Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="driverdis" data-source="post: 4628143" data-attributes="member: 284187">why do people keep bringing up "Pandora" batteries as a possible reason Sony went for a internal battery. Sony remedied the problem years before the Vita with the TA-088v3 Motherboard for PSP2000 and onwards. also, the battery of the Vita seems shockingly easy to access,remove,and replace for being a anti-pandora battery fix. Not to mention Sony removed the ability to write to the battery eeprom in any psp with a TA-085 V2 or newer motherboard. the first psp2000 motherboard (TA-085) and PSP1000's are the only models capable of even making a Pandora battery without physical modification to the battery. also, it seems Sony made newer batteries that prevented flashing its eeprom and required hardmodding to pandorize them (not 100% on this tho) so why would the Vita battery be susceptible to such mods then?the answer is that it would not be. thus, another reason against the idea that a internalbattery was decided on as a Anti-Pandora countermeasure. It makes way more sense if it was to accommodate the real touch panel if anything. considering the dimensions of the PS Vita battery, having it user accessible would require a battery cover solution similar to the 3DS, where the whole bottom is the cover. the problem here is that unlike the 3ds, the vita has the touch panel on the back, meaning for the battery to be user accessible, the touch panel would of needed to be built-in to the battery cover or to not have one at all . doing the first would be a real problem as people would lose all back touch functionality if they lost the back battery cover. at least Sony made the battery fairly easy to remove despite needing to open the console up. it could be worse, at least the battery is not soldered to the motherboard.</blockquote>

Verification

Search

Search

Reply to thread

Settings Notifications

Options