Posted by Roy L. Fuchs on 10/07/32 11:50

On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 21:33:39 -0500, "Jay G." <Jay@tmbg.org> Gave us:

>On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 04:07:22 GMT, Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 06:57:53 -0500, "Jay G." <Jay@tmbg.org> Gave us:
>>
>>>On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 05:20:51 GMT, Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:55:34 -0500, "Jay G." <Jay@tmbg.org> Gave us:
>>>>>
>>>>>Looks like all the later Intel microprocessors won out over the 80186 in
>>>>>terms of embedded applications.
>>>>>
>>>> I'd be willing to bet that 99% of those are SBCs ...
>>>
>>>Okay, I take that bet. Prove it.
>>>
>>>And since when do SBCs not count as embedded?
>>>
>>>1,750,000 hits for "SBC embedded"
>>
>> A "Single Board Computer" is, by definition, not an embedded device,
>> and IS by definition a computer.
>
>11,200,000 hits for "Single Board Computer embedded".
>
>Here's some companies that even makes SBCs for embedded devices:

FOR embedded devices, dumbass!

The SBC itself is NOT.

• Next in forum: Re: Combo HD-DVD and DVD format
• Prev in forum: Re: Major problems with Toshiba's HD-DVD=DEAD
• Thread view: Re: Major problems with Toshiba's HD-DVD=DEAD

[Reply to this message]