Page 1 of 1

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:10 pm
by nullstring
I would just like to suggest that the model A / model B naming convention be trashed.

Now that both \"models\" are using the same PCB, it really doesn\'t make sense to call them as such. Model A and model B are exactly the same thing now, except model A has some hardware missing/replaced.

I would also like to see a version that has 256MB, but no Ethernet/USB hub, if possible.

Just my opinion. I would like to see what others think.

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:24 pm
by kme
The A/B naming comes from nostalgia. The people behind R-PI are old enough to have used the BBC micro A or B model in the 80s and this is a British project and you know Brits and nostalgia (used to have an empire and such) :-) Let them have their fun with this. The rest of us just need an ID.

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:28 pm
by nullstring
[quote]Quote from kme on October 26, 2011, 20:24
The A/B naming comes from nostalgia. The people behind R-PI are old enough to have used the BBC micro A or B model in the 80s and this is a British project and you know Brits and nostalgia (used to have an empire and such) :-) Let them have their fun with this. The rest of us just need an ID.[/quote]

Lol ok. Sounds reasonable enough.

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:06 pm
by abishur
Just to clarify, the Model A/B were *always* the same PCB with model A being the base set of hardware features and Model B being the expanded hardware feature set (double the amount of memory, 2 usb ports and an ethernet port), which is to say the model A is not missing items or feature replaced items, but that the Model B includes extra items. As KME says, that\'s a throwback to the BBC micro.

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:23 pm
by jg
[quote]Quote from nullstring on October 26, 2011, 20:10
I would just like to suggest that the model A / model B naming convention be trashed.
[/quote]

Could be a good idea, especially as in many places \'A\' is considered better than \'B\', yet here the \'B\' is the superset model ?

If they use the same PCB, smarter might be to have a simpler convention of no suffix for Base model and why not \'E\' for Enhanced/Ethernet/Expanded memory build ?

Those with English as a second language, should understand that ?

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:33 pm
by texasdex
If you want to avoid confusion as to whether the \'A\' model is better than \'B\' then why not use \"Plus\" or + to designate the higher-specced one? Not that I object to the A/B nomenclature, it\'s just a thought.

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:41 pm
by liz
Sorry guys: it stays the way it is. And just to allay any worries, we\'ve had lots of dealings with people whose first language is not English, and there hasn\'t been any trouble working out which is which.

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:37 am
by johnbeetem
Many products use the same PC board with different part stuffing options and have completely different names for the resulting products. In fact, sometimes you put the same board in different chassis and call the products different things. Or you sell the board to OEMs who then create all sorts of products with different colors and different names.

I like the Model A/B naming. Reminds me of my Dad speaking fondly of the Ford Model A he had when he was a young man. Now that\'s nostalgia.

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:32 am
by Burngate
Ford model A? ... then the 2006 edition Pi should\'ve been model T?

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:25 pm
by Josh
I like the \"Model A\" and \"Model B\" thing. It\'s easier to understand than the jibberish some companies put out. For example, my laptop is a Uniwill L51II3 - where did they get that from?!

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:07 pm
by garyamort
[quote]Quote from nullstring on October 26, 2011, 20:10
I would just like to suggest that the model A / model B naming convention be trashed.
[/quote]

To tell the truth, I\'d prefer a more informative model scheme.

RaspberryPi256
RaspberryPi256Net

IE embed the memory into the name, and the optional feature. Not so much for the initial release, but if you start hitting 4-6 models.

As a noob I find the Texas Instruments naming scheme for the msp430\'s good because I can browse digikey\'s catalog and know what feature I want, rapidly rule out different models...or in fact learn about new models I was unaware of[I didn\'t know there was a model with LCD support...but the model name gave the hint that it is there].

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:58 pm
by novelty2145
You should call model A \"Platinum\" and model B \"Platinum Plus Ultimate.\" :D

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 4:07 pm
by Jongoleur
Personally, I\'m happy with the A/B thing.
Those in charge of naming could have gone all \"C\" on us ( A == Pi, B == Pi++ ).

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 4:48 pm
by garyamort
[quote]Quote from Jongoleur on October 27, 2011, 17:07
Personally, I\'m happy with the A/B thing.
Those in charge of naming could have gone all \"C\" on us ( A == Pi, B == Pi++ ).[/quote]

Well, if we want to get into the subject of naming...I\'ve got to admit that the name is the one thing that bothers me about the Raspberry.

Obviously it should of been called the Raspberry? because Pi is wrong.

Vi Hart explains why Pi is such a terrible mistake to begin with much better than I ever could:
http://vihart.com/blog/pi-is-still-wrong/

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:18 pm
by kattle87
@Garyamort
It\'s just that I\'m so happy with the sin(k*Pi) being zero for every k belonging to Z!

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:34 pm
by Burngate
Using pi and defining radians from it, you get ?=sin(?) for small ?.
Using tau the same way, you\'d end up with a 2 somewhere for no apparent reason.
Seems to me you have to choose between the baby and the bathwater

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:23 pm
by garyamort
[quote]Quote from Burngate on October 27, 2011, 18:34
Using pi and defining radians from it, you get ?=sin(?) for small ?.
Using tau the same way, you\'d end up with a 2 somewhere for no apparent reason.[/quote]

:P Check out minute 1 to 2. There is a 2 somewhere for no apparent reason, but it\'s when you use pi. Check out all the formula\'s for radians and they keep referring to 2pi - and then you have to reverse yourself and divide by 2 when going the other way.

As Vi says, \"Mathematics should be as beautiful and elegant as possible\".

From minute marker 3 to 4 she excellently addresses how much more elegant your formula is when you define everything by tau. :-)

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 6:25 am
by nobbit
We could always adopt the naming scheme of any random computer manufacturer (Acer, Asus, Dell, whichever) and add numbers and abbreviations that mean absolutely nothing to the general populace:
Model A could be RPi 128700A11 and Model B could be RPi 256700A11i

That would make sense to most and not cause confusion, yes? No? :)

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:34 am
by jg
[quote]Quote from garyamort on October 27, 2011, 16:07
To tell the truth, I\'d prefer a more informative model scheme.

RaspberryPi256
RaspberryPi256Net

IE embed the memory into the name, and the optional feature. Not so much for the initial release, but if you start hitting 4-6 models.

As a noob I find the Texas Instruments naming scheme for the msp430\'s good because I can browse digikey\'s catalog and know what feature I want, rapidly rule out different models...or in fact learn about new models I was unaware of... [/quote]

Good point : the String/substring search of Google and part suppliers, needs to \'work with\' the part codes.

Some do not, and yes, that is annoying.

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:08 am
by Jongoleur
The Pi could have been named using the telegraphic style beloved of technical businesses in the middle of the 20th century. Just looking at the Ross nomenclature in the 1940 British Journal Photographic Almanac gives a taste of the baroque excesses!

Ross Xpres Lens f1.9
25mm/1\" Iris setting: Yeda Focussing mount: Yedafo
50mm/2\" Iris setting: Yegi Focussing mount: Yegifo
...
Ross Xpres Lens f3.5
50mm/2\" Iris setting: Zenar Focussing mount: Zecto
90mm/3.5\" Iris setting: Zecupa Focussing mount: Zotup

Other lens names included Xanaf, Tilba, Phaba and so on.

In comparison, Model A/B is fairly sensible. :-)

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:57 pm
by vladhed
As much as I agree with Vi (because her name is the same as my favourite text editor), I think we\'re forgetting that the Pi in RaspberryPi actually comes from Python, the scripting language. Hence Raspberry? doesn\'t make sense, plus it ruins the pun or double entendre.

It really should be the RaspberryPy1U128 and RaspberryPy2UE256 :-)

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:05 pm
by Scribe
Can\'t we just pretend Pi means 3.141 or something yummy, Python ain\'t cool these days!

I would have to agree that something like RaspberryPi256Net makes a lot more sense and communicates the important information effectively to avoid confusion. In the same way you get ATMega128 something about it sits right with me.

Re: Consider throwing out the "Model A" / "Model B" naming convention.

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:09 pm
by liz
Theorise about what you\'d prefer all you like, chaps, but as I said above, the naming convention is not changing. Closing this thread now. Sorry!