[Arm-netbook] RK3399

Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton lkcl at lkcl.net
Wed Jan 17 13:48:16 GMT 2018

crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Miguel Garcia <gacuest at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2018-01-17 11:28 GMT+01:00 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl at lkcl.net>:
>> this shows that it has USB3 however it does not have RGB/TTL, so it
>> will be necessary to do a conversion from MIPI to RGB/TTL with an
>> SSD2828 or similar.
> Could you design an EOMA68+ with a different pinout?

the absolute absolute top priority is that there be absolutely NO
chance - whatsoever - of confusion in the eyes of a hundred MILLION
and above totally non-technical end-users.

if there is any chance that two Cards with different pinouts could be
plugged into the same socket

if there is any chance that the owner of two Housings does not know if
a Card is safe to plug in

then the answer to the question you ask is NO.

if however there is a way that the exact same connector could be
used... *WITHOUT* there being a SHADOW OF DOUBT... then yes.

what would you suggest, that could fit within that absolutely critical

> For example, the EOMA68 for less powerful devices, and an EOMA68+
> for more powerful devices. For example, the EOMA68+ would have
> support for MIPI (instead of RGB), mandatory use of USB 3.0, etc.
> For example, I think that an Allwiner A20 or an Ingenic SoC does not
> make sense on a FullHD screen, and an Rk3399 does not make
> much sense on a 320x240 screen.

 that's not.... within the "right" of EOMA68 to say to people "You
Cannot Use An RK3399 Card for purpose X".   should it be dictated that
users MUST not plug Cards in just because we *happen* to think that
there *might* not be *some* perfectly legitimate use-case which *right
now* we cannot envisage?

 that would result in confusion in the standard, wouldn't it?


More information about the arm-netbook mailing list