undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjoezydeco11y ago0 comments

See, that's where I don't get what Edison is about.

If I want a SoC capable of doing low cost user-interface type embedded tasks I need parallel LCD support (or at least LVDS). I'd get an NXP LPC18/40 or an STM32 at the low end or an i.MX5/6 at the high end. Way cheaper with way better application support.

If I wanted to do IoT sensing/reporting, this whole thing is just overkill. Again, a low cost LPC or STM coupled with a GainSpan or TI radio module (that I can bake directly to my PCB). To me, and I could be wrong here, IoT isn't about putting 500 MHz computing resources at the nodes and certainly not for a $75 BOM adder.

At least the LPC and STM are chips I can put directly down on my board and run out of the box. An SOM with a single-sourced connector (and Hirose is notorious for designing unique stuff nobody else wants to duplicate) is just commercial suicide.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

StavrosK11y ago· 2 in thread

I want a low-power, Wifi-enabled computer for various projects. Arduino shield compatibility means that I can create things like my license-plate-reading garage door opener, or irrigation system, while combining a fast processor and lots of RAM with all the nice hardware Arduino has.

joezydecoOP11y ago

And that's fine for that kind of application. You could also do just as much with a cheaper system (but you'd need a lot more software work so maybe that's Intel key point: you can shovel in all the X86 code you've been slogging around with you for decades).

But, in my opinion, the examples you mentioned are not IoT. Unless you're planning to put one of these at every sprinkler head.

StavrosK11y ago

They aren't, but you said you don't get what the Edison is about, so I mentioned a few cases it's perfect for.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse