Attracting more devs? With Android as main OS? Eh... why or how would that work? There's a load of devs for Android and even more crrappy useless cut down software which requires hoop jumping for advanced tasks and or multiple programs/paid programs if you want to get stuff done. Strongly dislike the idea. Linux and open sauce all the way for my little mobile companion.
High End games on Android? <Insert abbreviation for non stop maniacal laughter here> Most stuff I have tried plays like sh... looks mediocre and brings nothing new to the genre it borrows from. And those touchscreen only games, blech. High end my ass.
Also fumbling with tiny micro SDs? Please, no. Just no. From the perspective of someone who struggled to port, compile and package two PNDs - No no no no no. No.
edited paragraph:
As mentioned above, a kind of ruggedized version would be most awesome, build the Pandora like a toughbook, or at least like a Lenovo business notebook, make it last ages. Guess this isn't quite as easy as may sound. Similarly out of reach, but much appreciated: better analogue nubs. I mean theyre okayish (OK mine are first edition and 3/4 broken but the feeling and way they work doesnt change with the newer ones, does it?)
Reading the OP's opinion I couldn't fight the feeling that this particular vision of the Pandora sounds more and more like something from China that just aims at pleasing the masses and generating revenue. Instead of being the genuine and unique hacker's/geek's delight that has been dreamed into life by the community, for the community.
One more edit:
How will the Pandora differentiate itself from the market?
I bought my Pandora because I don't want a fancy smartphone and then receiving a call and say: "S#!t, shut up! I can't answer here because it's dangerous". I wanted a separate device, open, PC like, pocket sized. I had a Pocket PC before and it was disappointing now that I get to play with Android I see it's that same bull shit.
I think that, with an updated SoC and similar functions than the rest of the market, the desktop light-weight OS and durability would make it stand out. The best target market for the Pandora imo, is the selective costumer, the one that thinks before buying and the nostalgic. I don't think there's marketing bull shit space in the project/community.
Full size USB mating durability is what it is (and is in your Pandora), that's a function of their design. But your usage are very much outlying and you can't expect them to cater to this.. that is, if you really do end up cycling the USB an average two times a day for all those months.
This is a rediculous assertion. No one is making the claim that anyone is going to make 1500 insertions. It's a metric used to describe DURABILITY. Do you not understand that? If you went to a doctor and he said he'd do a procedure to save your life with a 1 in 1500 chance of death versus another doctor that could do the same procedure with a 1 in 10,000 chance in death which would you prefer? I'm merely using that as an example to illlustrate how the numbers can be used as a metric to describe the likelyhood of failure, or the durability of a product. You know like crash test ratings? Do I really have to explain this to you?
Like usual you don't have the first clue what you're talking about.
Insertion ratings mean one thing and one thing only: how many times you're (nearly) guaranteed to be able to remove the plug without damaging the connector. That's it. Not the likelihood of whether or not it'll fail every time you remove it. At work we often have to look at these ratings for connectors, and that's why (for critical, particularly flight hardware) we use connector savers and log every time we mate and demate to the original connector. If what you were saying were true we wouldn't care about reporting to the customer the number of insertions we've made.
The odds of it failing the first time you remove the connector are not 1/1500, they're close to nothing. The reason why it's rated 1/1500 is because each time you insert and remove the connector it adds mechanical stress which is cumulative. Your analogy is more like saying if the doctor estimates you'll live another 50 years that he's giving you a one in 50 shot of dying next year. Use your brain and stop making shit up.
And yes, what I said is obviously true, you're only calling USB mechanically flawed because you don't like that Binky said it about microUSB and are being a little bitch about it like you are about everything.
The irony in the red highlighted portion is clearly a facet of your bias. Obviously it is YOU that doesn't know what you're talking about. The following line that I previously cited from a source was under the heading DURABILITY. Do you know what that means? I will quote a snippet so you can try to digest the context of its usage.
Durability The newer Micro-USB receptacles are designed for up to 10,000 cycles of insertion and removal between the receptacle and plug, compared to 1,500 for the standard USB and 5,000 for the Mini-USB receptacle.
Now so far you've called me an asshole, a little bitch, talked about my brain when you didn't comprehend what was simply stated etc etc. Now I haven't done anything remotely similar to you in our recent discussion. This is what I mean when I say I get attacked, get sick of it, wtfpwn the shitnuggles out of the attacker, only to have the attacker cry and protest, ask for mod-ques and such. Then when I illustrate that I was only defending myself after being attacked people like you claim I'm playing the victim after having started the whole mess.
This is easily documentable and I may do so at a later date. For now let's continue with the rest of your tirade.
ep said: (actually I'm going to start calling him extended play, and by play I mean lame. It's lame because of the fervent, ferocious and irrational desire to continually swing from my merriam as Tarzan would swing from the trees answering a priority call deep in the jungle!)
Your analogy is more like saying if the doctor estimates you'll live another 50 years that he's giving you a one in 50 shot of dying next year. Use your brain and stop making shit up.
I'm merely using that as an example to illlustrate how the numbers can be used as a metric to describe the likelyhood of failure, or the durability of a product. You know like crash test ratings?
It means I'm admitting that it's not a perfect analogy. Even your vaunted intellect must acknowledge a chance of failure between 1 and 1500 insertions. That's how math works. The likelyhood of failure is low if one medical procedure or insertion is done, but after 1500 times failure is all but guaranteed (I'm not speaking from a probability standpoint as that assertion would be incorrect. Hopefully you catch my drift through).
For instance if someone claimed that a particular bumper had a higher crash test rating than another, would you furiously argue that no one is going to purposely crash test their car? Likely not as you should understand that it is a metric that describes durability. So as it turns out it is CLEAR that I actually DO have to explain something to you that would normally be obvious if you didn't have such pressing business deep in the jungle so to speak.
Tarzan said:
you're only calling USB mechanically flawed because you don't like that Binky said it about microUSB and are being a little bitch about it like you are about everything.
An argument can be made that if something is 6.7 (lets call it an even 7)...If something is 7 times more durable than the alternative, then the alternative is mechanically flawed. Now my mechanically flawed statement was backed up with evidence and I juxtaposed it against a similar statement that wasn't. You are correct I did that on purpose and I even admitted that I was being sarcastic when I made the statement. I just came from a jog when those posts were written and I admit my merriam probably had a little stank to it and was a bit spicy, no doubt due to the fact that I hadn't bathed before making those posts. I'm sure your direct proximity to it might have made you lightheaded due to the fumes and the swamp ball-like nature of the area in general (it's also quite crowded down there). Also you missed (again) the part where binky said microUSB was flawed because it uses SMT components and I showed that both types can either use SMT or through hole, so that particular argument was mechanically flawed.
We might be surprised to learn that the Pandora does not use through hole connectors and that might be something to request for future iterations. I don't know what they use now but I definitely would prefer not to have wobbly connections.
Now onto my favorite arch-nemesis (meant in a jovial and friendly fashion. We go back aways)
Thatgui said in response to a quote:
Overgauss, on 02 December 2012 - 04:17 AM, said:
My point was that sleek != cellphone and every device I listed can run linux distros such as SID, OpenWRT, Debian, Angstrom etc. So they have more in common with the pandora than you might think. There's game emu etc etc. In fact I am in the process of installing Debian onto my Pixi.
true, but most of our discussions here are about hardware features as I at least can't remember anyone writing "skip linux" and taking into account the rest of what you wrote ("pocketable, reduced formfactor, etc") => ??
Right but I was responding to the part where you said they had little to do with the Pandy:
My point was that sleek != cellphone and every device I listed can run linux distros such as SID, OpenWRT, Debian, Angstrom etc. So they have more in common with the pandora than you might think. There's game emu etc etc. In fact I am in the process of installing Debian onto my Pixi.
So I'm saying these can be mini laptops much like the Pandora. They are pocketable and have much of the functionality of a Pandora lacking of course a few hardware options. I'm surprised I wasn't taken to task for listing the Pixi, although I was prepared for it. Interestingly enough someone from these boards has a gentoo-linux port for the device!
That solely depends on your definition of functionality, and there are enough posts on this board that indicate that there are differnences in peoples definition of it. I also don't see the need to argue pro sleekness as this is something that is more or less a goal as craig already laid out that sleeknes will be an important factor in the P2s design and a big part of the active members is involved in a desperate struggle to change craigs mind in details.
Oh I fully agree about the definition of functionality issue. I see it like this. Functionality and convenience are related but two separate things. My external USB drive cabelling uses mini A USB (iirc) on one side and standard USB on the other to connect to the computer. The ability or functionality of external storage hasn't changed but the convenience may have arguably changed for some as they would consider the cable I described an adapter cable. For most this isn't a problem with external HDDs but suddenly with the Pandora it's a huge "functionality" issue. For me it's a convenience issue that isn't inconvenient for me personally, but is obviously important to most of you.
Edit: Forgot to talk about sleekness would you please show me where Craigix said that sleekness is an important factor in the P2? I can't find it and that statement would change our discussion somewhat.
2nd edit: I'm not sure where the android hate comes from. Android and linux can co-exist peacefully and provide more options. For instance most every phone with android on it can run linux. I had my hair blown back switching from a WP7 phone to a Galaxy SIII, the amount of app goodness was ASTOUNDING. Having Android doesn't make the device a cheap knock-off. What you do is sell it as a linux device with the option to install android. That way you still "differentiate" yourselves from the droves of android noob drones that would otherwise destroy the coolness of your niche device stuck in 2008.
For your convenience I've spoilered a wall of text. Read at your own risk. Being forwarned, I hope complaints will be minimal.
Let's look at microSD functionality/convenience for example. With microUSB hosting you could plug your Pandy into your laptop or what have you and perform file manipulations, copying etc without having to remove an SD card to do so. Say you have a Resident OS that is dedicated to an SD slot, swapping that slot in and out is problematic aand reduces you to only one easily removed SD slot.
With 4 micoSD slots, you could keep that resident OS on one card and have THREE WHOLE OTHER SLOTS to mess with. I have been dealing with mini/SD adapters back and forth with microSD cards bought cheaply (class 10 no less) to no ill effect. That experience may not be the same for you guys, but you still would have the usb host/OTG option to work with so you can just leave the cards in and forget it. MicroSD is often cheaper than SD and you can more easily grow the size of your storage at your own pace and with a cheaper pricepoint because you have 4 slots to work with.
Invariably someone brings up the speed of SD vs microSD but the newest statements from flash manufacturers have R/W speeds at 95/90 mb/s. Let's not ignore the fact that higher capacity and higher speed cards means a higher pricepoint as well. Are you guys really saying you are planning on paying $200-900 for the fastest and largest capacity cards at today's prices? Can we not expect adequate speed/capacity from microSD cards in the 2013-2014 timeframe that will meet the needs of most everyone involved? Recall the theoretical limit on microSD is 2 terrabytes!
It makes sense for manufacturers to concetrate on microSD technology because they can just port it to the SD formfactor. In otherwords microSD is driving the market moreso than SD. Especially because people like low power, small form factor devices in every shape and color and from opposite ends of the consumer electronics spectrum. Smart watches, Ereaders, Tablets, Palmtops, Cellphones etc etc. Let's not forget microSDIO that does Near Field Communication (swipe your phone to pay, or "bump" them to exchange contact info/photos etc), Irda, Wifi etc etc.
In short why stop at 2 SD slots because of tradition, convenience, and all the pros people like to mention when we are talking about a future device? Especially when we're mostly a bunch of linux nerds that shrug off inconvenience like a duck does water and easily adapt to challenges. If you were primarily windows advocates I might understand the resistance better. I personally went through a bit of hell hacking the devices I listed ealier and enjoyed every minute of it. I learned to change my frame of reference, adapt, and self teach myself things that the vast majority would have given up on long ago. Eveything listed as a loss of functionality due to adapter usage, cabling and what have you never crossed my mind as such.
