The home page should say "Not the v2 Sansas", as opposed to AMS

[Hillshum]

r20127 of SVN changed the home page to say AMS instead of v2. However, most people don't know that the v2s have an AMS chip or anything along those lines. By saying v2, we clearly distinguish between the two. That revision should be reverted. Should I upload a patch to Flyspray?

[soap]

There was never a "v1" Clip, for example...

[Hillshum]

But we don't say that any clip is supported, so that is irrelevant

[Llorean]

Well, "v2" means just as little as "AMS". A lot of people who know the term v2 know it from us. The firmware version could be called "v3" for some and many of the players that could be called "v2" aren't the actual second version of the hardware.

There's really no "good" name for them that will be clear to everyone. Calling them "AMS Sansas" on the other hand has the advantage that it's at least consistent.

[saratoga]

Well, "v2" means just as little as "AMS". A lot of people who know the term v2 know it from us. The firmware version could be called "v3" for some and many of the players that could be called "v2" aren't the actual second version of the hardware.

There's really no "good" name for them that will be clear to everyone. Calling them "AMS Sansas" on the other hand has the advantage that it's at least consistent.

None the less, a note on the front page mentioning V2 hardware is a good idea, as it is widely used in some circles (the sandisk forums, ABI).

[Llorean]

We could say "only first generation" instead.

[epithetless]

Well, "v2" means just as little as "AMS". A lot of people who know the term v2 know it from us.

Didn't the "v2" moniker originate from Sandisk when they released the "e200v2" players (that is, with "e240v2," "e260v2," etc. actually etched on their back casing)? Granted, Sandisk has gone beyond that initial difference with their subsequent Clip and Fuze hardware revisions (creating distinctions among even the AMS players)...

...so I think your suggestion of "only first generation" works nicely. 

[bluebrother]

None the less, a note on the front page mentioning V2 hardware is a good idea, as it is widely used in some circles (the sandisk forums, ABI).

Well, how about a "what does this mean?" link (or "details" or something like that) link that goes to a page describing the difference and how to indentify an AMS player?

[Hillshum]

SanDisk themselves started the whole v2 thing by putting 'v2' on the back, and using the term themselves.

[Llorean]

Since when do e200v2s have V2 on the back? Where does this information come from?

For ages we've had to identify them by booting them up and checking the firmware version.

[LambdaCalculus]

SanDisk themselves started the whole v2 thing by putting 'v2' on the back, and using the term themselves.

The problem with that is that SanDisk is also known for just taking whatever parts they have on hand for refurbishing older Sansas. Therefore, you may buy a refurbished v1 Sansa, but it'll have the back cover of a v2 Sansa, and the only way to find out for sure what you got is to look at the firmware version.

I should know; I purchased two c240s from Woot once, and both had v2 backs but were v1 internally.

[Hillshum]

They've always supposed to have said v2 on the back, but just not always do

[epithetless]

Hillshum and LambdaCalculus379 are right. Sandisk did start releasing players with "v2" on the back at the same time they introduced the v2/AMS hardware...but they weren't at all thorough about always matching the v2 hardware with a v2 backplate (or the v1 hardware with a v1 backplate), which forces us to check the firmware for accurate version identification.

Llorean, if this is news to you and you're looking for evidence, this thread on the Sandisk forums (started in January of 2008) provides pictures of the backplates and reiterates what I just typed above.

[saratoga]

I think "(not the AMS models)" should be changed to "(not the AMS models such as the e200v2 and c200v2)" to conform to Sandisk's own naming scheme. 

[JdGordon]

Since when do e200v2s have V2 on the back? Where does this information come from?

For ages we've had to identify them by booting them up and checking the firmware version.

my v2 has the v2 stamp on the back... but yes just because it says v2 doesnt mean it definetly is one