first mention of twins

ill try keep this nice.

i think the whole hype about Rpi being the big bad educational tool was nothing more than a pr stunt to get it selling quick, and that is just what happened. i also remember hearing somthing about this being developed by employees of broadcom, when it was first released the soc data sheet required a nondisclosure agreement, so right out of the gate there were problems calling it open source.

i'm sorry if i dont get the idea about teaching computer science with an embeded linux board. don't comp sci cources use full-blown computers already? and if you really want to learn about how computers work, it is much better to start with an 8051 or 8088 and assembly.

but now it seems the more i read, the more i can't suggest the pi for any use other than a media center.

anyways thats my two bits on the the pi.

sheldon bailey wrote:

 

but now it seems the more i read, the more i can't suggest the pi for any use other than a media center.

Professionals who are aware of the relevant  FCC regulations shouldn't be suggesting the Pi for use in any residential application in FCC jurisdiction anyway, since the device does not have FCC certification for residential use.  That would be a Class B certification, and it doesn't have one at the present date.

I doubt that anyone would deny that media centres constitute an overwhelmingly residential or domestic use of a digital device.  It's probably as close to being a poster child for residential use as one could find anywhere.

Morgaine, i agree with its unsuitability because of sub par hardware and or design. however in a properly shielded and fire proof box it would be a wonderfull media center.

From what I hear, Pi does indeed make an exceedingly good media centre.  It's just unfortunate that most of the media centre consumers live in nations that have strong residential equipment certification laws, and Class B (residential) certification is one bullet point that the Pi doesn't offer.

sheldon bailey wrote:

 

Morgaine, i agree with its unsuitability because of sub par hardware and or design. however in a properly shielded and fire proof box it would be a wonderfull media center.

Get a Roku, you will spend less money and time.

-J

sheldon bailey wrote:

 

Morgaine, i agree with its unsuitability because of sub par hardware and or design. however in a properly shielded and fire proof box it would be a wonderfull media center.

Get a Roku, you will spend less money and time.

-J

I think that we're veering a bit off-topic - although it's understandable because as engineers and technicians we're more used to weighing up definables than discussing ethics.

The Foundation have been quite clever, they've told the story about what prompted their formation countless times and then they just let us assume that their liberal use of the word "education" and their charitable status meant that the selling of this low cost computer would be part of some kind of bigger picture. Some of us thought that maybe this was part of a coordinated effort to e.g.

1) convince the weary U.K. taxpayer that teaching proper computer engineering was a good thing.

2) Lobby government, educational establishments and the industries that the education system feeds in order to gain cooperation, fashion a plan and eventually a curriculum.

3) Form partnerships with establishments, individuals and companies in order to provide solutions for that curriculum - a bare computer is nothing without software, supplementary learning materials, peripherals, ongoing support, etc.

4) Keep charming the non-geek public. It's gonna cost a lot of money, after all. One of the main problems that requires addressing is the lack of specific expertise within the teaching profession. Fixing this would cost rather more than $25 a pop.

However, anyone who cares to start at the beginning of the RPi blog (http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/date/2011/page/5) and watch any one of the innumerable video presentations may notice that since at least 2011 (the blog begins at around the time of the creation of the alpha boards) pretty much all of the Foundation's efforts have concentrated on selling a board with a big graphics chip to as many people as possible. There are occasional references to "an educational release" and a "programming prize fund", but this is all about selling a product. That's fine - some Pi have ended up in the hands of students and teachers who have unilaterally done amazing things, but most people who want to bring a consumer product to market don't create a charitable foundation in order to do get that product "out there".

What a pitch - Alan Sugar would be proud.

That's quite insightful, Jonathan.

I suspect that clever sleight of hand won't carry much weight with the FCC though.

jamodio wrote:

 

Get a Roku, you will spend less money and time.

 

-J

the roku is nice, but I always have old desktop pc hardware thrown at me, been using one as a media centre for a few years now.

even if the Rpi makes it way to the super poor areas, it would probably be traded for a meal or two. what good is an internet connected device if there is no internet?

while the Internet can be a good tool to help learn for people who actually use it responsibly, it is also a great distraction, and it lends to the "cut and paste" type of problem solving, that has no educational value whatsoever.

Morgaine Dinova wrote:

 

That's quite insightful, Jonathan.

 

I suspect that clever sleight of hand won't carry much weight with the FCC though.

Thanks Morgaine - the amount of evidence suggesting that it's an end-user (consumer / residential) product will hopefully carry a metric bunch of weight though. A cynic might suggest that the FCC doc. linked to in the other thread might be in need of a bit of an update (I think it was dated 1993) and that a really slick lawyer might claim that the Pi is just a populated motherboard and is thus exempt. The Foundation may have to airbrush all references to the word "computer" from the internet in order to pull this off, but they've had a lot of practice at airbrushing history on their forum... [/tongue-in-cheek mode]

a really slick lawyer might claim that the Pi is just a populated motherboard and is thus exempt

The UK's BIS has already ruled that it was a finished product.

The E14 FAQ says:

http://www.element14.com/community/docs/DOC-43262/l/updated-15-march-frequently-asked-questions-about-raspberry-pi

HOT OFF THE PRESS UPDATE FROM EBEN UPTON OF RASPBERRY PI EARLIER TODAY:

“We have spoken with BIS this morning, and have been told that, given the volumes involved and the demographic mix of likely users, the development board exemption is not applicable to us; as a result, even the first uncased developer units of Raspberry Pi will require a CE mark prior to distribution in the EU...... ....we are working with RS Components and element14/Premier Farnell to bring Raspberry Pi into a compliant state as soon as is humanly possible.”

and

Over the past weeks, it is clear that customers who have pre-ordered are going to use the Raspberry Pi as a finished product and not just an engineering development board.  We see it as the most responsible approach to ensure that all Pi’s meet the required standards for finished products in their respective country. We are prioritizing the compliance testing process by working closely with the Raspberry Pi foundation and RS Components to make sure there are no more delays.  We take our commitment and responsibility in this area very seriously and believe that while this is a frustrating short-term delay, it’s worth it to ensure our customers receive a fully compliant product.

It would be quite startling to see their position change to it being a finished product in the UK but not in the US.

There are plenty of published articles and interviews describing the RPi as a computer intended for children's bedrooms.

http://blog.ted.com/2013/06/14/wherefore-raspberry-pi-eben-upton-at-tedglobal-2013/

What is a Raspberry Pi?

It’s a credit-card sized computer ...

...

“Our idea was to build something cheap, powerful and available for children’s bedrooms so they could have the same experience we had.”

The prosecution rests. For now.

is there a thread or source why it failed compliance, and what standards were used to determine?

i would like to look into this a little more.

See Pete Lomas's blog here:

we have some definite options for ripping 10db or more off the key gremlin frequencies. Before you ask, yes, this should be enough.

http://www.element14.com/community/people/PeteL/blog/2012/03/29/spikes-in-the-ether-emc-and-compliance

and my unanswered question:

Are you trying to meet the Class A industrial standard, or Class B residential?

http://www.element14.com/community/people/PeteL/blog/2012/03/29/spikes-in-the-ether-emc-and-compliance#comment-13097

Similarly:

http://www.element14.com/community/people/PeteL/blog/2012/04/07/certification-testing--update

Jonathan Garrish wrote:

 

The prosecution rests. For now.

I sure hope that the message Element14 received was not about prosecution but about preventing bad things from happening before they happen.  After all this analysis of the regulatory situation perhaps we can rest, but Element14 cannot.  They have an official group-wide Code of Ethics  to adhere to, so I'm sure they are taking the matter seriously now that they have been alerted to the problem.

Every single stakeholder  in the Pi ecosystem is at risk (in different ways) because of this certification error, from suppliers to importers, distributors, retailers, users operating unintentionally radiating devices without knowing it, and other people in the residential vicinity of those devices who could be affected by them.  There is a very good reason for requiring residential certification, it's not just a pointless burden on manufacturing.  It's to prevent bad things from happening, a part of engineering and social responsibility.

Alas, there is still no acknowledgement of this week's advice in Feedback & Support on this matter.

There are some bits here and there but nothing conclusive or detailed ...

This is one of the classic ones were we get but don't get some information ...

http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/978

Pay attention that at that time they realize the even when  "at the Foundation call the computer a Raspberry Pi in conversation" "This thing’s called a Raspberry Pi, not a Raspberry Pi computer"

So we (they) call it a computer but is it not.... ohhh right now is a "linux box"

But first line on "About us" ...

"The idea behind a tiny and cheap computer for kids came in 2006"

So it is or it is not a computer ? ... perhaps Shakespeare can provide some light into this identity crisis.

On thing that they really missed big on the entire strategy and inspiration, is the context in the days of the BBC Micro and such.

-J