/looks at thread title... Yeah. I did bring that stuff up.Lob0426 wrote:Sorry @...:
Reading too darn many posts. That was not you asking for multi-core, 1.5GHz, 2GB memory, WiFi, Bluetooth plus SATA.
It was not even this thread.
Though @W. H. Heydt did bring something close up.
Well, so do I, but I'm not prepared to place bets on *when* that will occur.As I have said;
I believe there will be a redesign of the Raspberry PI in the future.
Entirely possible, though a faster version of the BCM2835 is also a possibility. It all depends on Broadcom's plans and prices. Again, it's more a matter of when, not if.I believe it will use a different SoC than the BCM2835.
Absolutely agree with this. It would horribly cost prohibitive to design a chip just for the Pi. Any chip used by any ultra-cheap computer will be an off-the-shelf part. In addition, all such computers will use parts that are well established and for which the manufacturers have already amortized off the development costs.I do not believe it will be a "designed only for RasPi" SoC. It will be something already available.
The first principle I would apply here would be: It will have those features that are native to the SoC. If the SoC has the features you list, they may be added. The next principle will be: can the connectors be added without impacting the cost? After that it will be: Is there board real estate for the connectors?It will have more features. The foundation has a lot more info about that now, than it had.
It will not have USB 3.0, WiFi, Bluetooth, SATA or a single edge connector.
Interestingly enough, the cubieboard people have put a number of connectors on the bottom. I have mixed feelings about that. Granted, the Pi has the SD card connector done that way (and I usually have to pause for a moment to remember to put the card in upside down), but the cubieboard has a lot more down there.
I agree that WiFi and Bluetooth are unlikely (since USB ports and hubs provide a trivially easy workaround and the transceivers require a relatively large amount of power).
If USB 3.0 is supported natively on the SoC, I can't see any bar to including it, Similarly, SATA, though that has power implications.
What you haven't included on that list is gigabit Ethernet. That is also a matter of native SoC support.
Now this I have to disagree with on principle...and it is, I think, the Foundation's principle. If you embed a Pi or Pi-like board in a keyboard, you have just taken away two things. One is the simple exposure of "this is what a computer *looks* like". The other is part of the Foundation's goals. It would close off the hardware tinkering aspect of the Pi by making those interfaces inaccessible.What I would like to see for the education market is an ARM device buried in a keyboard with at least two USB ports and an Ethernet port, bundled with the proper power supply. Hook it to a T.V. or monitor and get to work. Not have to put a bunch of components together to get a working system.