User talk:OliverGalvin/Comparison of single-board computers

Raspberry Pi
The dates are wrong for the introduction of the different models. Model B1 was introduced before A1, etc. Just check the cited sources in the Raspberry Pi main page. I can't figure out the editing and I can't make a log in, or I'd correct it myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.116.174.110 (talk) 19:24, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Scope
I am interested in your opinion about a question which I had couple of times while maintaining this article.

When is a computer a single-board computer which qualifies for this list?

The reason I think about this is that many wlan routers have just one board and if you put openWRT on it you can do so much crazy stuff. So do they qualify for the list because they are single-board and you can do nearly any computing stuff with them? Another question is if the raspberry Pi is really single-board because without a SD card it is useless. I actually need two boards (rPi + SD) to use this computer. Another example are computer where a component (ram/cpu) is not soldered onto the board but replaceable. So that I have again more then one board which are needed to use the computer.

What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Txt.file (talk • contribs) 22:14, 10 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Disqualifying computers that require just any additional board would cut out products that are expandable (e.g. those with mini PCIe slots or SD cards or add-on boards), which are arguably just as intersting to a hacking-oriented person as a true single-board system is to someone who doesn’t want to think about what else they’ll need to buy.
 * As for the countless OpenWRT-compatible routers, in my opinion, we should only consider computers that are meant by their manufacturer to be used as more-or-less general purpose computers. Including all the routers will lead back to the confusingly long list we had before on a separate page (now merged into this page).  Cold Shine  22:15, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Price column
Now that there are boards selling less than 10$, I think there should be an additional category (less than $10). comment added by Philippe Scheimann

I think the price column was very useful and I don't think prices change that often. In the worst case, it is an indication of how much such a board costs, it gives insightful information.

Can we bring back this column? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joao.m.s.silva (talk • contribs) 23:16, 22 January 2014 (UTC)


 * IMHO the price should not be in the Wikipedia. Some boards are not available anymore or the price has changed or different shops have different prices or something else. Therefor it is not a good idea to have the price in an encyclopedia. --Txt.file (talk) 12:02, 13 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree that prices don’t belong in an encyclopedia, but organizing the products in a few price ranges (maybe 4?) allows users of these comparison tables to weed out uninteresting items more quickly.  Cold Shine  02:24, 2 August 2014 (UTC)


 * What price do you want to insert? E.g. the banana pi has an official price but is nearly nowhere available. --Txt.file (talk) 10:04, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Agreed, for some products it’s more difficult than others, and some are pretty much permanently out of stock, which (in this business sector) means that they’ll never be available again. So what? It’s just an indicator like the others, and people care more about the price than they do about the RAM size or CPU power (see http://www.linux.com/news/embedded-mobile/mobile-linux/773852-top-10-open-source-linux-and-android-sbcs/).  Cold Shine  00:35, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Regarding the prices: I would only add the manufacture recommended price, when the device was released. In this case we could get rid of the whole artifical created Price Ranges, which do not make sense in a encyclopedia anyhow, because if someone wants to compare the units and looks into the ranges, it could be that two devices in one range are wider apart pricewise, then another device in a higher price range. 178.10.90.223 (talk) 16:13, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Open-hardware column
I think, that such thing is good. This is one of essential parameters for product (similar, as it is for software products). Meproun (talk) 04:39, 31 May 2014 (UTC)


 * This is a good idea but in what table should we put this information? --Txt.file (talk) 10:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I think this is rather important information and the General Comparison table would be a good place to display this. Otherwise the physical and electrical comparison is somewhat fitting grokjtrip (talk) 14:26, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * honestly it is pretty consistent with the previous moves and overall approach here - the price column is 'not important' but this 'openness' - is important. yeah. the only question is for whom it is? because for example for me, like an interested person, the whole thing is opposite, - the price IS very important but this meaningless idiotic 'openness' is even not worth of my attention to it. what this is? just someone's silly believes or marketing tricks? there is no any single hardware which is 'open' up to date. and no one needs that openness indeed. it's like openness of your ugly arse - no one needs this! please do not turn useful pieces of this project into sh1t. such a garbage information about the imagined 'openness' pretty well may collect somewhere in fanatic sites like fsf's one. and this place must be usable by the most of interested people not just those mentioned frustrated fanatics.

