I'm guessing most of these people don't actually have theirs yet. I technically have it, but I won't get to actually use it until I return home on the 30th, things like this often times don't make it through customs here in China.
Pandora 2 should be a 5" Linux Tablet with no built in gaming controls, but... - With Hinge & Attach
- Thread starter Mr_Loon
- Start date
sswam
Advanced Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2009
- Messages
- 1,393
Ok let's address Exophase / Klapse concerns one by one:
1. I don't want to clip iCP2 to something because it's too small and gives a sub-optimal distribution of weight and features. / I don't want all the weight to be on the part away from my hands / Getting a standalone tablet with a 5" screen that matches the iCP2's dimensions is going to be pretty much impossible.
I described a modified iCP2 which can be larger, would contain a battery, SD slots, etc. We should put enough kit in it to make it slightly heavier than the phone. Perhaps an extra-large battery.
2. I don't want to have two batteries in different locations, that's a less efficient use of space.
True, there would be some minor loss of space / power efficieny with two batteries. The advantage is, it's good to be able to use the phone part and controller part separately. I think we could figure out how to charge / share the batteries efficiently.
3. I don't want to have all the ports and slots on the top
The most important ones - full size USB, 2 * SD, audio jack, would be on the bottom part. But yes, that might be a concern.
4. I don't want to have sound coming out of the back of the screen
The Pandora's built in sound is a joke anyway. Since there will be an amp in the bottom part, and you want to make it heavier, we could put extra speakers / woofer in there.
5. The holder for the iCP2, while novel, still looks like a compromise vs something integrated.
modular > integrated every day of my week. We can put it in some sort of clip-on case with a holder and hinge.
6. A hinge arrangement has to be seriously heavy duty to prevent the top from being too heavy for it.
Your average modern phone is not exactly a brick. The Pandora 1 hinge is sad to say not very good, we can improve on that for sure.
7. And this ... pretty much settles the debate.
Who elected you debate adjudicator?
8. There isn't any overall improvement over ICP+smartphone possible if the Pandora2 were to go this route.
Except for the case, and all the additional features in the base to match and exceed Pandora 1 capabilities.
9. The top part would end up bulkier than a smartphone while packing less tech.
Since it's literally built around a smartphone, I don't see how it can pack less tech. It would be slightly larger due to the casing I suppose. Maybe bulk and weight distribution would be a problem for this design, I'm not sure.
10. The idea of a battery movable to the base would be pretty clever though and one point in favor of the idea.
I was thinking two batteries, one in the phone and one in the base. We could possibly leave out the phone battery and just use the base one, which is a waste of space but improve weight distribution. The base is going to be thinner, and the top thicker than current Pandora.
11. Mr_Loon - I'd really want to see full size USB3 & SDXC in the tablet section.
This contradicts what Exophase and Klapse want, to have ports in the base. If the base is taken off, my thing could potentially continue communicating with its base and storage over bluetooth rather than the normal USB connection. So you can use the phone without controller, and still talk to SD cards in the base in your pocket. That seems like a bit of a "mad scientist" feature, I admit.
I would like to avoid making our own phone / tablet / computer part, because we simply cannot keep up with the technology and efficiency of major phone manufacturers, or the software supprt of Ubuntu phone.
I'd like to see someone respond to the 28 advantages I listed for my idea.
1. I don't want to clip iCP2 to something because it's too small and gives a sub-optimal distribution of weight and features. / I don't want all the weight to be on the part away from my hands / Getting a standalone tablet with a 5" screen that matches the iCP2's dimensions is going to be pretty much impossible.
I described a modified iCP2 which can be larger, would contain a battery, SD slots, etc. We should put enough kit in it to make it slightly heavier than the phone. Perhaps an extra-large battery.
2. I don't want to have two batteries in different locations, that's a less efficient use of space.
True, there would be some minor loss of space / power efficieny with two batteries. The advantage is, it's good to be able to use the phone part and controller part separately. I think we could figure out how to charge / share the batteries efficiently.
3. I don't want to have all the ports and slots on the top
The most important ones - full size USB, 2 * SD, audio jack, would be on the bottom part. But yes, that might be a concern.
4. I don't want to have sound coming out of the back of the screen
The Pandora's built in sound is a joke anyway. Since there will be an amp in the bottom part, and you want to make it heavier, we could put extra speakers / woofer in there.
5. The holder for the iCP2, while novel, still looks like a compromise vs something integrated.
modular > integrated every day of my week. We can put it in some sort of clip-on case with a holder and hinge.
6. A hinge arrangement has to be seriously heavy duty to prevent the top from being too heavy for it.
Your average modern phone is not exactly a brick. The Pandora 1 hinge is sad to say not very good, we can improve on that for sure.
7. And this ... pretty much settles the debate.
Who elected you debate adjudicator?
8. There isn't any overall improvement over ICP+smartphone possible if the Pandora2 were to go this route.
Except for the case, and all the additional features in the base to match and exceed Pandora 1 capabilities.
9. The top part would end up bulkier than a smartphone while packing less tech.
Since it's literally built around a smartphone, I don't see how it can pack less tech. It would be slightly larger due to the casing I suppose. Maybe bulk and weight distribution would be a problem for this design, I'm not sure.
10. The idea of a battery movable to the base would be pretty clever though and one point in favor of the idea.
I was thinking two batteries, one in the phone and one in the base. We could possibly leave out the phone battery and just use the base one, which is a waste of space but improve weight distribution. The base is going to be thinner, and the top thicker than current Pandora.
11. Mr_Loon - I'd really want to see full size USB3 & SDXC in the tablet section.
This contradicts what Exophase and Klapse want, to have ports in the base. If the base is taken off, my thing could potentially continue communicating with its base and storage over bluetooth rather than the normal USB connection. So you can use the phone without controller, and still talk to SD cards in the base in your pocket. That seems like a bit of a "mad scientist" feature, I admit.
I would like to avoid making our own phone / tablet / computer part, because we simply cannot keep up with the technology and efficiency of major phone manufacturers, or the software supprt of Ubuntu phone.
I'd like to see someone respond to the 28 advantages I listed for my idea.
thatgui
Advanced Member
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 3,048
My question still remains unanswered. Also, how do you plan on connecting those two devices (more in a logical then physical sense) ?
Last edited by a moderator:
Although I do like the idea of combining two units, there are some issues that are preventing this from making it real.
First, like already mentioned a few times: the weight distribution. Let's take the Samsung Galaxy Note as a reference phablet. It's only 6mm longer than the Pandora and with nearly 10mm quite thin and has a 9.25 Wh battery. The total weight of the unit is 178 grams. If you combine it with a 37 Wh battery (for comparison: Pandora has a 15 Wh battery) in the base and a keyboard with a 3 Wh battery, The unit will still flip over at around 45 degrees. But the unit would not be light anymore since it weighs nearly 600 grams. It's too heavy to use in your hands. This is all based on my experience by turning my Galaxy Note into a clamshell.
The weight in the lid also requires a pretty stiff hinge. At the safe setting, you have to push pretty hard and hold your clamshell design firmly. Do not expect to just flip it open like a Pandora or a Nintendo DS.
A second issue is the price in combination with the access to technology. A Galaxy Note costs € 450,- if manufactured by Samsung and after being sold more than 10 million times. What would this device cost if it was not made by Samsung and sold only a few thousand times? Is it even possible without direct access to the high-tech components and engineers? I don't think so. The consequence would be, that the device would be a lot more expensive and quite a bit bulkier. Maybe you could get an equal device for € 800,- that would be 50% thicker. Don't underestimate the amount of research has gone into these phones and the effect of mass production at a huge scale.
Finally: if you want to go the smartphone route be sure to investigate the patents you will be using and the price you have to pay for them.
First, like already mentioned a few times: the weight distribution. Let's take the Samsung Galaxy Note as a reference phablet. It's only 6mm longer than the Pandora and with nearly 10mm quite thin and has a 9.25 Wh battery. The total weight of the unit is 178 grams. If you combine it with a 37 Wh battery (for comparison: Pandora has a 15 Wh battery) in the base and a keyboard with a 3 Wh battery, The unit will still flip over at around 45 degrees. But the unit would not be light anymore since it weighs nearly 600 grams. It's too heavy to use in your hands. This is all based on my experience by turning my Galaxy Note into a clamshell.
The weight in the lid also requires a pretty stiff hinge. At the safe setting, you have to push pretty hard and hold your clamshell design firmly. Do not expect to just flip it open like a Pandora or a Nintendo DS.
A second issue is the price in combination with the access to technology. A Galaxy Note costs € 450,- if manufactured by Samsung and after being sold more than 10 million times. What would this device cost if it was not made by Samsung and sold only a few thousand times? Is it even possible without direct access to the high-tech components and engineers? I don't think so. The consequence would be, that the device would be a lot more expensive and quite a bit bulkier. Maybe you could get an equal device for € 800,- that would be 50% thicker. Don't underestimate the amount of research has gone into these phones and the effect of mass production at a huge scale.
Finally: if you want to go the smartphone route be sure to investigate the patents you will be using and the price you have to pay for them.
Good stuff DREDD, thanks for clarifying.
1. I described a modified iCP2 which can be larger, would contain a battery, SD slots, etc. We should put enough kit in it to make it slightly heavier than the phone. Perhaps an extra-large battery.
This is very important. Good.
2. True, there would be some minor loss of space / power efficieny with two batteries. The advantage is, it's good to be able to use the phone part and controller part separately. I think we could figure out how to charge / share the batteries efficiently.
The main problem is that you will need something like 4000mAh on the tablet to get through a full gaming/webbrowsing day. (We cannot expect to get the most advanced powersaving design in soft or hardware.) This would make the top portion too heavy, unless the design let you move the top battery to the bottom base. This battery could consist of battery+back cover which you would swap with the base, putting the empty cover on the top portion and battery+cover on the base.
3. The most important ones - full size USB, 2 * SD, audio jack, would be on the bottom part. But yes, that might be a concern.
And what removable storage would the top portion have? What software would you be able to run in tablet mode, if the most important storage were on the base? Your tablet mode would be crippled. This is a big problem with the whole concept.
4. Since there will be an amp in the bottom part, and you want to make it heavier, we could put extra speakers / woofer in there.
Putting speakers and amplifier in the base shouldn't be a big problem, as far as I can tell.
5. modular > integrated every day of my week. We can put it in some sort of clip-on case with a holder and hinge.
There are advantages and dis-advantages to a modular concept. You are ignoring disadvantages.
7. Who elected you debate adjudicator?
I just stated an opinion that those points effectively ended the debate.
8. Except for the case, and all the additional features in the base to match and exceed Pandora 1 capabilities.
What advantages exactly? What is your imagined use of the tablet? Seperating the screen from the base needs to give some additional benefit over the drawbacks. Just being modular because "modular is kewl" isn't enough to overcome the drawbacks.
9. Since it's literally built around a smartphone, I don't see how it can pack less tech. It would be slightly larger due to the casing I suppose. Maybe bulk and weight distribution would be a problem for this design, I'm not sure.
It is difficult and costly to make things as tightly packaged as a smartphone. Given the expected power consumption of gaming (much higher than the idling consumption of a smartphone), the battery alone would make it huge.
10. I was thinking two batteries, one in the phone and one in the base. We could possibly leave out the phone battery and just use the base one, which is a waste of space but improve weight distribution. The base is going to be thinner, and the top thicker than current Pandora.
The "phone" battery (you mean tablet) would still need to be huge to accomodate gaming power consumption.
You end up saying that you don't want Pandora2 to make a phone/tablet part?? What about all your previous text where you describe what you want them to include in the tablet part? Choose one or the other.
Edit: I think I understand now - you just want a larger ICP2, not a modular Pandora2. NM.
1. I described a modified iCP2 which can be larger, would contain a battery, SD slots, etc. We should put enough kit in it to make it slightly heavier than the phone. Perhaps an extra-large battery.
This is very important. Good.
2. True, there would be some minor loss of space / power efficieny with two batteries. The advantage is, it's good to be able to use the phone part and controller part separately. I think we could figure out how to charge / share the batteries efficiently.
The main problem is that you will need something like 4000mAh on the tablet to get through a full gaming/webbrowsing day. (We cannot expect to get the most advanced powersaving design in soft or hardware.) This would make the top portion too heavy, unless the design let you move the top battery to the bottom base. This battery could consist of battery+back cover which you would swap with the base, putting the empty cover on the top portion and battery+cover on the base.
3. The most important ones - full size USB, 2 * SD, audio jack, would be on the bottom part. But yes, that might be a concern.
And what removable storage would the top portion have? What software would you be able to run in tablet mode, if the most important storage were on the base? Your tablet mode would be crippled. This is a big problem with the whole concept.
4. Since there will be an amp in the bottom part, and you want to make it heavier, we could put extra speakers / woofer in there.
Putting speakers and amplifier in the base shouldn't be a big problem, as far as I can tell.
5. modular > integrated every day of my week. We can put it in some sort of clip-on case with a holder and hinge.
There are advantages and dis-advantages to a modular concept. You are ignoring disadvantages.
7. Who elected you debate adjudicator?
I just stated an opinion that those points effectively ended the debate.
8. Except for the case, and all the additional features in the base to match and exceed Pandora 1 capabilities.
What advantages exactly? What is your imagined use of the tablet? Seperating the screen from the base needs to give some additional benefit over the drawbacks. Just being modular because "modular is kewl" isn't enough to overcome the drawbacks.
9. Since it's literally built around a smartphone, I don't see how it can pack less tech. It would be slightly larger due to the casing I suppose. Maybe bulk and weight distribution would be a problem for this design, I'm not sure.
It is difficult and costly to make things as tightly packaged as a smartphone. Given the expected power consumption of gaming (much higher than the idling consumption of a smartphone), the battery alone would make it huge.
10. I was thinking two batteries, one in the phone and one in the base. We could possibly leave out the phone battery and just use the base one, which is a waste of space but improve weight distribution. The base is going to be thinner, and the top thicker than current Pandora.
The "phone" battery (you mean tablet) would still need to be huge to accomodate gaming power consumption.
You end up saying that you don't want Pandora2 to make a phone/tablet part?? What about all your previous text where you describe what you want them to include in the tablet part? Choose one or the other.
Edit: I think I understand now - you just want a larger ICP2, not a modular Pandora2. NM.
Last edited by a moderator:
sswam
Advanced Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2009
- Messages
- 1,393
Yeah?
Well, my Pandora can sit upside down on its screen on my desk, with the "base" part up like a screen, leaning back at 45 degrees, and it's not near to overbalancing. If the hinge were stiffer, it could lean back a bit more.
Try it, if you have a Pandora. I guess our Pandora base is like at least 3 times heavier than the screen, so I reckon if the screen and base were equally heavy it would balance just fine.
I'll respond to Klapse's remaining objections:
You know I'm talking about using an OFF-THE-SHELF phone, with Android and Ubuntu, for the top part right? Because, it will be a more featurful and more powerful computer than anything we can produce. I don't want OPT to make a tablet, I want us to use a top 3rd party phone for that part.
Each unit would have a perhaps 2500mAh battery, and they would share the power when connected. I don't know if that would be wildly inefficient, or there is some major technical obstacle. I think it could be done.
If you separate the phone part, you get normal phone battery life, which can be pretty decent. If it runs low, dock it to the base, easy. I would mostly keep them together - I like the Pandora "mini-laptop" style. I'm a fan of hands free, rather than microwaved brains, so I would probably keep them together even for phone calls.
The phone part would presumably have internal microSD, at least 64GB I guess, you could put PNDs and ROMs on it if you want to use them with out the controller.
The phone could also communicate with SD cards, USB and even the audio kit in the base over bluetooth / wireless USB, if they are not connected with a cable. It would be somewhat slower. You would have to keep the base in your pocket or nearby for that to work, of course.
Also, since the phone part has a cell radio in it, you can grab extra games on the go, or even play games direct from a network filesystem.
What you said is not "a big problem with the whole concept".
Not a big problem? I would say rather it would be a very nice feature.
You didn't mention them either. Please state some disadvantages - or advantages if you'd like to be more positive.
I listed a whole lot of advantages already.
- We don't have to build our own great complex integrated thing, we can use an existing phone part, save money, save development effort and time, keep up with the latest technology rather than being 5 years behind, and enjoy having the cell phone features such as GPS, cell modem, camera, etc. Even if we superglued the phone and base together so we can't remove them, it's a massive advantage that we didn't have to build that.
- If one part breaks or needs to be upgraded, we can do that more easily. We can keep up with the latest CPU and phone tech by replacing the phone part. We can install a new base using tech from the iCP3 project, if that happens.
What I want is a "top part" which is an existing top of the range cell-phone, running patched Ubuntu, and Android, with Pandora software added to them.
And a bottom part, which uses iCP2 tech, but has all other the Pandora extras we know and love, namely SD card slots, full sized USB, hifi audio amp.
Well, if Open Pandora can quickly produce a "top part" which has lots of internal usb ports or such for naked usb cellular modem board, usb gps / compass, usb gyro, etc, and it can act as a phone, that might be good too. But if I can't make calls on it, I'm wasting my money and my pocket space with a Pandora and a separate phone. I don't need to use two pocket computers at once, I want all my pocket computing and phone tech in one spiffy modular device!
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry then, I was responding to the original thread idea and didn't realize your idea was different.
You are advocating an ICP3, which really should get its own thread, so that this thread can remain on-topic.
Mr_Loon
Can't Remember
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2010
- Messages
- 2,332
Steady on Sony, that was very nearly a constructive comment. Are you trying to say that if it was convenient then you'd be converted? If that is the case why not suggest something that would make the design more convenient.
Please understand I'm not trying to say 'I'm right, you're wrong' or 'this is the way it must be for me to support the P2 project' merely 'here is a carefully considered concept that would help P2 stand out and be damn useful to the end user, please discuss'.
__________________________
@ Dredd : Good to see you appreciate the benefits of a modular system but the more I think about it the less I like the idea of an off the shelf phone & heavily modified ICP2. Can I politely request you start / continue your own thread with this as the subject. I'd like to keep this one for the concept of P2 being a 5"tablet controlled by a standard ICP2. Hope that's OK.
Out of respect here are my main reasons for my objections, I'd be very happy to elaborate further in another thread. :
1) P2 Hardware manufacture should be in the hands of Open Pandora, not at the mercy of a 3rd party phone manufacturer. What if the phone company go bust, massivley increase prices, etc.
2) By having control of the manufacturing process the hardware can be designed to exactly meet the needs of the system. e.g. position of ports, base connection mechanism etc.
3) Where does the profit of Open Pandora come from? From my model it comes from sales of the tablet, the ICP2 & the base unit? From your model it just comes from the sale of base units.
4) I want to keep the 'indie hardware dream' alive.
Not so, you can have both, i.e. ports in the top & bottom, in my solution the base unit works as a conventional docking station with the base unit becoming in effect a multi port USB3 hub.
__________________________
The idea is for the device to run Android & Linux out of the box, rereading the OP this is not clear, will edit. Also my hope is that by the end of this year there will also be a finger friendly Linux desktop available. One would hope so with the projected arrival of Ubuntu for phones and the Nexus 7 being adopted as the reference tablet for Ubuntu.
__________________________
Edit : added Rev 1 of the Sketch
Last edited by a moderator:
Exophase
Nothing good will ever come of Exophase.
My concerns were all regarded to your original idea, which is for OPT to make a tablet that is paired with iCP2. You did say "or slightly modified" but no real indication of what that meant.. I didn't know you were talking about adding an enclosure on top of the iCP2.
They don't apply to DREDD's ideas which I have another set of problems with, which I largely went over in that thread.
Something modular could work, but all in all I think this is a big mechanical challenge and would cost more/be more difficult to produce. This could also just be me, but I don't really like the idea of having something that gets assembled/disassembles into multiple parts. But a lot of people are into convertible tablets now, so I don't know how much others feel this way. Here we are talking about at least three parts. If it is done I think it can't be something that involves screws, that's just too much work.
The ability to use touchscreen stuff in a way that's better than the current clamshell appeals to me, but everything seems to involve a major compromise.
They don't apply to DREDD's ideas which I have another set of problems with, which I largely went over in that thread.
Something modular could work, but all in all I think this is a big mechanical challenge and would cost more/be more difficult to produce. This could also just be me, but I don't really like the idea of having something that gets assembled/disassembles into multiple parts. But a lot of people are into convertible tablets now, so I don't know how much others feel this way. Here we are talking about at least three parts. If it is done I think it can't be something that involves screws, that's just too much work.
The ability to use touchscreen stuff in a way that's better than the current clamshell appeals to me, but everything seems to involve a major compromise.
Last edited by a moderator:
First of all: I hate tablets.
I also dislike the idea of a Pandora that's based on ICP2. It should be based on Pandora 1. Form is good.
Also Bluetooth has to be enabled all the time then (except there's some modification of the ICP 2). I dislike that.
If you like tablets and touch screen UI there's some much more better solution:
A flexible screen that can be turned by 180°.
Don't forget the wooden box.
I also dislike the idea of a Pandora that's based on ICP2. It should be based on Pandora 1. Form is good.
Also Bluetooth has to be enabled all the time then (except there's some modification of the ICP 2). I dislike that.
If you like tablets and touch screen UI there's some much more better solution:
A flexible screen that can be turned by 180°.
Don't forget the wooden box.
Last edited by a moderator:
Exophase
Nothing good will ever come of Exophase.
Full folding hinge is pretty cool, if it can easily lock at at least one intermediate point still. Is it possible to do a hinge with a lock button that lets you pick where to lock it? That'd be pretty cool in general.
It'd be kind of awkward having the controls underneath your hand while you use it as a tablet, but I think a fair compromise all things considered. Would just hope that the device could know that it's in this orientation and ignore the buttons..
It'd be kind of awkward having the controls underneath your hand while you use it as a tablet, but I think a fair compromise all things considered. Would just hope that the device could know that it's in this orientation and ignore the buttons..
Last edited by a moderator:
I could see that being useful - you can comfortably use the nubs with your first fingers, while operating the touchscreen with your thumbs
Mr_Loon
Can't Remember
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2010
- Messages
- 2,332
This was the original idea, but I certainly can see why anyone reading my post would've thought otherwise. I should have included the sketch from the start.
As for the "or slightly modified" I was thinking of things like :
Changing location of USB HID interface if required
Rerouting the shoulder buttons to use / report the dual shoulders on the Base Unit
Change of colour / styling to fit in with the base unit & tablet in an aesthetically pleasant manner
I still can't see why it would be more difficult to produce a tablet. A tablet PC is essentially a rectangular box with a touch screen but no hardware controls. Why would that be harder to produce than a mini laptop? IF it did not have to be ultra slim like a modern smartphone, also consider that with the detachable battery it would hopefully not have to be ultra fat / heavy either.
In that case leave it mini laptop mode but just unclip the ICP2 when you want to use it in Desktop / Couch gaming mode.
The ICP2 part will hopefully be done
The Tablet part is easier to build than a mini laptop
The base unit with its thumbscrews does sound a bit 'Heath Robinson' but as said before, I'm no designer, there may well be a far better design for the attachment mechanism.
However there is something to be said in using a tried and tested, patent free, simple (in engineering terms) thing like a bolt or thumbscrew. The bolts would give the tablet & base unit a rock solid connection. As an aside, the thumbscrews & threading would be of the highest quality and made from top grade materials.
If it took 90 seconds to 'strip down' from Mini Laptop mode with the battery on the base to Tablet mode with the battery on the top then would that be a big deal?
In that case leave it mini laptop mode but just unclip the ICP2 when you want to use it in Desktop / Couch gaming mode.
As stated I would like to see this device made by Open Pandora GmbH, with the best will in the world I can't see how Craig can even consider making P2 before all his P1 preorders have shipped. From my understanding this is unlikely to happen any time soon.
What made me think that ICP2 would be good for P2 was apart from the obvious help it would give Craig in financial terms was this line from the ICP2 Kickstarter : "We're happy for the iControlpad2 to be used by other people/companies in any way they please."
I would envision the P2 ICP2 being produced under license by OP GmbH.
As for the bluetooth there is this from the ICP2 Kickstarter page : "Works as a standard HID for anything with either bluetooth or USB connections."
So the only thing draining the ICP2 Battery would be the LED backlighting, which can of course also be turned off if desired.
Last edited by a moderator:
Making a mini tablet is (relatively) easy, but making the clip-on, clip-off, sturdy, compact, thin, light, strong, latching-in-the-right-places hinge assembly is very difficult!
Making a single device with a single hinge like the P1 is probably easier.
Making a single device with a single hinge like the P1 is probably easier.
If we have to use USB instead of bluetooth it drains even more power.
Pandora's power save feature turns the USB host off.
If Craig doesn't make Pandora 2 it's verry unlikely that ED will make a tablet.
He also likes the Pandora as it is now.
Pandora's power save feature turns the USB host off.
If Craig doesn't make Pandora 2 it's verry unlikely that ED will make a tablet.
He also likes the Pandora as it is now.
Similar threads
