Wired called Pandora Vaporware


HA!


Just goes to show you shouldn't trust an article just because it's written by a big name magazine. Do those guys even KEEP UP with the open source community? It sounds like they heard the Pandora's initial difficulties and automatically assumed the project was doomed. ....And then never checked back.
 
They listed Zodiac and Gizmondo as "failed or vaporware" too, technically none of the three have to be vaporware although it'd look pretty silly ;p (definitely not what a reader would infer)


They also claim that 3DO's 1993 release was into an "oversaturated market" including PS1, Saturn, and N64, even though none of those consoles were out in 1993. Some knowledge of console history there..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The only definition of "vaporware" I could attribute to the Pandora is the fact that it was delayed. They seem to imply the project outright failed.
 
From the perspective of a Wired reader, if you can't go into a shop and buy a Pandora, it doesn't exist. Period.


Fact is, when the Panasonic Jungle is released, there will be retail outlets stocking them. Until the Pandora gets to that point, no competition.
 
3DO bombed in 1993 when it entered an already oversaturated market, going head-to-head with the PlayStation and Nintendo 64.

Playstation and N64 in 1993? LOL
 
From the perspective of a Wired reader, if you can't go into a shop and buy a Pandora, it doesn't exist. Period.


Fact is, when the Panasonic Jungle is released, there will be retail outlets stocking them. Until the Pandora gets to that point, no competition.

So in other words, open source and homebrew anything pretty much doesn't exist?
 
The funny thing is that a different article from last week said the Pandora was NOT a vaporware failure, even though the article itself was about failure devices. And wired is apparently on the list (at their request and continued persistence) to receive a demo unit as soon as they're available.


I don't think it's a "Wired is against the Pandora and doesn't understand it", it's simply "some people simply don't understand it, some of whom happen to be writers for Wired." Meanwhile, other people do seem to get it, some of whom are also writers for Wired.
 
That does put things in a bit more perspective. I wasn't exactly on a "Wired hates Pandora! BURN THEM!" rant or anything, I was more baffled at their reaction - especially considering the fact that they're paying attention to this other upcoming handheld. It's starting to sound like the wrong writer did this article :p
 
Back
Top