46.211.126.71 (talk) 01:51, 23 May 2015 (UTC) ClosedSourceNonFreeProprietary

Sleep/standby mode
I think that in "Physical and electrical comparison" we should add column with information about supported low power modes. There is "Idle Power Consumption" column but it only tells about power consumption in normal state without load. New column should say if CPU core can be stopped and resumed, if we have control on peripherals power or at least if board after system halt is not power hungry. As far as I know most of SBC producers neglect such power management and I think it would be good to know which of this boards is suitable for battery power. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.184.164.213 (talk) 22:14, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Hardware watchdog
User:ScotXW t@lk 17:59, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

64-bit instruction set
User:ScotXW t@lk 17:59, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Support for Vulkan rendering API
User:ScotXW t@lk 17:59, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

suggestion/interest announcement: Free Hardware
I am looking for "free hardware design" single-board computers. The more "free hardware/software/copyleft", the better, and the more proprietary/closed source, the worse. I suggest to make a comparison list of single-board computers based on this criteria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.119.186.106 (talk) 11:26, 18 May 2017 (UTC)


 * You mean an additional columns with Open-source hardware? User:ScotXW t@lk 17:59, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

SATA port sort
When I go to the Comparison of single-board computers section and click on the little arrow next to "SATA", the sorted list shows me a few boards with SATA, a long list of "NO" boards without SATA, and then a few more boards with SATA.

How can we fix this so that when I sort on "SATA", all the boards with any kind of SATA are grouped together, no matter which specific version of SATA? --DavidCary (talk) 18:10, 12 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I have fixed this though at the the expense of making the table harder to maintain. Sorting goes from A to Z on the displayed text value. As "No" is in the middle of the alphabet it was in the middle of the sorted list.  I put "No" at the bottom of the list by changing   in the SATA column to be  .  I used ~No as ~ is the last visible character in the ASCII character set.


 * At first I thought the the fix would be to use  with a single pipe between the data-sort-value and the value but I saw that data-sort-value is being used in other columns without the single pipe and it seems to work. The examples at Help:Sorting use the pipe. I did not look further to see if lack of a pipe is frowned on. --Marc Kupper&#124;talk 22:31, 18 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Update and previous paragraph struck. The lack of a single pipe is ok. Apparently there is a set of templates intended for use in tables like the ones in this article that generate the leading pipe meaning  is is correct usage.  The template documentation for No explains this. --Marc Kupper&#124;talk 20:50, 19 August 2016 (UTC)


 * ✅. It now sorts correctly. Thank you, Marc Kupper. --DavidCary (talk) 15:03, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

OS support
Most of these boards are Android only, but (more interestingly IMO) some support stock Linux, to varying degrees. For simplicity, I am tempted to create a «Linux Support» column, with this set of values:
 * Android only
 * Linux, with blobs
 * Linux, with out-of-tree patches
 * stock Linux

So for example Raspberry Pi would be «Linux, with blobs» due to its GPU driver blob, without mentioning that it supports Android (since it's not «Android only»). 84.209.119.158 (talk) 16:58, 11 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Such a table has been added as Comparison_of_single-board_computers. Feel free to fill it. --Txt.file (talk) 11:51, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

LattePanda
Another famous example, missing on this List is the LattePanda. []

No mention of Samsung ARTIK
IoT kits by Samsung https://www.artik.io runs linux fedora. Has BLE, wifi, Thread, and ZigBee. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noonon (talk • contribs) 07:47, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Pinguino ?
Does the Pinguino qualify as a single board computer ? http://www.pinguino.cc/shop/index.php?route=product/product&path=60&product_id=52 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.130.251.17 (talk) 12:31, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Mips Creator CI20
there is no mention about this beautiful board. despite it has a distinguishing feature - a mips processor inside, which is very intriguing, when being around this sea of arm boards. guys, add it, dame it! i am not a native speaker, and it's obvious from this my writing i think. and secondly - i have no access to a normal computer and must use my android tab which is just an unusable crap in respect of software (the harware is ok). even writing this comment on android is almost a torture, not to memtion an editing of table rich wikipedia page. so, maybe there is some brave wikipedian who will make such a heroic act, and finally add the board which definitely deserves this, and hey, it just got an upgrade! 46.211.149.183 (talk) 20:08, 16 May 2015 (UTC) mips_lover_crappux_hater_ha_ha

No mention of Sharks Cove
Highly supported by Microsoft for tablet design http://www.sharkscove.org/ runs windows embedded/industrial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.164.205 (talk) 22:20, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Please add nvidia tx1
Please add the new jetson tx1 to the existing jetson tk1 listing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.81.189.144 (talk) 17:03, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add UP board
UP - Intel x5-Z8300 board in a Raspberry Pi2 form factor The UP board with x5-Z8350 CPU,16GB eMMC, 2GB RAM https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/802007522/up-intel-x5-z8300-board-in-a-raspberry-pi2-form-fa/description, http://up-shop.org/ 84.245.193.33 (talk) 02:31, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Please add NVIDIA Jetson AGX Xavier
There is no mention of the recent NVIDIA Jetson AGX Xavier board, a successor of the Jetson TX2. More information about this new board can be found at []. 2601:147:4380:1942:D490:A934:7BC9:EEB5 (talk) 02:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

snickerdoodle
Looks like this used to be on the list but was later removed for some reason. Technically it's two entries: snickerdoodle black and snickerdoodle one []. piSmasher is related, which is more of a single-board computer "in spirit"...

