On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Fernando Cassia <fcassia(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/1/16, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> If they're aiming it at IoT products, which they seem to be doing:
> 1) dedicated bandwidth to BT/WiFI
> 2) more stable
> 3) cheaper when on board
> 4) generally less problematic
>> Much more interesting, IMHO would be the addition of a SATA port AND USB
> Again of no use for the target market, both USB-3 and SATA are
> expensive from the $ to license the IP and the cost of board
Cypress disagrees wrt usefulness of a USB 3.0 port for IoT
I don't disagree it's not useful, but this discussion is _NOT_ useful
because _WE_ can't change the HW!
Well, the TI USB 3.0 driver IC costs between $2 and $4 a piece
$2-4 is 10% of the cost of a Raspberry Pi 3, please apply some
context, again not useful in this thread.
" not to mention the power use, besides ..."
I get your point wrt maximum power supply over the usb 33.0 bus, BUT
USB 3.0 actually features BETTER power saving than 2.0...
Actually that is a "it depends" because a GigE PHYS uses an order of
magnitude more power than a 100Mb PHY. It's not just about the bus but
what you plug into it. That is a big problem even with the RPi2 and
one of the reasons they upped the PSU requirements in the RPi3.
Oh well... my point only was to stick to the "KISS
Your point is still pointless because it's nothing that can be changed
by people on this list.
It seems I'll have to shell out the extra bucks needed for one of
while waiting for the elusive RasPi 4 or RasPi5 w USB 3.0...
Buy a device that best fits your needs, if that's usb-3 then don't buy
a RPi device.....
I've had some reports it works, we don't currently have a u-boot but
there is upstream Device Tree support for it enabled in out kernel.
Further reports are welcome.