3 ms·

The Raspberry Pi is intended for a different use - it's comparing apples to oranges. The Edison is intended for embedded applications - it has no display suppo

The Raspberry Pi is intended for a different use - it's comparing apples to oranges. The Edison is intended for embedded applications - it has no display support built in (like DVI/HDMI), less USB support, and less "plug-and-play" ports. SparkFun did a great write-up on unfair comparisons between the two platforms: https://www.sparkfun.com/news/1603 https://www.sparkfun.com/news/1603

StavrosK 12y ago
Sure, but I (and most of the hackers I know) use the Raspberry Pi like an Edison (i.e. only Wifi connected to USB, headless/SSH only, GPIO pins), so the Edison would be a better fit for my projects, if I could figure out how it works. As the SparkFun article mentions, with the cost of the Wifi, powered hub, cables, SD card, and Bluetooth adapter add up. The Raspberry Pi is meant as a low-cost teaching computer, whereas what I want is a SoC to hack on. Maybe it's as simple as programming it with the board and then detaching it and powering it.
joezydeco 12y ago
See, that's where I don't get what Edison is about. If I want a SoC capable of doing low cost user-interface type embedded tasks I need parallel LCD support (or at least LVDS). I'd get an NXP LPC18/40 or an STM32 at the low end or an i.MX5/6 at the high end. Way cheaper with way better application support. If I wanted to do IoT sensing/reporting, this whole thing is just overkill. Again, a low cost LPC or STM coupled with a GainSpan or TI radio module (that I can bake directly to my PCB). To me, and I could be wrong here, IoT isn't about putting 500 MHz computing resources at the nodes and certainly not for a $75 BOM adder. At least the LPC and STM are chips I can put directly down on my board and run out of the box. An SOM with a single-sourced connector (and Hirose is notorious for designing unique stuff nobody else wants to duplicate) is just commercial suicide.
- StavrosK 12y ago
  I want a low-power, Wifi-enabled computer for various projects. Arduino shield compatibility means that I can create things like my license-plate-reading garage door opener, or irrigation system, while combining a fast processor and lots of RAM with all the nice hardware Arduino has.
  - joezydeco 12y ago
    And that's fine for that kind of application. You could also do just as much with a cheaper system (but you'd need a lot more software work so maybe that's Intel key point: you can shovel in all the X86 code you've been slogging around with you for decades). But, in my opinion, the examples you mentioned are not IoT. Unless you're planning to put one of these at every sprinkler head.
    - StavrosK 12y ago
      They aren't, but you said you don't get what the Edison is about, so I mentioned a few cases it's perfect for.

StavrosK 12y ago

Sure, but I (and most of the hackers I know) use the Raspberry Pi like an Edison (i.e. only Wifi connected to USB, headless/SSH only, GPIO pins), so the Edison would be a better fit for my projects, if I could figure out how it works. As the SparkFun article mentions, with the cost of the Wifi, powered hub, cables, SD card, and Bluetooth adapter add up. The Raspberry Pi is meant as a low-cost teaching computer, whereas what I want is a SoC to hack on. Maybe it's as simple as programming it with the board and then detaching it and powering it.

joezydeco 12y ago

See, that's where I don't get what Edison is about. If I want a SoC capable of doing low cost user-interface type embedded tasks I need parallel LCD support (or at least LVDS). I'd get an NXP LPC18/40 or an STM32 at the low end or an i.MX5/6 at the high end. Way cheaper with way better application support. If I wanted to do IoT sensing/reporting, this whole thing is just overkill. Again, a low cost LPC or STM coupled with a GainSpan or TI radio module (that I can bake directly to my PCB). To me, and I could be wrong here, IoT isn't about putting 500 MHz computing resources at the nodes and certainly not for a $75 BOM adder. At least the LPC and STM are chips I can put directly down on my board and run out of the box. An SOM with a single-sourced connector (and Hirose is notorious for designing unique stuff nobody else wants to duplicate) is just commercial suicide.

StavrosK 12y ago
I want a low-power, Wifi-enabled computer for various projects. Arduino shield compatibility means that I can create things like my license-plate-reading garage door opener, or irrigation system, while combining a fast processor and lots of RAM with all the nice hardware Arduino has.
- joezydeco 12y ago
  And that's fine for that kind of application. You could also do just as much with a cheaper system (but you'd need a lot more software work so maybe that's Intel key point: you can shovel in all the X86 code you've been slogging around with you for decades). But, in my opinion, the examples you mentioned are not IoT. Unless you're planning to put one of these at every sprinkler head.
  - StavrosK 12y ago
    They aren't, but you said you don't get what the Edison is about, so I mentioned a few cases it's perfect for.