512MB deliberate deception?

> They have explained that this was done because they were afraid that their sales would dry up because many potential customers would prefer not to buy the 256MB version if a 512MB version [...]

Commonly know as "The Osborne Effect" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect).

The bump up to 512MB was certainly expected by myself--- the 256 MiB part would be EoL eventually, and even before then, the cost of the 512 part would match on production price.

I think it was the Android porting announcement that blew the cover on the impending memory upgrade-- there was no way a 256MB RPi could demo Android like it did, and when they wouldn't give out much details of the porting effort, it certainly suggested that they had 512 MB hardware, even if hand-spun engineering test boards.

The reference to the "Osborne effect" in this case is another piece of BS and excuse from RPF for poor planning and execution.

It can certainly apply if the distributors had a substantial volume of units in stock, which as far as we know is not the case, also if they had an important number of 256MB memory chips they don't go to scrap since are planned to be used for the model A.

So I agree that instead of providing BS or misinformation it could be acceptable if from the get go they say "our policy is not to announce blah blah."

It was almost like large flashing neon sign that the 512MB was coming when they started talking and showing some promising screens of Android 4.0.

One thing I don't understand is why the Rev 2.0 schematics have not been released yet ? Afraid that we may find something wrong again ?

Still too much focus on hype and self promotion, poor execution and lack of transparency, which creates a shadow on any technical progress.

My .02

Jonathan Garrish wrote:

 

  @ everyone else: I fear that some may have missed the point. I wasn't judging Android on the strength of a particular exploit (which isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things), but was using it as a mechanism to ask some rather more fundamental questions:

 

1) Why the obvious effort to get the Android port done asap rather than toss official resources at removing the remaining wrinkles?

 

I suppose that's the thing I'm not following in this logic.  What obvious effort is everyone refering to?  I can find a single post 7 pages back on the Raspberry Pi Foundation's site that mentions that a third party is working to get android moved over and everything else I read is fans clamoring around it.  Or is that what you mean?  All this obvious effort (by fans) to get the Android port done.  If that's the case I largely agree with what followed.

mynameisJim wrote:

 

Jonathan Garrish wrote:

 

  @ everyone else: I fear that some may have missed the point. I wasn't judging Android on the strength of a particular exploit (which isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things), but was using it as a mechanism to ask some rather more fundamental questions:

 

1) Why the obvious effort to get the Android port done asap rather than toss official resources at removing the remaining wrinkles?

 

 

I suppose that's the thing I'm not following in this logic.  What obvious effort is everyone refering to?  I can find a single post 7 pages back on the Raspberry Pi Foundation's site that mentions that a third party is working to get android moved over and everything else I read is fans clamoring around it.  Or is that what you mean?  All this obvious effort (by fans) to get the Android port done.  If that's the case I largely agree with what followed.

It was on the Pi blog:

http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/1700

Broadcom developer Naren Sankar is namechecked here:

http://phys.org/news/2012-08-raspberry-pi-android.html

So no, it's not just an unofficial community thing.

Jonathan Garrish wrote:

 

mynameisJim wrote:

 

Jonathan Garrish wrote:

 

  @ everyone else: I fear that some may have missed the point. I wasn't judging Android on the strength of a particular exploit (which isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things), but was using it as a mechanism to ask some rather more fundamental questions:

 

1) Why the obvious effort to get the Android port done asap rather than toss official resources at removing the remaining wrinkles?

 

 

I suppose that's the thing I'm not following in this logic.  What obvious effort is everyone refering to?  I can find a single post 7 pages back on the Raspberry Pi Foundation's site that mentions that a third party is working to get android moved over and everything else I read is fans clamoring around it.  Or is that what you mean?  All this obvious effort (by fans) to get the Android port done.  If that's the case I largely agree with what followed.

It was on the Pi blog:

 

http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/1700

 

Broadcom developer Naren Sankar is namechecked here:

 

http://phys.org/news/2012-08-raspberry-pi-android.html

 

So no, it's not just an unofficial community thing.