Granted my opinion is far removed from most here, but frankly and with no insult implied, they kind of seem self evident. No doubt due to my bias.
I can't state for certain but Craigix has said that he learned a lot from the first run and that things will be definitely smaller. For instance there is newer eMMC memory at 10nanometers with a read of 240mb/s that should drop in 2013 (write speed is still at 90 mb/s iirc. This means a very tiiiiny internal memory footprint). I expect smaller SoC's, microUSB/HDMI would help as well. The general trend is that electronic components get smaller over time with either an increase or consistency in power, speed, capacity etc. Evidence can be found everywhere and I'm not in a position to hazard a guess as to which components are going to be used in the P2. Look at all the Raspberry Pi/Gumstix spinoffs and copy cats for example. Now we have the possibility of 64 core parallel processing SoCs roughly the size of a credit card.
Most of the things regarding SoC and such are already very small and won't get any smaller (at least not in a scale that matters) so making the P2 smaller will eventually lead to sacrificing functionality - if you see potential, please help me out (honestly) ! And don't forget the P2 is planned to have a SoC module so you will loose additional space in all three dimensions to accomodate this.
You are quoting superfluous information. I would suggest that what you highlight in red is all that is required to orient people to what you are responding to.
Usually when people add a *little* personal flavour to their posts the effect is endearing.
In your case it isn't a little, but OMFFGOAS (Oh My Freaking Fabulous God On A Stick) but I am *THE* ingredient, the *ONE*, behold...**ME** !!!!1!!!11 .... !!! ... 1 . !
Example: A little butter makes most things taste better. Too much butter will make you feel sick, so that the mear thought of butter will make you want to throw up for a good while after...
You hardly give people any time to get over being ill before you drown them in butter *again*, and *again*.
Why?
You still haven't answered me as to why you do this.
The only conclusion I can draw at this point (and I will refrain from explaining the lengthly and complex process that led me to this)
is that you are intrinsically insecure and thus overcompensate.
Perhaps something very traumatic happened to you as a child?
This is on the assumption that you are innocent.
If you are not innocent, then your manner and behaviour is calculated. If this is the case then you in all likelyhood view your 'cleverness' as something to be proud of.
I will refrain from describing my view on 'cleverness' as then *I* will be adding too much personal flavour... and it would become obvious to everyone that there is something very wrong with me.
Look at the root cause of the posts. Fix that and the size of my post would shrink accordingly. At times I am responding to 2 or more post directly addressing me. If I make separate post it is frowned on. If I combine them into one post the same thing happens. As for flaming there is no way I'm going to allow someone to call me names or attack me multiple times without a similar response. You let that person attack me in numerous ways and instead direct your attention to the size of my post.
It's not like I'm not trying. I do use spoilers afterall.
Edit:
No sooner than I make this post, another person joins the fray.
Fae I haven't addressed your points because there is nothing to address. Do you have a problem with these posts? [ 1, 2, 3, 4]
They all have multiple quote levels to, I assume, provide context. I'm doing the same thing but just using red instead of multiple quotes. If you don't understand what I'm doing, or saying, and it is much easier for you to derive the conclusions you have about my motives, speculate on my childhood, past traumas, needs to overcompensate, and level of security I won't stop you of course. Do as you wish. Claim as you wish, but take no offense that I choose not to respond to something requiring no response.
Mathematically, the chance of failure of any given insertion will be tiny, whether 1500 cycles are guaranteed or 10000. To simplify things: if the chance of failure is P, then the chance that it didn't break after 1500 cycles (assuming those are independent stochastic experiments, which of course in reality is not true) would be something like (1-P)^1500. So if the chance of breaking would be 1 in 1500, then after 1500 cycles there would be only a 37% chance that the port is still intact, which is a pretty low figure because that means you're breaking your promise in 63% of the cases. It's more likely that the real chance is something like 1 in 100000 for full-sized USB and 1 in 1000000 for micro-USB.
Probably more important than the number of insert/remove actions that can be performed, in my opinion, is the physical strength once something is plugged in: how likely is it to unplug accidentally, how likely is it to break the entire port away from the pcb, etc. For micro-USB, which is often used for charging and maybe some syncing or other file transfers, this is not much of an issue because typically you're not really using the device (e.g. a phone) while it is plugged in. This is different for the Pandora (2).
Finally, nothing stops us from using high-quality components that are likely to last longer than cheap ones because they're built more precisely and from better materials. Personally I've never seen a broken (full) USB port; I don't think it's a major thing to worry about.
WB I'm simply using insertions in regards to durability. Insertions directly fell under the Durability sub-heading I cited. In fact that citation addressed the breakage issue you brought up, through hole components should help with the tearage issue (both standard and microUSB have through hole connectors).
People are wanting these devices to be robust enough to last several years with heavy usage. Unless these posts are being sarcastic they've already had problems with loose ports, pad tearing (SMT mounted minUSB in post 3?) etc. [1,2,3]
Considering only through hole connections along with cited durability ratings (placing stress on the cords instead of the connector for example)
microUSB 10,000 insertions
miniUSB 5,000 insertions
USB 1,500 insertions
I agree lets make everything as durable and long lived as possible. I'm not into disposable electronics.
wb also this:
[snip] but after 1500 times failure is all but guaranteed (I'm not speaking from a probability standpoint as that assertion would be incorrect. Hopefully you catch my drift through).
Most Samsung phones these days ship with an MHL port that, in theory, allows the user to output 1080p HDMI video through the otherwise microUSB sized port via an adapter.
No argument at a high level. When you get into the specifics around version and type - that is where it gets interesting.
Full USB 3.0 type A.
For the 'B' connector, though, I'd like to see us use either a USB 3.0 connector with the side-by-side pin sets OR an MHL connector to offload the HDMI. Both of these options are compatible with microUSB OTG.
This is a rediculous assertion. No one is making the claim that anyone is going to make 1500 insertions. It's a metric used to describe DURABILITY. Do you not understand that? If you went to a doctor and he said he'd do a procedure to save your life with a 1 in 1500 chance of death versus another doctor that could do the same procedure with a 1 in 10,000 chance in death which would you prefer? I'm merely using that as an example to illlustrate how the numbers can be used as a metric to describe the likelyhood of failure, or the durability of a product. You know like crash test ratings? Do I really have to explain this to you?
Like usual you don't have the first clue what you're talking about.
Insertion ratings mean one thing and one thing only: how many times you're (nearly) guaranteed to be able to remove the plug without damaging the connector. That's it. Not the likelihood of whether or not it'll fail every time you remove it. At work we often have to look at these ratings for connectors, and that's why (for critical, particularly flight hardware) we use connector savers and log every time we mate and demate to the original connector. If what you were saying were true we wouldn't care about reporting to the customer the number of insertions we've made.
The odds of it failing the first time you remove the connector are not 1/1500, they're close to nothing. The reason why it's rated 1/1500 is because each time you insert and remove the connector it adds mechanical stress which is cumulative. Your analogy is more like saying if the doctor estimates you'll live another 50 years that he's giving you a one in 50 shot of dying next year. Use your brain and stop making shit up.
And yes, what I said is obviously true, you're only calling USB mechanically flawed because you don't like that Binky said it about microUSB and are being a little bitch about it like you are about everything.
The irony in the red highlighted portion is clearly a facet of your bias. Obviously it is YOU that doesn't know what you're talking about. The following line that I previously cited from a source was under the heading DURABILITY. Do you know what that means? I will quote a snippet so you can try to digest the context of its usage.
Durability The newer Micro-USB receptacles are designed for up to 10,000 cycles of insertion and removal between the receptacle and plug, compared to 1,500 for the standard USB and 5,000 for the Mini-USB receptacle.
