That's where legislation would help because it would eliminate that situation.The datasheet we have on the DA9091 is under NDA so cannot be released.
The legislation would require the manufacturer of a component to produce a datasheet for public consumption or, as a manufacturer using it and required to produce such a datasheet, you can sub-contract to those who will help make provision of a datasheet easy for you. It's traditional, "don't give us what we need and you won't get our business, we'll go somewhere else".
Companies won't employ accountants who don't produce deliverables in a form which the company needs to comply with legislative requirements and there's no reason it shouldn't be the same for component manufacturers.
As said, there are endless excuses companies can come up with to not do things. It's why legislation is required to have them do what they would prefer not to.
No one is disputing any of that. But it doesn't help anyone judge whether Pi SBC are "very low profit margin devices" or not. It's not possible to validate such a claim and it will stay that way until it's stated what the profit margins for Pi SBC actually are, and it doesn't seem Raspberry Pi are willing to tell us beyond, paraphrased, "SBC and compute module gross profit per board is $7.4".As I said above, different products have different margins, it's not a one size fits all market. Some devices are very low margin, some are more inline with the usual levels. We need to keep the prices of semiconductors and SBCs very competitive.I know the difference. It would be nice to know what the actual net profit is then we can make a better judgement on whether Pi are "very low profit margin devices" or not.
Statistics: Posted by hippy — Fri Apr 04, 2025 1:55 pm