Originally posted by starshipeleven
View Post
You said headless embedded. These things offer 2-4 GPIO and i2c interface (depending on model), which is on average what you really need in an embedded project for a few buttons and leds and some sensors or something, I have yet to find use for 10+ GPIO like on a raspi.
Yeah, the fact that they expose some GPIO and i2c interfaces on the board and also advertise it in the product specs is completely unintentional. These are clearly networking-only devices, and I'm wrong when I use them for embedded projects and connect sensors and buttons to these interfaces.
Like? Apart from offering a ton of GPIOs that I'm unsure on how to use and a camera interface that can be dealt with by USB too, what does it really offer more?
We're not talking about hundred-dollar hardware here, so small differences matter. But the Zero's dimensions could also be of interest, as well as Bluetooth, shields designed for other Pis (as far as I'm aware, those are pin-compatible), and as you like to point out, HDMI. That's a lot of differences for a cheaper device.
Sorry, but we were talking of headless usage, so the main selling point of Raspi (the GPU) is not used. VoCore 2 has up to 2 true 100M ethernet ports, and can also have a pcie x1 port, plus SD and USB and some other stuff like GPIO and i2c and whatever.
For headless usage it is plain better than raspi zero.
For headless usage it is plain better than raspi zero.
Please note, the SoC on those routers is perfectly fine for IoT usage, and the same that is used on Carambola 2, which is a IoT devboard big as a stamp http://www.8devices.com/products/carambola-2
I don't understand how you can't just accept the Pi Zero is just different. It's not better or worse than those mini-routers, VoCore, or CHIP. They each have their own pros and cons that would appeal to specific people.
Comment