Merge in the table from List of SbC?
There is a comparison table in List_of_single-board_computers, under «Arm based». It is rather complete, and its more fine-grained division of info into more columns, is something I have wished for.84.209.119.158 (talk) 16:58, 11 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Apparently someone simply put a redirection on the above list page to this comparison page, without first adding all those boards to this page... Andreasfa (talk) 10:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I think the page PC-on-a-stick can be merged into this page. That page is just a simple list with minimal details and could be redirected here We could add another column to the general comparison listing the form factor. i.e. DIY board would denote a naked board, Plug-In Stick would denote sticks that could be plugged directly into HDMI. A reader could sort by form factor to list all the sticks As far as I know all PCs-on-a-stick are single-board-computers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vortex mak (talk • contribs) 16:09, 10 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree with this proposal. I have a proposed, and received editor approval, for a major change to PC-on-a-stick (see Talk:PC-on-a-stick). But, I do not want to orphan or lose the current content. I would like to see the current list of products merged to Single-board computers before I make the change. Leonnyan (talk) 21:05, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Enclosures? Antennas? Cameras?
In my own personal experience researching single-board computers as an entrepreneur, I found some vital information lacking in the usual comparisons, including this Wikipedia page but also various Blogs and computer magazine articles.

1) Can manufactured enclosures be purchased and/or printed and/or built? For example the Pandaboard OEM vendors sell enclosures. The community has a 3D printing file for enclosures available for download (I cannot comment on it's completeness or quality). They are just the one board I've been looking at closely. The commercial Intel NUC and the ASUS LINUX board ship with enclosures. I know some of the open source single board communities publish 3D printing files. And some have members that have created both hand-made and 3D printed created prototypes. IMHO this is important comparison information.

2) Antennas. I have been looking at Blue Tooth WiFi antennas. Some OEM vendors (again Pandaboard's vendors do, but I only mention them because I'm familiar with them) sell compatible antennas. The Intel NUC comes with built-in BT and WiFI antennas.

3) Camera accessories. The capability of the various boards to handle various cameras image sizes and rates also seems IMHO to be a useful comparison column. Not my area of expertise though....

4) Relationship to major chip manufacturer. Some communities have extremely close ties to various chipmakers. I'm not savvy enough to know for sure which "open source" groups are truly grass-roots and which are astro-turf.

5) OEM manufacturers. Some boards you can buy from commercial distributors. Some are "true" open source projects and you have to build it yourself. This is also a useful comparison. IMHO.

Just my $0.05 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.34.71.188 (talk) 23:57, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


 * While I’m in favor of adding some of this information, especially antennae and enclosures, at that point it would also make sense to talk about included power supply, USB cables, SATA cables (for SBCs that have a SATA connector). This would need yet another table, making the info even more fragmented.
 * As for the kind of product, as far as I can tell there are several categories:
 * Consumer: you’re given the board and several related accessories (USB cable, power supply); most of the ones in this page fall into this category, including all Android TV sticks, and they’re infrequently open-source;
 * DIY: you’re given the board only, and expected to be creative about the rest of the components; most often open-source;
 * Made or sponsored by chip manufacturer: very similar to DIY (see below) and similar to them; few of them, often open-source;
 * Industrial: similar to consumer, usually sell at a higher price, and sometimes you won’t even find a published price; I can’t think of any open-source ones;
 *  Cold Shine  12:28, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

General Comparison Models Column
Shouldn't the Raspberry pi have two rows under General comparison; One for the A line and another for the B's. Considering they are intended for different purposes (among other reasons). Also, should guidelines be posted here about what constitutes a unique device (a row) vs what is just another model (listed in the models column on the same row).
 * Nomad 1984 (talk) 05:41, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

