He is the Source for the comment, he is the Official
If you want a link to say the same thing
He is the Source for the comment, he is the Official
To me, that doesn't mean you can run multiple projects concurrently - it means you could run your Christmas tree lights, then your Easter Bunny lights, then ... all with the same Zero.
I understood it to be more a case of "How low can we make the price of a computer?". $5 was a good aiming point, and they succeeded - rather better than anyone expected.I figured the low cost was because it was an outlet to market an outdated SoC design in a cost-effective scaled-down package.
This, exactly. And not only is it not practical to limit to one per person (let alone one per household), but (IANAL) it might even be illegal collusion to even attempt to do so.Heater wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 3:37 pmPerhaps it's non-sense.
On the other hand perhaps it's a purely practical mater. I can imagine if I was a supplier, like Pimoroni, I would not want the hassle of enforcing the one per customer limit. That would imply I have to maintain in my database a record of how many Zero, of what type perhaps, so that I can keep a check on you. Nah, much easier just to check for one per order.
Of course enforcing one per customer is impossible. To do that all possible suppliers would have to share their data on which customers purchased what. That's not going to happen.
Really, I don't know what the fuss is about.
So you don't think that, say, putting up half a dozen security cameras might be a suitable project for Pi0/Pi0Ws? Or--since I built a Pi0W-based electroning name badge--there would be a problem if I made ones for the rest of the family as well? Or the point that was made about ordering Pi0s or Pi0Ws for each of two kids, plus one for the father to test/do setups/experiment with?Burngate wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 5:50 pmTo me, that doesn't mean you can run multiple projects concurrently - it means you could run your Christmas tree lights, then your Easter Bunny lights, then ... all with the same Zero.
As I understand the goal, it was to make a free computer and $5 was as close as could actually be achieved. And an impressive achievement it is.I understood it to be more a case of "How low can we make the price of a computer?". $5 was a good aiming point, and they succeeded - rather better than anyone expected.I figured the low cost was because it was an outlet to market an outdated SoC design in a cost-effective scaled-down package.
I remember "gas wars". Stations across an intersection from each other would drop their prices in an attempt to gain business from the other. Sometimes this was subsidized by the refining company. Prices would drop down as low as $0.15 to $0.17 per gallon. For a bit more context, that's the US gallon (4 quarts) and the at the time the GBP was $2.80.Back in 1980, the ZX81 sold for £80, and was thought remarkably cheap.
There aren't many things that have dropped so low, especially taking into account inflation.
Petrol, for example, was 29p a litre in 1980
Where on Earth did you get that idea from?As I understand the goal, it was to make a free computer...
What I see is an organization getting everyone excited about a $5 computer, without any clearly stated restrictions, and then later pulling the rug out from under us by saying, "I guess we forgot to mention this earlier, but you can only ever have just one."
https://youtu.be/jFoA4u4x2ukRASPBERRY PI ZERO
The Raspberry Pi Zero is half the size of a Model A+, with twice the utility. A tiny Raspberry Pi that’s affordable enough for any project!
I got it from the reoprts that Eben Upton talked with (IIRC) Eric Schmidt and mused about making a more expensive--and capable--Pi that would be a viable classroom server. Schmidt is supposed to have replied that, no, the goal should be a zero cost computer. The Pi0 being the result of that conversation.
Perhaps realism would suggest that the price should have been set at $6 to allow for a bit more profit at every level. It would be inteesting to know what the price would have to be for RS and Farnell to carry them, but even if that is known outside those companies, I'm sure no one is going to give a number in public.The folks at the Pi Foundation have their heads screwed on. As much as "free" might be a whimsical dream I'm pretty sure they are realists who would not practically entertain such a notion. Certainly the distributors and the factories would not.
I think people, at least the ones willing to take a dispationate look, *do* understand. On the other hand, that doesn't necessarily mean agreement. Nor does it mean that any given individual isn't willing to point to contradictions and changes in policy. For rather a long time (as such things go) we were led to believe that the reason for the sales restriction (one per order) was due to supply/demand imbalance and that--as production ramped up (at least somewhat) and demand declined because those that badly wanted the boards got them, the restriction would be relaxed or removed. It is now being stated that, not only will the restrictions NOT be relaxed, let alone removed, but that they are --and were supposed to be--even tighter. Not just one per order, but one per person. Since "one per person" is clearly unenforceable, it makes for bad policy. I would class it--as a policy--as misguided at best and downright stupid at worst.I just don't get why so many people are hung up on understanding the Pi Zero situation.
There is a very important difference between making NO money and making less than desired, or even very little. If the RPT/RPF are are actually making NO money on the Pi0/Pi0W, then they should either be discontinued altogether (there was never a promise that they would continue to be made regardless of demand, unlike other Pis) or just raise the price to a level at which there is an acceptable return. The later could even be coupled with things like educational discounts back to the current price.What I do see is that people get the chance to buy a great product at a really low price, from a charitable organization that is making no money out of it, and then complain like hell when they can't have more.
