> not truly "IBM PC-compatible"
It's an embedded system, not a as low-power desktop.
If you are using it like an ordinary PC then you are probably using it wrong.
It's an embedded system, not a as low-power desktop.
If you are using it like an ordinary PC then you are probably using it wrong.
But at that point you're usually looking at proper Linux-based boards with lots of standard IO - even HDMI output - in the ARM space, and Edison provides absolutely nothing over those. It might've provided something if you could reasonably treat it as a bog-standard x86 computer with some extra functionality attached.
No, you can't define other peoples use cases.
For myself, as long as the device meets my requirements (peripherals, power, tools, size, price) it can use power8 or PDP/11 for all I care.
In which case, you'll likely be using a significantly cheaper ARM board which does all the same stuff, uses less power, probably uses a more standard distro, etc etc. Which brings us back to - nobody wants an x86 IoT device. They don't fit in anywhere ARM doesn't fit better.
First of all, you don't know my requirements yet you declare ARM winner. What if for my particular use case Tensilica is the best choice?
Furthermore, you generally cannot define what IoT means for other people. For one person it could mean a 8-bit garage door opener, for someone else it could be an octa-core 64-bit monster.
Finally, Intel has a simplified x86 design with very good power usage for use in IoT. This CPU is not used in Galileo and alike today, but it exists.