Pandora with microSD - will you buy it?

[Grench]

I like the internal microsd and dual full sd external idea. As long as they allow to boot to whatever media drive you want and possibly set the order yourself i see all complaints agianst that idea almost selfish in a way.

Change that to one internal full sized SD, one external full size SD and one external microSD - I'd be OK, not thrilled, but OK with that. The volume is the same.


The 'locked inside' boot, swap, programs, persistent storage device - why would anyone want that to be slower, lower capacity and more fragile microSD?

 

[Exophase]

Change that to one internal full sized SD, one external full size SD and one external microSD - I'd be OK, not thrilled, but OK with that. The volume is the same.

The 'locked inside' boot, swap, programs, persistent storage device - why would anyone want that to be slower, lower capacity and more fragile microSD?

Because it's the one that's more work to swap out, and the one OPT is likely to stock with a card and therefore the one people are more likely to want to just leave alone. If it's never being removed it'd hardly be more fragile either. And if most people wouldn't bother replacing it then it's not going to matter if it could be larger or even faster because for the prices OPT would be spending on a stock card (no more than a few dollars) even you agree that there's no benefit in buying full SD.


Even if you argue that the card would be slower what exactly are you using to show that boot/programs are where you'd benefit from the increased SD performance, if at all? Most programs are a few MB at the absolute most, and a lot of them would be easy hits for disk cache or constantly running to begin with. It might boot slightly faster, assuming the SD is often even the boot bottleneck to begin with, but if it has a half decent hibernate how often would you need to boot to begin with? And having swap space on a Pandora 2 with at least 4GB of RAM is pretty silly.. who still needs a swap partition on their Linux desktops?


You've been saying that you need the full size SD for swapping data with other devices like digital cameras. Surely you'd want to do this with external slots and not an internal one you boot from? Dropping two external full SD is a regression from Pandora 1 in other ways too, for instance you lose the ability to use the device to copy from card to card which is occasionally useful.


Plus internal SD cards require a little bit more PCB space because they don't partially stick over the edge of the PCB.

 

[Grench]

Change that to one internal full sized SD, one external full size SD and one external microSD - I'd be OK, not thrilled, but OK with that. The volume is the same.

The 'locked inside' boot, swap, programs, persistent storage device - why would anyone want that to be slower, lower capacity and more fragile microSD?

Because it's the one that's more work to swap out, and the one OPT is likely to stock with a card and therefore the one people are more likely to want to just leave alone. If it's never being removed it'd hardly be more fragile either.

And if most people wouldn't bother replacing it then it's not going to matter if it could be larger or even faster because for the prices OPT would be spending on a stock card (no more than a few dollars) even you agree that there's no benefit in buying full SD.

Nope - I don't agree with that at all.


Just because your, "most people wouldn't bother," doesn't mean that the entire customer base should be sadled with a slower, lower capacity card slot. The Pandora IS a device for people who enjoy fiddling with their computers - making them faster, etc. That is why we have such a wide range of discussions around overclocking. I'm sure there are 'some people' who won't bother, just like there are 'some people' who are just fine running their current Pandora on a single 8GB class 2 card.


Especially in bulk, they would be able to buy an SD card with approximately twice the speed, twice the capacity of an equally priced microSD card. This makes their device perform better, 'out of the box', get better reviews and sell more units.

Even if you argue that the card would be slower what exactly are you using to show that boot/programs are where you'd benefit from the increased SD performance, if at all? Most programs are a few MB at the absolute most, and a lot of them would be easy hits for disk cache or constantly running to begin with. It might boot slightly faster, assuming the SD is often even the boot bottleneck to begin with, but if it has a half decent hibernate how often would you need to boot to begin with? And having swap space on a Pandora 2 with at least 4GB of RAM is pretty silly.. who still needs a swap partition on their Linux desktops?

One size does not fit all - and not all Linux desktops were created equal.


My home computer is an HP xw8600 workstation with 8 CPU cores, 16GB of RAM and a local four drive 8TB RAID 10 array on a dedicated caching 3ware RAID controller running Linux Mint 12 KDE. I multitask HEAVILY. I have pushed it to the point where it starts hitting the /swap partition quite a few times - and have considered doubling up my RAM again.


Just because YOU don't need the added flexibility, capabilities, speed and capacity, does not mean that there aren't those of us out there that DO need it. I am asking for the flexibility to meet BOTH of our needs. With a full sized slot you can still stuff whatever SD or microSD card in it that you want. I can not make a full sized SD card fit in a microSD slot.

You've been saying that you need the full size SD for swapping data with other devices like digital cameras. Surely you'd want to do this with external slots and not an internal one you boot from?

Doing it through an internal slot is fine - so long as that slot is capable of handling a card as large and as fast as the card I'm putting in the external slot. Most of my camera cards are 32GB - I stage and sort them through the 'system' card, then save them off to another card in sorted and annotated form. It works just fine. I may as well put a piece of black electrical tape over my left card slot on my Pandora since the 128GB card in there never moves. It could be internal on the device and I'd be fine with that.

Dropping two external full SD is a regression from Pandora 1 in other ways too, for instance you lose the ability to use the device to copy from card to card which is occasionally useful.

Not really. If you're already booting from one of your external slots, then the NAND is irrelevant. I copy from various cards 16GB to 128GB in capacity, to my boot card (128GB with a 100GB data partition), sort, annotate then copy back to another card as a 'project'. I treat my boot card as you would the internal hard drive in a normal desktop computer.

Plus internal SD cards require a little bit more PCB space because they don't partially stick over the edge of the PCB.

Not quite. Look closer. The edge of the Pandora is recessed across the front to prevent accidentally hitting the standby button, accidentally ejecting cards, protect the volume wheel. An internal card wouldn't need the recess - which makes the internal/external facing card's physical volume a wash.

 

[Exophase]

You can't just use the argument that some people will be against something when the same holds for the alternative. You have to actually start considering who wants things more. If your needs are highly unique or specialized and they come at a cost that MORE PEOPLE don't want then you really need to consider this.


There's some support for 1x internal SD + 1x external microSD + 1x external SD (you and _wb_) but so far more people have posted in favor of 1x internal microSD + 2x external SD, so..


Don't know what you mean about the Pandora edge being recessed. What I do know is that the SD card goes full out to the edge of the unit when completely inserted and therefore goes over the edge of the PCB, therefore its footprint on the PCB is less than its total footprint. Even if you have room inside to go over the edge with an internal SD card you don't have as much room, I don't see how there can be an argument against this..?

 

[Foxgod]

I would still buy it, but i find micro SD as external slot to be annoying and pointless.


Theres zero advantage to it, they are slower (even thought they are fast enough for the pandora2), inconvenient, break faster, and it doesnt save space as opposed to simply placing one internally.


Also, with SD card getting bigger in storage, i dont see need for two external slots anymore, besides having one as backup when the other breaks.


So my vote is one micro sd internal, one regular SD external.

 

[Grench]

I would still buy it, but i find micro SD as external slot to be annoying and pointless.


Theres zero advantage to it, they are slower (even thought they are fast enough for the pandora2), inconvenient, break faster, and it doesnt save space as opposed to simply placing one internally.

Those same microSD issues are present whether the card is external or internal.

Also, with SD card getting bigger in storage, i dont see need for two external slots anymore, besides having one as backup when the other breaks.
So my vote is one micro sd internal, one regular SD external.

Why would you insist on the internal slot being slower, lower capacity and more expensive? Why not just make both regular SDXC?


I've yet to see any solid reason why anyone would prefer microSD over SD formats in -any- position in/on the device.

 

[Grench]

Don't know what you mean about the Pandora edge being recessed. What I do know is that the SD card goes full out to the edge of the unit when completely inserted and therefore goes over the edge of the PCB, therefore its footprint on the PCB is less than its total footprint. Even if you have room inside to go over the edge with an internal SD card you don't have as much room, I don't see how there can be an argument against this..?

Really? You don't see the 1/32" recess from the outer edge of the unit to the level where the components on the front of the existing Pandora are?


Put a matchbook cover, ruler, business card or any other form of 90* straight edge up against the front of your Pandora with it sitting on a table. See that gap between the straight edge and the switch housing, audio port, SD slots and how the volume dial comes through the recess - but not past the edge of the actual case? An external port needs a slight recess to help prevent it from getting caught up, accidentally pushed in resulting in it getting ejected, etc. An internal card doesn't need the recess. The net dimensional volume is a wash between internal SDXC and external SDXC.


Yes, an internal SDXC would take up roughly twice the room as an internal microSD.


However, it would take two microSD cards running in a RAID 0 stripe to equal the capacity and performance of one full sized SDXC slot.

 

[Foxgod]

I would still buy it, but i find micro SD as external slot to be annoying and pointless.


Theres zero advantage to it, they are slower (even thought they are fast enough for the pandora2), inconvenient, break faster, and it doesnt save space as opposed to simply placing one internally.

Also, with SD card getting bigger in storage, i dont see need for two external slots anymore, besides having one as backup when the other breaks.
So my vote is one micro sd internal, one regular SD external.

Why would you insist on the internal slot being slower, lower capacity and more expensive? Why not just make both regular SDXC?


I've yet to see any solid reason why anyone would prefer microSD over SD formats in -any- position in/on the device.

Only one issue of them is present, the slower part, because all the other issues are only an issue when micro is used as an external slot.


And the slower isnt really an issue either, like i put between quotes, the bandwith is good enough.


However the amount of cons weight too much to warrant using an micro externally.


And,


Theres also SDXC Micro.

 

[slaeshjag]

µSD-slots takes up a lot less board-space. I dare you to find a place on the current pandora's PCB that you can fit a third full-size slot on.

 

[Exophase]

Really? You don't see the 1/32" recess from the outer edge of the unit to the level where the components on the front of the existing Pandora are?

It's nothing compared to the thickness of the case itself...

Yes, an internal SDXC would take up roughly twice the room as an internal microSD.

Twice? How do you get that? microSD is about 1/4th the surface area of SD.

 

[WizardStan]

Twice? How do you get that? microSD is about 1/4th the surface area of SD.

Approximately 1/8th the total volume by card, and since microSD cards don't have mechanical latches the way full sized do you're saving even more space.

 

[Linux-SWAT]

Why not come to an agreement and use mini-SD ?

 

[slaeshjag]

I had a pretty hard time finding *a* miniSD for my Dingoo one year ago

 

[bismuthdrummer]

Dropping two external full SD is a regression from Pandora 1 in other ways too, for instance you lose the ability to use the device to copy from card to card which is occasionally useful.

Not really. If you're already booting from one of your external slots, then the NAND is irrelevant. I copy from various cards 16GB to 128GB in capacity, to my boot card (128GB with a 100GB data partition), sort, annotate then copy back to another card as a 'project'. I treat my boot card as you would the internal hard drive in a normal desktop computer.

Yes, it is a regression.


Your argument ignores the cost of having the biggest and fastest SDXC card stuck in your Pandora. What you're saying is that in order to transfer large files from card to card, I have to have my largest SD be my system card, which I may not want, and therefore also for me to fork out that many more dollars when I want to crank up my system I/O speed, which you so highly desire.


Why can't I have a reasonably priced but fast internal drive and still transfer large files? Or even just a cheap system drive (maybe I don't care so much about boot time or system space)? Unless you are saying I'm going to save a load of cash on my Pandora by dropping a slot...


// This isn't a critical function, I am just illustrating the clear loss of functionality for the common Pandora user.

 

[SNESFAN]

Why not come to an agreement and use mini-SD ?

That would be a reason to not buy a pandora 2 right there...


The future of removeable media is miniSD huzzah!

However, it would take two microSD cards running in a RAID 0 stripe to equal the capacity and performance of one full sized SDXC slot.

Oooooooh raid 0 sdxc.... is that even possible? We need top men on this right away... im serious... that sounds sexy

 

[Linux-SWAT]

I achieved mirror RAID under zaxxon or slack, i don't remember. The SD thoughput was leveled to 24M/s.

 

[Grench]

Dropping two external full SD is a regression from Pandora 1 in other ways too, for instance you lose the ability to use the device to copy from card to card which is occasionally useful.

Not really. If you're already booting from one of your external slots, then the NAND is irrelevant. I copy from various cards 16GB to 128GB in capacity, to my boot card (128GB with a 100GB data partition), sort, annotate then copy back to another card as a 'project'. I treat my boot card as you would the internal hard drive in a normal desktop computer.

Yes, it is a regression.


Your argument ignores the cost of having the biggest and fastest SDXC card stuck in your Pandora. What you're saying is that in order to transfer large files from card to card, I have to have my largest SD be my system card, which I may not want, and therefore also for me to fork out that many more dollars when I want to crank up my system I/O speed, which you so highly desire.


Why can't I have a reasonably priced but fast internal drive and still transfer large files? Or even just a cheap system drive (maybe I don't care so much about boot time or system space)? Unless you are saying I'm going to save a load of cash on my Pandora by dropping a slot...


// This isn't a critical function, I am just illustrating the clear loss of functionality for the common Pandora user.

You could do that just fine if we had 3 SDXC slots. The one inside and one outside solution was a response to someone stating that the physical volume of 3 SDXC slots would be too much.


I sympathize with the loss of an external facing port - but I'm willing to give one up if that is the difference between having internal SDXC instead of getting stuck with microSD and all of the capability loss associated with it. In this scenario, I would end up using a USB SDXC dongle as the 2nd external SDXC slot when those needs present.

 

[bismuthdrummer]

You could do that just fine if we had 3 SDXC slots. The one inside and one outside solution was a response to someone stating that the physical volume of 3 SDXC slots would be too much.

Yep, I get it. I was just establishing that the loss of an external slot is in fact a regression.


How important the second external slot is, we can only find out through public opinion.


EDIT: Removed a question I answered through reading.

 

[Neelix]

Yes, an internal SDXC would take up roughly twice the room as an internal microSD.

Actually it would take up considerably more room than that... you seem to be forgetting that for an internal card, in addition to the area of the slot itself you'll need an almost equal amount of empty space beside the slot to allow for removal of the card... for a full size SD card this represents a massive area when compared to the size of the unit to begin with.


- Neelix

 

[Aurekana]

Yes, an internal SDXC would take up roughly twice the room as an internal microSD.

Actually more like 4x the room, judging by the cards sitting on my desk in front of me, and by this picture.


http://upload.wikime...oryCard_002.jpg

Why not come to an agreement and use mini-SD ?

But what about my MemoryStick collection??? =P

Actually it would take up considerably more room than that... you seem to be forgetting that for an internal card, in addition to the area of the slot itself you'll need an almost equal amount of empty space beside the slot to allow for removal of the card... for a full size SD card this represents a massive area when compared to the size of the unit to begin with.


- Neelix

I believe there are microSD slots similar to SIM card holders that flip open ike a clamshell and let you place the card in from the top, then close to secure the card in place. I wonder if there's anything similar for other memory card formats...