Page 1 of 2

The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2019 10:56 pm
by jayeye
I have always considered the Raspberry Pi as a platform for embedded systems, with using it as a generic computer being only a fringe application. Enter the RPi4. Dual 4K monitors? USB3? Does someone who can afford the dual 4K monitors (not to mention the adapters :) ), really need to save a couple of hundred dollars to get a Pi rather than get a proper desktop? Why not use the extra silicon area to provide, say, four or eight MIPI lanes for the CSI and DSI ports (or a second CSI port), put the USB3 ports on different roots instead of a hub, put more I/O pins, and so on?

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:05 pm
by Heater
jayeye,
I have always considered the Raspberry Pi as a platform for embedded systems,...
I see your mistake immediately. You clearly have no idea why the Pi was created in the first place. Certainly not as a platform for embedded systems.

On the other hand why not? Plenty of embedded systems have displays, if only very small ones. Why not two?

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:12 pm
by Andyroo
https://www.raspberrypi.org/forums/view ... 8#p1250926

Wonder how long it will be before this gets locked :roll:

Popcorn anyone?

We only see a small part of the market - I’m convinced something will need two screens even if it’s a plug in display to configure / debug the main output...

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:20 pm
by HawaiianPi
USB 3.0 makes perfect sense. Slow I/O was a major limitation of the older models.

Dual 4K micro HDMI was surprising. I expect people utilising that will be a very small minority. Most would be happier with a single standard size HDMI, and if they really wanted to support dual screens they could have implemented that using the USB-C port. It would be interesting to hear what the thought process behind that decision was, but I doubt we'll ever know.

For me, personally, the micro HDMI is not a problem, because I still have some cables left over from a previous ultrabook. So I may mess around with dual screens whenever my Pi4 arrives (which, apparently, will not be for quite awhile). But it's likely I'll just use it with a single 1080p screen and leave the multi screen setup on my gaming laptop.

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:43 pm
by jcyr
HawaiianPi wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:20 pm
Dual 4K micro HDMI was surprising.
Indeed, makes no sense at all!

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:43 pm
by Leeloo
" Most would be happier with a single standard size HDMI"
count me in, those tiny hdmi ports are going to break! maybe they should have added 2 internal hdmi headers then let the end user decide which 'adapter' to plug in depending on what ports they wanted ?

back to op though, I disagree on usb3 making no sense, one of the limiting factors in the pi3 was slow storage, well the sd card got faster but I can plug a ssd into the usb and ssds are as cheap as sdcards were!

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:51 pm
by Imperf3kt
I can see some use for two hdmi ports, but I'm with everyone else so far: why that particular port? (beside the obvious)
This breaks compatibility with all screen hats and hat like displays.

But that can be worked around.


Im also sceptical about the recommendation for a micro usb to usbc adaptor so the previous power supply can be used.
I use one of those right now to charge my phone.
It was good when brand new, but with age it introduces so much resistance that my phone has started charging slower than the battery drains. I worry in six months time that these devices will cause headaches with powering a Pi4b

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:06 am
by chinaguy
The RP4 makes perfect sense to anyone who works in the commercial computer sector and industry. The RP is fast becoming the standard go to device for many applications, I have seen them in Smart Media LED advertising boards and Tourist Information centers.

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:17 am
by hippy
[DELETED]

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:29 am
by hippy
[DELETED]

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:31 am
by Gavinmc42
There is a big market for embedded displays apparently.
I think Eben said they were surprised how many go into those products.

2 x 4K HDMI displays probably has this market drooling?

4B+? I guess that means these new Pi4's are named 4B1, 4B2, 4B4?
Two screens means coding on one, output on the other.
Schools can save on laptops/PC for coding now?
Pair programming is now easier....

Don't have to use 4K screens if you don't want too.
Nobody is forcing people to use them.

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:13 am
by W. H. Heydt
Gavinmc42 wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:31 am
There is a big market for embedded displays apparently.
I think Eben said they were surprised how many go into those products.
Remember the December when you couldn't get an A+ for love nor money because some "smart display" company cleaned out the entire supply?

