My feelings about this are pretty similar, but they don't have to do with "modern vs. retro", but rather, "how much life support is required to get the system working"? Accomplishing a single technical objective with a full-fledged computer with a modern operating system ,when it could be accomplished by something much more simpler, just strikes me as overkill and inelegant, with a huge surplus of moving parts. You inherit all of the problems and maintenance issues of the computer itself, just to accomplish that one task. This is especially the case if the OS is Windows, as Windows can be so much more fussy, insecure, and unstable. A good counter-argument to this is that if using a computer as a foundation for building your new device is the easiest, cheapest, and/or quickest way to do it, then those benefits might be worth the cost of having the computer involved.
CAM > All of the discussion about getting DVI to work and a modern DVI solution > made me start thinking about TDock again and what it was that made me stop > working on it. Largely is was simply lack of time, but also I believe I > also felt that while using RaspberryPi was maybe the cheapest solution, > somehow it never sat quite right with me to use a 1GHz processor with 1G > RAM as a display terminal for a 2.4MHz / 32K processor. > > Like it has already been stated, if you are throwing a Linux box into the > mix, then why not just run VirtualT on the thing and be done. Especially > if you are bound to a dispay anyway. Somehow using a lower-end > microcontroller with a VGA output from a CPLD / FPGA always seemed like a > more "retro" solution. > > Am I crazy for thinking this way? Or do the majority of people not really > care about "retro" value and only care that it is dirt cheap (or as close > as possible)?