PC on a Stick is registered trademark of Imation
Hello - my name is Leon Brown and I am employed by IronKey, a group within Imation Corporation. I have been gathering information in order to propose an update the PC on a Stick Wikipedia page to reference our history and ownership of this trademark. As I am new to editing Wikipedia, I am posting here to this discussion first in hopes of receiving guidance on the best approach. I have created a draft history of the trademark and its usage (in a Word doc for the moment), and would appreciate input on how best to make what may be a substantial change to this existing page. For example, is there a place I could post my suggested changes (and reference links) and receive input in advance? Thank you. I have added this identical comment here as I saw the discussion on potentially moving PC on a Stick content to this section Leonnyan (talk) 15:35, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, you can use your own userspace as a draft area, for example you can make a page like User:Leonnyan/Sandbox or User:Leonnyan/PC on a Stick where you can put a draft copy of what you want to apply. I think a better final destination for your content would be the article single-board computer but I can't really tell without seeing it first. Please look over Conflict of Interest to see how to handle cases where you are affiliated with a company which is the subject of your content. COI editing is strongly discouraged, and disclosing your interest before suggesting changes is the most encouraged way of handling conflict of interest. --BurritoBazooka (talk) 17:09, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I see the article PC-on-a-Stick is proposed to be merged into this one (at which point that article would stop existing). The merger has been proposed for over a year, though, so later (after I see your draft to see how it can be contributed) I'll see if all the content is mirrored on this article (Comparison of single-board computers), and if it is, propose that PC-on-a-Stick is deleted. --BurritoBazooka (talk) 17:38, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you (and sorry for my delay in replying). I will do as you suggested and share for input. Leonnyan (talk) 17:39, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I have created a page in my namespace User:Leonnyan/PC on a Stick and entered in the proposed content draft. It is currently centered on our product history via external references, though we would flush out more on the product advancement overtime in time. Regarding the COI and navigating how to propose claiming the PC-on-a-Stick name back, I will read up more on the Conflict of Interest link you provided. Any other thoughts or advice on how best to proceed are greatly appreciated. Thank you. Leonnyan (talk) 18:56, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I have made a change request on the Talk:PC-on-a-Stick page. I think I formulated my request correctly. We'll see. Thank you BurritoBazooka for your guidance to date. Leonnyan (talk) 21:49, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * An update. I have received the approval from editor for the major change request I made related to PC-on-a-Stick article on the Talk:PC-on-a-Stick page. Prior to making the (large) edit, I am concerned about how the current content will be handled. There is a comment above Talk:Comparison_of_single-board_computers entered by User:Vortex_mak - is it possible for that discussion to conclude before I remove information from the existing page? Or, other thoughts or comments? My intent is that the current content does not get orphaned and is correctly listed. Thank you in advance for input.
 * Hi!   After three years and more, you may have given up …  But have a look at Talk:Stick PC and at your user talk page, if you still want to put this info about IronKey's "PC on a Stick" on record.  yoyo (talk) 14:50, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Shared restricted bandwidth
It appears that many of those devices have a main USB bus, meaning that the total bandwidth of SD, SATA and ethernet access is shared and limited to USB 2 or USB 3 speeds. The possible exceptions being some boards which support a PCI[e] bus. Of course, where the processor itself has direct support for some connectors, such as HDMI or camera input, such ports allow dedicated bandwidth which may be faster than USB. It would be nice to find a simple and clean way to indicate these. Perhaps another column for "Shared bus devices", which could contain for instance "USB 2.0 bus: SATA 2.0, Ethernet", etc? 76.10.128.192 (talk) 21:41, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Ethernet speed
In the "Ethernet" column, can we indicate all the items with Gigabit Ethernet with "GbE"? There is no real difference between "10/100/1000" vs "1000" vs "GbE", right? --DavidCary (talk) 13:38, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Vivante free GPU drivers
Does this list need some updating what it comes to the Vivante GPU mainline support? As far as I know, the Etnaviv free software drivers are quite usable nowadays. --ilmaisin (talk) 15:07, 6 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Wrong place. Goto Free and open-source graphics device driver, Mesa 3D, Etnaviv, etc. User:ScotXW t@lk 17:59, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Too big
As SBCs become more popular, it's going to be like comparing all computers. We need to filter and/or split it up by function (GPIO <$10), (4k <$50), (USB3 <$100) ...