Broadcom is still third party (which is the exact wording I used) and that is indeed a single post, hardly an obvious effort that I keep hearing people on this board talk about.  1 person outside the confines of the RPF hardly constitues as the RPF organizing a giant push for android.

The Foundation is Broadcom, insofar that the Pi in it's present form would never have happened without Broadcom support and development of the current product would be impossible without Broadcom's ongoing cooperation. One can't really separate the rather nebulous concept of the Foundation (which has only one full time employee after all) from the manufacturing partners either. There is no third party IMO.

I'm talking about the hardware / software side of things, rather than the educational goals of course, so I guess we're just differing on semantics (in fine forum tradition!). You state that there is little Foundation effort in an Android port and I'm not sure how much involvement the Foundation (as we currently think of it) directly have in any hardware / software decisions at all

I think its fairly obvious that I disagree with your final application, but let's go with it for the sake of argument.  One person, one post.  Or lets even say that it's a team.  A single post talking about it 3 months ago.  That's not an obvious push.  Or some big agenda to get android.  Even if I accepted your premise of Bcom = RPF, that's still just some auxiliary background noise going on

I was editing my post while you replied, so perhaps the last paragraph of my previous post will clarify my opinion (and it is just an opinion after all!). There's a couple of posts by jamesh in this thread:

http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=20688

that rather gives me the impression (I know, it's a bit vague) that there's more to the port than some amateur knocking together code on their day off.

That one person happens to be Eben Upton.

How many posts did you find about the usb issue?

I also remember him complaining about multiple android versions he had on his pc so that he couldn't locate the right one....

(Not sure anymore if it was on twitter or in a post on the forum) Maybe those weren't for the Pi, altough he doesn't seem to port Android

as his full time job for Broadcom. And what was the stuff Liz was talking about when they did benchmarks on cheap android tablets?

Time will tell I assume.

Luc Cool wrote:

Time will tell I assume.

Indeed! Nothing ever gets announced until after someone notices it in the wild anyway.

mynameisJim wrote:

 

I think its fairly obvious that I disagree with your final application, but let's go with it for the sake of argument.  One person, one post.  Or lets even say that it's a team.  A single post talking about it 3 months ago.  That's not an obvious push.  Or some big agenda to get android.  Even if I accepted your premise of Bcom = RPF, that's still just some auxiliary background noise going on

The reason there's only one post is that they probably realized one post too late that mentioning Android gives away the 512MB upgrade.

Jonathan Garrish wrote:

 

The Foundation is Broadcom, insofar that the Pi in it's present form would never have happened without Broadcom support and development of the current product would be impossible without Broadcom's ongoing cooperation. One can't really separate the rather nebulous concept of the Foundation (which has only one full time employee after all) from the manufacturing partners either. There is no third party IMO.

 

I'm talking about the hardware / software side of things, rather than the educational goals of course, so I guess we're just differing on semantics (in fine forum tradition!). You state that there is little Foundation effort in an Android port and I'm not sure how much involvement the Foundation (as we currently think of it) directly have in any hardware / software decisions at all

Wrong in so may ways. Where do you people get your information from? Bon Bons?

Jonathan Garrish wrote:

 

The Foundation is Broadcom, insofar that the Pi in it's present form would never have happened without Broadcom support and development of the current product would be impossible without Broadcom's ongoing cooperation. One can't really separate the rather nebulous concept of the Foundation (which has only one full time employee after all) from the manufacturing partners either. There is no third party IMO.

 

I'm talking about the hardware / software side of things, rather than the educational goals of course, so I guess we're just differing on semantics (in fine forum tradition!). You state that there is little Foundation effort in an Android port and I'm not sure how much involvement the Foundation (as we currently think of it) directly have in any hardware / software decisions at all

Wrong in so may ways. Where do you people get your information from? Bon Bons?