This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Currently, the article states that all SBCs have to be microcomputers. But how about the Data General Nova? Please comment. -- Wernher 00:06, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Have cleaned up and expanded the article a bit, but it could use a picture of a embedded SBC, anyone know where to get a copyright-free one? Have removed the cleanup and stub tags since I think the article is OKish now, but anyone disagrees feel free to replace then and I'll take another shot at it. Astaroth5 16:23, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Added some current information and the photo of the SBC in a backplane. Chassisplans 15:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I am putting this in the talk section because every time I edit the article it is removed (like three times I think; doesn't this authortarian editting get old for you guys?). I would think the "authors" (although this is supposed to be owned by the "public") would want the references section to include as many SBCs as exist in the real world as a more complete and through handling of the topic. But none the less it appears not to be the case. So here is my list of the two board configurations and they aren't even close to being just "variants" anymore than the other SBCs in the reference list are. I give up and will go away because this article, like so many in wikipedia are "OWNED" by specific individuals who will NOT accept any other view of the material even when presented with the facts:
My assertion is that BealeBoard and BeagleBone are two essentially different products.
So lets start with a list of differences:
- the PCB boards are different sizes and shapes
- DRAM technology
- bone: 10/100 ethernet with RJ-45 connector
- board; 4-port USB 2.0 hub; bone: 1-port USB 2.0 host
- board: db-9 and 14-pin JTAG connectors; bone: usb to jtag, jtag header (not populated)
- board: 1.8-V 28-pin expansion header (not populated), 2 20-pin LCD expansion headers (not populated)
--bone: 3.3-V 2x46-pin expansion headers
- board: audio codec
- bone: LiOn battery charger, LED backlight driver
- board: audio line out and in connectors
- board: S-video and DVI-D video connectors
- board: seral port header
- board: reset and user buttons; bone: reset button
- board: SD/MMC slot; bone: microSD slot
- plus lots more
then things that are the same:
- client USB connector
- power connector (5.0-V)
- host USB connector
My guess is that they will delete this entire topic right out of the talk section since it doesn't agree with their "view" of the real world. It will only live on in the immutable history of wikipedia.
75.134.135.128 (
talk) 15:18, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
75.134.135.128 ( talk) 17:36, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:List of single-board computers#Scope - whether to include single-board microcontrollers that may be of interest to editors of this page. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 02:05, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
The market for SBCs have exploded, yet this article paints a picture from the old days! It does not mention the most defining concepts of modern SBCs, like SoC, SoM, GPIO, shields, developer boards, home automation, android, linux, u-boot…
The way it defines «single-board computer» is also problematic — if «two distinct architectures» wasn't a poor enough justification for not counting backplanes as boards, it hardly facilitates any more discussion of >1 board scenarioes, like:
In defining SBC, we should require only the general purpose computer to be on a single board — this is the embedded part of the embedded computer. There are too many examples where peripherals (aka special purpose, or application specific parts of the embedded system) are made as separate boards. Especially among those with a "board" form factor (in my opinion, the most genuine representants of the SBC revolution). The exact number of boards is an implementation detail. 84.209.119.158 ( talk) 22:57, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Currently, the article states that all SBCs have to be microcomputers. But how about the Data General Nova? Please comment. -- Wernher 00:06, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Have cleaned up and expanded the article a bit, but it could use a picture of a embedded SBC, anyone know where to get a copyright-free one? Have removed the cleanup and stub tags since I think the article is OKish now, but anyone disagrees feel free to replace then and I'll take another shot at it. Astaroth5 16:23, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Added some current information and the photo of the SBC in a backplane. Chassisplans 15:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I am putting this in the talk section because every time I edit the article it is removed (like three times I think; doesn't this authortarian editting get old for you guys?). I would think the "authors" (although this is supposed to be owned by the "public") would want the references section to include as many SBCs as exist in the real world as a more complete and through handling of the topic. But none the less it appears not to be the case. So here is my list of the two board configurations and they aren't even close to being just "variants" anymore than the other SBCs in the reference list are. I give up and will go away because this article, like so many in wikipedia are "OWNED" by specific individuals who will NOT accept any other view of the material even when presented with the facts:
My assertion is that BealeBoard and BeagleBone are two essentially different products.
So lets start with a list of differences:
- the PCB boards are different sizes and shapes
- DRAM technology
- bone: 10/100 ethernet with RJ-45 connector
- board; 4-port USB 2.0 hub; bone: 1-port USB 2.0 host
- board: db-9 and 14-pin JTAG connectors; bone: usb to jtag, jtag header (not populated)
- board: 1.8-V 28-pin expansion header (not populated), 2 20-pin LCD expansion headers (not populated)
--bone: 3.3-V 2x46-pin expansion headers
- board: audio codec
- bone: LiOn battery charger, LED backlight driver
- board: audio line out and in connectors
- board: S-video and DVI-D video connectors
- board: seral port header
- board: reset and user buttons; bone: reset button
- board: SD/MMC slot; bone: microSD slot
- plus lots more
then things that are the same:
- client USB connector
- power connector (5.0-V)
- host USB connector
My guess is that they will delete this entire topic right out of the talk section since it doesn't agree with their "view" of the real world. It will only live on in the immutable history of wikipedia.
75.134.135.128 (
talk) 15:18, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
75.134.135.128 ( talk) 17:36, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:List of single-board computers#Scope - whether to include single-board microcontrollers that may be of interest to editors of this page. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 02:05, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
The market for SBCs have exploded, yet this article paints a picture from the old days! It does not mention the most defining concepts of modern SBCs, like SoC, SoM, GPIO, shields, developer boards, home automation, android, linux, u-boot…
The way it defines «single-board computer» is also problematic — if «two distinct architectures» wasn't a poor enough justification for not counting backplanes as boards, it hardly facilitates any more discussion of >1 board scenarioes, like:
In defining SBC, we should require only the general purpose computer to be on a single board — this is the embedded part of the embedded computer. There are too many examples where peripherals (aka special purpose, or application specific parts of the embedded system) are made as separate boards. Especially among those with a "board" form factor (in my opinion, the most genuine representants of the SBC revolution). The exact number of boards is an implementation detail. 84.209.119.158 ( talk) 22:57, 10 September 2013 (UTC)