Is it greedy to take the RPT/RPF at their word? Is it ungrateful to object to having this particular rug yanked out from under one? As for me...I'm grateful that the Pi0 and Pi0W were launched. If I seriously thought they were going to go off the market in the foreseeable future (say, the next 6 months), I would start ordering more Pi0Ws until I had what I would consider to be a lifetime supply. I would be taking the risk that something better would come along rendering that supply suitable only for display cases, but at least I wouldn't run out of them for my own projects for a good long while.Greedy, ungrateful buggers.
The note that follows on Nov 30, 2017 is a great clarification - Thank you.
Everything has been made clear in this thread. Were you not paying attention?
The source/ citation is me. I walked over to the guy who deals with this and asked him. I was surprised that the official line was one per customer, but the reasoning is sound. It is prevent people buying large quantities and then selling them on eBay, scalping.
That's interesting. Did he have any idea how to implement a "one per person" policy? I would think that the "one per order" would inhibit the behavior that is to be forestalled. On the other hand, having enough so that supply and demand are in reasonable balance would do that as well. And--yes--I understand the difficulties in achieving that.jamesh wrote: ↑Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:41 amThe source/ citation is me. I walked over to the guy who deals with this and asked him. I was surprised that the official line was one per customer, but the reasoning is sound. It is prevent people buying large quantities and then selling them on eBay, scalping.
Maybe they are aware and it is up to them to decide what suits them better. If the rule as agreed between them was one per order then the shop would need to ship many orders with just single Zeroes until the stock is out. In case they lose money/work for free/don't make profits with such single Zero orders they have a choice to say no second time. So maybe pirates at Pimoroni can handle one per order and don't mind extra work hoping they get it back in other way, but the guy in CZ chose otherwise.
Exactly that. I wasn't too miffed at missing the MagPi AIY Voice Kit freebie because it was ( at the time ), one and that's your lot. Break it and you are SOL. I don't usually buy anything I can't get three of; for use, experimenting, spare.Heater wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:05 pmhippy,Ah yes. So the irony is then that they so rare that if you happen to have one it's too valuable to break and you take good care of. Even though the price is so low.I meant that I don't believe they ever said the Zero would be so cheap and readily available that people can treat them with reckless abandon
Now this is an option and I have access to funding; I am seriously considering a commercial venture to buy in bulk to resell in multiples if that is permitted. It obviously depends how much bulk pricing is but a 6K order would not be unrealistic, resold as 500 sets of 12, or maybe sets of 4. I have more research to do but will hopefully be in touch with the Foundation soon.
Does that mean that all of these listings on ebay are imaginary? https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R ... w&_sacat=0
Moving the Raspberry Pi camp does that...but with the Pi0/Pi0W you can't order in bulk at the $5/$10 rate. PM jamesh for details. If you're really developing a platform to sell, then your target devices are the CM, CM3, CM3L and--possibly--the NEC CM3-16.mwrich4 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 03, 2017 6:07 pmAm I wrong that most of the senior embedded tinkerers were born from the era of counting bits/bytes, dollars/cents and avoiding difficult to source components? Investing in a development platform is a long-term commitment that one does not take lightly. I thought that moving to the raspberry pi camp would offer the inspiration, resources, and support needed to chase random ideas for projects. It is unlikely that the person buying 1 at a time is going to contribute much fuel to keep the momentum going since they are very likely to be a novice.
I don't think that ever applied to the Model A, but that board came on the market and then disappeared quite quickly. I didn't manage to get any until much later and did so then only so that I'd have them. It did apply to the original Model B, but only fora few months. Even at that, it was pretty common practice to order one from each supplier (if you wanted more than one). In the middle of the period when the Model B was rationed, there was a brief period when it wasn't and I ordered then 2 at a time over a couple of orders.
And yet...somehow the scalpers do manage to get their hands on some quantity greater than someone who patiently orders one at a time (from any given vendor) and the relative scarcity drives the price up on the secondary market.
Not quite. If you're a hobbyist do "one off" projects, then any Pi that otherwise fits the constraints will be fine. On the other hand, if you are planning to go into mass production, the CM series is the intended platform.mwrich4 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:03 amI'm going to try to go away silently ... the group here is fixated on commercial order type thoughts.
As a tinkerer, the edge connected compute module is overkill and much pricier to implement a 1-off idea, since it requires a custom board for each implementation.
Yup. That's true.The PiZero (or even a full Pi) was attractive because using a dozen or so GPIOs didn't require a large hobby budget.
No, that's not really true. It is true of the Pi0 and Pi0W. It is not true for any other Pi. All others in current production, A+, B+, Pi2Bv1.2, Pi3B can be had in whatever quantity you want at their listed price.I hear you, "Buy one and go away unless you want to buy 1,000. Even then, we'd prefer you use another ARM SoC platform."
Find 49 friends and make a group purchase so that each person in the group gets 10?Imperf3kt wrote: ↑Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:24 amTo an extent, I can understand the first one is cheap, repeat purchases must be in bulk, but who has 5 grand (minimum as it is stated the per unit cost is substantially more when buying in bulk) to buy a second Pi0w because their first one broke? I could stand to buy 5 or 10 but not 500. I could even accept the price doubling and the reason being the size factor - a major selling point of the zero.
But of course, my opinions don't matter as they're ineducated opinions - there are very likely reasons why the Pi foundation does things this way, we just don't get told.