[HH] modularity trend

[Tom Metro]

Ming kuo wrote:
> This is trend is happening evidenced by 1) standardization of
> cellphone chargers...

Chargers? I'm not following what chargers have do with the Tango PC.

As for standardization, there was no mention of the motherboard they
used being an open standard. I assume proprietary, with a soldered-on
mobile CPU. I believe they did say you could user-upgrade the RAM.


> 2) Modular products such as Google Ara project...

Project Ara[1] is definitely interesting. The ability for end-users to
reconfigure the system appeals to D-I-Y types, and the idea of having an
open marketplace of component vendors should appeal to everyone who
cares about greater choice.

The Ara framework will likely be used for far more than just cellphones.
Anything that requires mobile computing and a touch screen could be
built on it by shedding the unnecessary parts (cell radio, GPS, etc.)
and adding custom hardware specific to the application (IR thermal
imaging sensors, etc.).

I was impressed that Google has taken this concept as seriously as it
has, and has invested considerable effort into it, but it is still yet
to be seen whether they can turn it into a product that is useful for
anything beyond niche applications. It could, for example, end up being
used only for specialized application in the same way as a Panasonic
Toughbook gets used in industrial applications, where added bulk and
weight are acceptable compromises. (If that turns out to be the case,
Google will likely kill it or sell it off.)

1. http://www.projectara.com/ and http://motorolaara.com/


In any case, Tango Super PC doesn't seem to be an extension of this
modularity trend. It's just a small form factor PC split into two
pieces, with the internals being less modular than a fully
standards-based PC.


> 3) miniaturization of electronics allowing for modular design without
> adding much bulk.

Yes, but it is a sliding scale. Every time miniaturization makes a
smaller modular design possible, it's competing with an even smaller
monolithic design.


> 4) the gross margin pressure, forcing companies to find ways of
> reducing costs to consumer

Modular only saves you money if you can convince the consumer that it is
OK that some potentially important features are missing, because they
can easily add them later when needed.

For equivalent functionality, modularization is more expensive, except
in low volume, where the cost difference becomes insignificant.

In the late 80's and early 90's the upgradebility of PCs was a big
selling point, but the reality ended up that rarely did people upgrade.
I bet even today it is only a tiny percentage that attempt a trivial
upgrade on their laptops, like installing more RAM.


> 5) Advantage of modular design to the consumer, allowing for
> flexibility of use cases for same hardware.

As makers we love modular design for this reason. The general public
doesn't seem to be willing to pay the price (in cost and bulk) for this
advantage.

Project Ara will be a good test to see whether this has changed.


> So I am convinced of the trend and got me thinking ideas for modular 
> ideas of Raspberry Pi, Arduino and the like. Anybody thinking along 
> the same way??

Elaborate on what you mean. Those platforms are already modular in the
sense that an Arduino can be expanded by stacking shields on top. Each
have countless peripherals that can be attached.

The RAM could be socketed to permit upgrading. Ditto for the CPU. These
typically aren't because the soldered on components usually serve the
purpose for the lifetime of the board in almost all cases. If you need
more RAM or CPU, switch to a different board.

Modularity on the motherboard only makes sense if the board itself has a
significant cost. Aside from that, modularity is embodied by
standardized connectors, like the Arduino shield headers.

 -Tom