Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #7722 > unrolled thread

Raspberry Pi update from RS Components!

Back to article view | Back to comp.arch.embedded

Contents

  Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Don McKenzie <5V@2.5A> - 2012-03-24 03:48 +1100
    Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-03-23 10:15 -0700
      Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! nico@puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) - 2012-03-23 17:38 +0000
        Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-03-23 11:40 -0700
        Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Frank Buss <fb@frank-buss.de> - 2012-03-23 20:05 +0100
          Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! "TTman" <pcw1.cad@ntlworld.com> - 2012-03-23 20:27 +0000
      Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Anders.Montonen@kapsi.spam.stop.fi.invalid - 2012-03-23 21:24 +0000
        Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Don McKenzie <5V@2.5A> - 2012-03-24 08:53 +1100
        Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Frank Buss <fb@frank-buss.de> - 2012-03-23 22:54 +0100
          Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! John Walliker <jrwalliker@gmail.com> - 2012-03-23 16:01 -0700
          Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! j.m.granville@gmail.com - 2012-03-24 04:38 -0700
            Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2012-03-24 13:49 +0100
      Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! John Devereux <john@devereux.me.uk> - 2012-03-24 07:37 +0000
        Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-03-24 12:12 -0700
          Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-03-24 12:46 -0700
            Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! josephkk <joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-03-27 12:34 -0700
              Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-03-27 13:28 -0700
      Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Chris Baird <abuse@brushtail.apana.org.au> - 2012-03-24 21:35 +1100
        Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Bob <bobcousins42@googlemail.com> - 2012-03-24 06:40 -0700
          Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Chris Baird <abuse@brushtail.apana.org.au> - 2012-03-25 01:31 +1100
            Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-03-24 12:15 -0700
        Re: Raspberry Pi update from RS Components! Don McKenzie <5V@2.5A> - 2012-03-25 04:16 +1100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#7722 — Raspberry Pi update from RS Components!

Welcome to the latest Raspberry Pi update from RS Components!

Much has been happening behind the scenes since you received our last 
update, not least the start of compliance testing on the Raspberry Pi.

Why are we doing this? Compliance testing is an essential part of 
bringing any electronic product to market. The Raspberry Pi is being 
tested to make sure it conforms to all the regulations that apply to 
electronic devices around the world. This means that we can be sure the 
Raspberry Pi we deliver to you meets the correct standards and is as 
safe as you would expect any electronic device you purchase to be.

We’re working with the Raspberry Pi Foundation to manage the testing 
process as quickly as possible, while ensuring all tests are carried out 
to guarantee safety.  More information is being posted on the Raspberry 
Pi website , as well as on our own FAQ pages rswww.com or DesignSpark. 
We’re also regularly tweeting updates on progress.  Follow 
@RSElectronics on twitter to catch the latest news.

Alongside this, we’ve also been contacting the first group of people who 
registered for a Raspberry Pi from RS, to help us plan delivery of the 
initial batch of boards.  In next week’s update, we’ll provide more 
information on how we’re managing the queue and the order process.

RS Components

======================

-- 
Don McKenzie

Dontronics: http://www.dontronics-shop.com/

The World's Cheapest Computer:
DuinoMite the PIC32 $30 Basic Computer-MicroController
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/the-maximite-computer.html
Just add a VGA monitor or TV, and PS2 Keyboard.
Arduino Shield, Programmed in Basic, or C.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#7723

Don McKenzie wrote:
> Welcome to the latest Raspberry Pi update from RS Components!
> 
> Much has been happening behind the scenes since you received our last
> update, not least the start of compliance testing on the Raspberry Pi.
> 
> Why are we doing this? Compliance testing is an essential part of
> bringing any electronic product to market. The Raspberry Pi is being
> tested to make sure it conforms to all the regulations that apply to
> electronic devices around the world. This means that we can be sure the
> Raspberry Pi we deliver to you meets the correct standards and is as
> safe as you would expect any electronic device you purchase to be.
> 
> We’re working with the Raspberry Pi Foundation to manage the testing
> process as quickly as possible, while ensuring all tests are carried out
> to guarantee safety.  More information is being posted on the Raspberry
> Pi website , as well as on our own FAQ pages rswww.com or DesignSpark.
> We’re also regularly tweeting updates on progress.  Follow
> @RSElectronics on twitter to catch the latest news.
> 
> Alongside this, we’ve also been contacting the first group of people who
> registered for a Raspberry Pi from RS, to help us plan delivery of the
> initial batch of boards.  In next week’s update, we’ll provide more
> information on how we’re managing the queue and the order process.
> 
> RS Components
> 
> ======================
> 

Just curious: Does this mean the first round was shipped without being
EMC tested?

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7725

Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Don McKenzie wrote:
>> Welcome to the latest Raspberry Pi update from RS Components!
>> 
>> Much has been happening behind the scenes since you received our last
>> update, not least the start of compliance testing on the Raspberry Pi.
>> 
>> Why are we doing this? Compliance testing is an essential part of
>> bringing any electronic product to market. The Raspberry Pi is being
>> Alongside this, we’ve also been contacting the first group of people who
>> registered for a Raspberry Pi from RS, to help us plan delivery of the
>> initial batch of boards.  In next week’s update, we’ll provide more
>> information on how we’re managing the queue and the order process.
>> 
>> RS Components
>> 
>> ======================
>> 
>
>Just curious: Does this mean the first round was shipped without being
>EMC tested?

This obviously means the first batch has not been produced at all. At
least I'd expect people to report experiences with the RP if they
shipped a batch.
-- 
Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply
indicates you are not using the right tools...
nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.)
--------------------------------------------------------------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7726

Nico Coesel wrote:
> Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Don McKenzie wrote:
>>> Welcome to the latest Raspberry Pi update from RS Components!
>>>
>>> Much has been happening behind the scenes since you received our last
>>> update, not least the start of compliance testing on the Raspberry Pi.
>>>
>>> Why are we doing this? Compliance testing is an essential part of
>>> bringing any electronic product to market. The Raspberry Pi is being
>>> Alongside this, we’ve also been contacting the first group of people who
>>> registered for a Raspberry Pi from RS, to help us plan delivery of the
>>> initial batch of boards.  In next week’s update, we’ll provide more
>>> information on how we’re managing the queue and the order process.
>>>
>>> RS Components
>>>
>>> ======================
>>>
>> Just curious: Does this mean the first round was shipped without being
>> EMC tested?
> 
> This obviously means the first batch has not been produced at all. At
> least I'd expect people to report experiences with the RP if they
> shipped a batch.


So it was being sold without inventory on the shelves? Hmm ...

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7727

Nico Coesel wrote:
> 
> This obviously means the first batch has not been produced at all. At
> least I'd expect people to report experiences with the RP if they
> shipped a batch.

I think the first batch was produced, because I don't think they faked
their blog update about the wrong ethernet connector. But I wonder if
they have to dump the first batch, if the test fails. Maybe they can
sell it with a sticker "for use in EMC shielded cages, only" :-)

-- 
Frank Buss, http://www.frank-buss.de
electronics and more: http://www.youtube.com/user/frankbuss

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7729

"Frank Buss" <fb@frank-buss.de> wrote in message 
news:jkihha$gj0$1@newsreader4.netcologne.de...
> Nico Coesel wrote:
>>
>> This obviously means the first batch has not been produced at all. At
>> least I'd expect people to report experiences with the RP if they
>> shipped a batch.
>
> I think the first batch was produced, because I don't think they faked
> their blog update about the wrong ethernet connector. But I wonder if
> they have to dump the first batch, if the test fails. Maybe they can
> sell it with a sticker "for use in EMC shielded cages, only" :-)
>
> -- 
> Frank Buss, http://www.frank-buss.de
> electronics and more: http://www.youtube.com/user/frankbuss

They'll probably turn up on Ebay :) 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7733

In comp.arch.embedded Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Just curious: Does this mean the first round was shipped without being
> EMC tested?

From <http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/840#comment-16997>:

"I'm going to have to put a statement out about this later: in short, once a 
certain number of orders were in, RS decided they didn't want to sell the 
boards as dev boards (which was what we'd planned for the first, uncased units 
- dev boards don't require CE marking - see Arduino, Beagleboard etc.) because 
the sales volumes were so big they were worried someone with a similar or 
competing product might try to cause some legal trouble over the definition of 
development board. We're still trying to work out if we can get some out 
earlier without CE marks to developers. We're rushing through compliance as 
fast as is humanly possible at the moment."

-a

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7734

On 24-Mar-12 8:24 AM, Anders.Montonen@kapsi.spam.stop.fi.invalid wrote:
> In comp.arch.embedded Joerg<invalid@invalid.invalid>  wrote:
>
>> Just curious: Does this mean the first round was shipped without being
>> EMC tested?
>
> From<http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/840#comment-16997>:
>
> "I'm going to have to put a statement out about this later: in short, once a
> certain number of orders were in, RS decided they didn't want to sell the
> boards as dev boards (which was what we'd planned for the first, uncased units
> - dev boards don't require CE marking - see Arduino, Beagleboard etc.) because
> the sales volumes were so big they were worried someone with a similar or
> competing product might try to cause some legal trouble over the definition of
> development board. We're still trying to work out if we can get some out
> earlier without CE marks to developers. We're rushing through compliance as
> fast as is humanly possible at the moment."
>
> -a

More reading:

http://www.raspberrypi.org/forum/general-discussion/new-rs-email-compliance

Cheers Don...

======================


-- 
Don McKenzie

Dontronics: http://www.dontronics-shop.com/

The World's Cheapest Computer:
DuinoMite the PIC32 $30 Basic Computer-MicroController
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/the-maximite-computer.html
Just add a VGA monitor or TV, and PS2 Keyboard.
Arduino Shield, Programmed in Basic, or C.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7735

Anders.Montonen@kapsi.spam.stop.fi.invalid wrote:
> In comp.arch.embedded Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Just curious: Does this mean the first round was shipped without being
>> EMC tested?
> 
> From <http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/840#comment-16997>:

And this is the discussion in the forum:

http://www.raspberrypi.org/forum/general-discussion/new-rs-email-compliance

Looks like the customers are not amused. The foundation should have
tested it before. Is it allowed to sell it as a dev board? I don't think
the comments in the article are right, that it is not allowed to sell it
as a dev board, if they sell too many of it. There must be other
reasons, maybe the intended use of it.

This will cause a major delay, if they have to do all the things like
EMC, WEEE, CE etc. and then for all countries where they plan to ship
it. Maybe we'll get the first devices sometime in summer.

-- 
Frank Buss, http://www.frank-buss.de
electronics and more: http://www.youtube.com/user/frankbuss

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7736

On Mar 23, 9:54 pm, Frank Buss <f...@frank-buss.de> wrote:

> This will cause a major delay, if they have to do all the things like
> EMC, WEEE, CE etc. and then for all countries where they plan to ship
> it. Maybe we'll get the first devices sometime in summer.
>
I got my order in on day one and Farnell are quoting delivery in
"early May".  This is presumably one from the first batch.

I too am very surprised that they haven't sorted out regulatory
testing. Even if the first batch of boards really is intended only for
"developers", it would be unfortunate if interface specifications such
as placement of ground pins needed to change to sort out radiated
emissions or ESD problems.

Lets hope it works out OK.

John

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7738

On Saturday, March 24, 2012 9:54:31 AM UTC+12, Frank Buss wrote:
> I don't think
> the comments in the article are right, that it is not allowed to sell it
> as a dev board, if they sell too many of it. There must be other
> reasons, maybe the intended use of it.

It does seem strange that there could be some magical, but unknown, number above which it suddenly changed from a development board.!!!

More likely, is work on a case is driving this.

Once a case is offered/included, it gets harder to claim 'it is a development board'.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7740

On 24.03.2012 12:38, j.m.granville@gmail.com wrote:

> It does seem strange that there could be some magical, but unknown,
> number above which it suddenly changed from a development board.!!!

Well, those lawyers' world _is_ strange, from a technical point-of-view.

