Talk:Nintendo DSi

Numbers and Such !!

Alright, so I switched around a few things, and I feel I must mention why:

• "The decrease in depth likely forced the GBA slot removal since the bottom portion will probably be around 12mm."
  I figure 12mm if the DSi follows the previous DS standards, the DSi's bottom portion will be just around 2/3 of the total thickness. If so, it will be roughly 12mm - a mere 1mm thicker than a GBA cartridge!
• "It's 12% thinner."
  I know you're the one that changed this to 14%, Matt, but enter the depth dimensions (21.5mm vs. 18.9mm) here, here, or even here! The result is consistent: around 12.093%, not 14%.

So yep! That's that. —Ando (talk) 03:08, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmm... I really don't think that is why. Check this out. It is to scale. As you can see, most of the loss was in the screen. There is still enough room for it. I measured it out. The bottom portion of my DS Lite is 16mm. The bottom portion of the DS Lite in the image is 30 pixels. The bottom portion of the DSi is 28 px. That means that the DSi's bottom portion is 15.9333...mm (okay close to that at least). So there is plenty of room for the GBA slot. Something else was the cause. I'm willing to bet it was the internal flash memory, as the SD Card slot was very far from where the GBA slot would have gone.Emma ^(Talk) 03:51, October 22, 2008 (UTC)

Huh, I never really payed attention to the thickness difference in that image before, but yeah, I guess there doesn't really appear to be too much of a difference. That's pretty bizarre. So perhaps that is the reason, then! Feel free to modify accordingly. —Ando (talk) 03:59, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Still, though, it doesn't really look like there's a whole 3mm difference between the two images. :/ Maybe that's just me.