4 ms·

You have projects like http://beagleboard.org/ http://beagleboard.org/ (beagle xm $150 and $89 beagle bone), and http://leaflabs.com/devices/ http://leaflabs.co

You have projects like http://beagleboard.org/ http://beagleboard.org/ (beagle xm $150 and $89 beagle bone), and http://leaflabs.com/devices/ http://leaflabs.com/devices/ ($45 maple), which are all ARM based devices, that have been around for a while. I just don't understand how these guys got it so cheap, which is why it seems like they just optimized the bom to get it to where it is. I'll hand it to them though, that is an impressive feat.

joshu 15y ago
Maple has no network or USB and is thus not really comparable.
av500 15y ago
Part of being so cheap might be that the main SoC is subsidized by Broadcom. I have no problem with that, TI is doing the same for the Pandaboard (http://www.pandaboard.org http://www.pandaboard.org)
- nl 15y ago
  They have said the SOC isn't being subsidized.
  - av500 15y ago
    I stand corrected
thelibrarian 15y ago
The big thing going for them price-wise is that due to them being a charity, Broadcom is selling them the SoC at prices you would normally only get when buying millions of them, rather than the thousands that they will actually end up buying. Plus I think a lot of the engineers etc donated their time, again because it is an educational charity, thus their R&D was probably very cheap. Thus we end up getting a device that is smaller and more capable than the Beagleboard XM (CPU- and graphics-wise) at one sixth of the price.
- monological 15y ago
  See I didn't know this. Now it makes sense why they were able to get it so cheap. Getting a deal like that w/ Broadcom is pretty difficult to do imagine.
easp 15y ago
Well, for one thing, they have the advantage of launching their product later. For another, they have access to good pricing on a capable SoC that isn't usually available in small volumes at any price. In other words, they knew the right people. And yeah, they've been very aggressive about other costs too. For example, the alignment of the various connectors on the board are all funkey, because it was cheaper that way.
nitrogen 15y ago
"just optimized the bom" is really easy to say and hard to do. If it was so easy to cut down the bill of materials of what was previously $150+ (Beagle) to $35 (Raspberry), wouldn't TI have done so with the Beagle? Also, it's like saying that DarkShikari et al. "just optimized the code" to make x264 the best easily-available encoder of H.264 on the planet. Finally, the Raspberry Pi is tremendously more powerful than the Maple.

joshu 15y ago

Maple has no network or USB and is thus not really comparable.

av500 15y ago

Part of being so cheap might be that the main SoC is subsidized by Broadcom. I have no problem with that, TI is doing the same for the Pandaboard (http://www.pandaboard.org http://www.pandaboard.org)

nl 15y ago
They have said the SOC isn't being subsidized.
- av500 15y ago
  I stand corrected

thelibrarian 15y ago

The big thing going for them price-wise is that due to them being a charity, Broadcom is selling them the SoC at prices you would normally only get when buying millions of them, rather than the thousands that they will actually end up buying. Plus I think a lot of the engineers etc donated their time, again because it is an educational charity, thus their R&D was probably very cheap. Thus we end up getting a device that is smaller and more capable than the Beagleboard XM (CPU- and graphics-wise) at one sixth of the price.

monological 15y ago
See I didn't know this. Now it makes sense why they were able to get it so cheap. Getting a deal like that w/ Broadcom is pretty difficult to do imagine.

easp 15y ago

Well, for one thing, they have the advantage of launching their product later. For another, they have access to good pricing on a capable SoC that isn't usually available in small volumes at any price. In other words, they knew the right people. And yeah, they've been very aggressive about other costs too. For example, the alignment of the various connectors on the board are all funkey, because it was cheaper that way.

nitrogen 15y ago

"just optimized the bom" is really easy to say and hard to do. If it was so easy to cut down the bill of materials of what was previously $150+ (Beagle) to $35 (Raspberry), wouldn't TI have done so with the Beagle? Also, it's like saying that DarkShikari et al. "just optimized the code" to make x264 the best easily-available encoder of H.264 on the planet. Finally, the Raspberry Pi is tremendously more powerful than the Maple.