That said, there most likely is no particular, magical number.  There's 
a gray zone between two ends of a spectrum of legal positions.  One end 
of that spectrum consists of objects meant to be used by engineers who 
are supposed to know what they're doing.  The other end of the spectrum 
is made up of bona-fide commodity items like, say, cellphones.

As long as you're clearly on either end of that spectrum, you know 
without significant doubt which kinds of rules you're going to have to 
live by --- basically none for experimental, pro-only hardware, or the 
whole CE certification shebang for commodity items.  There are some 
intermediate points with well-defined rules, too, e.g. stuff only 
licensed radio amateurs are allowed to use, or all higher classes of 
laser equipment.

But all that knowledge doesn't help you if you find yourself in that 
gray zone, away from all fixed points.  The type of distribution channel 
the Pi is aiming at, particularly that whole "one Pi per child in 
school" idea, makes it hard to defend the position that this is not a 
commodity item.  It's hard to claim development board status if you 
require no proof of qualification whatsoever from people you sell that 
thing to.

The sheer number of sales has some bearings on that distinction, too. 
If you're selling it by the million, it's not a development board.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7737

Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> writes:

> Don McKenzie wrote:
>> Welcome to the latest Raspberry Pi update from RS Components!
>> 
>> Much has been happening behind the scenes since you received our last
>> update, not least the start of compliance testing on the Raspberry Pi.
>> 
>> Why are we doing this? Compliance testing is an essential part of
>> bringing any electronic product to market. The Raspberry Pi is being
>> tested to make sure it conforms to all the regulations that apply to
>> electronic devices around the world. This means that we can be sure the
>> Raspberry Pi we deliver to you meets the correct standards and is as
>> safe as you would expect any electronic device you purchase to be.
>> 
>> We’re working with the Raspberry Pi Foundation to manage the testing
>> process as quickly as possible, while ensuring all tests are carried out
>> to guarantee safety.  More information is being posted on the Raspberry
>> Pi website , as well as on our own FAQ pages rswww.com or DesignSpark.
>> We’re also regularly tweeting updates on progress.  Follow
>> @RSElectronics on twitter to catch the latest news.
>> 
>> Alongside this, we’ve also been contacting the first group of people who
>> registered for a Raspberry Pi from RS, to help us plan delivery of the
>> initial batch of boards.  In next week’s update, we’ll provide more
>> information on how we’re managing the queue and the order process.
>> 
>> RS Components
>> 
>> ======================
>> 
>
> Just curious: Does this mean the first round was shipped without being
> EMC tested?

I thought development boards are exempt anyway? I find it hard to
believe that all the hundreds of well regarded dev boards from Olimex et
al have been formally EMC tested. How could they be, most have headers
for direct access to the microcontroller pins.

The Pi will very likely fail any such test IMO.


-- 

John Devereux

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7745

On Mar 24, 3:37 am, John Devereux <j...@devereux.me.uk> wrote:
> Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> writes:
> > Don McKenzie wrote:
> >> Welcome to the latest Raspberry Pi update from RS Components!
>
> >> Much has been happening behind the scenes since you received our last
> >> update, not least the start of compliance testing on the Raspberry Pi.
>
> >> Why are we doing this? Compliance testing is an essential part of
> >> bringing any electronic product to market. The Raspberry Pi is being
> >> tested to make sure it conforms to all the regulations that apply to
> >> electronic devices around the world. This means that we can be sure the
> >> Raspberry Pi we deliver to you meets the correct standards and is as
> >> safe as you would expect any electronic device you purchase to be.
>
> >> We’re working with the Raspberry Pi Foundation to manage the testing
> >> process as quickly as possible, while ensuring all tests are carried out
> >> to guarantee safety.  More information is being posted on the Raspberry
> >> Pi website , as well as on our own FAQ pages rswww.comor DesignSpark.
> >> We’re also regularly tweeting updates on progress.  Follow
> >> @RSElectronics on twitter to catch the latest news.
>
> >> Alongside this, we’ve also been contacting the first group of people who
> >> registered for a Raspberry Pi from RS, to help us plan delivery of the
> >> initial batch of boards.  In next week’s update, we’ll provide more
> >> information on how we’re managing the queue and the order process.
>
> >> RS Components
>
> >> ======================
>
> > Just curious: Does this mean the first round was shipped without being
> > EMC tested?
>
> I thought development boards are exempt anyway? I find it hard to
> believe that all the hundreds of well regarded dev boards from Olimex et
> al have been formally EMC tested. How could they be, most have headers
> for direct access to the microcontroller pins.
>
> The Pi will very likely fail any such test IMO.
>
> --
>
> John Devereux

