How many devs will still keep developing software on Pandora when Pandora successor is out?

[Klumpen]

P1 will have more than enough software until then.

What we need as soon as the successor comes along, is software for it to get new customers.

When the first one was sold 4000 times in the end, the second one at least has to be sold 10000 times

so ED can pay back most of the debts to the investors, maybe won't even earn anything for it then just like last time.

I'm curious about P2 software at launch and 6 months after launch.

 

[skeezix]

Anything I build, where feasible will also be built for Pandora. Why not?

jeff

 

[Hồng Thất Công]

Ed could send reputable devs Pandora successor dev-kits from newly set up dev-kit donation fund?

 

[WizardStan]

Twist: The P2 dev-kits are just P1s.

 

[Klumpen]

Twist: The P2 dev-kits are just P1s.

...but with Nyancat airbrush design.

 

[Hồng Thất Công]

So you devs stop complaining you don't have anything to develop for P2. Start working now!

 

[iprice]

I'll probably continue to develop for the P1 as I most likely won't be able to afford a P2 straight away. I was still supporting the Caanoo and Wiz earlier this year with the release of AquaVenture on both platforms as well as others.

 

[Ziz]

Except of the resolution I see no reason to develop just for the successor.

Even if you use the multicore, in fact you do this by threading. Multiple threads run on a single core too, just slower.

And new applications, that are too slow on the P1 would have never ported / developed for it anyway. So you still have a benefit, if you like slow motion games. ^^

It is easier to develop for a new system with a higher screen resolution keeping the lower resolution in mind than using the new pixel amount in an existing application without just upscaling the smaller image.

Btw.: Having just one of the both systems is no argument to develop just for one of them...

 

[sebt3]

Ed could send reputable devs Pandora successor dev-kits from newly set up dev-kit donation fund?

This was tried for pandora. Many major GP32x/wiz dev's were send a pandora prototype (realy expensive stuff) and most prototypes just took dust without any use. Also the pandora dev found money just disappeared into nowhere. So I would be reluctant to go this road.May be send P2 device to the known dev first. Get them a priority while dispatching the device so they can hack early on. But imho that the most ED should do.

 

[bzar]

I'll try to support both where sensible, but will prioritize the successor once I get a hold of one.

 

[ekianjo]

So you devs stop complaining you don't have anything to develop for P2. Start working now!

Instead of posting, learn programming yourself and become a contributing member on the repo

 

[Ziz]

Ed could send reputable devs Pandora successor dev-kits from newly set up dev-kit donation fund?

This was tried for pandora. Many major GP32x/wiz dev's were send a pandora prototype (realy expensive stuff) and most prototypes just took dust without any use. Also the pandora dev found money just disappeared into nowhere. So I would be reluctant to go this road.May be send P2 device to the known dev first. Get them a priority while dispatching the device so they can hack early on. But imho that the most ED should do.

In my opinion a good developer doesn't need a dev-kit prototype for making new applications. If the compatibility is as said, they can test the software on the recent model, ignoring that it maybe runs much slower. For real testing you can send your application to a real Pandora owner. The basic stuff like Input Handling, Logic, PND baking and so one doesn't need a faster test unit.

 

[levi]

Maybe not, but you need target hardware to be able to optimise said applications well.

 

[Ziz]

Maybe not, but you need target hardware to be able to optimise said applications well.

Hm, if you port something, especially with the need of GLES, yes. However the best and most optimized ports are of a very small group of developers, who will surely buy a Pandora 2 anyway.But if you write an application "from the scratch" you normally optimize "on the fly" and all you need are FPS values from testers to improve your application. Because you know your application very good it is easy to spot the bottle necks - most of the time platform independent. Furthermore at some point you get a "feeling", what a specific FPS on your system or available handhelds means for the device you don't own, e.g. if an application has at least 20 fps on my gp2x, it runs very well on the pandora. Especially if you own a Pandora 1 you can also test openGL ES Code and make a similar calculation I think.

 

[sebt3]

^^ + keep in mind that Exo developped drastic on a different device than the pandora while the pandy was the primary target So it's definatly doable

 

[PokeParadox]

PandoraPanic! was developed without a Pandora... HW is not necessary - it makes life easier sometimes  though.

Also I'm sure we'd trust ED with a dev fund right?

 

[commander-beef]

Cross compiling is the way to go. Coding on Pandora mighty be painfull, so cross compiling is better. You dont need p2 to cook anything for p2. Firstly crossdev tools are needed for p2 on all systems [win + deb (ubuntu)]

 

[_wb_]

Cross compiling is the way to go. 

Why? The Pandora is already powerful enough to do its own compiling, the P2 will certainly be powerful enough.

There's nothing wrong with cross-compilation of course, but there's no need to do it that way either (except the convenience of faster compilation), and it's much easier to do native compilation (especially on the P2 where tools like gcc and library include files might very well be included by default in the OS, given that storage space will be less of an issue)

 

[commander-beef]

Cross compiling is the way to go. 

Why? The Pandora is already powerful enough to do its own compiling, the P2 will certainly be powerful enough.

There's nothing wrong with cross-compilation of course, but there's no need to do it that way either (except the convenience of faster compilation), and it's much easier to do native compilation (especially on the P2 where tools like gcc and library include files might very well be included by default in the OS, given that storage space will be less of an issue)

cpu speed [for compilation] + a bigger memory + and full keyboard for me is main factor to use crosscompile than dev on p1. 

 

[Ziz]

Cross compiling is the way to go.

 Why? The Pandora is already powerful enough to do its own compiling, the P2 will certainly be powerful enough.

There's nothing wrong with cross-compilation of course, but there's no need to do it that way either (except the convenience of faster compilation), and it's much easier to do native compilation (especially on the P2 where tools like gcc and library include files might very well be included by default in the OS, given that storage space will be less of an issue)

 cpu speed [for compilation] + a bigger memory + and full keyboard for me is main factor to use crosscompile than dev on p1.

+ not owning a pandora