posted in Technology
Raspberry Pi is intentionally blocking RAM capacity upgrades
www.notebookcheck.net/Raspberry-Pi-is-intentionally-blocking-RAM-capacity-upgrades.1404979.0.htmlposted in Technology
Raspberry Pi is intentionally blocking RAM capacity upgrades
www.notebookcheck.net/Raspberry-Pi-is-intentionally-blocking-RAM-capacity-upgrades.1404979.0.htmlReplying to @empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
This makes sense. Hear me out.
A CM5 is a device designed to be embedded into other devices. I believe most of their sales come from just that- companies that make other things, and build a CM5 into them rather than design their own control board.
As you go up through the model tiers, the price increases faster than the added price of memory. IE, if the 2gb one is $20, and the difference between a 2gb memory chip and an 8gb memory chip is $10, the 8gb unit isn’t $30 it’s $60. You pay RPi a premium for the high end products.
Desoldering RAM off a production PCB is something no hobbyist is going to bother with. BUT, a company buying 10,000 of these to build into their product MIGHT find it cost effective to setup a production line to do so. And they could probably resell the 2gb chips.
Point being- while I don’t like this, and I don’t like the ideas it represents, I also understand why they are doing it. It’s not about us, the hobbyists. It’s about the manufacturers that build compute modules into their products.
Replying to @SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
What’s the problem with a company doing what they want with hardware they purchased and own?
Replying to @MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone
In concept nothing. But do you also recognize a legitimate business model of selling multiple products at different price points, spaced out more than the different cost of production?
And speaking hypothetically with some stupid numbers is it your argument that they should be able to purchase the $20 product, add $10 of parts, and either use it or sell it as the $200 product?
Replying to @SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
The fact that it is economically viable to resolder different chips, is already showing it’s a illegitimate business model, imo…
Not a product, but a money grab
Replying to @Eximius@lemmy.world
So hypothetically.
Let’s say a raw memory chip, is $2 $4 and $10 for a 4gb, 8gb, and 16gb raw chip.
Let’s say the RPi Compute module are $50, $70, and $100 for the 4gb, 8gb and 16gb versions. From smallest to largest that’s a $50 price increase for a $8 cost increase.
Is that an ‘illegitimate’ business model? Honest question I’m curious where you’re at.
Replying to @SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
I think so, yes. It bases the business on “money milking” by staggering SKUs to maximize profits. “Cheap” one that is mostly useless, just to upsell the others. “Mid” one that is just okay. And “expensive”, that isnt more expensive to make, but looks reasonable here to really milk the money. “Usual” dark patterns these days.
Per your hypothetical:
Say there is some r&d budget A, production and logistics costs B, and SKU component costs Ci. Since we’re capitalistic corpo aimed at line go up, there is also D% margins.
rough math, per unit: ((A + B) * sku_1 / N**2 + C + 2) * D = 50 ((A + B) * sku_2 / N**2 + C + 4) * D = 70 ((A + B) * sku_3 / N**2 + C + 10) * D = 100 sku1, sku2, sku3 = number of sku units C - cost of all other components N = number of units D = 100% + margin%
Set D, A, B, C, N and you’ll see how they expect to sell their rpis, not based on “hey this is our proposal”, but based on “target this market, upsell this, and focus on selling this overpriced sku”.
But maybe they’re not evil, and they don’t want to tell you what to do, just a proposal and expected market. Let’s do a simpler situation. A per-unit equitable margin based business:
B - per unit logistics, prod costs (they are literally identical in every way except for ram chip) D < 100%, added margin
(B + C + 2 ) * (1 + A + D) = 50 (B + C + 4 ) * (1 + A + D) = 70 (B + C + 10) * (1 + A + D) = 100 Merge B + C for brevity. 1 + A + D = M BC = 50 / M - 2 BC = 70 / M - 4 3) BC = 100 / M - 10 => M = 10, BC = 3
Oi. Margin of 900% (that’s some costly R&D) , but 3) is literally then broken. And then math does not math, with abstract bad numbers.
Let’s try more realistic numbers:
1G - 53 2G - 87 4G - 127 8G - 194 16G - 334 BC = 53 / M - R1 BC = 87 / M - R2 BC = 127 / M - R3 BC = 194 / M - R4 BC = 334 / M - R5
Now some data is missing for ram chip prices, or costs of components, but let’s just assume indeed BC + R1 = 53/M. I.e. they don’t purposely lose money on the shittiest sku. Ram prices are exponential. Say BC + R1 = 25. Which makes M around 200%. Wait, that makes 16G chip cost at least 120. Okay, about 2.5 times as expensive than the most expensive retail-amount chip I found on alibaba.
So math aint mathing, and money appears to be a floating imaginary point in petroleum integral support space.
Oh well, companies will be companies. At least when you buy a raspberry pi you definitely are not paying them to actually specifically reduce your capabilities, gaslight you without valid engineering explanations, and just continuing to try to extinguish an unending PR nightmare using your fancy SKU cash
In reality, their base tier SKU is likely a net money loss. Which is why they’re scared shitless somebody actually broke their dark pattern. The sales department is always right on what and how many should be sold!