I disagree: there is quite a lot of general information available about the Pandora successor. Its ancestry (the Pandora) is completely known. The general concept is also known: it's going to be a clamshell handheld hybrid between a game console and a mini-laptop, with a focus on hackability and FOSS. It will in many ways be nothing more and nothing less than an improved version of the Pandora we all know.
I actually expected that you would comment on it this way. The thing is, such graphical works are not like programming.
Just as an example, it can be imagined that when the first images (photos or renders) of the new device's case can be seen, people in this thread here will suddenly come up with very new ideas that may differ a lot from the current ones.
Another example: If the Pandora's successor can be used with a cradle, a
possibility that Ed recently wrote about in a different thread, then it could be used as a mobile desktop PC that is easily connected to a desktop "dock". This is not how the Pandora is typically used. So, what purposes will people see the Pandora's successor fulfill, and how will those purposes differ from the purposes that the Pandora is fulfilling? If enough information about the Pandora's successor is available that the purposes that people will see that device fulfilling can be guesstimated, will it help people come up with better names and logos?
As a third example (and probably the most important one): What is the Pandora's successor even? Surely its hardware is essentially an upgrade of the Pandora's hardware, but would it make sense to set different priorities this time around? For instance, wouldn't it make more sense to treat the new device as a micro-netbook with integrated gaming controls, rather than as a gaming device that happens to also sport a "full desktop"? If so, then would a good logo not reflect such things?
Then again, I don't know anything about marketing. I'm merely seeing a lot of indications that it would make sense to only start the process of thinking about a name and logo when it can no longer be avoided. The unfortunate thing is that I think that that is pretty much exactly the way Ed has done it.