[conspire] Oh yeah? Raspberry Pi 4 Model B arrives with up to 4GBRAM

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Paul Zander (paulz at ieee.org):

>  A couple years ago, a speaker on single board computers said the
>  biggest difference between a Pi and BeagleBone was the the BeagleBone
>  had mounting holes.  Obviously this has changed.  When I start the
>  next project I will have to check out the wikipedia list.

One thing I didn't mention about that list is that many of the specific
single-board computer (SBC) models mentioned are no longer available,
including a third or so of the list of twelve I cited (the subset that
are able to run mainline Linux kernels).[1]  And that, in turn, is a
reminder of one important way in which SBCs differ from more-familiar
x86 desktop/server computing:  rapid product churn.

Well, now that I think about it, x86 models come and go at a fair clip,
too, but it doesn't matter as much because there is a lot more
commonality over time, e.g., the owner of a 20-year-old Pentium III
still has no problem with full hardware support.  SBCs, like smartphones
and in line with the entire field of embedded computing, tends towards
one-offs.

That is part, but _only_ part, of why I keep coming back to the problem
of most SBCs requiring out-of-tree kernels and a lot of secret-sauce
proprietary, binary-only system software (such as the disturbingly
extensive set of firmware BLOBs required for RPis):  One consequence 
is that this fact overshadows the hardware's future.  Just ask all the 
people who thought their winmodems were perfectly fine because a
binary-only x86 driver could be downloaded that ought to work with any
2.2.x Linux kernel.

As to why the BeagleBone Black ended up being profoundly more compatible
with open source than any RPi so far, I'm not sure, but my gut instinct
says the explanation will turn out to have to do with avoiding Broadcom
-- a company that's been quite supportive of the RPi project (and made
many sales from it) but has a secret-saauce addiction.  Well, on
reflection, that's probably a little harsh.  Let me try again:

The (commendable) aim of the RPi project was to produce a credibly
powerful SBC for young people and hobbyists at a $35 price point.  The
(commendable) aim of the BeagleBoard project was to produce an SBC
designed with open source software development in mind, and as a way of
demonstrating the Texas Instrument's OMAP3530 system-on-a-chip.  See:
http://www.edn.com/design/systems-design/4313253/Take-advantage-of-open-source-hardware

Anyway, I keep being impressed by SBCs including RPis but preferring to 
stick with x86_64 and stay away from ARM, because x86_64 can get pretty
close to ARM's lower power consumption and price point, without the
limitations. 


[1] Equally, there are probably newer SBCs able to run mainline Linux
kernels that aren't yet on that list.  Wikipedia does really well in 
general by crowdsourcing maintenance, but nobody's perfect.   But that
may limit the practical usability of that list.