Replace Cpu With Omap Successor?

[paulguy]

I think 2 years would be most appropriate. After 5 years, there will be very little demand.

This nonsense about "alienating" people with a first pandora is silly. All the software is PC ports, so like PC software, it'll only really benefit from faster hardware. There's no reason you can't run a lot of software on a 500Mhz P3, but you can run the same stuff on a faster computer, and it'll run better, or you can run more at a time. It's not like a games console where a new version means the new software won't run on the old version. The Pandora is a portable PC, not just a games console, like DS or PSP! The same rules DO NOT apply!

 

[1magus]

Emulating the PS2 is not that hard in terms of raw power needed, really you need a powerful GPU that is similar in power to a Geforce 6 or above. And possible a quad core CPU lol.

 

[thomasmes]

Why does everybody want a new Pandora already?

I just wan't to know if it is easy to replace the CPU with a more recent one, so Pandora 1 is more up to date. I don't want a complete new one.
If it costs no extra work, just a bit more money, I am happy to pay a little extra for a faster Pandora 1.

 

[torpor]

I don't want new Pandora hardware. The hardware we've got is good enough for many, many things.

What I want is new Pandora software. Anyone want to fund a Pandora-exclusive software development group that will work on this for the next 6 months?

 

[mahousaru]

Shame the idea of proven technology and good coding has been eroded by throwing faster processors and more memory at a problem

 

[WizardStan]

All the software is PC ports, so like PC software, it'll only really benefit from faster hardware.

Wow! :blink:
I just... don't know where to begin with the wrongness of these statements. Just... no. You... GAH! :wacko:

 

[urjaman]

All the software is PC ports, so like PC software, it'll only really benefit from faster hardware.

Wow! :blink:
I just... don't know where to begin with the wrongness of these statements. Just... no. You... GAH! :wacko:

First part (All the ...) is true for most of UMPC/Utility software there is at the moment. Of cource emulators and other stuff are optimized for the pandora, as well as the OS, but so far only partially, as most of you have noticed XFCE is quite pristine (the battery info plugin has been patched to show our info, but thats about it AFAIK) with its big configuration windows etc.

 

[Mr B]

We have Apple to thanks for with new products EACH YEAR!!!

"The same procedure as last year, Miss Sophie? - The same procedure as every year, James!”

Apple isn't really reinventing anything. They are switching over to the current generation CPU, and updating a bit here and there. To do that with the Panda would be easy, and unfair. I mean, com on, you'd like major revisions for the OS only once a year? And, as i said. Being an enthusiast market aimed piece of hardware means it has a longer life cycle, so don't expect a new unit for at least a year. More likely two. And then it's just going to be on the development end, actually having a product to present takes a while, as we've seen.
B!

 

[hedwards]

I think 2 years would be most appropriate. After 5 years, there will be very little demand.

This nonsense about "alienating" people with a first pandora is silly. All the software is PC ports, so like PC software, it'll only really benefit from faster hardware. There's no reason you can't run a lot of software on a 500Mhz P3, but you can run the same stuff on a faster computer, and it'll run better, or you can run more at a time. It's not like a games console where a new version means the new software won't run on the old version. The Pandora is a portable PC, not just a games console, like DS or PSP! The same rules DO NOT apply!

Having waited nearly 2 years and still not received my unit, I'd be pissed if a new one came out between batches. Even if it's a minor detail like more memory. Why? Because we were assured that it wouldn't be happening that our pre-orders were going to cover the cost of development and that the developers were going to be making their money on future orders, whereas we were paying for the cost of development. I'd feel like a real sucker having written them an interest free loan if the 3rd batchers ended up with a better unit even if they did pay more, I could've had a better unit for only a few dollars more. Build quality and experience are going to make later units better polished, but there isn't really any way around that, and the older ones are at least collectors items.

Beyond that though, a faster processor and more memory would allow for emulation of more recent systems as well as more complicated native software. The Pandora isn't anywhere near powerful enough to not benefit from more clocks, assuming that it could be done without giving up too much battery life.

EDIT: Mr B, major revisions aren't that big a deal as long as they run fine on all the revisions. I'd personally rather have smaller fixes and tweaks as necessary, with security updates on a more regular basis.

 

[lulzfish]

Shame the idea of proven technology and good coding has been eroded by throwing faster processors and more memory at a problem

It's not a shame that we can do things easily that were once completely impossible.

 

[Natro]

In the case of the OMAP3640, the only difference would be a faster machine with an even lower power consumption. Its essentially the same exact hardware except instead of a 65nm chipset, its a 45nm chipset. My point is that it would be a transparent upgrade aside from some increased capabilities and support that TI threw into it. Everything that works on the current Pandora should also work on one with an OMAP3640. There would probably just need to be some minor hardware and probably a few lower-level kernel adjustments to account for the different electrical characteristics of the chipset.

On the otherhand, there is nothing wrong with the existing Pandora design and chipset. It seems the concerns about the speed capabilities are related to the need to overclock to make some games playable. A faster processor would only extend the range of games that would be playable on the Pandora.

Any changes to hardware would add to production time and cost. As simple as a change may seem, it would only distract from getting the first generation of Pandora's out the door. An upgrade of any kind regardless of how simple it may seem is probably best left until the next generation Pandora.

 

[Mr B]

This nonsense about "alienating" people with a first pandora is silly. All the software is PC ports, so like PC software, it'll only really benefit from faster hardware. There's no reason you can't run a lot of software on a 500Mhz P3, but you can run the same stuff on a faster computer, and it'll run better, or you can run more at a time. It's not like a games console where a new version means the new software won't run on the old version. The Pandora is a portable PC, not just a games console, like DS or PSP! The same rules DO NOT apply!

Don't know what you expect, but the whole point is to keep a uniform system just like consoles, so you can run highly optimized code, and get the best performance, and battery life. So, indeed, the same rules does apply.

EDIT: Mr B, major revisions aren't that big a deal as long as they run fine on all the revisions. I'd personally rather have smaller fixes and tweaks as necessary, with security updates on a more regular basis.

I was rather hinting at the hardware updates being fairly minor. Apple isn't updating the hardware due to any actual need, they are doing it just to keep the media circus, and with it, the buyers on there toes, and try to milk more sales. They didn't really bring any new features that reinvented the iPhone from model to model. Heck, some of the upgrades, were simply features people hacked in to the earlier models already, so Apple had there hands forced. Provide it, or get bad PR for the new model.
So the main concept of the yearly release, is the major software revisions. Software, that works for the earlier versions, even if Apple to some extent cripples functionality. Again, often for functions already hacked in to the older device, meaning that they could provide them, but they just wont, trying to persuade people to get the latest model instead.
We, on the other hand, have every opportunity to get major software revisions more often then once every year. Add to that the fact that developers of the hardware, software, and end users are here, on this very forum, communicating with one and other, and that all ands up to a much more health enthusiast environment then a big corporate yearly release schedule.

My point is that it would be a transparent upgrade aside from some increased capabilities and support that TI threw into it. Everything that works on the current Pandora should also work on one with an OMAP3640.

Everything that takes full advantage of the new hardware version, doesn't work on the first generation and, thats where you start alienating people. Even worse, since most developers jumped on the first batch, and they will feel let down, and might even drop thoughts of development all together. Not an ideal situation.
B!