Well, 40 was the number quoted above. I suspect it quite a few more than that though.jbudd wrote: ↑Thu Sep 20, 2018 3:47 pmIsn't it a bit disingenuous to imply that out of 2 million sold only 40 have succumbed in this way?The 3B+ is not overly delicate, unless you count a 0.002% failure rate as overly delicate.
I think 40 was an estimate of the number of people who have posted about it in the forum.
I'm sure the Raspberry Pi Foundation has done tests.
What proportion of RPI3B+ tested survived a deliberate short circuit from Pin 1 (3.3V) to the Wifi cover?
What about Pin 2 (5V)?
Will the Raspberry Pi 4 have the same exposed metal cover, or has the design been tweeked to obviate even this tiny risk of damage?
No, I don't feel aggrieved. I think it's interesting that an enhancement in the design had unexpected consequences.
I'm disappointed by the official response though. It's reminiscent of larger purveyors of computers and operating systems.
No, we don;t deliberately short out powered up Raspberry Pi's, because we know that it will probably result in the death of the Pi. Its like testing an airbag in a car by running in to a wall. Destructive. I would expect 100% of shorted out Pi's to break.
The take away is Don't short out the Pi. You should ONLY plug stuff in with the Pi turned off. This, I hope, is regarded as standard enginering practice. Whether the 3B+ is more susceptible should be irrelevent because it not something you should be doing in the first place. It's quite possible that the susceptibility is the same! Statistically, there simply isn't enough data to say one way or the other.