5 ms·

I dislike these type of replies. Read this: "So I tapped into the wealth of Maker experience I’ve accumulated over the last few years and build a new one, usin

I dislike these type of replies. Read this: "So I tapped into the wealth of Maker experience I’ve accumulated over the last few years and build a new one, using a single board computer, some extra peripherals, and a 3D printer. And I shoved the whole thing into a Pelican case. Say hello to the BeagleBox, a dirt cheap, tough-as-nails field computer for about $200." Anybody can get a mass produced piece of equipment if they spend money. Not everyone can re-purpose cases, then hardware and convert it into a usable device, that is cheap, hackable and fit for purpose. I have to read this article again.

Dylan16807 10y ago
It's fine to build a tool for the sake of building, but if you want to present it as effort-saving you need to compare it to what you can buy if you know where to look.
- bootload 10y ago
  "but if you want to present it as effort-saving you need to compare it to what you can buy if you know where to look." wrong metric(s), cost-saving & (hack-ability).
  - Dylan16807 10y ago
    The core of this is a $60 system. It does not save money over a $40 laptop that you could put in the same waterproof box. And what does 'hack-ability' mean in this context? It's not easier to replace any parts on the beaglebone. Swapping the screen is easier; nothing else.
TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
I appreciate Animats' comment, and it's on topic. I recently saw someone using a Toughbook but didn't have time to stop and ask about it. And like you say, not everyone can re-purposes cases and hack and convert things. So it's nice to see "if you're into this, you might also like to know about ..." comments.
rflrob 10y ago
If I were funding a science expedition, I think I would prefer that people use an off-the-shelf item, even if it's a little bit more, than spending time hacking something together. In grad school, a labmate of mine pointed out that supporting a junior researcher costs ~$200/day (with tuition, stipend, and benefits), so if spending $200 on an experiment or piece of equipment would save a day of work, it's usually worth it. I'm not saying it's not useful to have people who can do the hacking, but you want them to spend their time hacking things that can only be hacked.

Dylan16807 10y ago

It's fine to build a tool for the sake of building, but if you want to present it as effort-saving you need to compare it to what you can buy if you know where to look.

bootload 10y ago
"but if you want to present it as effort-saving you need to compare it to what you can buy if you know where to look." wrong metric(s), cost-saving & (hack-ability).
- Dylan16807 10y ago
  The core of this is a $60 system. It does not save money over a $40 laptop that you could put in the same waterproof box. And what does 'hack-ability' mean in this context? It's not easier to replace any parts on the beaglebone. Swapping the screen is easier; nothing else.

TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago

I appreciate Animats' comment, and it's on topic. I recently saw someone using a Toughbook but didn't have time to stop and ask about it. And like you say, not everyone can re-purposes cases and hack and convert things. So it's nice to see "if you're into this, you might also like to know about ..." comments.

rflrob 10y ago

If I were funding a science expedition, I think I would prefer that people use an off-the-shelf item, even if it's a little bit more, than spending time hacking something together. In grad school, a labmate of mine pointed out that supporting a junior researcher costs ~$200/day (with tuition, stipend, and benefits), so if spending $200 on an experiment or piece of equipment would save a day of work, it's usually worth it. I'm not saying it's not useful to have people who can do the hacking, but you want them to spend their time hacking things that can only be hacked.