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

Professionals who are aware of the relevant  FCC regulations ...

for the record, I have tried to locate the first professional to credit for raising

the issue of Class B testing.  Does anyone have any earlier reference than

https://twitter.com/abishurp/status/188635726030708736

@Raspberry_Pi Did y'all also do the class B testing (do y'all still plan on doing it?) or are you quitting while you're ahead here?

7:33 AM - 7 Apr 12

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]

coder27 wrote:

 

for the record, I have tried to locate the first professional to credit for raising

the issue of Class B testing.  Does anyone have any earlier reference than

https://twitter.com/abishurp/status/188635726030708736

Was that posted in April of this year, or 2012?

For our part here on Element14, all the credit clearly has to go to yourself for nailing this issue near the beginning of Pi time and persevering with it until today.  It was only extremely recently that I finally picked up on your FCC links in detail, and was amazed by what I read there.

If Element14 had paid attention to your postings on the subject last year, they wouldn't be in this risky situation they are in today.

coder27 wrote:

 

for the record, I have tried to locate the first professional to credit for raising

the issue of Class B testing.  Does anyone have any earlier reference than

https://twitter.com/abishurp/status/188635726030708736

Was that posted in April of this year, or 2012?

For our part here on Element14, all the credit clearly has to go to yourself for nailing this issue near the beginning of Pi time and persevering with it until today.  It was only extremely recently that I finally picked up on your FCC links in detail, and was amazed by what I read there.

If Element14 had paid attention to your postings on the subject last year, they wouldn't be in this risky situation they are in today.

Was that posted in April of this year, or 2012?

It was 7 April 2012.

perhaps the problems with certification was engineered into the Rpi to prevent it from being used as an OEM part of a finished comercial product. keeping it in the educational or maker spaces.

probably not the case.