On 02/03/2016 09:00 AM, John Kasunich wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, at 11:49 AM, Rafael wrote: > >> >> Problem with all those boards is in the fact that they have no common >> bus so that others could build standard interfaces on open architecture. >> All seem to be built to replace a PC with most of it's functionality. >> >> Want to make a common box, bad luck. Everybody comes with their own >> silly PCB shape, hole positions, and names for add on boards, unsuitable >> connectors on all sides so you need space around them, or include chips >> that are not needed in embedded applications. Who needs audio or 4K >> video on 3D printer or small CNC machine? >> >> In that regard we are back to early 80's or later when some interfaces >> did not work in different PCs even though the connectors were the same. >> > > Another problem with all these boards is that they have "flash in the pan" > life cycles. The PC was a stable and viable platform for over two decades, > and you can make an argument that it will remain so for perhaps another > decade before finally disappearing.
You are right about "flash in the pan". However, PC evolved a lot since it's beginnings. Need for ever higher data transfer and adoption for use as servers changed everything. In order to fix a problem with one embedded system I had to pull out very old PC motherboard with IDE controller and old drive to get Linux working. Modern PC board would not work. Buses are changing from mostly parallel to serial. PCI is going that way and USB3.x is very promising. It's direction most computer vendors are taking. Simplifies cabling over longer distances if nothing else. > RasPI and Beagle and all these other things have life cycles more in line > with smart phones - this year's new shiny is considered obsolete next year, > and the replacement is far less likely to be a "drop-in", so you wind up > needing new breakout boards or other interface hardware. Isn't that frustrating? Original Beaglebone way different from the next generation, better but still not that great. You can't stack more that 2 or 3 interfaces on one SBC, they have to be in correct order because of high connectors in some cases, and you cannot touch PCB in the middle with the scope probe. I wish people would go to computer museum and see how others dealt with this kind of problems before they go to Kickstart or some such to start yet another SBC project for entertainment use mostly. Computer history repeats itself it seems. Mainframes to PCs, and now back to "mainframes in the cloud". -- Rafael ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
