Featured Articles
Announcing Pi
Technical Specifications
Raspberry Pi FAQs
Win a Pi
Raspberry Pi Wishlist
Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 56 replies
  • Subscribers 711 subscribers
  • Views 7315 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

512MB deliberate deception?

e14 Contributor

The RPF has made lots of predictions that turned out to be way off,

but perhaps they were just being overoptimistic.   They have told stories

that I don't think most people believe now, about needing to resolder 10K

ethernet jacks, but perhaps they were just mistaken.  But now we

have a more clearcut case:

 

On October 15, Liz wrote:
"This has, as you've probably guessed by now, been in the works for months. (In fact, the day we visited the factory last month, all the Pis being made there were 512MB ones already - we had to be very careful which photos we used from the visit.) "

http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=63&t=19963&start=75

 

However, On September 5, 2012 at 3:59PM when Ozy asked:

"are there any plans for GPU, CPU, or RAM updates in the pipeline? "

http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/1929

 

JamesH at 4:00PM answered:

"Not at present."

 

and Liz confirmed at 4:00PM

"Not at the moment, no."

 

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 was in the pipeline. 

And of course, they are not required to look out for their customers' interests

or to divulge confidential information on future products.  But the standard

solution to that for any organization that values its reputation for honesty

is to say simply "we have a policy of not commenting on unannounced products."

Parents

  • > 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.

  • in reply to cjbaird

    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

  • in reply to jamodio

    > 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 ?

     

    It may be that RPF doesn't own all the rights to the scematics. 

    If that's the case, they they may have to negotiate with the rights-holder(s).

  • in reply to jamodio

    jamodio wrote:

     

    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 ?

     

    My .02

    Rev 2.0 schematics have just been released: http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/2233.

     

    Let's see what you find this time image

Reply Children
  • in reply to johnbeetem

    Interesting that Eben says in that post that the DNC pins are up for grabs again.. 

     

    The original 5th September post he links to has a question from JBeale specifically asking if we can now rely on the DNC pins being fixed and Eben answers yes..

    http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/1929#comment-31646  Not really sure what I should make of that..

     

    I think we can also surmise why the schematics weren't released earlier.. The reference to the 512Mb PoP.

  • in reply to jamodio

    I'm a bit disappointed to see IC3 pins 14 & 16 not brought out anywhere, that will make it rather more difficult to add a proper USB power switch IC, but at least they don't appear to have been tied directly to 5v or anything like that.

     

    Note 3 (for P5) : "Connector designed to be mounted underside, DO NOT FILL holes in process" - hmm.. 3.5 out of 8 filled on the one I received this morning..

     

    Don't really notice anything much else that we didn't already know about..

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

     

    Interesting that Eben says in that post that the DNC pins are up for grabs again.. 

     

    Especially given the note under P1 on the schematic "All Pins are Fully Defined as Shown No Reserved Pins". So as there are no reserved / DNC pins we can just ignore his statement ?

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

    > I think we can also surmise why the schematics weren't released earlier.. The reference to the 512Mb PoP.

    brilliant!

     

    That also fits with my theory that rev 2.0 was intended to be 512MB

    from the start, which explains the mystery of why such a big jump in

    revision number for just small stuff like mounting holes.

    http://www.element14.com/community/thread/20330?tstart=0&start=9

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

    "My, Grandma - what big memory you have!"

     

    "All the better for porting Android, my dear..."

     

    The concensus from the admittedly small number of respondents to my thread over at the other place seems to be that even if Android is just an excuse for a giant Trojan then that's fine because all the other guys are just as bad and we can't resist the lure of the shiny things."

     

    Jeez, you couldn't make it up. How can ethical software developers ever hope to compete when users just don't care about trifles like security, anonymity and freedom? The folks at Firefox et al (including the providers of your favourite flavour of free operating system) might as well pull down the shutters and let the beast take it's pleasure. What on earth has Android got to do with education anyway? Perhaps Google have insisted that Gove specify it... image

     

    Still, perhaps all those extra hardware sales and subsequent apps will mean that the Foundation will be able to afford to hire a tech, instead of relying on Gordon to fix the split transactions thing for free and in his spare time.

     

    It all absolutely reeks in my opinion.

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

    are you talking about this thread?

     

    http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=62&t=20756

     

    Because reading the article I gotta agree with what the others are saying.  You're taking a single case study in which some developers built a speacial program to use man in the middle attacks on android devices that had attached to a fake wifi hotspot which was only successful on >8% of the 13K free apps they tested.  You're applying blame to google for other developer's bad programing.  What's more you're applying a response that was never said to those that responded.  What gives?

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

    The point he is trying to make is that, while the Pi isn't ready for it's educational goal yet, suddenly the foundation seems to put most of it's energy into running android on it. So, how does android fit in the educational charity goal of the foundation? No doubt it will give sales another boost.

    I don't think they will be able to hire a tech with the extra income as they will likely use it for marketing and promotion.

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

    Jonathan Garrish wrote:

     

    "My, Grandma - what big memory you have!"

     

    "All the better for porting Android, my dear..."

     

    The concensus from the admittedly small number of respondents to my thread over at the other place seems to be that even if Android is just an excuse for a giant Trojan then that's fine because all the other guys are just as bad and we can't resist the lure of the shiny things."

     

    Jeez, you couldn't make it up. How can ethical software developers ever hope to compete when users just don't care about trifles like security, anonymity and freedom? The folks at Firefox et al (including the providers of your favourite flavour of free operating system) might as well pull down the shutters and let the beast take it's pleasure. What on earth has Android got to do with education anyway? Perhaps Google have insisted that Gove specify it... image

     

    Still, perhaps all those extra hardware sales and subsequent apps will mean that the Foundation will be able to afford to hire a tech, instead of relying on Gordon to fix the split transactions thing for free and in his spare time.

     

    It all absolutely reeks in my opinion.

     

    Man, you read stuff in to people posts that just isn't there!  What the others said is pretty much spot on. Anyone can write an Android app that is BAD, just like they can on iOS or Windows. You are accusing Gogole of something on the flimsiest evidence! Chill dude!

     

    If you are indeed an ethical software developer, write ANdroid apps that don't leak. Pretty simple mate.

     

    And as for Android on the Raspbery PI, just another OS, if you don't like it use Linux - that the recomended OS and that isn't likely to change - Android on a Raspberry PI would not be suitable for teaching programming, so presumably is well low on the foundations list of sh!t to do. Gotta fix that USB first. Reading threads there, the Foundation aint putting much effort in to Android at all - it's everyone else that keeps asking for it. Christ knows why. Pointless exercise on a device like that.

     

    Still, for some paranoids, everything reeks.

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

    Luc Cool wrote:

     

    The point he is trying to make is that, while the Pi isn't ready for it's educational goal yet, suddenly the foundation seems to put most of it's energy into running android on it. So, how does android fit in the educational charity goal of the foundation? No doubt it will give sales another boost.

    I don't think they will be able to hire a tech with the extra income as they will likely use it for marketing and promotion.

    Evidence man - where the evidence they are putting most of its enerygy in to ANdroid. As far as I can see there ain't any evidence AT ALL. You are making it up to for prove a point that isn;t there.

     

    Bill