynk 1 which as far as I can see is a better product for most users.

2 Likes

Supporting two different Blynk products isn’t a viable option for Blynk as a company, so Blynk 0.1 needs to be retired.
Blynk makes most of their money from corporate customers, and those customers need features such as user control, data invalidation, web access to the data etc, which wasn’t possible without a major re-write of the product - hence Blynk 2.0

Pete.

is the widgets pack 1 time pay introduced??

good option for high schools/tudents and hobbyists like me out there,

we cant take 6-7 dollars every month from others.

It is something that Blynk said they would look into. It may never happen, I don’t know - I guess that depends on whether Blynk think it fits into their pricing model and business plan.

There is no mention of it on the website, so I assume that it’s not currently an option.

Pete.