 * Agree. The outdated ones are just noise and must be removed.--84.214.220.135 (talk) 20:06, 8 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not suited at all for this kind of data! We need a real solution maybe involving Wikimedia + "Semantic MediaWiki". There is https://wikidevi.com/wiki/Main_Page User:ScotXW t@lk 17:59, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

What does "USB: Device" mean?
The "I/O interfaces and ports" table has three columns for "USB": "2.0", "3.0", and "Device". It's not clear what "Device" means, nor what the different values in the column ("Device" and "Client") mean. 95.17.84.134 (talk) 18:19, 6 May 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree this is currently confusing. The USB standard is designed to have a "directed topology" -- a USB host has "host ports" that provide power and directs traffic flow; a USB device has "device ports" that send data only when the host requests it.
 * Many users want to be able to plug in a USB flash drive or USB camera into the SBC. A SBC without a host port is useless to those people, even if the SBC has a USB device port.
 * Many users want to be able to plug a SBC into their laptop and start talking to it right away. Many users want to use a SBC as an interface between software running on a laptop computer and some hardware. A SBC without a device port is useless to those people, no matter how many USB host ports it has.
 * How can we make this article less confusing but still useful to those people?
 * --DavidCary (talk) 18:10, 12 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the explanation. I used that, more or less, to add a footnote explaining the USB columns. I also replaced the one use of the word "Client" the Device column with just "Yes" as "Client" is not one of the standard terms in the USB world. --Marc Kupper&#124;talk 21:14, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Comparison of single-board computers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140818120021/http://www.myirtech.com:80/list.asp?id=466 to http://www.myirtech.com/list.asp?id=466
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150308051559/http://www.myirtech.com:80/list.asp?id=510 to http://www.myirtech.com/list.asp?id=510

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:20, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Comparison of single-board computers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.solid-run.com/wiki/CuBox-i_Hardware
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.myirtech.com/list.asp?id=466
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.myirtech.com/list.asp?id=510
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140921053554/http://www.inforcecomputing.com/product/moreinfo/inforce6540.html to http://www.inforcecomputing.com/product/moreinfo/inforce6540.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:46, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Many Core Systems
Some months (years?) ago, I read about Many-Core-SBCs. Using some search engine, I found the Parallella []. Sadly, I didn't find any information in this article. Maybe someone knows even more about this variety of SBCs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.112.244.136 (talk) 10:27, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Wrong location User:ScotXW t@lk 17:59, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Add column storage M.2?
M.2 should replace mSATA in the next years because M.2 is more flexible (module size, purpose...) and more suitable for solid-state storage.

Note also:
 * SSD is more suitable than HD for small factor boards.
 * Some boards support M.2:
 * Banana Pi BPI-W2 (M.2 2242 and 2280, PCI Express 1.1 and 2.0)
 * HummingBoard Gate, Edge and Pulse (M.2 2242, PCI Express 2.0)

Possibilities for the table I/O interfaces and ports:
 * 1) Add a new sub-column M.2 within the main Storage column
 * 2) Rename sub-column SATA to SATA/M.2
 * 3) Keep column name SATA and each cell indicates if connector is mSATA and/or M.2 (my preference)

Please, provide feedback. Feel free to operate this improvement. --Oliver H (talk) 14:24, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Missing Creator Ci40, Cubieboard4, Nvidia Jetson TX1/TX2 and OLinuXino A64

 * Imagination_Creator (MIPS Creator Ci20 is already present)
 * Cubieboard (previous versions are already present)
 * Nvidia Jetson TX1 and TX2 (Nvidia Jetson TK1 is already present)
 * OLinuXino (A10, A13 and A20 are already present)

--Oliver H (talk) 20:47, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Group/Merge/Distinguish duplicated boards MK8xx
I an newbie but it seems different manufacters sell USB-sticks using similar names MKxxx. Example:
 * Tronsmart MK908 Mini PC
 * Generic MK809III Mini PC TV Box
 * BaiLe MK809IV vs ANDROSET MK809III (bestadvisor.com/wireless-hdmi/baile-mk809iv-vs-androset-mk809iii)

I have just added links, grouped and merged similar MK8xx boards within table I/O interfaces and ports:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparison_of_single-board_computers&diff=852552356&oldid=852114069
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparison_of_single-board_computers&diff=852553452&oldid=852552356
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparison_of_single-board_computers&diff=852557728&oldid=852553452

But I am not sure if I was correct...

Anyway, the wikipedia article is ambiguous to present multiple rows about similar product MK802 II without any link to distinguish them, isn't it?

Other tables have the same issue :-(

What is your opinion?
 * 1) We should just group them without any modification.
 * 2) We should group + merge the rows concerning same product name.
 * 3) We should group + distinguish them because there are different manufacturers selling products having same name.

Thanks for your feedback. Please feel free to directly change the table rows if you are confident.

--Oliver H (talk) 21:14, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

TODO: newest BeagleBoard and Pine SBCs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pine_Microsystems#Single_board_computers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BeagleBoard#BeagleBoard-X15

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BeagleBoard#PocketBeagle

Notrium (talk) 13:21, 19 September 2019 (UTC)