Yes, dev boards are exempt, the issue is whether rPi foundation can
support the claim that this *is* a dev board given the number of
boards sold and the type of users who are buying them.  From the quote
above it sounds like someone's lawyers got into the loop and added the
FUD.  So of course the bean counters then said, "Let's get the testing
done" since it can be pretty expensive if it turns out they get
whacked with fines, etc.

It's the right decision.

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7747

rickman wrote:
> On Mar 24, 3:37 am, John Devereux <j...@devereux.me.uk> wrote:
>> Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>> Don McKenzie wrote:
>>>> Welcome to the latest Raspberry Pi update from RS Components!
>>>> Much has been happening behind the scenes since you received our last
>>>> update, not least the start of compliance testing on the Raspberry Pi.
>>>> Why are we doing this? Compliance testing is an essential part of
>>>> bringing any electronic product to market. The Raspberry Pi is being
>>>> tested to make sure it conforms to all the regulations that apply to
>>>> electronic devices around the world. This means that we can be sure the
>>>> Raspberry Pi we deliver to you meets the correct standards and is as
>>>> safe as you would expect any electronic device you purchase to be.
>>>> We’re working with the Raspberry Pi Foundation to manage the testing
>>>> process as quickly as possible, while ensuring all tests are carried out
>>>> to guarantee safety.  More information is being posted on the Raspberry
>>>> Pi website , as well as on our own FAQ pages rswww.comor DesignSpark.
>>>> We’re also regularly tweeting updates on progress.  Follow
>>>> @RSElectronics on twitter to catch the latest news.
>>>> Alongside this, we’ve also been contacting the first group of people who
>>>> registered for a Raspberry Pi from RS, to help us plan delivery of the
>>>> initial batch of boards.  In next week’s update, we’ll provide more
>>>> information on how we’re managing the queue and the order process.
>>>> RS Components
>>>> ======================
>>> Just curious: Does this mean the first round was shipped without being
>>> EMC tested?
>> I thought development boards are exempt anyway? I find it hard to
>> believe that all the hundreds of well regarded dev boards from Olimex et
>> al have been formally EMC tested. How could they be, most have headers
>> for direct access to the microcontroller pins.
>>
>> The Pi will very likely fail any such test IMO.
>>
>> --
>>
>> John Devereux
> 
> Yes, dev boards are exempt, the issue is whether rPi foundation can
> support the claim that this *is* a dev board given the number of
> boards sold and the type of users who are buying them. 


It is most definitely not a development board and they explicitly say so
in the FAQ:

http://www.raspberrypi.org/faqs

Quote "What’s a Raspberry Pi? ... The Raspberry Pi is a credit-card
sized computer that plugs into your TV and a keyboard. It’s a capable
     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
little PC which can be used for many of the things that your desktop PC
does, like spreadsheets, word-processing and games. It also plays
high-definition video".

Then, quote "We want to see it being used by kids all over the world to
learn programming".

By kids all over the world, to learn programming. That makes it rather
clear that is is marketed as a computer and not a dev kit.


>                                                  ... From the quote
> above it sounds like someone's lawyers got into the loop and added the
> FUD. 


It's not FUD, the lawyer was IMHO right.


