Why I didn't buy a Pi

[bloodline]

ARM with SATA still is not that common.
And the few boards I  have seen only control two devices.
If we had ARM systems with an expansion bus, then adding additional controllers would be easy.

As to the issue of power draw, one Sun system I have has an Athlon mobile processor in it and is relatively low draw.

And I am not anti-ARM.
I am typing this on a Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 tablet.

I also have some PPC processors I am working with that are low power, but the economic argument goes right out the window with those.

I can find computers in skips more powerful than the Raspberry Pi... But if all you want in a computer is CPU power, then I don't know watch attracted you to the Amiga :-?

For some of us the usefulness equation is more complex:

(software support + performance + smallness+ quietness + modern connectivity) / (power consumption + price + limit of available replacement units)

For personal reasons smallness can refer to several physical quantities, as weight is also a factor for my projects.

And one of my Pis was made in the UK, which is my first computer to be built here since my Sinclair ZX81!

[bloodline]

Raspberry Pi is cute small computer but it is getting old. I dont know if Raspberry Pi 2 is in making but there are better (faster and cheaper) Arm based alternatives you can buy.

Apparently, there is a road map advancing the platform... No idea where that is going though.

I would prefer a Cortex based platform, but I haven't found any of the other SBC ARM platforms which have the feature set at the price of the RaspPi... Yet

[bloodline]

@ bloodline
It was, and still is, the 68K processor.
Although the graphics definately get a nod.
My company's products could match the colors and resolution (and were 68K based -with a better OS  I might add), but the Amiga had a much larger software base as well.

Shame we never heard of it then..

That is probably vital to the sucess of any device, software.

Of course it is, all new platforms start with nothing... And it doesn't matter how singing and dancing the new one is, find you can't convince developers to use it... It's dead.

Oh, and on cheap ARM systems, I won a Chinese  built Rocketchip based 4 core 1.8 GHz A9 set top box for $51 a couple of weeks ago.

Brilliant! I'm in the market for one like that. Link me up!

So what does the UK built Pi bring to the table that my Chinese device can't wipe off it?

If I'm buying a hobby computer for my own pleasure, it's nice to know it was built in the UK. I'm not going to get into a moral discussion here, let's just say I would prefer it if we built more stuff here.

And I wouldn't brag to much about the Sinclair, it had all the reliability of a British automobile or motorcycle (which might explain why the British don't make any of these products anymore).

I'm not bragging about the build quality of British products, I'm well aware of the systematic failure of British industry from the mismanagement of late '60s through the '70s and the keen effort of the successive governments to kill off our manufacturing base. I just happen to like seeing one thing in my flat that doesn't have a "Made in China" sticker on it...

Just as I rather like seeing the "Made in the USA" etching on the back of new iMacs and Mac Pros.

You figure it out

[bloodline]

bloodline...

I apologize for the entire tone of that post you responded to.
Its far to arrogant.

I appreciate your apology, and hope my response was not to acerbic.

As  to my past endeavors, a few may have seen them. Delmar Company gets  brief mention at the end of the Wikipedia listing on the Tandy Color  Computer.
And the systems were  based on Peripheral Technologies'  PT68K4 and PT68K5 boards (which may be a little better known), the former was part of a long series by Peter  Stark on construction and then use under Star DOS.
Our systems were  either set up for four or more terminals or as a console system with a  keyboard and mouse (via the addition of an ET4000 based video card) and ran on Microware OS-9. We also had a X-Windows based windowing system (at  a time when Win 3.1 was new).

The Amiga had some neat hardware, but we could support four to five users on our base systems which started at under $1000.

What made the Amiga special was really the feature set at the price point, in 1987 is was the sweet spot. I feel the raspberry Pi also manage to get the feature set at the price point sweet spot. No one minds spending $25 on a fully featured computer they can plug into their TV...

But, as to hobbyist computing, you never have to justify it.
One system I'm building right now uses a 33 MHz Z80 offshoot the Z8S180.
Why, eh, I wanted one.
The Rocketchip box?
I just lucked out on a low bid (that's been happening a lot lately) and those chip have somewhat dodgy wifi.

And why in the world am I so fascinated with RISC?
I don't completely agree that PPC have died out, withered back quite a bit, but they are still being developed.
ARM is just fascinating.
And I really want to try Sparc.

And while I still have and use them, X64 boxes continue to underwhelm me.

As to the Pi, I like the expansion options on some versions.
I have a fondness for small mcu boards with similar expansion capabilities.
Why else would I have both a Cortex M3 and an M4 based board?

I love the Cortex M series of chips for microcontroller work, they are great... I'm looking at using the M0 based LPC812 to replace my old 8bit ATMega328 designs!

The raspberry Pi has a nice set of GPIO (and no unnecessary devices) and that is appealing to my hobby projects.