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.

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

jamodio wrote:

 

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

Indeed - the road to a lucrative career in Law is paved with semantics.

Regarding Pete Lomas' blog - I see he's not even logged into his account here since October 2012.

Morgaine - obviously "getting the paperwork done right" is a given - especially considering the inordinate amount of time that the RPF have spent promoting their product Stateside. It all just makes no sense as there is absolutely nothing to be gained, but a lot to be lost by not getting the relevant certifications

Indeed - the road to a lucrative career in Law is paved with semantics.

So how many semantic issues do you detect in the opening line of

Eben's March 2013 pycon keynote speach:

[Eben]: Thankyou guys. So, my name is Eben Upton, I run a thing based in the UK called the Raspberry Pi Foundation. Ah, we make little computers for kids.

https://github.com/robotclass/pycon-us-2013-keynote-eben-upton/blob/master/keynote-eben-upton.textile

coder27 wrote:

 

Indeed - the road to a lucrative career in Law is paved with semantics.

 

So how many semantic issues do you detect in the opening line of

Eben's March 2013 pycon keynote speach:

[Eben]: Thankyou guys. So, my name is Eben Upton, I run a thing based in the UK called the Raspberry Pi Foundation. Ah, we make little computers for kids.

https://github.com/robotclass/pycon-us-2013-keynote-eben-upton/blob/master/keynote-eben-upton.textile

I'd say that in my opinion that opening sentence was explicit and not open to misinterpretation by any reasonable person.

#1) He's still leaning on the Foundation for promotional purposes, rather than on Raspberry Pi (Trading) Ltd - of which he is listed as a director.

#2) He's promoting his organisation's consumer product. Computers, if I'm not mistaken.

Have I missed anything?

Being a portable computer by the FCC definition  would automatically define Pi as a Class B device.

Note however that it's captured as a Class B device anyway, even without the above, because if falls foul of the FCC's three key questions that distinguish between devices of the two classes:

1. Is the marketing of the device restricted in such a manner that it is not sold to residential users?
2. Does the application for which the device is designed generally preclude operation in residential areas?
3. Is the price of the device high enough that there is little likelihood that it would be used in a residential environment, including a home business?

Since it fails to be excluded from the residential environment through restricted marketing and sales (point 1), and it cannot avail itself of the exemptions in points 2 and 3, by FCC rules it is a Class B device anyway, even if someone could retrospectively wish away the fact that it is clearly a portable computer.

A Class B device without Class B certification is uncertified for its expected use, and cannot be marketed or offered for sale to residential users.  If it has Class A certification then it can be marketed or offered for sale as a restricted commercial or industrial device, but that is not  how Pi has been marketed and offered for sale, as anyone can plainly see.

Being a portable computer by the FCC definition  would automatically define Pi as a Class B device.

Note however that it's captured as a Class B device anyway, even without the above, because if falls foul of the FCC's three key questions that distinguish between devices of the two classes:

1. Is the marketing of the device restricted in such a manner that it is not sold to residential users?
2. Does the application for which the device is designed generally preclude operation in residential areas?
3. Is the price of the device high enough that there is little likelihood that it would be used in a residential environment, including a home business?

Since it fails to be excluded from the residential environment through restricted marketing and sales (point 1), and it cannot avail itself of the exemptions in points 2 and 3, by FCC rules it is a Class B device anyway, even if someone could retrospectively wish away the fact that it is clearly a portable computer.

A Class B device without Class B certification is uncertified for its expected use, and cannot be marketed or offered for sale to residential users.  If it has Class A certification then it can be marketed or offered for sale as a restricted commercial or industrial device, but that is not  how Pi has been marketed and offered for sale, as anyone can plainly see.