Saying,
"I wish the Pi had X and Y" isn't insulting.
Saying
"OMG the Pi is going to die if they don't immediately add features X and Y, how could the RPF not know this?" often indicates a lack of understanding of the issues involved, and perhaps does border on being insulting. The RPF folk have repeatedly shown themselves to be quite astute (so if you find yourself saying something closer to this second hypothetical quote, maybe don't attack the RPF for not understanding something when you don't have actual proof that they don't understand it; often the RPF knows additional details that you don't).
The U.FL antenna connector the OP wants is
unlikely to happen - a Foundation engineer said elsewhere on the forum that the pads are there for their testing purposes, and populating them with a connector would: a) invalidate their current FCC certification; and b) make getting a new certification less likely; because such a connector would c) actively encourage people to attach antennas in a way that would not be certified. So there is an existing stated (and quite reasonable sounding) reason why an antenna connector is unlikely to happen, and the Foundation didn't
overlook an opportunity, they chose their path carefully.
Yes, it would be neat if all these little "verified by a Foundation employee but buried in a thread" insights got gathered on a page somewhere that could be referenced.
As to the JST battery connector and charging bits, aside from the cost and space issues mentioned (and no, "just get rid of something that others already like and use" doesn't fly), there may be liability issues - lithium-based rechargeable batteries have safety issues one must pay heed to, and there have been some spectacularly public failures in recent history - if they added a connector and charging circuitry (which would be very useful for robotics and such) and someone managed to burn down their house while using such a Pi (even if it was
entirely their own fault), they might come after the RPF. And it doesn't take many lawsuits to drain a non-profit, plus it'd be bad press. I know Adafruit is putting such connectors on many of their boards (I have several), but they sell almost exclusively to hobbyists, while part of the Foundation's goal is to be much more accessible. Personally, I'd welcome such a battery connector, but I think it's unlikely to happen.
Generally, it's not a matter of what one is asking for, but rather how one is asking:
"I'd like to see the Pi add X / I wish the Pi had X" is
good (this leads to discussion of how useful, generally applicable, and realistic/fanciful X is; folks may point out the same request has been made numerous times).
"The Pi will LOSE MARKETSHARE AND DIE if it doesn't add X!" is
bad (and you are likely to be told rather bluntly why X is unlikely to be added).
As well, some folks (not the OP) who come here to suggest changes seem to insist that they'll only accept comments/answers from employees of the RPF, when this is quite clearly a public/community discussion forum (the obvious way to communicate directly and only with the Foundation is to email them, not post here).
As for the definition of a "working version of the Pi" being "one with enough RAM and CPU to run a usable browser" - I
never run a web browser (or X-Windows for that matter) on any of my Pi's. They're all either headless or running custom GUIs with touchscreens. The Pi has been a "working version" since the original model B. Everyone's uses are different. Don't assume otherwise.
rpdom wrote:IIRC this isn't the first time you've started attacking people in this way.
Yes, it's a pattern. An annoying and unhelpful pattern.
Fill ya boots.
