[liamwestray]

Literally can't add anything to this.

You nailed it.

I suspect MicroPython is going to do the same thing to Arduino/C as Python just did here in Academia as well.

[rleigh]

I'm afraid I don't agree. MicroPython is neat, but if there's one thing Python is not suited for, it's microcontrollers. Coupling one of the slowest scripting languages with low latency near-realtime requirements is not a recipe for success. It might be useful for teaching basic concepts, but it is not going to be useful for real applications. And Arduino already has the teaching of basic concepts nailed very effectively.

I certainly think that MicroPython serves a niche, primarily very simple hobbyist/educational roles. However, I do not regard it as suitable for anything beyond this. It's the wrong tool for the job, and if you want a scripting language for low-latency low-overhead use, there are smaller and more efficient languages which fit better into an embedded role.

[liamwestray]

You’re an engineer. And engineering programs will continue to use engineering focused tools. The goals of engineering program projects are vastly different than other areas of academia. Developing the tool is the project for engineering.

Bioscience / environmental science programs will find micropython good enough for their needs. The tool itself is just the means to the end if real science. Micropython let’s you deploy in lower power applications without having to learn much beyond what you already know from Jupyter notebooks.

I really don’t know any PhD students or post-docs in microbiology/environmental sciences who have the time to learn embedded C or similar languages.