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.
Yep , sounds fair enough , still ,would be good to have the same functionality with timers as version one , being able to make changes without having to re code is something I find very useful.