5 ms·

This project looks awesome. I can imagine it being used instead of the ESP8266 in many of my IoT projects. That would be a huge time saver. It will start to be

This project looks awesome. I can imagine it being used instead of the ESP8266 in many of my IoT projects. That would be a huge time saver. It will start to become competitive once it is actually cheaper than Raspberry Pi Zero. Especially as the Vocore2 is MIPS-based.

askvictor 8y ago
My main issue with using a full-blown linux device for IoT is that it's a full blown linux device. Not only is it harder to get up and running IMHO (vs just flashing your code to esp8266), you need to maintain a full OS which is a hassle security wise in the longer term. I get that there are some advantages, but overall I think IoT is better off as simple as possible. Also, it's not possible to take the RPi zero seriously until they start shipping in any serious quantity - I don't like the play they've made by keeping it scarce.
- GyYZTfWBfQw 8y ago
  Any OSes you would recommend?
- cptskippy 8y ago
  > Also, it's not possible to take the RPi zero seriously until they start shipping in any serious quantity - I don't like the play they've made by keeping it scarce. What do you consider to be serious quantity? You can order 250+ of them off Digikey right now or go into any Microcenter and buy them.
- ethbro 8y ago
  Simplicity-first is a good point. By choosing more complex, extendable system, the manufacturer can deliver extra functionality. But on the other hand, every bit of additional complexity requires maintenance (both security and as standards evolve). IoT companies rarely seem to care about the latter, which ultimately only impacts the customer (unless there's a recurring service model of revenue). Something like the digital hazardous waste idea should be mandatory in the IoT space. Either: (a) you provide timely security patches for all shipped code and a way to apply them to your product, OR (b) you freely offer such tools, keys, and source as are necessary for users to self-patch. Don't want to be responsible? Don't include unnecessary functionality.

askvictor 8y ago

My main issue with using a full-blown linux device for IoT is that it's a full blown linux device. Not only is it harder to get up and running IMHO (vs just flashing your code to esp8266), you need to maintain a full OS which is a hassle security wise in the longer term. I get that there are some advantages, but overall I think IoT is better off as simple as possible. Also, it's not possible to take the RPi zero seriously until they start shipping in any serious quantity - I don't like the play they've made by keeping it scarce.

GyYZTfWBfQw 8y ago
Any OSes you would recommend?
cptskippy 8y ago
> Also, it's not possible to take the RPi zero seriously until they start shipping in any serious quantity - I don't like the play they've made by keeping it scarce. What do you consider to be serious quantity? You can order 250+ of them off Digikey right now or go into any Microcenter and buy them.
ethbro 8y ago
Simplicity-first is a good point. By choosing more complex, extendable system, the manufacturer can deliver extra functionality. But on the other hand, every bit of additional complexity requires maintenance (both security and as standards evolve). IoT companies rarely seem to care about the latter, which ultimately only impacts the customer (unless there's a recurring service model of revenue). Something like the digital hazardous waste idea should be mandatory in the IoT space. Either: (a) you provide timely security patches for all shipped code and a way to apply them to your product, OR (b) you freely offer such tools, keys, and source as are necessary for users to self-patch. Don't want to be responsible? Don't include unnecessary functionality.