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:13 am
by LTolledo
The RPi4 makes no sense to me
to you, and only you!

but not for most of us.... who have been waiting eagerly for the upgraded specs.

if you're not happy with the new RPi4B, better stick with the RPi2B or even RPiZWH

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:15 am
by W. H. Heydt
What use is 2x4K? How about a couple of these: https://www.packedpixels.com/ (either version) for a portable Pi with lots of screen real estate.

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 3:48 am
by MisterEd
I plan to use the 2nd HDMI port for giving presentations. The 1st port for the monitor and the 2nd for the projector.

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 4:32 am
by DavidS
jayeye wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 10:56 pm
I have always considered the Raspberry Pi as a platform for embedded systems, with using it as a generic computer being only a fringe application. Enter the RPi4. Dual 4K monitors? USB3? Does someone who can afford the dual 4K monitors (not to mention the adapters :) ), really need to save a couple of hundred dollars to get a Pi rather than get a proper desktop? Why not use the extra silicon area to provide, say, four or eight MIPI lanes for the CSI and DSI ports (or a second CSI port), put the USB3 ports on different roots instead of a hub, put more I/O pins, and so on?
For realistic desktop usage we still do not even need as much power as the Cray-XMP provides. Even the hot application of today (RTRT [Real Time Ray Tracing]) can be realized with the 400MFLOPS of the Cray XMP (now that we have finally figured out how to do it). For many applications to accomplish the goal faster than is needed we really do not even need the Cray XMP's approximately 180MIPS non floating point performance.

So why would anyone need a computer that is capable of at least 16GigaFLOPS, 8000MIPS in the ARM Cortex A72 cores alone, plus whatever the new videoCore VI provides. Adding to that more RAM than any Cray Y-MP shipped with.

So we have more processing power than a Cray-X1, more memory than any Cray Y-MP, and that is not even considering the VideoCore VI GPU.

So if you know of a task that REQUIRES more processing power than a Cray Y-MP that is appropriate to perform on a desktop computer, then I would be surprised.

Now it is true that the nature of the operating systems, and the layers on them (like X and a WM, and a ToolKit) make computers SEEM slower than they are, they are more than fast enough to do everything we want without any delay (especially with the speed of access to storage devices). Do not allow bloat and cycle wasting code fool you, the speed is there. Run an efficiently written OS and you will see this to be true, so long as you stick with well and efficiently written software.

The Raspberry Pi was always meant to be a desktop type computer, to help educate those that can not afford a tower. The project/embedded aspect is just gravy (for embedded use a P8X32A if going for production) increasing the potential for teaching/learning.

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 4:37 am
by fruitoftheloom
jayeye wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 10:56 pm
I have always considered the Raspberry Pi as a platform for embedded systems, with using it as a generic computer being only a fringe application. Enter the RPi4. Dual 4K monitors? USB3? Does someone who can afford the dual 4K monitors (not to mention the adapters :) ), really need to save a couple of hundred dollars to get a Pi rather than get a proper desktop? Why not use the extra silicon area to provide, say, four or eight MIPI lanes for the CSI and DSI ports (or a second CSI port), put the USB3 ports on different roots instead of a hub, put more I/O pins, and so on?

Why post ? if itdoes not fit your requirements then buy an alternative product.

:roll: :lol:

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 4:56 am
by Imperf3kt
jayeye wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 10:56 pm
so long as you stick with well and efficiently written software.
You've found the caveat.
Your average beginner isn't going to know how to write their own efficient code and the available choices are less than stellar examples. Take Chromium as an example...

I doubt most could even recognise an inefficient program.


I just found an amusing (as in funny haha) product when googling "rpi4", a device called rock Pi 4 model B which looks almost identical to an actual rpi4b lol

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:18 pm
by pagenotfound
When I learned about the dual monitor feature I was just as perplexed as everyone else. It makes sense, though.

- many programmers use this

- as mentioned, presentation / classroom settings for the presenters screen and a video beamer

- digital signage / advertising

- thin clients in offices, call centers or data entry where one Pi can run two clients. Space and acquisition cost savings are negligible, but you save on support costs and need only half the network connections.

I'm sure the RPF/RPT have even more use cases in mind. Given their criteria for including features they didn't implement this on a whim.

