Talk:Pandora (computer)

message: Could somebody please convert the forum post references in the wiki to real citations, so it doesn't reference another wiki? Thanks. atomicthumbs‽ (talk) 03:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forum post references 

message: This is claiming the Pandora will be the first to be powerful enough to run N64 emulators. This is incorrect; The PSP has a port of Daedalus that apparently runs several games well. 65.184.147.182 (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The PSP system software requires all executables to be signed by Sony. Which licensed publisher has used the emulator to port one of its games and release it on UMD or PlayStation Network? --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 17:12, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  True and, nonetheless, absolutely irrelevant. The point of replying to a comment is to comment on it, not to argue a completely different point. What you mention could very well be used to defend the Pandora if someone was attacking it but the OP is only mentioning the Pandora is NOT the first portable console to have a N64 emulator and this is true. --eduo (talk) 21:42, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: StrmnNrmn's Daedalus is not at all a fully functional emulator. It's more likely a proof of concept, and its development has been apparently discontinued at v13 long ago. It's a port from an N64 emulator designed for PC. It does NOT run at full speed on PSP, and has many graphical glitches, slowdowns, and limited compatibility (even if it is the best N64 emulator on PSP). If the Pandora can run a full speed N64 emulator, it will become the first handheld device to do so properly.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.56.15.59 (talk) 23:30, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Saying the DS is a portable N64 is like saying the Pandora PDA is a portable Xbox. The architectures are completely different to the point that porting isn't just a recompile. The point of Pandora is that it comes with custom firmware. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 00:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  First for N64? 

message: Somehow we should mention that zodttd has reported it running stably at 900 MHz  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.127.175.78 (talk) 16:53, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What source do you plan to cite? --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 17:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

text: The link is broken. Besides, it takes a lot to convince Wikipedia editors that a given blog is a reliable source. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 00:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: How about that one? Besides zodttd is a reputed developer within the community and one of the earliest to have had access to a Pandora. --89.127.175.78 (talk) 08:23, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  900 MHz 

message: I think this might mean that unlike many other devices it won't become corrupted if there is an error when updating the firmware...? Is this the case? I'm sure there must be a more suitable way of saying it though? Barrylb (talk) 03:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It might just be a fallback bootloader in mask ROM that loads a rescue image from an SD card. (The PSP supports something similar if a battery with serial number -1 is attached.) But we might as well wait for more verifiable information about the Pandora PDA's bootloader to become public, which should happen this summer when the product comes out. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 14:26, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: (after more research) In fact, that's how it works. But I'm hesitant to use that source in the article because it's a forum post, despite that it was posted by gp32x.com staff. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 20:22, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Unbrickable" design? 

message: Hardware developer MWeston confirmed that the "easter eggs" on his personal Pandora site were accurate and the Pandora will indeed have an integrated Bluetooth radio.  Only his forum post exists as proof at the moment, so I didn't include a confirmation link.  If you read the whole thread though, it's clearly not a joke.Candre23 (talk) 12:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Internal Bluetooth

message: The text says "The Pandora will have an existing software base due to having a package manager that will accept Debian packages for the ARMEL (little-endian ARM) architecture." However, TI specs claim the chip used is Big Endian. Jalwikip (talk) 08:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That was a typo, it is LE. PlopperZ (talk) 14:15, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big/little endianness 

message: Lead developer Craig Rothwell has stated that preorders would only take place when the final units are within about four weeks of shipping.ref1ref2  I would love to put the refs in the actual article, but Wikipedia still has a problem with forum posts as sources, even when those posts are made by the people involved.Candre23 (talk) 21:33, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preorder / ship date 

message: Parden my french, but this thing is baddass.
Is there any exact release date?-- 12.185.250.67 (talk) 04:31, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not exactly, but some finalized consoles are supposed to be taken to trade shows in August.  As the post above says, preorders will start about four weeks before everything is ready to be shipped, which will probably be some time shortly after August.  There's a list of official forum dev team updates over here, so you know where to look if there's any news... Esn (talk) 22:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: DAMN!!!

message: The battery life estimates on this page are extremely vague.
I realize this is by design since we don't know anything exact but there should be a little more information IMHO.  It is easy to glean for instance that video battery life can potentially be quite a lot more than 10 hours even with brightness at 100%.  I know this because PMP Player Advance on the PSP can easily decode 2000kbps h.264 video with 192kbps MP3 audio while running at only 66mhz.  The resolution is 480x272, so the pixel data is only about one third of what it might be on the Pandora.  So lets figure 3x66mhz just to get a wild guess how much performance would be needed to do something similar with higher-quality video, and you get 200mhz... A recent official Pandora blog entry noted that it gets about 8.5 hours of runtime at 500mhz with full brightness and sound on, with no power management.  At less than half that (200mhz) battery life should be 15 hours, easily.
Besides this, the battery life at the stated speed (600mhz on this wikipedia entry) won't be anywhere near 10 hours.  Maybe 8 at best considering it only gets 8.5 at 500mhz.  But for old emulators and simple programs, such high speeds won't be necessary and 10+ hours should be easily attained.
What I suggest is that the battery life section is split up.  It currently says:
"Approximately 10 hours of runtime for video / general applications and 100 hours for music playback"
More accurate would be:
Battery life:
*Games - Between 5 and 10+ hours depending on how demanding the game is
*Video - At least 10 hours
*Music - At least 100 hours
This amount of information is important since battery life is a major consideration for someone considering a purchase, or in this case, a pre-order.  If there's no objections I'll go ahead and add this information in the near future.  76.10.137.127 (talk) 03:02, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem with including your information is that no more specific estimate of runtime is verifiable against any remotely reliable source. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 01:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battery life 

message: What is the current price of the consoles in USD? Wiki131wiki (talk) 19:55, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The pandora is not a released product, so there isn't a "current price", but the announced price is about $330. But generally prices of products have no place in Wikipedia articles anyway. Mahjongg (talk) 23:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Price 

message: How many shoulder buttons are there? Are there only two (R and L)? or is there 4 (like a Playstation controller)? Akadewboy (talk) 13:57, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering the shape of the device and the number of buttons available on the main face, I would presume only 2. Just a guess CompuHacker (talk) 21:33, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I can confirm 2 on the official site: find the photo at the upper right, and click #4. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 21:57, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you think the chances are that that button contains two individual buttons :/? CompuHacker (talk) 07:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you mean that each shoulder button has two individually addressable sensors so that it acts like a 1-dimensional D-pad? Not likely, or the blog, forum, or wiki would have mentioned it by now. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 12:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  There are only 2 should buttons, this has been confirmed on the gp32x forums.  However, the SoC board has exposed connectivity for someone to hack shoulder buttons or a rocker switch if they want to.  If there is a game that requires extra buttons, the numerical buttons at the top of the board can be mapped and are easily acccessible while playing the game.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 15.219.153.74 (talk) 05:27, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many shoulder buttons? 

message: Firstly I feel that in the infobox the website specified it is http://www.openpandora.org
Secondly I feel that the SD memory card spec should be more clear it says 64GB i assunme this means combined but someone could interpret it as each.
I would make these changes myself but I suck with wikicode.
Xor24 talk to me 00:44, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Website and SD memory card question 

message: I strongly disagree with the recent request to turn the specifications section into prose. Having it be in list form makes it a lot more concise and I believe more useful. I can see no benefits to turning it into prose. Esn (talk) 01:54, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Seconded. As I understand it, expressing specs in a bulleted list is the industry standard. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 12:13, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, for a catalogue. Take a look at any of our better console articles to see how hardware can be discussed without lazily resorting to bullet points. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that a list is more efficient. I go here to obtain facts (with all due reservations) and I do not go here to find samples of elegant use of English language. As for the sniping comments about  lazily resorting, please remember to assume good faith and please avoid such negative comments about contributors.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.164.176.22 (talk) 20:46, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Bah. It wasn't addressed at contributors, it was addressed at contributions. "More efficient" is what the infobox is for. Re-tagging. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:14, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  How do you make an allegement against a contribution without also criticising the contributor? Bah's above notwithstanding I attempt to maintain good faith. Still. --14:50, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Specifications into prose

message: "Next batch is going to be available for pre-order at the end of December, 2008[2] with a shipment around March, 2009[3]. "
This is unlikely to still be true, but I hesitate to remove cited information.  These dates were set when a November 30th ship date was still assumed for batch one.   This has been postponed until at least late December, more likely January sometime.
I'm sure Craigix has said that he's not taking any more orders (even for spares in batch 1) until the first batch has fully shipped with no problems.
I'm not sure how to state that in the article, though.  APL (talk) 18:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Out of date information? 

message: I can't tell if this is a more subtle attempt at the vandalism we've been seeing this week, or an honest, good-faith edit, but I reverted it anyway because it's false. 
1) Only orders from the british store (UK and USA) were refunded.
2) All posts from the developers have indicated a ship date of January or February.
APL (talk) 19:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent revert 

message: I've reverted an edit trying to claim (uncited) that Pandora's initial run had been cut in half, and that people only received partial refunds.
In fact, a large portion of people (Credit Card orders from UK and USA mostly) were given full refunds (In British Pounds) and asked to re-order if they still wanted a Pandora.    
It was recently announced that they'll only manufacture the ones that have been paid for by the (still non-finalized) manufacturing date, so perhaps that's what the editor was thinking.  Or perhaps he was just yet another hater trying to add in false information.
APL (talk) 14:15, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  More disinformation. 

message: Can someone please cite a reliable source that indicates the Pandora will be an eighth-genreation console, at the moment it is completely subjective. For the time being I have removed this claim in line with the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy.
It's absolutely not 8th generation.  It's also absolutely not 7th generation either, which it's tagged as.  Not being a console means it doesn't even belong anywhere near those tags.  Being able to run emulation doesn't qualify it either, otherwise every computer in the last ten years or more qualifies to some degree or other.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.4.83.207 (talk) 11:08, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eighth generation status 

message: For anyone not familiar with See also sections, I recommend reading WP:SEEALSO. Based on that guideline, I have removed anything already referred to in the article. I also removed Open source hardware because I don't believe the Pandora is open source hardware, as well as Cambridge Z88, Dingoo, and Atari Portfolio as they don't appear to have any significance here, other than that they're all devices older than the Pandora and that the older two might have influenced the design of the Pandora. Lastly, I removed OmapZoom because (assuming the Pandora uses it) it should be included somewhere in the article instead.  Eugeniu B +1 19:42, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "See also" Section 

message: Seriously. There are already three links on the page that contain the source for that information.
Shame on both of you for removing sourced, accurate information.
If you're not happy with exactly how explicitly the source is identified it would have been nearly as easy to add the footnote yourself.  I'm not asking you to do research here, it would have required an honestly trivial effort to click the link, especially after I pointed out exactly what link was the source. (If it wasn't the obvious one to check, anyway.) 
While I could understand it if it required a non-trivial amount of research beyond clicking a single link, in this case I honestly don't understand the motive for repeatedly removing that sentence. APL (talk) 04:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Er, I don't want to imply that I'm angry about the edits, or that I think it's a big deal, because it's obviously not. It was a single sentence and I fixed it.  I just wanted to take a moment to express my puzzlement about the attitude that caused the problem. My post above might not have the right 'tone', It's supposed to be friendly, but questioning. APL (talk) 04:54, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release, not yet.   

message: The second paragraph of the history section, except the first sentence, should be deleted. Now that the product has been launched, it is not necessary to say "so and so said in a forum it would be released on this date" and "so and so said that that was an optimistic estimate on a forum" and "so and so issued a revised estimate in a forum," etc. Honestly, I don't know if that level of detail was ever appropriate for an encyclopedia article. "[Date] has been announced for the launch of the product, but several announced launch dates have been missed, going back to [Earliest announced launch date.]" would have sufficed. Now it is just silly.140.163.0.5 (talk) 14:00, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I pared it down. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 22:12, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Pandora (console). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090427104314/http://www.openpandora.org:80/blog.php to http://openpandora.org/blog.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080515211929/http://openpandora.org/blog.php to http://openpandora.org/blog.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:50, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified