Thanks for the explanation :) We're pretty much in agreement overall, some project choices just seemed odd though. These projects tend to be bureaucratic beasts on top of the technical challenges. One of the interesting takeaways was that the micro:bit team learned a lot of non-technical lessons that are valuable (how to best deploy the devices, what kids will do with them, what's especially interesting etc.)
"""A huge amount of research, development and testing that went into working out how the device should function. """
I guess that's where I disagree. I feel all this afford could have been invested into creating better software for existing solutions and focusing more resources on pedagogical aspects. At the end of the day the micro:bit costs 13-15 pounds a pi-zero costs maybe 6? I don't feel the hardware side of things provided the most value for the invested tax money I guess. HUGE DISCLAIMER: if the hardware is open sourced fully eventually (I also heard/read it's planned eventually) then I'm actually cool with building yet another smallish computing device.
"""This isn't just about creating a new generation of engineers; Rather, I'll know we've succeeded if in fifteen years I meet doctors, teachers, artists, musicians, lawyers, civil servants and other professionals who are computer literate enough to know how to effectively explore and make use of such technology. """
Completely agree.