3 ms·

It's a small computer on a single board, but it's geared towards the high end as far as performance and features go. From the Arduinos, the RasPis, the BanPis,

by Udo 12y ago

It's a small computer on a single board, but it's geared towards the high end as far as performance and features go. From the Arduinos, the RasPis, the BanPis, Beagleboards, to small but full-fledged Atom boards it's a huge spectrum. It's absolutely great that we have so many great systems to choose from, but I'm not sure one is really a "response" to the other. For example, the Raspberry Pi hits the sweet spot for me as far as home automation things go - it is reasonably powerful enough to run all the software I need including a full web stack, but it has a really low power consumption. For a media station I'd probably choose a Banana Pi instead. The Sharks Cove looks like a great solution if you have to run a minimal Windows (of course). Edit: the title has been changed so it no longer references the Pi, making parts of this post moot. Still, I'm leaving it as it was.

awalton 12y ago
I'm not sure why people even bother bringing up RasPi and its ilk here. It's very clearly targeted towards a different audience: professionals who need to develop hardware/drivers for Intel tablets. Just look at all of the headers they've broken out, the test points on the board, the LED display for bus/early boot debugging, etc. The Raspberry Pi was designed with extensibility in mind, designed so the headers are on one side of the board so it can be enclosed sensibly, no extraneous functionality, simple construction, etc. This thing is just a reference tablet board minus the touchpanel, with all of it's I/O ports exposed. You certainly can built Quark/Atom SBCs into a "RasberryPi" like device, but this is not the device you were looking for. It's a terrible hobbyist board. Perhaps some one will use this board to develop a decent hobbyist Atom SBC/"NUC" - Intel's certainly has enough publicly available documentation to make it happen now.
- Udo 12y ago
  I "bothered" because the Pi was explicitly used as a target for comparison in the original title of this thread. And I'm not sure where the hostility is coming from, but my point was actually similar to yours, minus the abrasive attitude. My comment was about different capabilities and use cases, and I criticized the label "Raspberry Pi" in this context - which, in case you missed it, was in the original title of this thread. > You certainly can built Quark/Atom SBCs into a "RasberryPi" like device, but this is not the device you were looking for. In no part of my comment did I remotely advocate or even hint at anything like that.
  - awalton 12y ago
    > And I'm not sure where the hostility is coming from I'm not sure how you read hostility, but okay. > In no part of my comment did I remotely advocate or even hint at anything like that. And you obviously missed the thinly veiled Star Wars reference. Perhaps next time I'll put it in quotes.
    - Udo 12y ago
      > And you obviously missed the thinly veiled Star Wars reference. Perhaps next time I'll put it in quotes. Your statement "You certainly can built Quark/Atom SBCs into a "RasberryPi" like device" was supposed to counter an argument I never made. Yeah, it's petty, but I felt the need to point that out. Obviously, this is not in any shape or form about your Star Wars reference. > I'm not sure how you read hostility, but okay. It's my impression. It may well be wrong, but here's how I read it: You come across as hostile in a number of ways. The issue above is a good example. I perceive your comment as passive aggressive, but more importantly you drag the discussion to areas that are beside the point. It feels like you corrected me about positions I never expressed, and when I criticized this you switched yet again to something unrelated and attacked that. What I dislike about these maneuvers is that they work. If done right, this combination of abrasiveness and well-executed straw men can get you pretty far in most forums, including this one.
      - awalton 12y ago
        > I perceive your comment as passive aggressive, but more importantly you drag the discussion to areas that are beside the point. And that's not what you're doing with this entire post? You keep trying to turn this into some kind of nerd fight when my comment was nothing but a statement of facts.
- 2close4comfort 12y ago
  And there are plenty of wintel boards that have launched in the past that have failed to reach a fraction of the audience that Pi or even Beagleboard has. Even the android board seems more realistic than this it seems wee bit over engineered for the purposes or is missing the things to truly make it unique and at the price advertized they could have done more I would have thought.

by Udo 12y ago

awalton 12y ago

I'm not sure why people even bother bringing up RasPi and its ilk here. It's very clearly targeted towards a different audience: professionals who need to develop hardware/drivers for Intel tablets. Just look at all of the headers they've broken out, the test points on the board, the LED display for bus/early boot debugging, etc. The Raspberry Pi was designed with extensibility in mind, designed so the headers are on one side of the board so it can be enclosed sensibly, no extraneous functionality, simple construction, etc. This thing is just a reference tablet board minus the touchpanel, with all of it's I/O ports exposed. You certainly can built Quark/Atom SBCs into a "RasberryPi" like device, but this is not the device you were looking for. It's a terrible hobbyist board. Perhaps some one will use this board to develop a decent hobbyist Atom SBC/"NUC" - Intel's certainly has enough publicly available documentation to make it happen now.

Udo 12y ago
I "bothered" because the Pi was explicitly used as a target for comparison in the original title of this thread. And I'm not sure where the hostility is coming from, but my point was actually similar to yours, minus the abrasive attitude. My comment was about different capabilities and use cases, and I criticized the label "Raspberry Pi" in this context - which, in case you missed it, was in the original title of this thread. > You certainly can built Quark/Atom SBCs into a "RasberryPi" like device, but this is not the device you were looking for. In no part of my comment did I remotely advocate or even hint at anything like that.
- awalton 12y ago
  > And I'm not sure where the hostility is coming from I'm not sure how you read hostility, but okay. > In no part of my comment did I remotely advocate or even hint at anything like that. And you obviously missed the thinly veiled Star Wars reference. Perhaps next time I'll put it in quotes.
  - Udo 12y ago
    > And you obviously missed the thinly veiled Star Wars reference. Perhaps next time I'll put it in quotes. Your statement "You certainly can built Quark/Atom SBCs into a "RasberryPi" like device" was supposed to counter an argument I never made. Yeah, it's petty, but I felt the need to point that out. Obviously, this is not in any shape or form about your Star Wars reference. > I'm not sure how you read hostility, but okay. It's my impression. It may well be wrong, but here's how I read it: You come across as hostile in a number of ways. The issue above is a good example. I perceive your comment as passive aggressive, but more importantly you drag the discussion to areas that are beside the point. It feels like you corrected me about positions I never expressed, and when I criticized this you switched yet again to something unrelated and attacked that. What I dislike about these maneuvers is that they work. If done right, this combination of abrasiveness and well-executed straw men can get you pretty far in most forums, including this one.
    - awalton 12y ago
      > I perceive your comment as passive aggressive, but more importantly you drag the discussion to areas that are beside the point. And that's not what you're doing with this entire post? You keep trying to turn this into some kind of nerd fight when my comment was nothing but a statement of facts.
2close4comfort 12y ago
And there are plenty of wintel boards that have launched in the past that have failed to reach a fraction of the audience that Pi or even Beagleboard has. Even the android board seems more realistic than this it seems wee bit over engineered for the purposes or is missing the things to truly make it unique and at the price advertized they could have done more I would have thought.