Now so far you've called me an asshole, a little bitch, talked about my brain when you didn't comprehend what was simply stated etc etc. Now I haven't done anything remotely similar to you in our recent discussion. This is what I mean when I say I get attacked, get sick of it, wtfpwn the shitnuggles out of the attacker, only to have the attacker cry and protest, ask for mod-ques and such. Then when I illustrate that I was only defending myself after being attacked people like you claim I'm playing the victim after having started the whole mess.
This is easily documentable and I may do so at a later date. For now let's continue with the rest of your tirade.
ep said: (actually I'm going to start calling him extended play, and by play I mean lame. It's lame because of the fervent, ferocious and irrational desire to continually swing from my merriam as Tarzan would swing from the trees answering a priority call deep in the jungle!)
Your analogy is more like saying if the doctor estimates you'll live another 50 years that he's giving you a one in 50 shot of dying next year. Use your brain and stop making shit up.
I'm merely using that as an example to illlustrate how the numbers can be used as a metric to describe the likelyhood of failure, or the durability of a product. You know like crash test ratings?
It means I'm admitting that it's not a perfect analogy. Even your vaunted intellect must acknowledge a chance of failure between 1 and 1500 insertions. That's how math works. The likelyhood of failure is low if one medical procedure or insertion is done, but after 1500 times failure is all but guaranteed (I'm not speaking from a probability standpoint as that assertion would be incorrect. Hopefully you catch my drift through).
For instance if someone claimed that a particular bumper had a higher crash test rating than another, would you furiously argue that no one is going to purposely crash test their car? Likely not as you should understand that it is a metric that describes durability. So as it turns out it is CLEAR that I actually DO have to explain something to you that would normally be obvious if you didn't have such pressing business deep in the jungle so to speak.
Tarzan said:
you're only calling USB mechanically flawed because you don't like that Binky said it about microUSB and are being a little bitch about it like you are about everything.
An argument can be made that if something is 6.7 (lets call it an even 7)...If something is 7 times more durable than the alternative, then the alternative is mechanically flawed. Now my mechanically flawed statement was backed up with evidence and I juxtaposed it against a similar statement that wasn't. You are correct I did that on purpose and I even admitted that I was being sarcastic when I made the statement. I just came from a jog when those posts were written and I admit my merriam probably had a little stank to it and was a bit spicy, no doubt due to the fact that I hadn't bathed before making those posts. I'm sure your direct proximity to it might have made you lightheaded due to the fumes and the swamp ball-like nature of the area in general (it's also quite crowded down there). Also you missed (again) the part where binky said microUSB was flawed because it uses SMT components and I showed that both types can either use SMT or through hole, so that particular argument was mechanically flawed.
We might be surprised to learn that the Pandora does not use through hole connectors and that might be something to request for future iterations. I don't know what they use now but I definitely would prefer not to have wobbly connections.
Now onto my favorite arch-nemesis (meant in a jovial and friendly fashion. We go back aways)
Thatgui said in response to a quote:
Overgauss, on 02 December 2012 - 04:17 AM, said:
My point was that sleek != cellphone and every device I listed can run linux distros such as SID, OpenWRT, Debian, Angstrom etc. So they have more in common with the pandora than you might think. There's game emu etc etc. In fact I am in the process of installing Debian onto my Pixi.
true, but most of our discussions here are about hardware features as I at least can't remember anyone writing "skip linux" and taking into account the rest of what you wrote ("pocketable, reduced formfactor, etc") => ??
Right but I was responding to the part where you said they had little to do with the Pandy:
My point was that sleek != cellphone and every device I listed can run linux distros such as SID, OpenWRT, Debian, Angstrom etc. So they have more in common with the pandora than you might think. There's game emu etc etc. In fact I am in the process of installing Debian onto my Pixi.
So I'm saying these can be mini laptops much like the Pandora. They are pocketable and have much of the functionality of a Pandora lacking of course a few hardware options. I'm surprised I wasn't taken to task for listing the Pixi, although I was prepared for it. Interestingly enough someone from these boards has a gentoo-linux port for the device!
