What if we back up a bit and make it more incremental?

[Grench]

What if we were to make a Pandora 2 that is more of an incremental step over the current Pandora?


The idea behind this is to re-use as much of the engineering and equipment that already exists as possible.


Working from the base up...


Same battery cover.


Same battery.


Same base plastic & stylus.


New motherboard (specs later in post)


Same keymat.


Same keymat surround plastics


New screen surround plastics to fit new screen


~4.5" touch screen - 1280x720? 1024x600?


Speakers -smaller so they fit under the screen - maybe more of them 2x per side since they're smaller?


Same lid top plastics


Motherboard - all external ports match to existing positions on the case plastics.


A dual or quad core ARM SoC @ 1.5Ghz or greater.


Two SDXC slots on front.


Same volume wheel.


Same on/off/standby switch.


Same headphone/mic jack.


Same awesome audio system MWeston already designed for the Pandora.


Same charging port.


USB 3.0 type A host port - in the same spot.


microUSB OTG port - in the same spot (flashing to fill the larger case hole)


miniHDMI port - where we currently have the weird video port. (yes we loose the other stuff)


802.11b/g/n (with 2.4ghz AND 5ghz antennas) - use what was learned to make it right.


Bluetooth 4.0


8GB onboard NAND


Since we're talking about cellphone SoC setups - a few things might be able to come along for the ride:


gyroscope/tilt/compass


GPS


rumble


Angstrom or Slackware or Ubuntu as the stock OS - Android can live on as a PND.


Anyway - I think you all get the idea. A new motherobard (and on-board components), new screen and -one- new plastic piece (screen surround and speaker placement changes).


Frankly, the current batch of cases isn't bad. Those issues seem to be fixed.


Ergonomically the current setup is pretty good.


We have the needed ports.


The controls are - excellent.


Most of the technology and design of the current unit is pretty darn good.


So, what's everyone think? Is it viable?

 

[Wrath Of Khan]

Keyboard, sound, d-pad and face buttons all seem fine to me. The cases and battery covers do the trick but if a new case can be built, then it should be.

 

[Grench]

Keyboard, sound, d-pad and face buttons all seem fine to me. The cases and battery covers do the trick but if a new case can be built, then it should be.

My thoughts in this circle around how to get from where we are now to 'up to date' on specs while expending as little time and money in development as possible. If you recall, the case development was it's own level of purgatory. The current batch of cases (for 1Ghz and GC Pandoras) are actually pretty good - they don't self dissolve or crack when looked at sideways. Improving the plastics used helped -a lot-.


The way I see it, the path CraigIX has taken the P2 development down could result in a device that has to be sold in the ~$700 range. It has a pile of development costs wrapped around it. He's running down a road that looks, from my perspective, like an Android mini-tablet with game controls and a keyboard. If that kind of device is what you're after - good for you.


A fair number of people and, to some extent ED, have voiced that their 'ideal device' isn't that - but what they seem to be describing is exactly what we got - only with more CPU, faster everything, better graphics, better video out and a better display.


Thinking about it - that wouldn't be so bad.


So - what's everyone else think?

 

[craigix]

Keyboard, sound, d-pad and face buttons all seem fine to me. The cases and battery covers do the trick but if a new case can be built, then it should be.

The way I see it, the path CraigIX has taken the P2 development down could result in a device that has to be sold in the ~$700 range. It has a pile of development costs wrapped around it. He's running down a road that looks, from my perspective, like an Android mini-tablet with game controls and a keyboard. If that kind of device is what you're after - good for you.

Even though I've repeatedly said that isn't what it is? Stop believing the trolls who want to derail this.

 

[TeDaDeS]

I would fully agree to keep the current open pandora eco-system as it is and only add upgrades to it for the moment.


But I would go further and not have it called the pandora 2, as it is just a regular upgraded pandora.


The pandora 2 would be anything craigx or ed think up to be the next awsome device they can imagine. And they thought of the price the first time, so I'm sure they will not forget it for the second device. Maybe they will put even more effort in lowering the price as it has been a problem for the current unit for a while now.

 

[Grench]

Keyboard, sound, d-pad and face buttons all seem fine to me. The cases and battery covers do the trick but if a new case can be built, then it should be.

The way I see it, the path CraigIX has taken the P2 development down could result in a device that has to be sold in the ~$700 range. It has a pile of development costs wrapped around it. He's running down a road that looks, from my perspective, like an Android mini-tablet with game controls and a keyboard. If that kind of device is what you're after - good for you.

Even though I've repeatedly said that isn't what it is? Stop believing the trolls who want to derail this.

I must have missed some things then.


From what I've seen you 'say', it will have a roughly 5" high resolution screen, a blazing fast SoC, they keybard&nubs from the iCP2, have at least one microSD card slot and that it must ship with an Android OS due to a deal tying that as a precondition to getting the hardware. The community would then be free to port/install Linux (or whatever) on the device as there will be no boot-lock on it. The price point target is somewhere in the realm of the current 1Ghz Pandora.


You're welcome to correct/add/remove anything I got wrong there.


I'm not saying it would be a bad machine - I hope it turns out great. I started this thread to see if there was a community opinion on whether the current hardware design still had legs - which could result in a greatly decreased development curve for you.


This is the right forum. It is an appropriate topic - community development ideas for a Pandora successor.


I'm not sure if you're calling me a, "Troll who wants to derail this," or cautioning me against believing them - whoever they are.


Can you please clarify what you're upset about?


Thank you.

 

[3_bit]

I like what I'm hearing, but I'd miss the UART's that are part of the TV-OUT since you can do cool stuff with them. Aside from that, Wouldn't the Tegra 4 (Provided they use the latest ARMs in it) be a viable option?

 

[klapse]

What if we were to make a Pandora 2 that is more of an incremental step over the current Pandora?


The idea behind this is to re-use as much of the engineering and equipment that already exists as possible.


...


So, what's everyone think? Is it viable?

You read my mind...


You forgot to add improved battery and battery contacts (reboot on bump is a big problem)


Redoing the lid would add costs. Would you go for a wider aspect ratio and move speakers to the case? They could concievably be located on the sides, firing outwards, or located where the status LEDs are. All this would require a modified case and add to cost, so keeping the screen size exactly as-is might be the only cheap enough route.


In this scenario, this P1.5 could be the Ed+Community linux device. Craig's would be the Android device (unsure whether there are any linux hackers remaining to Craig at the moment to do a fully featured linux build for his P2)

 

[Grench]

I like what I'm hearing, but I'd miss the UART's that are part of the TV-OUT since you can do cool stuff with them. Aside from that, Wouldn't the Tegra 4 (Provided they use the latest ARMs in it) be a viable option?

Show me a dozen cases where someone has actually done something with them. They're such a small minority sliver of the audience that it is hard to justify a weird proprietary nobody-will-make-a-cable-for-it external port just for them.


I don't want to leave anyone out in the cold though - so how about a ribbon cable header, like the one used for the LCD, on the motherboard. If there are still hackers out there that need the UARTs, they can use a Dremmel to cut a slit in the case to feed a ribbon cable through and hack away.

What if we were to make a Pandora 2 that is more of an incremental step over the current Pandora?


The idea behind this is to re-use as much of the engineering and equipment that already exists as possible.


...


So, what's everyone think? Is it viable?

You read my mind...


You forgot to add improved battery and battery contacts (reboot on bump is a big problem)


Redoing the lid would add costs. Would you go for a wider aspect ratio and move speakers to the case? They could concievably be located on the sides, firing outwards, or located where the status LEDs are. All this would require a modified case and add to cost, so keeping the screen size exactly as-is might be the only cheap enough route.


In this scenario, this P1.5 could be the Ed+Community linux device. Craig's would be the Android device (unsure whether there are any linux hackers remaining to Craig at the moment to do a fully featured linux build for his P2)

I have never encountered the reboot on bump - it must be annoying though. Are you using an old black plastics Pandora that has started to decay by chance? Is your battery lid broken or cracked? Are the pins from the Pandora side still oriented right? Is anyone with the new titanium colored case experiencing this?


Anyway, one of the biggest points to this idea is to make as few case revisions as possible and still create a current 2013 technology device that fits in it. If we do as you suggested - then they are changing ALL of the plastics and re-incurring all of those development costs and time.


The idea is to keep the motherboard dimensions and location of exposed features identical, the same battery, same plastics, etc...


Updated CPU, Updated display are the two main features.


To update the display to a modern 16:9 panel will dictate that the plastic screen bezel & speaker setup be modified. That is one piece of plastic to re-mold, new screen to source, new motherboard to design - not to minimize this gargantuan effort.

 

[klapse]

They're such a small minority sliver of the audience that it is hard to justify a weird proprietary nobody-will-make-a-cable-for-it external port just for them.

Bingo

I have never encountered the reboot on bump - it must be annoying though. Are you using an old black plastics Pandora that has started to decay by chance? Is your battery lid broken or cracked? Are the pins from the Pandora side still oriented right? Is anyone with the new titanium colored case experiencing this?

Rebirth unit with old plastic. The battery is too small. allowing it to slide around when bumped. I solved this with a piece of foam between lid and battery.

Anyway, one of the biggest points to this idea is to make as few case revisions as possible and still create a current 2013 technology device that fits in it. If we do as you suggested - then they are changing ALL of the plastics and re-incurring all of those development costs and time.

Cheapest would be to keep the lid identical along with the LCD size. There isn't any room left in the vertical axis for a larger LCD anyway.


EDIT: On the SoC side, TI's Omap5 linux development seems to still be going strong. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTIxNDE Dual core A15s at 2Ghz sounds pretty tasty...

 

[Grench]

Cheapest would be to keep the lid identical along with the LCD size. There isn't any room left in the vertical axis for a larger LCD anyway.

Actually - not true. A 4.7" 16:9 screen would take up about the same vertical dimension. A wider screen should be able to fit into the lid - the question then becomes what to do with the speakers. My answer is to use much smaller speakers, but more of them. Another option would be to remove the light pipes and put speakers with clear plastic cones into that area and let the LEDs down below just generally glow up through the clear speaker plastics - they're plenty bright for that.

EDIT: On the SoC side, TI's Omap5 linux development seems to still be going strong. http://www.phoronix....item&px=MTIxNDE Dual core A15s at 2Ghz sounds pretty tasty...

The Omap5 would have all the bits & pieces we would be after.


It would require a new motherboard design and some acknowledgment that it would be getting built for a small population - not a mainstream device.


I have no idea if it's viable.

 

[bismuthdrummer]

Even though I've repeatedly said that isn't what it is? Stop believing the trolls who want to derail this.

I understand your frustration, but you'll have to clarify, Craig, as I am likewise confused. Which part of his view was wrong?


I see that his tone characterizes your vision negatively, but will the device definitely not cost in the $700 range? Will it not run Android? I get that you maybe don't think of it as a mini-tablet, but won't it still have gaming controls and a keyboard?


I think the controls and Android are pretty obviously in your vision, so did you mean the cost? I know we don't know the exact numbers yet because the BOM has to be established. But I am pretty sure I remember you saying somewhere that the $700 was much easier to manage as a business because you don't make recurring costs from software or monthly subscriptions of any kind. And if I recall you suggested the P2 would be in this range as well. On top of that you have stated that you will have the best handheld with TI engineering sample chips, if it all works out. So please clarify because I think you've got more than one forum-goer confused on the price, or whatever bothered you.

 

[klapse]

It would be detrimental to Craig's P2 project if someone else did a P1.5, so there is no surprise in his reaction.


The P1.5 idea would be more of a fallback solution in case the P2 doesn't work out.

 

[bismuthdrummer]

I guess my view is that Grench's proposal is a reasonable P2 because the second iterations of devices often look the same but with improved specs. Whether we are surprised or not, Craig needs to be more specific if he wants to debunk misperceptions about his intentions. And if he doesn't really want to debunk anything then I don't know what to say, I will just stop here.

 

[TeDaDeS]

Until the full concept is published we can only speculate if the device will hurt the current open pandora. I could imagine that the new device is so different that it should carry a different name than P2 and can easily co-exist with the current open pandora.


If not the device should generate so much sales it would cover the potential losses in sales from the current unit.


When reading the summary of information that was mentioned on the forums about the new device it should have no problem being sold next to the open pandora.


So the question would be if there will be a new pandora or that it will be fully replaced by the new device (that might also be named open pandora).

 

[klapse]

Until the full concept is published we can only speculate if the device will hurt the current open pandora.

You missed the point of the discussion. The issue was competition between the proposed upgraded pandora (called P1.5 by me) and Craig's proposed Pandora2 (P2) and NOT between either device and the current Pandora. Either P1.5 of P2 would replace the current openpandora completely.


The real motivation for the P1.5 may ultimately be financial: if P1 sales drop off too much around mid 2013, there may not be enough to clear the preorder queue and begin to generate profits. At this point it might be necessary to offer a new class of performance (including, for example, Dreamcast emulation) to boost sales.


The P1.5 proposal in the original post might require just a new motherboard, lcd and minimal changes to the lid. (also a piece of foam to hold the battery in place), possibly making development inexpensive enough to find funding.


(edit: it is possible that the changed connectors (hdmi, microusb) would not fit the existing holes in the case, making the whole idea unworkable)

 

[thatgui]

Altough I like the idea of having a evolving Pandora, I can't see that this is likely with what we have. An upgrade would at least mean a board redesign, and with the board and the SoC beeing the most expensive part the meaning of the whole undertaking would get obsolete.


It isn't even certain that whoever would do the redesign is willing to transfer parts of the old design into the new, as as far as I remember craig (or even mweston itself ??) was deeming the old design overly complicated and wished to simplify it. The more the new design would differ from the old one however, the more prototyping, testing and adjustemt to the production machines will be required, which will add to the costs.


Also even slight changes to the lid will result in an alteration of the mold, which will certainly cost a lot of money.


And last but not least, independet of what SoC would be choosen to be the successor of the current one, the Pandoras "firmware" would need to be adjusted, maybe even the games that heavily depend on certain features of the current SoC. Leading to the undertaking depending heavily on the OS devs.

 

[klapse]

Altough I like the idea of having a evolving Pandora, I can't see that this is likely with what we have. An upgrade would at least mean a board redesign, and with the board and the SoC beeing the most expensive part the meaning of the whole undertaking would get obsolete.

This simply makes no sense at all. The P1.5 could get as modern a SoC as the P2. Where do you come up with "obsolete"?

It isn't even certain that whoever would do the redesign is willing to transfer parts of the old design into the new, as as far as I remember craig (or even mweston itself ??) was deeming the old design overly complicated and wished to simplify it. The more the new design would differ from the old one however, the more prototyping, testing and adjustemt to the production machines will be required, which will add to the costs.

This makes no sense either. Reducing the number of layers on the PCB could occur independent of whether the PCB goes in an old (P1.5) or new (P2) case.

Also even slight changes to the lid will result in an alteration of the mold, which will certainly cost a lot of money.

Yes. But less than a lid and main case and keymat and dpad and abxy and battery...

And last but not least, independet of what SoC would be choosen to be the successor of the current one, the Pandoras "firmware" would need to be adjusted, maybe even the games that heavily depend on certain features of the current SoC. Leading to the undertaking depending heavily on the OS devs.

This is the case for both the P2 and P1.5, so how is it relevant to the question of whether to go with a P2 or P1.5?

 

[thatgui]

This simply makes no sense at all. The P1.5 could get as modern a SoC as the P2. Where do you come up with "obsolete"?

Hmm, came out the wrong way I guess or maybe I did missunderstand the original intention:


I thought that this was about to create a Pandora 1.5, meaning reuse as much from the original Pandora as possible to lower production costs and bringt it earlier to market.


If I did understand it correctly I don't see where my arguments fail. If i did not, please enlighten me

 

[ShleeDragon]

As strange as this sounds. the modular idea is actually supporting your argument.. so the pandora 2 will likely have a much longer shelf life when it comes to minor upgrades over time.