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:20 pm
by jamesh
Digital signage is a huge market, and developers like multi monitor setups. And the 2711 SoC has two HDMI outputs....

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:31 pm
by rpdom
I'd never used a multi-monitor setup until just over three years ago. Now I find it hard to work without it.

My work laptop used to have a built-in 1080p screen and two more 1080p monitors attached. My current home laptop also has 1080p built-in, but only supports one external 1080p monitor. It's a struggle, but I manage ;-)

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Wed Jun 26, 2019 2:24 am
by chwe
Imperf3kt wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 4:56 am
DavidS wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 4:32 am
jayeye wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 10:56 pm
so long as you stick with well and efficiently written software.
You've found the caveat.
Your average beginner isn't going to know how to write their own efficient code and the available choices are less than stellar examples. Take Chromium as an example...

I doubt most could even recognise an inefficient program.


I just found an amusing product when googling "rpi4", a device called rock Pi 4 model B which looks almost identical to an actual rpi4b lol

I think you messed a bit with the quotes here.. :D

Or they simply don't want to deal with code optimization? Let's assume you don't make your living with writing software as most of the people do.. then it perfectly makes sense to solve performance issues with throwing money to the hardware in the hope it's fast enough. E.g python is not known to be a efficiency wonder, nevertheless a bunch of serious projects rely on it.

Indeed the RockPi is a 'amusing product', it performs more or less similar to a RPi4 with additional PCIe over M.2, additional eMMC (optional as module), an USB-C which is PD conform (means it allows also higher voltages than 5V to avoid undervoltage issues) based on a SoC which is already well supported in mainline kernel and it's available for a higher but still affordable price since months... :lol:

Nevertheless the RPi4 locks well crafted and IMO a step in the right direction (having enough CPU power for an affordable price). I really hope we'll soon see a working 64bit kernel for it (I don't care about the 32bit userspace, that's a 30min job to glue a arm64 debian to it). As soon as the ridiculous reseller prices in my country drop to a acceptable price I'll buy one (currently they come up with ~25$ for the official microHDMI cable for it :roll:, the 2GB version goes for ~60$ and the 1GB version I'm interested in isn't even sold).

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Wed Jun 26, 2019 3:02 am
by Heater
chwe,

Everyone is quoting DavidS as saying:

"Your average beginner isn't going to know how to write their own efficient code and the available choices are less than stellar examples. Take Chromium as an example..."

But I can't find DavidS actually saying that here. Perhaps he retracted the comment.

Either way it is a sentiment that I have heard expressed by others here and I actually doubt that it is true.

Given the enormity of the specifications that Chromium (and any other browser) has to implement it is hardly surprising that they are very large and complex pieces of software. HTML, CSS, SVG, Javascript WASM etc, etc, etc. I don't see that Firefox or Edge etc are any less so.

It is for sure that Google expends a lot of effort on optimizing things. For example the V8 Javascript engine has incredible performance for an interpreted language which has improved greatly over recent years.

I notice that those that complain of bloat and/or less than efficient algorithms in Chrome and other browsers never actually indicate what code they would remove there or how they would optimize it. It's just speculation on their part.

DavidS,
Run an efficiently written OS and you will see this to be true,
This is a sideways way to say that Linux is not efficiently written. Again I would say that given the task it has to do it is amazingly performant at it. Certainly a lot of work has gone into Linux over many years to optimize performance in all kinds of areas.

Again I note that this is just a speculation thrown out with no indication as to any particular feature of Linux code that is sub-optimal nor any suggestion as to how to do it better.

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Wed Jun 26, 2019 7:09 am
by Imperf3kt
Heater wrote:
Wed Jun 26, 2019 3:02 am
Everyone is quoting DavidS as saying:

"Your average beginner isn't going to know how to write their own efficient code and the available choices are less than stellar examples. Take Chromium as an example..."

But I can't find DavidS actually saying that here. Perhaps he retracted the comment.
That would be because DavidS never did, I did and missed removing one line of quote tags from my reply.

The offending post has been amended.

Re: The RPi4 makes no sense to me. Fight me!

Posted: Wed Jun 26, 2019 7:53 am
by jamesh
Since the OP has not returned, this fight has fizzled out.

Bit one sided.