5 ms·

Your New Raspberry Pi! ThinkPad 11e Gen 5 (11") for $169 Specs: 2.6GHz CPU / 8GB RAM / 128GB SSD / 11.6" Display / 720P Camera / Keyboard / Battery

by pulse7 4y ago

smoldesu 4y ago
I mean, it's a cheap low-wattage PC that can probably run Linux. That alone doesn't make it a Raspberry Pi though; the motherboard is still much larger than an RPi SOC, and the wattage is low, but still higher than most Pis. Even as someone who prefers x86 machines for most projects, I think it's misleading to pitch this as a Raspberry Pi. It's a cheap Intel netbook that is far from a drop-in replacement like some of the RockChip boards are.
- rcarmo 4y ago
  Not until they can match the Pi's software availability. In that regard, cheap Intel Celeron are a _vastly_ better alternative to the Pi than anything in the RK series, and can be gotten cheaper to boot.
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    What do you mean? I was under the assumption that modern Rockchip and Pi boards are both on AArch64 now.
    - rcarmo 4y ago
      CPU architecture is only 20% of the problem here. Hardware support and being able to run mainline kernels and distros is a much bigger issue. The baseline kernels and Linux distributions that are currently available for Rockchip boards are still stuck in 5.10 (or were a few months back) and both kernels and drivers are poorly maintained. It is rather ironic to see something like the RK3588 (or the S variant) with a GPU driver that is almost irretrievably broken outside Android, for instance (depending on vendor). Likely the best software support in that regard is from Khadas (who at least have remote flashing working), but some boards can't even boot from NVME without messing about with serial consoles and reflashing selected bits of their controller hardware. (You can point out that the Pi still has binary blobs in their firmware and that the Pi CPUs themselves are essentially an afterthought around the VideoCore chip, but Raspbian is exceptionally well maintained in comparison, and so is Ubuntu for the Pi. And although Armbian is pretty amazing, they can't match that for other boards either.) This is why I will take a Celeron over a Rockchip any day. There is, in a nutshell, very little for Intel board vendors to frak up.
      - smoldesu 4y ago
        > This is why I will take a Celeron over a Rockchip any day. Strictly speaking, so would I. That was part of my original comment; I prefer x86 hardware all days of the week. That being said, if your concern is software compatibility, I don't really see many Pi applications that don't elegantly translate to other ARM-based SOCs. Yes, Rockchip has limitations, but for hobbyists it probably won't make a big difference. The lack of mainline kernel support stinks, but for everyone that isn't manufacturing an LTS critical support system, it's fine. I agree with you more than I disagree, but my experience using the Orange Pi and Raspberry Pi has not been radically different.

Your New Raspberry Pi! ThinkPad 11e Gen 5 (11") for $169 Specs: 2.6GHz CPU / 8GB RAM / 128GB SSD / 11.6" Display / 720P Camera / Keyboard / Battery

by pulse7 4y ago

Your New Raspberry Pi! ThinkPad 11e Gen 5 (11") for $169 Specs: 2.6GHz CPU / 8GB RAM / 128GB SSD / 11.6" Display / 720P Camera / Keyboard / Battery

smoldesu 4y ago

I mean, it's a cheap low-wattage PC that can probably run Linux. That alone doesn't make it a Raspberry Pi though; the motherboard is still much larger than an RPi SOC, and the wattage is low, but still higher than most Pis. Even as someone who prefers x86 machines for most projects, I think it's misleading to pitch this as a Raspberry Pi. It's a cheap Intel netbook that is far from a drop-in replacement like some of the RockChip boards are.

rcarmo 4y ago
Not until they can match the Pi's software availability. In that regard, cheap Intel Celeron are a _vastly_ better alternative to the Pi than anything in the RK series, and can be gotten cheaper to boot.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  What do you mean? I was under the assumption that modern Rockchip and Pi boards are both on AArch64 now.
  - rcarmo 4y ago
    CPU architecture is only 20% of the problem here. Hardware support and being able to run mainline kernels and distros is a much bigger issue. The baseline kernels and Linux distributions that are currently available for Rockchip boards are still stuck in 5.10 (or were a few months back) and both kernels and drivers are poorly maintained. It is rather ironic to see something like the RK3588 (or the S variant) with a GPU driver that is almost irretrievably broken outside Android, for instance (depending on vendor). Likely the best software support in that regard is from Khadas (who at least have remote flashing working), but some boards can't even boot from NVME without messing about with serial consoles and reflashing selected bits of their controller hardware. (You can point out that the Pi still has binary blobs in their firmware and that the Pi CPUs themselves are essentially an afterthought around the VideoCore chip, but Raspbian is exceptionally well maintained in comparison, and so is Ubuntu for the Pi. And although Armbian is pretty amazing, they can't match that for other boards either.) This is why I will take a Celeron over a Rockchip any day. There is, in a nutshell, very little for Intel board vendors to frak up.
    - smoldesu 4y ago
      > This is why I will take a Celeron over a Rockchip any day. Strictly speaking, so would I. That was part of my original comment; I prefer x86 hardware all days of the week. That being said, if your concern is software compatibility, I don't really see many Pi applications that don't elegantly translate to other ARM-based SOCs. Yes, Rockchip has limitations, but for hobbyists it probably won't make a big difference. The lack of mainline kernel support stinks, but for everyone that isn't manufacturing an LTS critical support system, it's fine. I agree with you more than I disagree, but my experience using the Orange Pi and Raspberry Pi has not been radically different.