Pandora 2: Battery

[_wb_]

Battery as back cover with two thickness options sounds good to me. If it adds too much initial cost to have the two types available from the start, it would be OK to have the thickest (10+ hours) battery only at first, and add the thin option later, when some revenue has been generated by P2 sales.


Two batteries so you can swap one while running on the other is a cool idea, but the problem probably is that 2 batteries with the same total volume as the current big battery will probably carry a lot less power (because of the extra casing needed etc.), and I still want to avoid taking extra stuff like additional batteries with me most of the time. Also usually I'm not too far from a power plug, so if the P2 could just be made to run without battery while plugged in, swapping without powering off would be possible at least in that way. Anyway I want to avoid having to swap batteries as much as possible.

 

[Exophase]

You think that almost no one wants a thinner device?

Nope, I think almost no one wants a thinner device at the expense of battery life. Something this very thread actually demonstrates, seeing as how the option only got your vote!

Making the battery the rear cover of the device would add -no- thickness beyond what would have to be there if the battery were behind a cover.

You claim that 'the typical case who wants the 10 hour capacity'. I'm not talking about removing that - for those who want it.


I am fairly confident though that if people looked honestly at their actual use patterns, they're rarely if ever dropping the existing battery under 50% in a 'normal day' without being in reach of a USB port to charge from. People are 'spec hungry' though. 10 hours is a nice claim. So is 20mm thin.


What is wrong with having OPTIONS. I.e. I could have a thinner device with a 5 hour battery. You could have a brick with a 10 hour battery.


Is the real problem you're having here with the idea or who presented it?

The problem is that making the battery take up the ENTIRE back of the unit does actually add thickness because that means that unlike on the Pandora the full sized USB ports can't take up part of the back. And it's already confirmed that it will have full sized USB. So yes, it is a compromise that makes things thicker. The other problem is the overhead in manufacturing two custom batteries for a low volume device, that expense has to come from somewhere. Maybe it'll be worth it if there are enough people like you who want to fund the design to buy a second battery, but if there are few interested why bother?


You can call people dishonest or whatever but I don't think you'll change their mind as to what they want.

 

[Binky]

I also suspect that having multiple batteries increases thickness


The best in terms of thinness would be a single 5Ah battery and the worst 5 1Ah batteries,


especially as the small batteries would need stiffening to avoid being too fragile

 

[_wb_]

Exophase: would it be necessary to make the battery take up the ENTIRE back of the unit?

 

[Null]

we will be keeping the longest possible battery life.

2 months™ min please.

 

[Exophase]

Exophase: would it be necessary to make the battery take up the ENTIRE back of the unit?

If you have two different batteries it'd be kind of awkward to do anything else..

 

[_wb_]

I see what you mean. You could make the bigger battery bulge out a bit, in a nice ergonomic curve or something (while keeping it possible to put the device on a table like a laptop if possible). Or make the small battery make a crater in the back of the device; this wouldn't help to make it thinner but it would still make it lighter.


Or if the entire device is not shaped like a box, but thicker in the middle and thinner near the edges, then perhaps the small battery would decrease the thickness in the middle (thus making it overall thinner, e.g. for putting it in your pockets).

 

[Grench]

You think that almost no one wants a thinner device?

Nope, I think almost no one wants a thinner device at the expense of battery life. Something this very thread actually demonstrates, seeing as how the option only got your vote!

Which means you could misinterpret the alphabet. NONE of my proposed multi-battery solutions decrease continuous play battery life. They keep the overall battery life AND make the device thinner.

Making the battery the rear cover of the device would add -no- thickness beyond what would have to be there if the battery were behind a cover.

You claim that 'the typical case who wants the 10 hour capacity'. I'm not talking about removing that - for those who want it.


I am fairly confident though that if people looked honestly at their actual use patterns, they're rarely if ever dropping the existing battery under 50% in a 'normal day' without being in reach of a USB port to charge from. People are 'spec hungry' though. 10 hours is a nice claim. So is 20mm thin.


What is wrong with having OPTIONS. I.e. I could have a thinner device with a 5 hour battery. You could have a brick with a 10 hour battery.


Is the real problem you're having here with the idea or who presented it?

The problem is that making the battery take up the ENTIRE back of the unit does actually add thickness because that means that unlike on the Pandora the full sized USB ports can't take up part of the back. And it's already confirmed that it will have full sized USB. So yes, it is a compromise that makes things thicker. The other problem is the overhead in manufacturing two custom batteries for a low volume device, that expense has to come from somewhere. Maybe it'll be worth it if there are enough people like you who want to fund the design to buy a second battery, but if there are few interested why bother?


You can call people dishonest or whatever but I don't think you'll change their mind as to what they want.

It doesn't have to take up the entire back - but it would work just fine if it did. The USB would simply have to move more into the gigantic void under the hinge.


Look at the existing Pandora. Flip it over. See the battery lid? Picture it glued onto a battery that slides in from the left rather than using delicate clips and tabs. Now picture that same slide-in battery with the case back on it twice as thick - with the tabs still at the same elevation. That is an option. At that point you have a 'hump backed' device. Expand that 'high cap' battery to be the entire back - adding another 20% to it's capacity.


My preferred option would be for two battery doors - one on each SIDE of the device.


As an example: Using two Galaxy S III batteries or similar:


http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0089VO7OM/ref=asc_df_B0089VO7OM2119749?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=asn&creative=395093&creativeASIN=B0089VO7OM&hvpos=1o1&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=7412603901812634276&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=


Slide one in from the left. Slide one in from the right. 4200mAh with the ability to swap for continuous use. Leaves a tunnel down the center of the device for the back end of the USB port. Disadvantage is it's about the same thickness as the one we have now. Advantage - no need to design a 'special' battery for the Pandora.

I see what you mean. You could make the bigger battery bulge out a bit, in a nice ergonomic curve or something (while keeping it possible to put the device on a table like a laptop if possible). Or make the small battery make a crater in the back of the device; this wouldn't help to make it thinner but it would still make it lighter.


Or if the entire device is not shaped like a box, but thicker in the middle and thinner near the edges, then perhaps the small battery would decrease the thickness in the middle (thus making it overall thinner, e.g. for putting it in your pockets).

You have the right idea - dream a little. See what we can come up with by playing off of each other's ideas.

 

[Exophase]

Which means you could misinterpret the alphabet. NONE of my proposed multi-battery solutions decrease continuous play battery life. They keep the overall battery life AND make the device thinner.

Uh, you were talking about making a thinner battery option for people who want the device to be thinner at the expense of battery life, and I was telling you you were addressing a feature almost no one wants.. Stop playing your little obfuscation games.

Making the battery the rear cover of the device would add -no- thickness beyond what would have to be there if the battery were behind a cover.It doesn't have to take up the entire back - but it would work just fine if it did. The USB would simply have to move more into the gigantic void under the hinge.

I'm not following you at all, where are you saying to move the USB exactly? What is this gigantic void? There's no place to move it up and keep it on the PCB, and obviously you can't put it inside the hinge.. and anywhere higher than the main base of the unit wouldn't have enough volume for it anyway.. Here, just draw on this picture where you're saying it's supposed to go:


http://technabob.com...back_render.jpg

Look at the existing Pandora. Flip it over. See the battery lid? Picture it glued onto a battery that slides in from the left rather than using delicate clips and tabs. Now picture that same slide-in battery with the case back on it twice as thick - with the tabs still at the same elevation. That is an option. At that point you have a 'hump backed' device. Expand that 'high cap' battery to be the entire back - adding another 20% to it's capacity.

What you'd have is the awkward looking hump back device as the default that so far everyone but you wants to use, while you get the flush one with the lower battery capacity. It's like using the original PSP battery with the PSP-2000 and onwards using the special battery cover. It works but it isn't ideal.

My preferred option would be for two battery doors - one on each SIDE of the device.
As an example: Using two Galaxy S III batteries or similar:


http://www.amazon.co...&hvptwo=&hvqmt=


Slide one in from the left. Slide one in from the right. 4200mAh with the ability to swap for continuous use. Leaves a tunnel down the center of the device for the back end of the USB port. Disadvantage is it's about the same thickness as the one we have now. Advantage - no need to design a 'special' battery for the Pandora.

Again, before going off with these ideas that are expensive to design maybe you should ascertain that a) there's any real market interest to drive the higher design costs and overhead (two batteries adding to X capacity are more expensive than one battery of that capacity) and B) there isn't some alternative that fits that need better. For this design you'd need more complicated electronics to be able to switch the batteries, including an ability to charge whichever one needs it.

 

[android927]

Although i don't particularly like the idea of 2 small batteries, i think that making the battery part of the P2's backside could actually work pretty well. Yes the USB host would be in the way, but i think you could get around that issue. I drew up a quick diagram in paint of how i imagine the P2's battery could work: http://postimage.org/image/4agp58k85/

 

[Grench]

That's a bit of a necropost...


That full sized USB host is a difficult one to work around. With two batteries, we could have one on either side of that fat port.


I also like the idea of making the P2 'battery compatible' with a current mass market popular cell phone or camera. it would be one less thing for OpenPandora to spec, design and produce and have the added benefit of meaning that we'll always be able to find them.


I'm starting to get the idea that nothing we dream up or suggest is going to get considered anyway though. it seems more and more that the P2 Spam area is just a circular file for these ideas to keep them out of the main areas.

 

[EssoAir]

Although i don't particularly like the idea of 2 small batteries, i think that making the battery part of the P2's backside could actually work pretty well. Yes the USB host would be in the way, but i think you could get around that issue. I drew up a quick diagram in paint of how i imagine the P2's battery could work: http://postimage.org/image/4agp58k85/

It seems nice in theory, but why have the 5hr battery at all? Who is bothered by a little bit more thickness?

 

[_wb_]

Although i don't particularly like the idea of 2 small batteries, i think that making the battery part of the P2's backside could actually work pretty well. Yes the USB host would be in the way, but i think you could get around that issue. I drew up a quick diagram in paint of how i imagine the P2's battery could work: http://postimage.org/image/4agp58k85/

It seems nice in theory, but why have the 5hr battery at all? Who is bothered by a little bit more thickness?

Some people are willing to throw away useful features like full USB, full SD, ... to make the P2 slimmer than the P1. Nobody wants to have worse battery life than before, but an optional slim battery would be a better way to make the P2 slimmer than taking away features.

 

[EssoAir]

Although i don't particularly like the idea of 2 small batteries, i think that making the battery part of the P2's backside could actually work pretty well. Yes the USB host would be in the way, but i think you could get around that issue. I drew up a quick diagram in paint of how i imagine the P2's battery could work: http://postimage.org/image/4agp58k85/

It seems nice in theory, but why have the 5hr battery at all? Who is bothered by a little bit more thickness?

Some people are willing to throw away useful features like full USB, full SD, ... to make the P2 slimmer than the P1. Nobody wants to have worse battery life than before, but an optional slim battery would be a better way to make the P2 slimmer than taking away features.

That makes sense. But can we not make a thin battery much of a priority? Making the device thinner (to me) seems like such a waste of effort, cost and resources. If you want a thin device, buy a Samsung Galaxy S III or a Note 2 and get an iControlPad

 

[android927]

The idea of having the battery be the back of the device to reduce thickness was originally proposed by Grench. I like the idea because those who want a slim device (like Grench) can opt for a thin battery, while it also gives the P2 a potentially unlimited battery bay capacity, so down the line OP can release some kind of mega 20+ hour brick of a battery that we fans of high capacity batteries can drool over.

 

[Grench]

The idea of having the battery be the back of the device to reduce thickness was originally proposed by Grench. I like the idea because those who want a slim device (like Grench) can opt for a thin battery, while it also gives the P2 a potentially unlimited battery bay capacity, so down the line OP can release some kind of mega 20+ hour brick of a battery that we fans of high capacity batteries can drool over.

And another option to consider...


If the battery were the back of the device - and could accept additional batteries clipped onto it...


Pandora + thin battery ~ 5hrs


Pandora + thick battery ~10hrs


Pandora + thick battery + thin battery ~15hrs


Pandora + 2 thick batteries ~ 20 hrs


Pandora + 2 thick batteries + thin battery ~ 25 hrs


Pandora + 16 thick batteries ~ one solid week @ 24hrs per day


Of course that last one would be a bit impractical.


The other idea was to bifurcate the base of the Pandora and have modular 'battery as the device back' packs as well as other modules for I/O, hackers, etc...


All of these ideas wind up being too complicated - adding expense. They're fun to dream up though.

 

[Binky]

How would you protect the contacts on the bottom of each battery module from damage, dirt etc without loosing too much space with a protective cover?


I'd say that


thin battery (in thin backpanel) --> 3Ah @ 3.7V


thick battery (in thick backpanel) --> 6Ah @ 3.7V


Would do nicely. You could also have:


thin battery + other stuff (in thick backpanel)

 

[WizardStan]

Attempting to charge two batteries at the same time is a potential nightmare. I'm not aware of any all-in-one chips that can automatically flip from one and two batteries and balance between them. MWeston might be able to work out the details but it wouldn't be easy, and I would seriously recommend against it. You're better off with two different battery sizes and a smarter fuel gauge.

 

[Binky]

Would a double-sized battery just charge half as quickly as a normal sized one (assuming same manufacturing techniques ect)

 

[EssoAir]

Would a double-sized battery just charge half as quickly as a normal sized one (assuming same manufacturing techniques ect)

WizardStan was simply saying (and I agree with him) that the circuitry used to regulate charging of a battery is very precise. Its too easy to make a Li-Ion battery explode if charged incorrectly. Now, throw in the charging of two batteries simulatniously leaves too much room for error. Making modular batteries is simply out of the question, However, allowing users to purchase an expanded battery that works independantly of the origonal is a great idea and I hope they impliment it.