Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tiny quad-core system-on-module for makers and hardware startups

neutis.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 123 posts

Re: Tiny quad-core system-on-module for makers and hardware startups

#91

Post by [deleted] »

quickthrower2 wrote: post #67
fernly wrote: post #55

My flabber is gasted at people complaining about paying a meaty $49 for a quad-core, 64bit, cpu with 8gb of local storage. Twenty years ago I was writing docs for the SGI Challenge[1] with its four MIPS R4000s in a tidy cabinet the size of a two-drawer file (disk drives mounted externally) weighing about 250lbs. This thing far exceeds the capacity of that machine, costs several orders of magnitude less, and FITS IN A…

Depends what you are going to do with it. If you are buying 1 for a hobby, you have a point. If you are buying 10000 for you business, you'll care about the cost down to the cent.

[deleted]

Re: Tiny quad-core system-on-module for makers and hardware startups

#92

Post by alex_hitchins »

tty7 wrote: post #59
fernly wrote: post #55

My flabber is gasted at people complaining about paying a meaty $49 for a quad-core, 64bit, cpu with 8gb of local storage. Twenty years ago I was writing docs for the SGI Challenge[1] with its four MIPS R4000s in a tidy cabinet the size of a two-drawer file (disk drives mounted externally) weighing about 250lbs. This thing far exceeds the capacity of that machine, costs several orders of magnitude less, and FITS IN A…

so? $49 is way too expensive for this. i can get a x86 from ebay way more cheaper than this. who would even bother, the rpi zero is $5.

Could you send me a link? I'm in the market for one of these boards and would be interested to see what the alternative secondhand option would be. Better to reuse & recycle than create more landfill.

Re: Tiny quad-core system-on-module for makers and hardware startups

#93

Post by StavrosK »

lorenzhs wrote: post #87
StavrosK wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's more like ten dollars though.

Nobody claimed it was $5 including shipping . It's still £3.82 ($5.32) without VAT (deducting it since US prices never include sales tax, either) and shipping at Pimoroni UK right now.

It's not $5 plus $5 shipping unless I can buy three for $20. Otherwise it's just $10 including shipping.

Since you can't buy more than one, "shipping" is just a way to get the price up. It's like those eBay sellers who sell a $10 item for $1 and charge $12 for shipping, per item.

Re: Tiny quad-core system-on-module for makers and hardware startups

#94

Post by tonyedgecombe »

fernly wrote: post #55

My flabber is gasted at people complaining about paying a meaty $49 for a quad-core, 64bit, cpu with 8gb of local storage. Twenty years ago I was writing docs for the SGI Challenge[1] with its four MIPS R4000s in a tidy cabinet the size of a two-drawer file (disk drives mounted externally) weighing about 250lbs. This thing far exceeds the capacity of that machine, costs several orders of magnitude less, and FITS IN A…

It never ceases to amaze me how cheap our industry is, even about buying our own products.

Re: Tiny quad-core system-on-module for makers and hardware startups

#95

Post by jononor »

beagle3 wrote: post #79
madez wrote: post #47

It claims to run on mainline Linux but mainline Linux does not yet support CPUFreq, hardware crypto, HDMI, nor the GPU for the Allwinner H5. http://linux-sunxi.org/Linux_mainlining_effort

It says "based on mainline linux", not "running on mainline linux". They probably have non-upstreamed patches.

Everything is based on mainline Linux so that's a rather empty statement. Question is how far away is it, and what is the track record for getting changes upstream.

Re: Tiny quad-core system-on-module for makers and hardware startups

#96

Post by imtringued »

squarefoot wrote: post #88
tty7 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so? $49 is way too expensive for this. i can get a x86 from ebay way more cheaper than this. who would even bother, the rpi zero is $5.

The RPi Zero at $5 is a (hardly verifiable) reality only for a few lucky purchasers, especially writers in some blogs/magazines, but an urban legend for everyone else. 10 people every now and then telling the world they got it at $5 mean nothing when there are thousands who can't get it without price inflating bundles. We already know why it is produced in so scarce quantities, so I won't comment further. Besides tha…

THe RPi Zero is misleading. It has less performance than this.

The direct competitor is the RPi3 and costs $35 which is $15 less and it doesnt require a breakout board to access it's IO. The eMMC is the only interesting aspect about this board.

SD card manufacturers can get away with using the shittiest flash and controllers they can find because SD cards can be replaced. eMMC is not user serviceable and therefore actually needs to be... you know... reliable.

This board is clearly not for hobbyists. It's intended for hardware startups that will design their own custom breakout boards.

Re: Tiny quad-core system-on-module for makers and hardware startups

#97

Post by [deleted] »

jononor wrote: post #95
beagle3 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It says "based on mainline linux", not "running on mainline linux". They probably have non-upstreamed patches.

Everything is based on mainline Linux so that's a rather empty statement. Question is how far away is it, and what is the track record for getting changes upstream.

[deleted]

Re: Tiny quad-core system-on-module for makers and hardware startups

#98

Post by nottorp »

squarefoot wrote: post #88
tty7 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so? $49 is way too expensive for this. i can get a x86 from ebay way more cheaper than this. who would even bother, the rpi zero is $5.

The RPi Zero at $5 is a (hardly verifiable) reality only for a few lucky purchasers, especially writers in some blogs/magazines, but an urban legend for everyone else. 10 people every now and then telling the world they got it at $5 mean nothing when there are thousands who can't get it without price inflating bundles. We already know why it is produced in so scarce quantities, so I won't comment further. Besides tha…

For the record, I have a few RPi Zeros but they were all sold as kits costing $20-$30.

Also, PIs aren't so solid. Definitely not good for industrial use.

Re: Tiny quad-core system-on-module for makers and hardware startups

#99

Post by imtringued »

thom_nic wrote: post #57
oneplane wrote: post #35

Unless it gets the ecosystem the Pi and the Beagle have, this gets old rather quickly.

I think "ecosystem" doesn't actually matter much (if "ecosystem" means maker/ tinkerer mindshare) for commercial applications. All you need is (1) kernel support for the chip including drivers e.g. for video/ peripherals, and (2) good userland support for aarch64. You can debootstrap a Debian rootfs that will work on any aarch64 chip. As mentioned elsewhere, it sounds like the H5 chip has good kernel support which co…

There is no real demand for alternatives to the RPi.

People who buy RPis don't care about specs and price. They usually buy only one for $35 and use it to get linux experience or they already have a specific usecase in mind like retropi, pihole, etc.

I once wanted to work on the mali open source driver but now I'm thinking: What's the point? Nobody (including me) gives a shit about it anyway. Just spend $15 more on that RPi 3.

Re: Tiny quad-core system-on-module for makers and hardware startups

#100

Post by beagle3 »

wryun wrote: post #89
beagle3 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It says "based on mainline linux", not "running on mainline linux". They probably have non-upstreamed patches.

But by that definition, what linux isn't 'based on mainline linux'? Unless they're offering some guarantee that they'll keep their patches up-to-date...

There some boards out there still running on 2.6.x series, and many running 3.0 - those would not qualify as “mainline linux״ at this time.

Some boards can boot a kernel.org kernel without patches; those run “mainline Linux”, not something “based” on it.

Post reply on HN