|
|
|
|
|
by serf
793 days ago
|
|
I think that the inside should match the motif that the outsides set. what I mean by that : the outside sets a tone of professional heavy-duty post-apocalyptic computing, yet the insides are filled with fragile wire connects, fragile routes, multiple boards and new (read: unproven) non-redundant technologies. I would expect something that exudes that aesthetic to be wired like a NASA project [0], use radiation hardened components, redundancy, SOMETHING that speaks to the durability. [0]: https://workmanship.nasa.gov/lib/insp/2%20books/links/sectio... |
|
The availability of commodity hardware is one of the reasons projects like the Recovery Kit can exist. Redundancy and durability can be measured in multiple ways, and I suspect it's cheaper to keep on hand a stack of backup components that can easily be swapped out than to invest the time, energy and money on a more bespoke hardened solution that can't easily be replicated and would put this project out of reach for many people trying to replicate it.
The goal of "Ruggedized Raspberry Pi" seems to have been met quite well, IMO.