<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div dir="auto">If history is any guide, RISC-V and Linux and maybe Open AI may be three legs of a stool stout enough to support the planet. And keep in mind all initial efforts can't start with a manufacturing run of 10k pieces as RPI did, coupled with their nonprofit (RIGHTEOUS) charter. So $150 is not a terrible price in perspective and having ALL of the source, including maybe the hardware CAD source is heady stuff (but I know virtually nothing about this board's production tool chain yet: maybe it is predicated on access to Mentor Graphics or other ungodly expensive tools, and I especially don't know if any non-righteous firmware is hidden in it, ha!). And notice the board has a lot of apparently fast memory, specialized engines, and maybe other discriminators.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But an idealized vision of an effective RISC-V board running Linux with mostly compatible RPI GPIO pinout is in my mind kind of like a start up in the 60s when "firmware" was a bunch of diodes holding the boot loader instructions that anybody with a soldering iron could duplicate, but coupled with the "otherwise almost everything is code" flavor of nirvana, and some tie in with a huge set of ecosystems. The chips will still be black (as in black hole black) boxes to all but a very few on this list, but the implications for unfettered development seem to me as heavy as anything gets. It sounds too good to be true. Where am I being naive or grandiose?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Pete</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto" id="composer_signature">Sent by my phone with an editing mind of its own</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div><br></div><div dir="auto" style="font-size:100%;color:#000000"></div><div style="font-size:100%;color:#000000" dir="auto" align="left"><div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: jonathan hunsberger via TriEmbed <triembed@triembed.org> </div><div>Date: 1/15/21 11:12 AM (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: TriEmbed Discussion <triembed@triembed.org> </div><div>Subject: Re: [TriEmbed] Raspberry Pi perspectives </div><div><br></div></div><div dir="ltr"><div>Maybe not a lot of fully open options in the "sbc running Linux" category yet, but..</div><div>BeagleV recently released on RISC-V. At $150 it's not really a RPi replacement, but could lead to proliferation of similar solutions at lower cost.</div><div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 1:10 AM Mauricio Tavares via TriEmbed <<a href="mailto:triembed@triembed.org">triembed@triembed.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 10:17 AM Pete Soper via TriEmbed<br>
<<a href="mailto:triembed@triembed.org">triembed@triembed.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> Here are some criticisms of RPI that this list will hopefully take as constructive. Some good tech details that many of us may have been unaware of.<br>
><br>
> <a href="https://ownyourbits.com/2019/02/02/whats-wrong-with-the-raspberry-pi/" rel="noreferrer">https://ownyourbits.com/2019/02/02/whats-wrong-with-the-raspberry-pi/</a><br>
><br>
I was not aware of the everything-goes-through-gpu-blob aspect<br>
of the Rpi4. What are the alternatives? I was looking at the Rock Pi,<br>
especially the N10 for some applications, and then started wondering<br>
if it has as much closed source stuff as the Rbpi.<br>
</blockquote></div></div>
</body></html>