> ...  So of course the bean counters then said, "Let's get the testing
> done" since it can be pretty expensive if it turns out they get
> whacked with fines, etc.
> 
> It's the right decision.
> 

Absolutamente. Someone has screwed up when they prematurely announced
this device. They should not have started sales before having all ducks
in the row and they clearly didn't have them in a row. At least they
fessed up and are doing the right thing now.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7804

On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 12:46:06 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>rickman wrote:
>> On Mar 24, 3:37 am, John Devereux <j...@devereux.me.uk> wrote:
>>> Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>>> Don McKenzie wrote:
>>>>> Welcome to the latest Raspberry Pi update from RS Components!
>>>>> Much has been happening behind the scenes since you received our last
>>>>> update, not least the start of compliance testing on the Raspberry Pi.
>>>>> Why are we doing this? Compliance testing is an essential part of
>>>>> bringing any electronic product to market. The Raspberry Pi is being
>>>>> tested to make sure it conforms to all the regulations that apply to
>>>>> electronic devices around the world. This means that we can be sure the
>>>>> Raspberry Pi we deliver to you meets the correct standards and is as
>>>>> safe as you would expect any electronic device you purchase to be.
>>>>> We’re working with the Raspberry Pi Foundation to manage the testing
>>>>> process as quickly as possible, while ensuring all tests are carried out
>>>>> to guarantee safety.  More information is being posted on the Raspberry
>>>>> Pi website , as well as on our own FAQ pages rswww.comor DesignSpark.
>>>>> We’re also regularly tweeting updates on progress.  Follow
>>>>> @RSElectronics on twitter to catch the latest news.
>>>>> Alongside this, we’ve also been contacting the first group of people who
>>>>> registered for a Raspberry Pi from RS, to help us plan delivery of the
>>>>> initial batch of boards.  In next week’s update, we’ll provide more
>>>>> information on how we’re managing the queue and the order process.
>>>>> RS Components
>>>>> ======================
>>>> Just curious: Does this mean the first round was shipped without being
>>>> EMC tested?
>>> I thought development boards are exempt anyway? I find it hard to
>>> believe that all the hundreds of well regarded dev boards from Olimex et
>>> al have been formally EMC tested. How could they be, most have headers
>>> for direct access to the microcontroller pins.
>>>
>>> The Pi will very likely fail any such test IMO.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> John Devereux
>> 
>> Yes, dev boards are exempt, the issue is whether rPi foundation can
>> support the claim that this *is* a dev board given the number of
>> boards sold and the type of users who are buying them. 
>
>
>It is most definitely not a development board and they explicitly say so
>in the FAQ:
>
>http://www.raspberrypi.org/faqs
>
>Quote "What’s a Raspberry Pi? ... The Raspberry Pi is a credit-card
>sized computer that plugs into your TV and a keyboard. It’s a capable
>     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>little PC which can be used for many of the things that your desktop PC
>does, like spreadsheets, word-processing and games. It also plays
>high-definition video".
>
>Then, quote "We want to see it being used by kids all over the world to
>learn programming".

So it could be positioned as a software development kit.  And as a credit
card sized target for embedded SW development.

Yeah, that is a bit "soft".
>
>By kids all over the world, to learn programming. That makes it rather
>clear that is is marketed as a computer and not a dev kit.
>
>
>>                                                  ... From the quote
>> above it sounds like someone's lawyers got into the loop and added the
>> FUD. 
>
>
>It's not FUD, the lawyer was IMHO right.
>
>
>> ...  So of course the bean counters then said, "Let's get the testing
>> done" since it can be pretty expensive if it turns out they get
>> whacked with fines, etc.
>> 
>> It's the right decision.
>> 
>
>Absolutamente. Someone has screwed up when they prematurely announced
>this device. They should not have started sales before having all ducks
>in the row and they clearly didn't have them in a row. At least they
>fessed up and are doing the right thing now.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7806

