What is Raspberry Pi for?

[dave_the_nerd]

Any other examples of how having a small wifi enabled computer is useful?

I'm using an Arduino as a CNC machine controller. A Pi could do a similar job, probably.

 

[zinfamous]

we're considering implementing a Raspberry Pi array to handle video, audio, and syncing, for some detailed recording of a behavioral project we are doing in the lab. It's a super cheap way to do it, with apparently little fuss, and all we need is a few Pi boards to control each individual camera, and feed it through the DAQ that we already have for a separate audio recording.

...or something like that; I'm not the one consulting on this. Anyway, it's the most reasonable option for what we need.

 

[Cerb]

Has anyone heard of anything useful that was created by Pi that was not able to be created before it existed?

Yes. Just put a price tag on it. That's really the thing. Instead of risking a $300+ PC or dev board, or needing to spend thousands of dollars, you can spend $50. For DIY projects, if you blow it up, no big deal, and it uses little enough power to run on batteries, and even solar panels.

 

[ElFenix]

i do appreciate the irony of poster "GoodEnough" arguing about what a raspberry pi can be used for

 

[Muadib]

The Raspberry Pi 2 is powerful enough to make a very nice and dirt cheap HTPC. You can easily load OpenELEC and have a functioning Kodi box in just a few minutes (Kodi is the new version of XBMC). I'm planning to order one for this purpose as soon as the supply becomes less constrained.

I'm so tempted to jump on this, but they didn't change the the video, so it won't do 4k.

 

[Pheran]

I'm so tempted to jump on this, but they didn't change the the video, so it won't do 4k.

That's true, but 4K is pretty much irrelevant unless you have a HUGE display, not to mention the near complete lack of 4K source material right now. People get so hung up on tech standards that so often make no meaningful difference. The truth that consumer electronics companies don't want you to hear is that 1080p is good enough for the majority of consumer scenarios.

Does 4K resolution matter?

 

[thecoolnessrune]

i do appreciate the irony of poster "GoodEnough" arguing about what a raspberry pi can be used for

Different thread doing the same thing.

For whatever reason he seems genuinely incapable of looking at multiple factors objectively. Everything seems to be about taking one feature or point and extrapolating the object's entire worth on that one value.

 

[Muadib]

That's true, but 4K is pretty much irrelevant unless you have a HUGE display, not to mention the near complete lack of 4K source material right now. People get so hung up on tech standards that so often make no meaningful difference. The truth that consumer electronics companies don't want you to hear is that 1080p is good enough for the majority of consumer scenarios.

4K will be the thing this year, as most tv manufacturers kick 1080p to the bargain bin. You need to go see a good 4k set if you really think it makes no difference. The difference far eclipses when you went from dvd to blu-ray.

 

[BoberFett]

4K will be the thing this year, as most tv manufacturers kick 1080p to the bargain bin. You need to go see a good 4k set if you really think it makes no difference. The difference far eclipses when you went from dvd to blu-ray.

That will come in handy for that massive library of 4K movies I have...

 

[NikolaeVarius]

4K will be the thing this year, as most tv manufacturers kick 1080p to the bargain bin. You need to go see a good 4k set if you really think it makes no difference. The difference far eclipses when you went from dvd to blu-ray.

I'll take it. Hopefully I can get an insanely cheap 1080P TV this black friday.

 

[ElFenix]

5k or bust!

 

[Muadib]

That will come in handy for that massive library of 4K movies I have...

I bet you said the same for your 1080p library too.

 

[Muadib]

I'll take it. Hopefully I can get an insanely cheap 1080P TV this black friday.

I don't know your definition of cheap, but you won't have to wait that long.

 

[Muadib]

5k or bust!

The next big thing will be 8k.

 

[splat_ed]

The next big thing will be 8k.

I'm waiting till it's over 9k!

 

[videogames101]

It's just an overpriced micro.

 

[Hugo Drax]

It is a small computer? Ok, so what are some real uses for it?
All I see is silly "top 10" lists for things that have no real practical value.

Has anyone heard of anything useful that was created by Pi that was not able to be created before it existed?

I also don't understand the point of using it as a $30 desktop as a way to save money. Seems like a pointless way to save money. I assume they invented this NOT as a low cost alternative to a desktop PC.

Its for smart kids to hack around and do stuff with it. Like an Erector set or the radio shack electronics kits.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

I also don't understand the point of using it as a $30 desktop as a way to save money. Seems like a pointless way to save money.

You are 101% right.
Why only pay $30..$35 for a solution which is only GoodEnough, when you can waste spend $399, on (a full sized PC) something which is just as good, only much bigger, uses much more electricity and much less fun ?

E.g. Why waste $35 on a (PI) programmable flashing LED light project for junior's School project, when they can do it using a brand new $899 PC + $199 Interface board + $49 external LED board ?

EDIT:
Sorry if my answer was TOO sarcastic.
Modern PCs are NOT very good for quick/cheap/easy electronics experiments, such as programmable LED light flashers, because it is NOT easy to electronically drive stuff from a PC (without buying interfaces), and PCs (Desktop) are NOT particularly well suited to running off small batteries.

Whereas RPI's have built in interfaces, and can run off batteries (and/or low voltage), if required.

 

[Cerb]

It's just an overpriced micro.

Know of cheaper?

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

Know of cheaper?

Some others, e.g. Arduino, can be a fair bit cheaper. But they would have far less ram, speed, maybe no video out (HDMI) etc on the board, and won't have the huge Rasberry PI infrastructure (hardware and software)**.
Although the Arduino has an extensive infrastructure of its own. There are also pricier but higher spec Arduino stuff as well.

**What I mean is that the INFRASTRUCTURES are different. They are both big in their own right.

 

[olds]

http://imgur.com/gallery/rfKfFSI

 

[Kaido]

That's true, but 4K is pretty much irrelevant unless you have a HUGE display, not to mention the near complete lack of 4K source material right now. People get so hung up on tech standards that so often make no meaningful difference. The truth that consumer electronics companies don't want you to hear is that 1080p is good enough for the majority of consumer scenarios.

Does 4K resolution matter?

I take very much the opposite POV. 4K looks amazing on any screen: phones & tablets (well, 2K for now or whatever the % is), laptops & monitors (ex. the $1500 Toshiba laptop & 28" Dell), televisions, etc. I've setup a lot of 39" 4K Seikis for digital content display boards & they are really great! 4K on larger sets looks incredible, of course, but it also looks great on smaller displays, including inside & outside the range that all of these re-run "4K vs. eyeball articles" say.

But then again, most people don't even notice that the horrible soap opera 120Hz stuff is turned on, so...there's that

 

[Red Squirrel]

I'd love to see 4k computer monitors. That's where you can actually make use of it because it gives you more pixel real estate on a single monitor. Then you do triple monitor and now we're talking. But really at 4k or even 8k you could probably get away with a single monitor and be just as productive as triple monitor.

The tech industry also seems to do stuff backwards. They push higher res TVs at us, before the content for them is even available. By the time the content is fairly standard, they're now trying to push something even higher res.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

I'd love to see 4k computer monitors. That's where you can actually make use of it because it gives you more pixel real estate on a single monitor. Then you do triple monitor and now we're talking. But really at 4k or even 8k you could probably get away with a single monitor and be just as productive as triple monitor.

The tech industry also seems to do stuff backwards. They push higher res TVs at us, before the content for them is even available. By the time the content is fairly standard, they're now trying to push something even higher res.

The thing is, that the human eye, can only make out a certain (limited) amount of detail. So your 24 inch, 64K monitor, may well have 99,999,999,999,999 pixels. But your human eye (without the aid of a microscope), will not be able to make out (see) the tiny pixels.

So I am not convinced that your 4K single monitor (at say 24 inches) will be able to replace a triple monitor setup, and give you the same work place efficiency.

Back on topic:
I don't think a tiny $35, limited spec "mini-PC"/Embedded-micro-system, needs to offer 4K, to be successful in the current market place.

EDIT:
To avoid possible forum arguments. 4K monitors, may give nice sharp pictures and make really nice computer monitors, in the future.
What I meant was that if the characters are only 1mm high, from typical monitor viewing distrances, the characters would be too small, to read. Even if there are plenty of tiny pixels, showing the 1mm high characters, in splendid details. (I'm not sure how small is too small, but 1mm is probably too small, at a guess).

 

[Pheran]

I take very much the opposite POV. 4K looks amazing on any screen: phones & tablets (well, 2K for now or whatever the % is), laptops & monitors (ex. the $1500 Toshiba laptop & 28" Dell), televisions, etc. I've setup a lot of 39" 4K Seikis for digital content display boards & they are really great! 4K on larger sets looks incredible, of course, but it also looks great on smaller displays, including inside & outside the range that all of these re-run "4K vs. eyeball articles" say.

I wasn't talking about computer monitors. Monitors normally have a much closer viewing distance than televisions, which can make the extra resolution worthwhile. When you talk about TV screens at typical living-room seating distances, 4K becomes a dubious proposition. Of course they are going to look amazing if you stand right up to them, but that's not how people watch TV.