I must applaud the inclusion of the multiple certifications for Europe and North America. At least this will alleviate any possible delays based on testing.
I am curious as to what the "Canadian thing" was that had to be tested?
I just scanned the document mentioned, and it lists as exempt: things like digital watches that use less than 6 nanowatts. I find that 6 nanowatts very very little. I measured my 1980ies watch once, and got about 0.3 micro amperes. So about 450 nW. I'm pretty sure that that watch is pretty harmless at that powerlevel even if it would TRY to interfere with radio communications.
The Foundation certainly promoted the board as an effective media computer, running XBMC and OpenELEC very nicely. They even had prominent articles about that on their blog, and they also showed it hosting normal Linux desktop distros and have many times said "It's just standard Linux". This ensured that the board would attract interest from ordinary consumers worldwide, and hence end up going into normal domestic consumer situations worldwide too, not just into the hands of electrical engineers and radio amateurs who know how to deal with EMC problems.
There can't be the slightest doubt that this was intentional. They didn't try to restrict the audience for batch #1 to techies only, quite the opposite, so feeling aggrieved when the need for full domestic certification was explained to them was fairly comical. They ensured that it would have to be so by their promotion.
Using ferrite clamps during testing is a common way to indentify which of the cables is radiating. It says absolutely nothing about whether the device passes any tests with or without these clamps. Using them is simply a testing tool.
Quite a lot of devices are shipped with ferrite lumps of different sorts on the cables (I've hade a Cannon camera with one on the USB lead and a network switch with one on the power cable as well as being invloved in product developments where the ferrites were on the cable but inside the box). It's an expensive solution but may the best bet if the cost of a re-design is significant. Of course the device is no longer compliant if a different cable is used and the documentation should reflect this.
This ensured that the board would attract interest from ordinary consumers worldwide, a....
There can't be the slightest doubt that this was intentional. They didn't try to restrict the audience for batch #1 to techies only, quite the opposite, so feeling aggrieved when the need for full domestic certification was explained to them was fairly comical. They ensured that it would have to be so by their promotion.
Well, I think I tend to believe them that they thought the first batch would not attract end-users. They thought (timeframe: sept 2011) that the software wouldn't be ready and that most people would not want to sink their money in a $35 paperweight until the software would be ready.
In fact, people ARE willing to invest in a nifty paperweight if it probably will be able to work as a computer later on. People ARE willing to bet that it will do what they want within reasonable timeframe. People ARE willing to do this because it only costs $35+shipping+tax.
Let me ask you this way: I have a product here. It'll be useful about half a year from now when we have the software ready. Do you want to buy it now? I expect 95 out of 100 people to sya: no. That's what they expected. In the meanwhile work on the software continued and they showed off their progress on the software front. Fine.
So, due to the software already on its way, due to some demos showing impressive stuff many people have changed their minds and ordered the devices now already. That changes the game a bit.
By selecting two of the world's largest electronic component distributors to work with them, the Raspberry Pi Foundation have done all they can to target Techies with the first batch. Had they teamed up with Amazon, whou would, arguably, have been better equipped to handle the volumes of orders and interest, one could, quite reasonably have assumed that they were targetting end-users.
Each of the software demonstrations has been an early version, far from ready for end-users - much like the demonstrations of Windows 8 last year. You could not claim that the Windows 8 developer tablets given away were for end-users, likewise, it is quite reasonable to consider the iniital release a techie-only prodict.
I can go to B&Q and buy a gas boiler, but it would be illegal for me to fit it myself.
Since software and firmware can have a critical effect on the EMC of a device and the O/S was in beta. I suspect that the combination shipped quite possibly had not been tested.
Luckily I am in the EU so the FCC rules do not affect me. If it must be Class B certified to ship in the USA, hard luck to all the US enthusiasts, you will just have to wait for Revision 2 and I'll get my Raspberry PI sooner. IIRC one of the goals of the project was to boost programmign and electronic skills amongst UK students. If other juristictions want to give the UK a head start so be it!
As for the popularity on launch, I think you will find that at least one message board targetting consumers had messages posted by third parties about the new $25 computer, encouraging users to "Order Yours Today" as if it were a limited offer - hardly something the Raspberry Pi Organisation wanted and probably the underlying reason why BIS advised that CE marking was reqiuired. Incidentally, BIS have no authority to interpret the regulations in conjunction with the facts to determine absolutely whether CE Marking is indeed essential for the first batch. Only the courts have such authority.