That solely depends on your definition of functionality, and there are enough posts on this board that indicate that there are differnences in peoples definition of it. I also don't see the need to argue pro sleekness as this is something that is more or less a goal as craig already laid out that sleeknes will be an important factor in the P2s design and a big part of the active members is involved in a desperate struggle to change craigs mind in details.
Oh I fully agree about the definition of functionality issue. I see it like this. Functionality and convenience are related but two separate things. My external USB drive cabelling uses mini A USB (iirc) on one side and standard USB on the other to connect to the computer. The ability or functionality of external storage hasn't changed but the convenience may have arguably changed for some as they would consider the cable I described an adapter cable. For most this isn't a problem with external HDDs but suddenly with the Pandora it's a huge "functionality" issue. For me it's a convenience issue that isn't inconvenient for me personally, but is obviously important to most of you.
Edit: Forgot to talk about sleekness would you please show me where Craigix said that sleekness is an important factor in the P2? I can't find it and that statement would change our discussion somewhat.
2nd edit: I'm not sure where the android hate comes from. Android and linux can co-exist peacefully and provide more options. For instance most every phone with android on it can run linux. I had my hair blown back switching from a WP7 phone to a Galaxy SIII, the amount of app goodness was ASTOUNDING. Having Android doesn't make the device a cheap knock-off. What you do is sell it as a linux device with the option to install android. That way you still "differentiate" yourselves from the droves of android noob drones that would otherwise destroy the coolness of your niche device stuck in 2008.
For your convenience I've spoilered a wall of text. Read at your own risk. Being forwarned, I hope complaints will be minimal.
Let's look at microSD functionality/convenience for example. With microUSB hosting you could plug your Pandy into your laptop or what have you and perform file manipulations, copying etc without having to remove an SD card to do so. Say you have a Resident OS that is dedicated to an SD slot, swapping that slot in and out is problematic aand reduces you to only one easily removed SD slot.
With 4 micoSD slots, you could keep that resident OS on one card and have THREE WHOLE OTHER SLOTS to mess with. I have been dealing with mini/SD adapters back and forth with microSD cards bought cheaply (class 10 no less) to no ill effect. That experience may not be the same for you guys, but you still would have the usb host/OTG option to work with so you can just leave the cards in and forget it. MicroSD is often cheaper than SD and you can more easily grow the size of your storage at your own pace and with a cheaper pricepoint because you have 4 slots to work with.
Invariably someone brings up the speed of SD vs microSD but the newest statements from flash manufacturers have R/W speeds at 95/90 mb/s. Let's not ignore the fact that higher capacity and higher speed cards means a higher pricepoint as well. Are you guys really saying you are planning on paying $200-900 for the fastest and largest capacity cards at today's prices? Can we not expect adequate speed/capacity from microSD cards in the 2013-2014 timeframe that will meet the needs of most everyone involved? Recall the theoretical limit on microSD is 2 terrabytes!
It makes sense for manufacturers to concetrate on microSD technology because they can just port it to the SD formfactor. In otherwords microSD is driving the market moreso than SD. Especially because people like low power, small form factor devices in every shape and color and from opposite ends of the consumer electronics spectrum. Smart watches, Ereaders, Tablets, Palmtops, Cellphones etc etc. Let's not forget microSDIO that does Near Field Communication (swipe your phone to pay, or "bump" them to exchange contact info/photos etc), Irda, Wifi etc etc.
In short why stop at 2 SD slots because of tradition, convenience, and all the pros people like to mention when we are talking about a future device? Especially when we're mostly a bunch of linux nerds that shrug off inconvenience like a duck does water and easily adapt to challenges. If you were primarily windows advocates I might understand the resistance better. I personally went through a bit of hell hacking the devices I listed ealier and enjoyed every minute of it. I learned to change my frame of reference, adapt, and self teach myself things that the vast majority would have given up on long ago. Eveything listed as a loss of functionality due to adapter usage, cabling and what have you never crossed my mind as such.
Granted my opinion is far removed from most here, but frankly and with no insult implied, they kind of seem self evident. No doubt due to my bias.
I can't state for certain but Craigix has said that he learned a lot from the first run and that things will be definitely smaller. For instance there is newer eMMC memory at 10nanometers with a read of 240mb/s that should drop in 2013 (write speed is still at 90 mb/s iirc. This means a very tiiiiny internal memory footprint). I expect smaller SoC's, microUSB/HDMI would help as well. The general trend is that electronic components get smaller over time with either an increase or consistency in power, speed, capacity etc. Evidence can be found everywhere and I'm not in a position to hazard a guess as to which components are going to be used in the P2. Look at all the Raspberry Pi/Gumstix spinoffs and copy cats for example. Now we have the possibility of 64 core parallel processing SoCs roughly the size of a credit card.
Most of the things regarding SoC and such are already very small and won't get any smaller (at least not in a scale that matters) so making the P2 smaller will eventually lead to sacrificing functionality - if you see potential, please help me out (honestly) ! And don't forget the P2 is planned to have a SoC module so you will loose additional space in all three dimensions to accomodate this.
Well, we're quite a ways off the trail from marketing discussion... but to be fair, the hardware does make a significant (and I would argue the biggest) difference.
Tandem to the hardware is the OS, however, and I think the path of "user-friendly Linux" is a better proposition for the default OS than Android. I have nothing against Android at all, in fact I hope we can run it equally well, but if I were to pick an OS for which I would rather have better support because it's the one that ships with the product, it would be a Linux distro like we have now. Despite the likelihood of less devs, despite the certainty of less games, I think Linux is a better choice if we can do it well because it differentiates us and doesn't have a tether to Google or any singular entity. But regardless of which choice we make, it has to be even more friendly than it is now, though it isn't bad now. (EDIT: No disrespect to notaz et al in the slightest, they have done well to make it as usable as it is.)
Inevitably a downside of using the Linux name is the commonly held belief that it will be difficult to use, which can hurt first impressions. Android already being the celebrity, it's a much easier sell to users who are on the fence as they likely already own or know someone who owns an Android device.
The common vein in all of this is that generally, the more we differentiate ourselves from popular handhelds, the harder we are to sell. It sets the bar the highest to find and affordably deploy features the world does not already love and have bountifully through other sources.
Umm.. no. This statement shows you haven't understood the entire discussion about product differentiation.
Differentiation means placing the product apart from others. If the differences are valued by some segment of the market and the product is unique (like the P1), the product will be bought. Non-differentiation means you offer the same as everyone else - a commodity product, like table salt, where you have to compete on price versus largely identical competitors.
Umm.. no. This statement shows you haven't understood the entire discussion about product differentiation.
Differentiation means placing the product apart from others. If the differences are valued by some segment of the market and the product is unique (like the P1), the product will be bought. Non-differentiation means you offer the same as everyone else - a commodity product, like table salt, where you have to compete on price versus largely identical competitors.
Did I state that differentiation was something different? Your appeal to my cognition of the discussion is overly broad in my view -- consider paring it back a bit.
Thatgui can clarify, but as I understand he was humoring Craig's stance on making the P2 more attractive (by making it smaller, taking on Android, etc.) while asking how we could still set ourselves apart from the masses.
Craig and a part of this community thinks that the Pandora 2s design should be more aimed in the mass market direction, to raise sailes and attract more people and maybe attract more developers. If this means to sacrifice some of the Pandoras features they are willing to do it. So why not play this through in a food for thought manner.
And if we're taking a mass market direction, certain features that would set us apart become difficult to market. The Pandora 1 is an objectively poor example of a mass market device.
I thought I qualified my statement plenty with observations and arguments I am willing to debate out, but instead you simply redefined the discussion when I already understood. I said "generally", implying that there are cases where unique features become a mass market demand. But we aren't discussing a purely niche market like the P1, and the OP can certainly correct me if I am wrong on this.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
