[Arm-netbook] R-Pi Only Better and More Available?

[Andrew M.A. Cater]

On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 06:32:46PM +0100, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 05/26/2012 05:59 PM, moo cow wrote:
> 
> > The RPi, people IMHO did most everything right and for the right
> > reasons
> 
> They did _some_ things right. Their choice of SoC is questionable, and 
> their choice of 128MB and 256MB versions was downright dire - to the 
> point where they are finally starting to twig that 256MB isn't enough 
> and sweeping under the carpet that they were ever going to make the 
> 128MB version (which I am pretty convinced will now never see the light 
> of day).
> 

Both model A and model B now have 256M - it was cheaper to do it that
way in the end and all the binaries will work on both :)

> > until their complete lack of commercial and manufacturing
> > experience hit them like a ton of bricks right at the end.
> 
> That was just the icing on the cake that made the product 6+ months late 
> and 50% more expensive than the expectations they had set. All this was 
> on top of reneging on the promise to have it built in UK. Having them 
> built in UK was a loudly advertised fact in the second half of last 
> year, supporting British industry, etc. that gave them a lot of 
> publicity. Until they did the maths and gave all those that supported 
> them for patriotic reasons the finger and instead had them built in 
> China - where the manufacturer botched the order that lead to the whole 
> batch having to be replaced.
> 

The tax regime did for them: it's cheaper to import finished boards than
components - then you have to find someone to actually assemble them in UK.
The Ethernet socket screwup was not entirely anyones fault: a misread
bill of materials / small foul up. This woas for 10,000 boards - no one
expected 150,000 plus. Each of the 10,000 had the correct component fitted.
The Pi on my desk is one of Farnell's batch made in China with a serial of
12011. It arrived when they said it would ...


> Seems to me that they did an awful lot wrong, on every level, from 
> choice of components to implementation and ethics.
> 
> > Since day
> > one other Techies seem to have had an insane jealously of them for
> > being brave enough to stick their necks out and being the first to
> > take the risk to actually do something ... its sad they have made a
> > right royal cock up right at the end after the hard bit has been done
> > so well and hopefully they can get over it and move on to design a
> > whole series of pi's and learn their lessons.
> 
> Can you summarise for me what exactly they did right? While I credit 
> them fully for doing _something_ (this is very commendable in itself), 
> and making enough noise to make a lot more people look at ARM machines 
> in general instead of x86, I don't think their actual product and 
> handling thereof particularly covered them in glory.

It's HERE. Google are threatening to train teachers and equip them 
with RasPis for British schools.

> 
> > In terms of the via device .. why would it get anyone excited about it
> > ?  at a retail price probably 2x the pi's if it ever sees the light of
> > day in its current form  .. i'd sooner pay a bit more and get
> > something like a 1GB SATA A10 Olimex board ;-)
> 
> Or a CuBox for €99.
> 
> The most appealing things about the APC are:
> - *TX form factor is massively convenient, bolts in straight into a 
> standard chassis
> - Half the price of a SheevaPlug for similar spec (but more USB ports, 
> VGA out)
> 

The APC is vapourware at the moment: it has always been quite hard
to track down Via boards at reasonable prices. One change in the 
market and it will be gone. If I could order 10 now - and cases to
put them in - I might do that for thin clients. But I can't.

AndyC


> Gordan
> 
> _______________________________________________
> arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk
> http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
> Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk