Pandora 2 specifications and price

[Binky]

Here's a point:


no P2 will be a mass market product for techno-n00bs


therefore, we can expect users to understand that removing the disk with the OS on is a bad idea


These are my preferences from best to worst:

1. dual external SDXC, internal microSDXC, twice as much built-in NAND as needed on release
   
2. dual external SDXC, internal microSDXC
   
3. single external SDXC, internal microSDXC, twice as much built-in NAND as needed on release
   
4. dual external SDXC, twice as much built-in NAND as needed on release
   
5. dual external SDXC, hardly any built-in storage
   
6. single external SDXC, twice as much built-in NAND as needed on release
   

 

[_wb_]

Here's a point:


no P2 will be a mass market product for techno-n00bs


therefore, we can expect users to understand that removing the disk with the OS on is a bad idea

Well, I certainly understand that. But I might want to let my child play with my Pandora too, and she might not understand that.

Full to micro adapters are not even an alternative for mobile devices, way too flimsy.

Yes, I would certainly prefer to have the external slots full SD slots for this reason. And the internal slot too, because for that slot, the adapter would not just be flimsy, it would not fit.

If you get two full SD-slots and one internal µSD, but still with the possibility to boot from the external two, would that µSD slot really be an issue?

No, it would not be an issue, but I would probably not use it (except as a backup installation in case I mess something up, which is what I currently use the NAND for). So I would end up booting from the external slot, which is fine for me, but not absolutely ideal. I want my boot card to be the fastest, biggest, most expensive card I have (and this will probably not be a microSD card), so it would be nice if I can put it in an internal slot, which gives it some extra protection (no accidental removal, less chance that it gets lost somehow).


So if the P2 has 2x full SD slots and 1x micro slot, I'd prefer the micro slot to be external and one of the full slots to be internal. Just 2 full SD slots (one of which is internal) would be OK too. It would also be cool to have 3 full SD slots (one of which is internal), if it is important not to give the impression that the P2 can do less than the P1 (and if space limitations allow this). But I'd probably not need the third slot. So I'd be fine with only one external slot: it's also good to have less holes in the device, so less dust/dirt can enter and it becomes more splash water proof. I already use the current Pandora while I'm taking a nice long bath, but this is probably a bit risky, so I wouldn't mind if the P2 would be made to survive getting dropped in the water.

 

[Grench]

Grench:


Just to clear this out: you want a full-sized SD card slot on the inside of P2, because (as you claim)

1. SD cards have better capacity/price ratio than microSD cards in the high end cards
   
2. SD cards have better speed/price ratio than microSD cards in the high end cards
   

Not JUST the price ratios. Throughout all of the history of SD and microSD, the microSD card capabilities have always been 12-24 months behind that of full sized SD. So...


Currently released SD cards are twice as large in capacity as currently released microSD cards.


Currently released SD cards are twice as fast as currently released microSD cards.


Previously released 12 month old SD cards, compared to equal spec currently released microSD cards are roughly 1/2 the price per GB of the microSD equivalent.


I do not see this trend changing. There simply isn't the 'call for speed and capacity' from the phone and tablet front. If there were, more manufacturers would be equipping their tablets with full sized SD slots.

Exophase has counterargued, that

1. There is no technical reason for the speed/price ratio difference (SD and microSD are the same tech aside form the packaging)
   
2. The current situation regarding the speed you describe is because of current market needs
   
3. The market is shifting from SD to microSD, reversing or at least leveling the situation regarding speed you describe in the near future
   
4. There is some merit to the capacity difference due to physical size of the medium
   

He is correct that there is no electro-mechanical reason for the microSD to be slower. That does not erase the fact that microSD IS slower, has always BEEN slower and that there is no real indication of it 'catching up' to current - only that it is moving forward about a year or more behind full sized SD, just like it always has.


I think there is something beyond market needs involved in the difference in development. The physical size of full sized SD likely makes it easier to manufacture.


"The market is shifting from SD to microSD" - Sorry, I don't see it. I see microSD becoming more common because device manufacturers have foolishly not given the public a choice in it. I would MUCH rather have a tablet with a full sized SD that can take photos straight from my camera than one with a microSD that I can't hardly handle the card from. I don't see it ever 'taking over' for high end cameras (many of which are still CF, but the photogs tend to use SDXC in a CF adapter). Remember, the Pandora and hopefully the Pandora 2 are general computing devices - not locked down cell phones and tablets. For the population that use their Pandora for things other than games, the Pandora needs the added flexibility that full sized SD offers.

I ask of you:

1. Do you have any reason to believe the market is NOT shifting toward microSD cards? Current trends in the most sold devices (cellphones) seem to gravitate toward microSD.
   
2. Are you suggesting microSD cards cannot for some reason be as speed/price efficient as SD cards? Why?
   
3. How large a microSD would be large enough to render the capacity issue moot?
   

I'll try not to get too caught up in this, but I found these parts to be confusing.

Cell phones don't care about the card speed. Heck, most cell phone users don't care about card sizes beyond 8GB. It is a completely different usage scenario. The Pandora is a general use computing device - and deliberately NOT a phone and NOT a manufacturer locked-down tablet. It's use profile is MUCH wider.


microSD cards have NEVER been speed/price, capacity/price efficient as SD cards. They have -always- been 12-24 months behind SD in capabilities. What makes YOU think this is going to change?


How much storage is enough? There is no such animal as 'enough', only limitations based on what the machine can take and how much my wallet can handle.


Right now I use my left SD slot with a 128GB Lexar class 10, 133X card in it. It contains the boot OS parition, a /swap partition, a programs partition and a persistent media partition. I keep transient media files on the 128GB Lexar class 10 card in the right slot. The persistent data and media card are generally >80% full.


128GB SDXC cards have been on the market for about 12 months now. I expect 256GB SDXC cards to hit sometime in either Q4 2012 or Q1 2013. Those will be followed about 3-6 months later with microSDXC 128GB cards.


So, by the time microSD 128GB cards hit the market, I will likely have moved to 256GB cards in my Pandora.


For the proponents of an internal microSD slot, what is your planned usage? OS backup?


My requirements for an internal slot is boot, swap, programs and persistent storage. Four partitions, 3/4 getting the most severe use that the machine can dish out. I want the largest, fastest, most robust card that I can get my hands on in that application. At any given time through the entire history of and current development of SD based card technology, that dictates using full sized SD media.

 

[Grench]

Here's a point:


no P2 will be a mass market product for techno-n00bs


therefore, we can expect users to understand that removing the disk with the OS on is a bad idea

Well, I certainly understand that. But I might want to let my child play with my Pandora too, and she might not understand that.

Full to micro adapters are not even an alternative for mobile devices, way too flimsy.

Yes, I would certainly prefer to have the external slots full SD slots for this reason. And the internal slot too, because for that slot, the adapter would not just be flimsy, it would not fit.

If you get two full SD-slots and one internal µSD, but still with the possibility to boot from the external two, would that µSD slot really be an issue?

No, it would not be an issue, but I would probably not use it (except as a backup installation in case I mess something up, which is what I currently use the NAND for). So I would end up booting from the external slot, which is fine for me, but not absolutely ideal. I want my boot card to be the fastest, biggest, most expensive card I have (and this will probably not be a microSD card), so it would be nice if I can put it in an internal slot, which gives it some extra protection (no accidental removal, less chance that it gets lost somehow).


So if the P2 has 2x full SD slots and 1x micro slot, I'd prefer the micro slot to be external and one of the full slots to be internal. Just 2 full SD slots (one of which is internal) would be OK too. It would also be cool to have 3 full SD slots (one of which is internal), if it is important not to give the impression that the P2 can do less than the P1 (and if space limitations allow this). But I'd probably not need the third slot. So I'd be fine with only one external slot: it's also good to have less holes in the device, so less dust/dirt can enter and it becomes more splash water proof. I already use the current Pandora while I'm taking a nice long bath, but this is probably a bit risky, so I wouldn't mind if the P2 would be made to survive getting dropped in the water.

Thank you _wb_. I'm glad there is someone else out there that 'gets it'.

 

[bzar]

Thanks for the clarifications on your rationale. This what I came here for and now I can be on my way


...after I answer the questions you posed.

What makes YOU think this is going to change?

Market shift. I see more and more devices having µSD slots for storage. Bigger market, more variety in customer base, more demand for larger capacity cards, more demand for higher speed cards to make use of the larger capacity cards. Right now it might not be cost-effective to produce high-end µSD cards, but with a larger customer base it will be. You may disagree with me here, since it's at best speculation.

For the proponents of an internal microSD slot, what is your planned usage? OS backup?


My requirements for an internal slot is boot, swap, programs and persistent storage. Four partitions, 3/4 getting the most severe use that the machine can dish out. I want the largest, fastest, most robust card that I can get my hands on in that application. At any given time through the entire history of and current development of SD based card technology, that dictates using full sized SD media.

Boot, swap (if needed), often used programs and persistent storage.


I'm not disputing SD's track record.


EDIT: _wb_, a µSD card with SD adapter CAN fit any SD slot. I can provide you with a picture of one such adapter if you'd like.

 

[Foxgod]

Here's a point:


no P2 will be a mass market product for techno-n00bs


therefore, we can expect users to understand that removing the disk with the OS on is a bad idea

Well, I certainly understand that. But I might want to let my child play with my Pandora too, and she might not understand that.

Full to micro adapters are not even an alternative for mobile devices, way too flimsy.

Yes, I would certainly prefer to have the external slots full SD slots for this reason. And the internal slot too, because for that slot, the adapter would not just be flimsy, it would not fit.

If you get two full SD-slots and one internal µSD, but still with the possibility to boot from the external two, would that µSD slot really be an issue?

No, it would not be an issue, but I would probably not use it (except as a backup installation in case I mess something up, which is what I currently use the NAND for). So I would end up booting from the external slot, which is fine for me, but not absolutely ideal. I want my boot card to be the fastest, biggest, most expensive card I have (and this will probably not be a microSD card), so it would be nice if I can put it in an internal slot, which gives it some extra protection (no accidental removal, less chance that it gets lost somehow).


So if the P2 has 2x full SD slots and 1x micro slot, I'd prefer the micro slot to be external and one of the full slots to be internal. Just 2 full SD slots (one of which is internal) would be OK too. It would also be cool to have 3 full SD slots (one of which is internal), if it is important not to give the impression that the P2 can do less than the P1 (and if space limitations allow this). But I'd probably not need the third slot. So I'd be fine with only one external slot: it's also good to have less holes in the device, so less dust/dirt can enter and it becomes more splash water proof. I already use the current Pandora while I'm taking a nice long bath, but this is probably a bit risky, so I wouldn't mind if the P2 would be made to survive getting dropped in the water.

Thank you _wb_. I'm glad there is someone else out there that 'gets it'.

I dont understand why you would prefer the internal one to be full..


MicroSD got plenty of bandwith, class 10 is enough, and switching micro sd cards is annoying, hence is why i prefer them internally, then you never have to switch the microsd.


But everyone got its own preferences.

 

[Grench]

Here's a point:


no P2 will be a mass market product for techno-n00bs


therefore, we can expect users to understand that removing the disk with the OS on is a bad idea

Well, I certainly understand that. But I might want to let my child play with my Pandora too, and she might not understand that.

Full to micro adapters are not even an alternative for mobile devices, way too flimsy.

Yes, I would certainly prefer to have the external slots full SD slots for this reason. And the internal slot too, because for that slot, the adapter would not just be flimsy, it would not fit.

If you get two full SD-slots and one internal µSD, but still with the possibility to boot from the external two, would that µSD slot really be an issue?

No, it would not be an issue, but I would probably not use it (except as a backup installation in case I mess something up, which is what I currently use the NAND for). So I would end up booting from the external slot, which is fine for me, but not absolutely ideal. I want my boot card to be the fastest, biggest, most expensive card I have (and this will probably not be a microSD card), so it would be nice if I can put it in an internal slot, which gives it some extra protection (no accidental removal, less chance that it gets lost somehow).


So if the P2 has 2x full SD slots and 1x micro slot, I'd prefer the micro slot to be external and one of the full slots to be internal. Just 2 full SD slots (one of which is internal) would be OK too. It would also be cool to have 3 full SD slots (one of which is internal), if it is important not to give the impression that the P2 can do less than the P1 (and if space limitations allow this). But I'd probably not need the third slot. So I'd be fine with only one external slot: it's also good to have less holes in the device, so less dust/dirt can enter and it becomes more splash water proof. I already use the current Pandora while I'm taking a nice long bath, but this is probably a bit risky, so I wouldn't mind if the P2 would be made to survive getting dropped in the water.

Thank you _wb_. I'm glad there is someone else out there that 'gets it'.

I dont understand why you would prefer the internal one to be full..


MicroSD got plenty of bandwith, class 10 is enough, and switching micro sd cards is annoying, hence is why i prefer them internally, then you never have to switch the microsd.


But everyone got its own preferences.

My preference is to not have microSD at all - and make the next device all full sized SD.


If there -must- be an internal slot to keep people from improperly ejecting their OS card, then I would like that one to be able to take the highest capacity, fastest cards on the market. I intend to treat that internal card as I would the internal hard drive on a desktop computer. Capacity and speed become very critical in that application.


If volume or device headers is such that we can only have two full sized cards - then I would accept having one of those 'internalized'.


If people feel that they 'must' have a microSD slot for data interchange with their phone and/or tablet and can't stand the thought of using a very common adapter - then I don't see an issue with adding an external microSD slot to the device in addition to a full sized exposed SD slot.

 

[Aurekana]

If the system will have a large amount of memory, then it would be feasible to load the entire operating system into a ramdisk, in which case the speed of the OS-card, be it a microSD card inside the device, would be entirely irrelevant, and the ramdisk read/write speeds would be far faster than any memory card could manage.

 

[Binky]

microSD is suitable for upgradeable internal disks, its also good for razor-thin smartphones


It is not suitable for removable storage, and can never hold as much data as an SD card using the same technology (due to having less space inside)


I want conveniently removable storage, which is why I want at least one full-size SD slot

 

[_wb_]

EDIT: _wb_, a µSD card with SD adapter CAN fit any SD slot. I can provide you with a picture of one such adapter if you'd like.

I was talking about fitting a full SD card in a microSD slot. You could do that with an adapter, but obviously the SD card does not go in the microSD slot, it would stick out (or hang out). This would be something you can do with an external microSD slot (but I wouldn't recommend it); with an internal microSD slot this is of course not possible.

 

[bzar]

^ Oh, that way. Sorry then, my mistake

 

[Wrath Of Khan]

didnt craig suggest 8gig of ram for the pandora2.Would html5 benefit alot from this.Craig is quite fond of html5.Wonder if thats a reason for 8gigabyte.

 

[bzar]

^ Not really. HTML5 apps don't take enormous amounts of memory, usually most is used on assets (images, sounds, video) rather than runtime data. Most bigger HTML5 apps I've used have taken a few dozen MiB, while the largest have been something over 100MiB, but these would take the same amount even if they were native (because of the assets). HTML5 performance is currently most dependant on the browser (JS engine, canvas implementation, HW acceleration, WebGL support), and usually GPU or CPU bottlenecked when comparing different setups with the same browser and OS.

 

[notaz]

Even it it needed 8GB it could not access it, single process is limited on 3GB no matter what, because it's 32bit CPU, PAE or not.

 

[SNESFAN]

doesn't chrome sandbox each tab in it's own process? I know on my regular workstation it's not uncommon to have 8-9 chrome.exe processes running each chewing like 30-120mb each

 

[Grench]

Even it it needed 8GB it could not access it, single process is limited on 3GB no matter what, because it's 32bit CPU, PAE or not.

And when CraigIX said it would have 8GB, that's where I jumped to the assumption that he was considering some 64bit ARM beast that hasn't come to market yet.


Of course, according to many people here, that beast hasn't been invented, couldn't exist - even though it's instruction set is submitted for addition to the Linux kernel and nobody in their right mind would build one...


http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9223894/ARM_s_first_64_bit_processors_target_servers_smartphones


http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2011/10/31/appliedmicro-shows-worlds-first-64-bit-arm-processor.aspx


http://news.softpedia.com/news/ARM-s-Next-Gen-64-bit-Processor-Will-Be-Called-Atlas-and-Apollo-250369.shtml


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/28/arm_holdings_arm_v8/


http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4230160/ARM-unveils-64-bit-architecture


Of course, none of that likely applies to whatever chip they're looking at for the next unit. Still - 64bit ARM -is- coming. The when and whether it is applicable to a handheld device - that's yet to be seen.


Fun reading though.

 

[fusion_power]

^ Not really. HTML5 apps don't take enormous amounts of memory, usually most is used on assets (images, sounds, video) rather than runtime data. Most bigger HTML5 apps I've used have taken a few dozen MiB, while the largest have been something over 100MiB, but these would take the same amount even if they were native (because of the assets). HTML5 performance is currently most dependant on the browser (JS engine, canvas implementation, HW acceleration, WebGL support), and usually GPU or CPU bottlenecked when comparing different setups with the same browser and OS.

Does HTML5 even has HW acceleration? And is this supported on ARM Plattforms and Linux yet? I can imagine, if Pandora 2 want to deal with HTML5 (craig seems to like it), then it would be a clever idea to search for suiting Hardware, so we can be sure that stuff like HTML5 is supported by the P2 Hardware, without many circumstances.


I'm not a HTML5 fan but I like the Idea that it could be a solution to get away from Flash.

 

[bzar]

Browsers have had HW acceleration for quite some time now, even on linux. Especially mobile browsers. Not sure what the support in mainstream desktop browsers (which we'd likely use) is like for OpenGL ES and friends though.


Do remember that HW acceleration is not a magic source of performance, and its utilization depends heavily on the context. In browsers it's used to provide smooth and fast scrolling and zooming of content, and to some extent speed up canvas operations.

 

[zonova]

Erm, just a question. If the software for PS2 emulation were made at the same level as PSX emulation is now, would it be playable on the Pandora 2? With whatever basic idea of specs we have so far, i mean.


Also, i'd like to say that having an internet SD card sounds a bit silly, why would you do that? The sandisk website states that both MicroSD and SD cards have speeds of up to 95mb/s. Sounds good to me.


However, i'm not sure that by 2014 SD cards will be completely out of use. If they aren't, i would still love at least 1 SD card slot, and however many MicroSD card slots you can fit/decide to put.


I'd like to say that i fully support the OPT and i wish them luck. Btw, 700$ seems like a very reasonable price for such a niche item, i don't think anyone is expecting this to become as common as an iphone.

 

[barbour31]

700 dollars? Someones are out of their minds! The first pandora cost is extremely high for what it is too. It was delayed so long, by the time the thing began shipping cheaper devices with better specs had come out. And it was originally 300, the designers then doubled the price for no reason w/o improvements. I can't see the "P2" ending well. When the devs decide they want more money they'll jump the price up 100% to 1400. All this cost w/o free shipping. No freak'n thanks. Openpandora equals OpenFail. I was excited when they announced the original 6 years ago, but after all the bull shit the original went threw I am highly expecting another bad deal for round 2.