josephkk wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 12:46:06 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> rickman wrote:
>>> On Mar 24, 3:37 am, John Devereux <j...@devereux.me.uk> wrote:
>>>> Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>>>> Don McKenzie wrote:
>>>>>> Welcome to the latest Raspberry Pi update from RS Components!
>>>>>> Much has been happening behind the scenes since you received our last
>>>>>> update, not least the start of compliance testing on the Raspberry Pi.
>>>>>> Why are we doing this? Compliance testing is an essential part of
>>>>>> bringing any electronic product to market. The Raspberry Pi is being
>>>>>> tested to make sure it conforms to all the regulations that apply to
>>>>>> electronic devices around the world. This means that we can be sure the
>>>>>> Raspberry Pi we deliver to you meets the correct standards and is as
>>>>>> safe as you would expect any electronic device you purchase to be.
>>>>>> We’re working with the Raspberry Pi Foundation to manage the testing
>>>>>> process as quickly as possible, while ensuring all tests are carried out
>>>>>> to guarantee safety.  More information is being posted on the Raspberry
>>>>>> Pi website , as well as on our own FAQ pages rswww.comor DesignSpark.
>>>>>> We’re also regularly tweeting updates on progress.  Follow
>>>>>> @RSElectronics on twitter to catch the latest news.
>>>>>> Alongside this, we’ve also been contacting the first group of people who
>>>>>> registered for a Raspberry Pi from RS, to help us plan delivery of the
>>>>>> initial batch of boards.  In next week’s update, we’ll provide more
>>>>>> information on how we’re managing the queue and the order process.
>>>>>> RS Components
>>>>>> ======================
>>>>> Just curious: Does this mean the first round was shipped without being
>>>>> EMC tested?
>>>> I thought development boards are exempt anyway? I find it hard to
>>>> believe that all the hundreds of well regarded dev boards from Olimex et
>>>> al have been formally EMC tested. How could they be, most have headers
>>>> for direct access to the microcontroller pins.
>>>>
>>>> The Pi will very likely fail any such test IMO.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> John Devereux
>>> Yes, dev boards are exempt, the issue is whether rPi foundation can
>>> support the claim that this *is* a dev board given the number of
>>> boards sold and the type of users who are buying them. 
>>
>> It is most definitely not a development board and they explicitly say so
>> in the FAQ:
>>
>> http://www.raspberrypi.org/faqs
>>
>> Quote "What’s a Raspberry Pi? ... The Raspberry Pi is a credit-card
>> sized computer that plugs into your TV and a keyboard. It’s a capable
>>     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> little PC which can be used for many of the things that your desktop PC
>> does, like spreadsheets, word-processing and games. It also plays
>> high-definition video".
>>
>> Then, quote "We want to see it being used by kids all over the world to
>> learn programming".
> 
> So it could be positioned as a software development kit.  And as a credit
> card sized target for embedded SW development.
> 
> Yeah, that is a bit "soft".


Yup, and I guess their laywers just had their comeuppance that that
won't fly in case it goes wrong somewhere :-)

[...]

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7739

Don McKenzie wrote:
> Much has been happening behind the scenes since you received our last
> update, not least the start of compliance testing on the Raspberry
> Pi.

Gee, gee, gee... Is Dontronics is spreading FUD about the Raspberry Pi
again?

-- 
C,,

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7741

On Saturday, 24 March 2012 10:35:37 UTC, Chris Baird  wrote:
> Don McKenzie wrote:
> > Much has been happening behind the scenes since you received our last
> > update, not least the start of compliance testing on the Raspberry
> > Pi.
> 
> Gee, gee, gee... Is Dontronics is spreading FUD about the Raspberry Pi
> again?

Not really. To be fair, Don reposted the same email from RS that I and many 
others got, and without additional comment. The Raspberry Pi org is generating
 FUD all by itself! Fitting wrong components, now suddenly realising they need 
to do compliance testing... as one of the posters on their forums said "it's a 
shambles".

Of course, we forgive their amateur mistakes, because they are a well meaning 
charity. However, it does not bode well for their real and more challenging 
task, of providing support and training to teachers and students.

R.Pi themselves do not place great importance on producing their own hardware, 
it's a means to and end (they are quite happy for it to be cloned). I guess 
they thought it would be an easy place to start.

Given their limited resources, it would have made a lot more sense to create a 
spec for a platform then invite manufacturers to build devices to the spec.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7742

 > Not really. To be fair, Don reposted the same email from RS that I
 > and many others got, and without additional comment.

Then why would a guy whose business sells 'competitors' need to
crosspost it everywhere?

-- 
C,,

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.arch.embedded

csiph-web