Pandora 2 should be a 5" Linux Tablet with no built in gaming controls, but... - With Hinge & Attach

[Binky]

There may be heaps of tablets to chose from but I can't think of any with a 5" screen that can also be used as a pocketable mini laptop with the inclusion of a base unit.

iCP2 + http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/380008/ubuntu-for-phones-to-arrive-next-week-on-nexus-4

Not 5" but not far off.

GNU/Linux for smartphones is coming, sure as x is x

I could accept your argument that having the PCB in the lid would be a bad idea if you could show me how it would have a major impact on development costs, overall size of the unit, difficulty of manufacture, ergonomics, seamless use of keyboard /gaming controls etc. but I'm yet to hear a convincing argument of that nature. I do not claim that such an argument cannot exist, but I'm yet to hear it.

Hold yer horses!

I've spent plenty of time showing how the tablet system results in loss of battery life, pocketability, reliability and simplicity.

Your counterargument is always difficulties can be overcome, and there are major advantages.

Have you ever completely dismantled your Pandora?

When I did I was struck by the beautifully simple internal layout. keypad on pcb on battery. Coiled ribbon from pcb to screen.

That's not to say the details aren't complicated. Just that the principle is neat.

For me, the effort and expense that would go into the tablety thing would be much better spent craming in more connecivity:

DVB/DAB

an eSATA/USB combo port

SDXC+SDXC+microSDXC for storage

With GNU/Linux for smartphones (using the same drivers as android) on the horizon, and the iCP2 coming out in Two Months, what would the proposed tablet offer that was special?

 

[overgauss]

The PCB in the screen means that the base can be stuffed with extra goodness like an extra battery, USB hub, ports, slots etc.  I recall that you thought that modularity would be good.  For example an extra battery that attaches to the bottom of the pandora.  My point is that all the arguments that you now use against a removable and reversible screen were never used back in the day when you were for modularity.

You claim that user replaceable batteries would make the device more bulky and structurally weaker.  As it happens just about every type of consumer electronics device that uses a battery has user replaceable batteries in them.  From cell-phones to laptops and even hearing aids.  Now it struck me that you might have meant AAA batteries or something like that, which is not part of my argument.  It may be the case we are talking about 2 different things.

I want to be able to plug the pandora into my TV and sit on my couch with detatchable controller in hand to do things on the big screen like, check my email, bang out some code, cruise the intarwebs, and play games powered by its sweet graphix chip (linux and android based games and software).

By having the brains of the device on the screen side of things it means that wiring between the controller and the brains is as simple as using a usb cable.  This of course means the controller could charge itself and the battery attached to the screen as well.

With a twin usb connection between the controller and the screen, it would be easy for the unit to tell which orientation the screen is in (on top of all the other added benefits).

Like so:

S=screen side

B= back of the unit

C= controls

+-------------+

|       s          |

+________+

h1s             t2s

h1c             t2c

+-------------+

|       C         |

+________+

So here we are with the device open and the screen and controls facing the user. Closing the unit would leave B up as to be expected with the device in suspend mode.

h is the "heads" orientation of the usb connection, t the tails.  Now if we remove the screen and flip 180 degrees, heads becomes tails and tails becomes heads.  In this case t2s (tails 2 screen) becomes h2s and is now leftmost.

+-------------+

|       B         |

+________+

h2s             t1s

h1c             t2c

+-------------+

|       C         |

+________+

After swapping, the screen the usb connections on the left and right still have the right orientation but since the connection is "mixed" between 1's and 2's it is a simple matter for the device to be able to tell the difference, and enter slate mode instead of suspending when the screen is closed down on top of the control pad. 

When closed we have S side up and can now use the device to sketch, draw a circuit or diagram, do photo manipulation or paint, and write/draw in general.  This helps maximize the utility of a screen that one can interact with via touch or digitizer.

For the hinge, I considered adding a thumb wheel besides the hinges (on the outside edges) to add tension and lock the screen in place. 

If you have the brains in the base of the unit, you now have to wire the screen across the top and bottom halves, and perhaps things like speakers etc.  Forget adding any extra slots screen side for the same reason.

By having the brains screenside you can do all that I said above and more (I've left a lot out to keep this short)!  The benefits of the clamshell design quickly seem to vanish in comparison.

 

[Mr_Loon]

There may be heaps of tablets to chose from but I can't think of any with a 5" screen that can also be used as a pocketable mini laptop with the inclusion of a base unit.

iCP2 + http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/380008/ubuntu-for-phones-to-arrive-next-week-on-nexus-4
Not 5" but not far off.


GNU/Linux for smartphones is coming, sure as x is x

Agreed, so why would you, or anyone else, buy a P2 rather than Linux Smartphone + iCP2. For me it would be the 5" screen (I don't like large phones), larger keyboard, full size USB3 X2, Full Size SDXC X2, Battery life, Modules designed to work & fit together seamlessly, Sofa Gaming mode, Relaxed mode (using tripod mount).

Hold yer horses!


I've spent plenty of time showing how the tablet system results in loss of battery life,

Not necessarily true, the controls could possibly be connected to the GPIO via the pogo pins.

pocketability

The modular design would have minimal impact on pocketability, my guess is that a talented designer could implement the concept and make the finished product not much taller and just a little wider than a P1, the Papercraft models err very much on the side of caution in this respect.

reliability and simplicity.

The modular nature of the system may well have major benefits to both retailer and customer during the RMA & Manufacturing process. With a traditional P1 style design if a gaming button stops working (or is found not to work on testing before despatch) then you have to send the whole unit back for repair, with Dragonscale you would simply return the control module etc.


As for simplicity, that's the beauty of it, the incredibly simple twist of building the PCB into the lid (it's gotta go somewhere) opens up a whole load of genuinely useful additional usage scenarios for the device.

Your counterargument is always difficulties can be overcome, and there are major advantages.

That is what I genuinely believe to be true.

For me, the effort and expense that would go into the tablety thing would be much better spent craming in more connecivity:


DVB/DAB


an eSATA/USB combo port

A little esoteric for the standard model IMHO but a 3D printed base could possibly be made to include such features via USB3.

SDXC+SDXC+microSDXC for storage

Exactly as proposed Micro SDXC in lid / tablet, Twin SDXC in base.


_________________________________________


@ Overgauss, any chance of a sketch? I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at with the twin USB connection / hinge design.

 

[overgauss]

This is from Design F for P2 originally posted by Drammurt.

Rotate either the left or right usb coupled pair (male and female connected pair either on the left or the right) 180 degrees.  Call the left side heads and the right side tails.  Now when you rotate the screen the usb ports will still match up.  The right side of the screen's female usb port, currently called tails, flips to the heads orientation and couples with the male usb port found on the left of the controller. The left side of the screen's female usb port, currently called heads, flips to the tails orientation and couples with the male usb port found on the right of the controller.

 

[thatgui]

The modular design would have minimal impact on pocketability, my guess is that a talented designer could implement the concept and make the finished product not much taller and just a little wider than a P1, the Papercraft models err very much on the side of caution in this respect.

 That is highly unlikely, except for the slim chance that some major step in technology will be made, we can expect that all internal components (pcb, keyboard, gaming controls, battery, etc) will roughly stay the same size. But with your modular concept (which has its appeal, no doubt about it) you will add a lot of layers of plastic and thin layers of air, that will make it taller and probably wider too.

Where should this talented designer come from (divine intervention)?

The modular nature of the system may well have major benefits to both retailer and customer during the RMA & Manufacturing process. With a traditional P1 style design if a gaming button stops working (or is found not to work on testing before despatch) then you have to send the whole unit back for repair, with Dragonscale you would simply return the control module etc.

true, but that does not invalidate his point. It may be easier to replace some parts, but these are additional costs (price of the part, shipping costs, administrative cost) that need to be included in the market price.

That is what I genuinely believe to be true.

 Damn I should have known that earlier, I could have rebuted Einsteins theory of special relativity long ago (

But seriously, thats a nice view on things, but it shouldn't influence your conception on what is possible and what is just wishfull thinking.

 

[Mr_Loon]

That is highly unlikely, except for the slim chance that some major step in technology will be made, we can expect that all internal components (pcb, keyboard, gaming controls, battery, etc) will roughly stay the same size. But with your modular concept (which has its appeal, no doubt about it) you will add a lot of layers of plastic and thin layers of air, that will make it taller and probably wider too.


Where should this talented designer come from (divine intervention)?

From what I can tell the impact in terms of overall size & thickness will be measured in mm when compared to P1, also remember that this concept includes a 5" 4:3 Screen which will inevitably lead to the lid being a little larger. Where specifically do you see this major impact on pocketability occurring?


As for where does the designer come from? Do you dispute that such people exist? I don't know any architects but I could imagine a scenario where I could find one if required, the same applies for a product designer. A potential way of doing it : approach freelance designers with a clear concept & goals, offer them a financial package based on number of units sold for the chosen design.

true, but that does not invalidate his point. It may be easier to replace some parts, but these are additional costs (price of the part, shipping costs, administrative cost) that need to be included in the market price.

The point was that the modular nature of the concept has some major advantages when compared to the standard mini laptop model, not that there would be no cost for RMA's etc.

Damn I should have known that earlier, I could have rebuted Einsteins theory of special relativity long ago (


But seriously, thats a nice view on things, but it shouldn't influence your conception on what is possible and what is just wishfull thinking.

I believe that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages & that no fundamental reason / area has been pointed out yet that would render the concept invalid. What specifically do you believe to be wishful thinking?


___________________________

@ Overgauss : got it now, interesting & highly creative idea, however not sure how appropriate it would be for this concept as from my perspective more benefits would be gained from using pogo pins : GPIO for control set, Audio for headphones in the base & USB3 for other connectivity. From what I can tell, the main advantage your design would bring would be the ability to use the lid in Tablet mode when the screen is reversed, you could just detach the screen and attach the battery to it to get a more pleasant tablet experience if required.

___________________________

From what I can tell Ubuntu for Tablets will be a great fit for this concept, the proposed way that the system will switch between desktop & tablet mode when a keyboard / hardware controls are attached / detached seems like it could present a rather slick user experience IMHO.

 

[Binky]

Heres a way in which reliability could be improved and the tablet section could be put on backwards.

This is not dependant of connector type, apart from the connector having rotational symmetry order 2.

Have two sets of pins like so (supposing we need five connections going throgh the hinge):

1 2 3 4 5

5 4 3 2 1

Provides full redundancy and is an easy way to produce rotational symetry.

---

On the subject of wires through the hinge, I suggest i2c and USB3 signals. with connectors  chosen to suit the restrictions of space and durability

This results in 14 separate lines, and the ability to turn off the usb to save power while still having the use of the keyboard and controls

 

[thatgui]

 From what I can tell the impact in terms of overall size & thickness will be measured in mm when compared to P1, also remember that this concept includes a 5" 4:3 Screen which will inevitably lead to the lid being a little larger. Where specifically do you see this major impact on pocketability occurring?

You have several casings that have to fit togther snuggly, but due to fabrication tolerances you will inevitably have small gaps between the modules. Also every module will have its own casing, which won't be a very thight fit around the internal components so there will also be some unused space that will add to the overall thickness.Sure we are talking about mm here, but in this device / size category 2-3mm can mean a lot.

Didn't notice screen size and formfactor - I guess most people would not mind if the P2 would be a little wider, but I wonder about the availability of such a screen.

As for where does the designer come from? Do you dispute that such people exist? I don't know any architects but I could imagine a scenario where I could find one if required, the same applies for a product designer. A potential way of doing it : approach freelance designers with a clear concept & goals, offer them a financial package based on number of units sold for the chosen design.

Why should I dispute the existence of designers? I'm simply saying that there's only a slim to none chance that you will find a designer that is talented, willing to work for a budget that will be very low and is able to to bring something up that incorporates your design, but isn't a "RMA hell" as the budget for materials will also be small.Looking at the total sales of the P1, I don't think that the financial package you are suggesting will be very attractive to designers.

The point was that the modular nature of the concept has some major advantages when compared to the standard mini laptop model, not that there would be no cost for RMA's etc.

I never said that. Binky argued that this design will be less reliable than a simpler design. As an answer you wrote that it may simplfy the RMA process. Regarding that, my point is that you are right that it will probably simplify the rma process, but will probably raise the overall rma costs => the more complex a design is, the more is it likely to brake.

I believe that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages & that no fundamental reason / area has been pointed out yet that would render the concept invalid. What specifically do you believe to be wishful thinking?

Thats my whole point:huh:
The idea itself - great !. But I highly doubt that this design would be possible under the given circumstances:

• the budget for the case will be low (my hobbyhorse, so to speak)
• OPT won't be able to afford the best materials available for the case, thus limiting the design possiblities
• OPT won't be able to afford a lengthy design process for / many design iterations of the case
• OPT won't be able to afford a good designer as they are hard to find and expensive
• rma costs have to be calculated into the market price, thus limiting again the design possibilties

 

[3_bit]

• the budget for the case will be low (my hobbyhorse, so to speak)
• OPT won't be able to afford the best materials available for the case, thus limiting the design possiblities
• OPT won't be able to afford a lengthy design process for / many design iterations of the case
• OPT won't be able to afford a good designer as they are hard to find and expensive
• rma costs have to be calculated into the market price, thus limiting again the design possibilties

Kickstarter, anyone?

 

[thatgui]

Kickstarter, anyone? 

Don't know that much about kickstarter, but to what degree has a product be finished in order to be "kickstarter ready" ?

 

[overgauss]

Heres a way in which reliability could be improved and the tablet section could be put on backwards.

This is not dependant of connector type, apart from the connector having rotational symmetry order 2.

Have two sets of pins like so (supposing we need five connections going throgh the hinge):

1 2 3 4 5

5 4 3 2 1

Provides full redundancy and is an easy way to produce rotational symetry.

---

On the subject of wires through the hinge, I suggest i2c and USB3 signals. with connectors  chosen to suit the restrictions of space and durability

This results in 14 separate lines, and the ability to turn off the usb to save power while still having the use of the keyboard and controls

Yup. For instance if you used USB you would merely be stacking the two while facing them in opposite directions.  Assuming you place the brains of the pandora in the controller section, you now have less room to place extra sd slots, fatter battery, an integrated usb 3.0 stick like you suggested, and all the other stuff that you can think of that you would want.

Having the brains behind the screen lets you have ports on the screen itself and the ability to use the controller as another power source (in addition to the one in the screen), use the controller remotely, have rotatlional symetry about the y-axis for the screen, add aditional ports etc, stylus usage, all while maintaining pocketablity.

I get to use your claim that this is basically a phablet with controls (wheras my position is that this is a tablet-top.  IE convertible PC) to state that a phablet with controls can easily be made to fit in ones pocket just as a clamshell can fit in ones pocket.  This is true because phablets, as you might say, are hella thin already.  Besides in your USB 3.0 pendrive argument you claimed that things would get smaller as a matter of courser as this is the nature of micro-electronics.  Obviously the same principle would apply here as well.

 

[Binky]

For instance if you used USB you would merely be stacking the two while facing them in opposite directions.  Assuming you place the brains of the pandora in the controller section, you now have less room to place extra sd slots, fatter battery, an integrated usb 3.0 stick like you suggested, and all the other stuff that you can think of that you would want.

Having the brains behind the screen lets you have ports on the screen itself and the ability to use the controller as another power source (in addition to the one in the screen), use the controller remotely, have rotatlional symetry about the y-axis for the screen, add aditional ports etc, stylus usage, all while maintaining pocketablity.

I get to use your claim that this is basically a phablet with controls (wheras my position is that this is a tablet-top.  IE convertible PC) to state that a phablet with controls can easily be made to fit in ones pocket just as a clamshell can fit in ones pocket.  This is true because phablets, as you might say, are hella thin already.  Besides in your USB 3.0 pendrive argument you claimed that things would get smaller as a matter of courser as this is the nature of micro-electronics.  Obviously the same principle would apply here as well.

Are you claiming that putting processor/support circuitry in the lid provides extra space?

If so, its complete and utter bunkum!

You need room for a full-size circuit board in the lid for processor &c, and another full-size PCB in the base for the keyboard and peripherals

The volume is very similar to putting two PCBs in the base.

 I think I'd rather have most of the thickness in the base so that it was (relatively) more comfortable to hold!

 

[Mr_Loon]

This concept for P2 could be condensed to the following simple question :

Do we gain more than we lose by having a PCB in the lid? To me it's pretty obvious that the benefits massively outweigh the negative aspects, but I fully appreciate that others may feel differently.

What we really need is some expert opinion on the likely dimensions (especially height) of the PCB for the lid & the impact that will have on overall thickness. My gut feel is that this impact will be a maximum of 4-5mm (compared to a lid without a PCB). We need more than my gut feel though before the relative merits of this concept can be properly assessed.

 

[overgauss]

For instance if you used USB you would merely be stacking the two while facing them in opposite directions.  Assuming you place the brains of the pandora in the controller section, you now have less room to place extra sd slots, fatter battery, an integrated usb 3.0 stick like you suggested, and all the other stuff that you can think of that you would want.

Having the brains behind the screen lets you have ports on the screen itself and the ability to use the controller as another power source (in addition to the one in the screen), use the controller remotely, have rotatlional symetry about the y-axis for the screen, add aditional ports etc, stylus usage, all while maintaining pocketablity.

I get to use your claim that this is basically a phablet with controls (wheras my position is that this is a tablet-top.  IE convertible PC) to state that a phablet with controls can easily be made to fit in ones pocket just as a clamshell can fit in ones pocket.  This is true because phablets, as you might say, are hella thin already.  Besides in your USB 3.0 pendrive argument you claimed that things would get smaller as a matter of courser as this is the nature of micro-electronics.  Obviously the same principle would apply here as well.

Are you claiming that putting processor/support circuitry in the lid provides extra space?

If so, its complete and utter bunkum!

You need room for a full-size circuit board in the lid for processor &c, and another full-size PCB in the base for the keyboard and peripherals

The volume is very similar to putting two PCBs in the base.

 I think I'd rather have most of the thickness in the base so that it was (relatively) more comfortable to hold!

I'm just going with what you said about a phablet. With this perspective it is obvious that you would have more space in the controls section.

You said it yourself.  The (overall) volume remains the same (which is what I've been trying to say all along).  Now, however, the space taken up by 2 pcbs in the base can instead be taken up with one pcb in the base, plus thicker battery, more sd slots, etc.  If today you can have a galaxy note that is not much thicker (if at all) than the lid of a Pandora and this slate device contains all the compugting power of the Pandora itself, that means you can add a base to the slate with all your controls etc, so  that the total unit has the same or less volume of the original Pandora. I'm not saying you create more total space, just more space in the base unit that can be tasked with things other than being the brains of the unit on top of everything else.

Imagine a Galaxy S4 on top of an icp2 or even a larger controller.  So again the phablet with controls would have the same overall volume as your clamshell design.  By removing the brains from the base, you now however, have more space in the base to add additional functionality to the overall unit.  If you merely have a detatchable screen, then you would still need to power it, it would be harder to communicate with it from a distance with your controller, you would need to work out all kinds of proprietary communication between the brains located in the base unit and the dummy screen (imagine plugging in the slate portion to a projector and controlling your powerpoint presentation via a detatched bluetooth controller) etc etc.

Top heaviness, balance and comfort can still be accounted for during the design process.  Especially since everything is shrinking in size as we speak.

Edit to add:

Brains behind the screen means more efficient use of space, less cabling, ease of connection between screen and base when a datatchable/rotateable screen/controls setup is considered. etc etc.