jamesh wrote:The problem is I think the website doesn't get updated as much as it should. If you go back to earlier blog comments, then there is clearly wrong information in them that has never been updated. But I will flag this up for better handling, it could be done better.PiGraham wrote:I don't think any of that is at issue. I agree that RPF have good reasons for not publicising their product development schedules.jamesh wrote:There's not a lot more to say, apart from perhaps giving some background in to the previous statements about when the Pi2 might be coming out.
Two years ago, 2017 would have been the best date for a new Pi, but the technology world changes quickly. Things like the ODROID-C1 mean that for the same price there was much more competent device, and something needed to be done. Broadcom had been working on the 2836 and even though the team was small, this work came to fruition much faster than expected (the chip worked first time!) , so there was an opportunity to catch up with the other SBC's out there, earlier than expected. Also worth noting that although the Foundation is a charity, they are still a business, and need to keep going as a business. With the education team running full tilt, and some expensive engineers to pay for, they need a steady income stream, and the P2 is how that revenue stream is maintained.
Maybe they should refrain from publishing false or misleading development schedules.
Code: Select all
No, he was not cheated. The B+ was and is the perfect device to learn programming, in Scratch, Python or C++.Kuja65 wrote:Now he feels cheated... Is he right? Was he cheated?
The simple and only answer is NEVER give any future date that any new product might be available, don't hint at any confidential product plans before making a general announcement. If you make a pre-announcement don't give any possible availability date no matter how close it might be. If you hint at new product that will ALWAYS be taken as an announcement (that's the Osborne Effect). The classic RPF example is the "We'll have a DSI display available" - when did Eben say that?jamesh wrote: The problem is I think the website doesn't get updated as much as it should. If you go back to earlier blog comments, then there is clearly wrong information in them that has never been updated. But I will flag this up for better handling, it could be done better.
I think it is purely descriptive to say that there were people 'in the know' who could plan optimally at the expense of people then people that could not. That is the whole idea of evading the 'Osborne effect' by keeping customers in the dark.Heater wrote:I'm appalled by all these accusations of "lying", "cheating", "deception" etc on the part of the Foundation. "ingroups", "outgroups", WTF?
You exaggerate - nobody claimed that.Heater wrote:Makes it sound like the Foundation is some big, bad, evil, predatory organization out to screw people over. Crazy.
For many it is a substantial update - the creators seems to thinks it is a great update. So there are customers who rather would have waited for some days, weeks, even months for the product that is clearly better for them.Heater wrote:Good grief this is a minor upgrade to an existing product. Happens all the time. It's provided at the same old price. It's nice but not essential.
They knew that there was the chip available. They had even planned designed the B+ to such that the new chip would fit into the design when its time would come. Informing people where things are don't mean that a release day is announced 6 months before. There are reasonable compromises available.Heater wrote:Has it occurred to anyone that perhaps even the Foundation did not know if this would happen and or when? Better not to shout about something until you know it works. Then there is the oft mentioned Osborne effect.
Actually the Osborne effect is likely to be a myth. There were other reasons for the downfall, like that Kaypro brought to the market a better and more affordable computer. Maybe the totally premature announcement of a future was an failed attempt to keep customers from not buying the competing product but wait for Osborne's response? And then they were unable to produce the promised new computers because of other bad business decisions.Heater wrote:Now imagine what happens when you announce a new product, your current product sales drop to zero as everyone knows the new mode is available next month. Then you hit problems in the design, development, production, or supply of the new model that delays it for 6 months or a year! Oops, disaster all round. And everybody is miserable.
Heater wrote:So stop it everybody. The Foundation has served us proudly on this. Go forth and buy more Pi.
Note: I said "minor upgrade" on purpose. Not to denigrate the Pi 2 in any way. But really, I'm sure that for most things we currently use Pi's for you won't be seeing massive speed boosts. Sure it will enable some new things to be done that make use of vector floating point or more RAM, but basically it's the same machine. Which by the way I think is an excellent thing to be.
There is no simple answer to keep everyone happy, but I think the best option is to be open about the "no comment" stance.jamesh wrote:Been pondering actually about how it could be done better.
Eben gets asked all the time when the next Pi comes out - what should he say? He cannot give exact dates, because there are none, and if he does say something that's inside a year the sales of previous models drop like a stone (Osbourne effect). So his only real options is to say nothing. Which some people would take as "very soon, better not buy a B+ now" and some would take as "there not planning anything, they are not serious, why buy at all?"
So if he does say something like 2017, because at the time that's what he expected, that gets reported everywhere. If plans change, does the Foundation then remove everything on their website, and thereby giving away that something is happening? And of course, there is no way of changing every reference to 2017 out there on the internet.
It really is a no-win situation.
There are those who rely on Robert X Cringeworthy's article (and therefore Wikipedia) to dismiss it as a myth, and then there are some of us old gits who were fortunate to have known, in person, people like Adam Osbourne, Gene Amdahl and the like who lived and worked in the industry during those days. I know whos opinion and beliefs on the matter carries more weight for me, having actually been there rather than reading about it on Wikipedia.Sleep Mode zZ wrote: Actually the Osborne effect is likely to be a myth. There were other reasons for the downfall, like that Kaypro brought to the market a better and more affordable computer. Maybe the totally premature announcement of a future was an failed attempt to keep customers from not buying the competing product but wait for Osborne's response? And then they were unable to produce the promised new computers because of other bad business decisions.