@ GHI Team,
If I have a look at the cerberus performance/price ratio, does it mean that probably the actuel cost of the Chipworkx module could be optimized, or does it implicitly mean that it would be a good choice to migrate my application to the CERB as it will be in release version ?
From 30$ to 150$, it now sounds like somehting that I can not explain…Or I missed a tip that contradict my thoughts…
Any suggestion ?
Thanks
In this corner, we have the old man of the ring, ChipworkX.
Years of GHI developments built into ChipworkX and it’s SDK. Robust support options for commercial implementors.
In the challenger corner, we have the new comer to the block, Fez Cerberus.
OSHW and software, firmware still in Alpha, still not complete parity in function with core features from the challenger.
So my view, “it depends”. If you want this for a commercial project, you probably can’t look past the tried and true ChipworkX, if you want to tinker at home, and are happy to have some potential pain during the next months, then Cerberus/Cerb40.
And the winner is… 
Of course the stage of CHIPWX is not the same thant CERB, but my underlined question deals with the time CERB will be released on all the NETMF implementation. Then ! will its price also be released to the CHIPWX one ??? :naughty: …I hope not !
I am not a GHI employee so I can’t speak for them…
But it’s open hardware, the price is unlikely to change, and if it does anyone else can walk away and reproduce the devices using the open design. I can’t see it significantly changing unless core product components significantly change or manufacturing cost changes.
The other part of your assertion (“all the NETMF implementation”) isn’t really valid either. You have to realise that the netmf is unique to each hardware platform, and even to each implementation. Two “porters” can implement netmf onto the same platform and get a different “product”. The features someone chooses to implement can be tailored, eg support different CPU features differently - there’s an obvious core that you can’t be without. The other thing again is that GHI for years have built their firmware capability, and you may not get those same features coming down into the open hardware line - it could be pushed back to a later release or could even be too commercially sensitive to release.
Finally, support is not as clear as it is today with the commercial products. Sure, you’ll still get top notch support from the community here, and Gus-bot will still be typing weird things, but a commercial product producer would definetely need to be willing to accept some additional risk if they chose Cerberus as a platform without talking through the support options with GHI.
These products are new, and this is really GHI’s most recent play in the Open Hardware arena, so I think the story will get clearer as time passes and we can see how things are going to evolve.
Brett,
I fully agree with your point of view, and when I say “All the NETMF”, of course I’m talking about a comprarable implementation of what I already have on CHIPWX…
Beyond the pure development and hardware concepts, it is more an information about : For how many years can I be sure to be able to count on CHIPWX modules, before it will be potentially replaced by a more powerfull processor (cf. SUPPORT FOR NETMF 4.2 post from GUS), and what could be the invest for us to achieve such a migration in terms of development (this is my part) and price (GHI part) :think:
In commercial products (and moreover for a startup as we are), pereniality and ROI are important params !
However, thanks for your interesting feedback, even for a none GHI employee 