Database Info

GPS PASSION - HTC CRUISE test

here the test and review by GPS PASSION
http://www.gpspassion.com/forumsen/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=105771

energy59 said:
here the test and review by GPS PASSION
http://www.gpspassion.com/forumsen/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=105771
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This device, as attractive as it may be, is starting to rack up some real negatives:
1) the confused (for consumers) situation with the Qualcomm chip and the US Court injunction (what effect may that have on overall sales and consequently warranty, quality control etc ?)
2) variations in build quality (sliders, screens unglued etc)
3) constant WWE ROM supply problems and high prices
4) the ongoing argument over video drivers (may not be a real issue, since it seems unlikely to me that any class action will actually occur)
I'm getting a small amount of "sand in my shoes"

I wonder: why are we bashing this device more and more lately? The more we bash, the less people buy, the worse TC sales are, the less support we'll get and eventually we might wind up with NO software updates at all..
So let's try to think about the positive things shall we

ianl8888 said:
1) the confused (for consumers) situation with the Qualcomm chip
2) variations in build quality (sliders, screens unglued etc)
3) constant WWE ROM supply problems and high prices
4) the ongoing argument over video drivers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1: is a non-issue, by the time in 2009 when HTC will need to use a new chip, this device will have been replaced in all likelihood, or will have a slightly different chipset. No problem.
2: I've not heard of any problems, slight noise from a screen and concerns here and there, but no issues with previous build so why this one? Anyway, you get a defective one, you return it!
3: supply will level in a month or two, place an order now and you should have it early Feb. The fact that it's popular should tell you a lot.
4: again is a non-issue - either you want a multi-purpose phone like this or you don't. The video will be as released, I don't believe anything more will happen with it. It's fine as released for general purpose stuff...
Essentially, if you wanted a high-performance video device this one was never for you; if you want a great PDA phone it is. Make your choice. For me build quality is excellent and the rest is of no importance.

If you want great video performance buy a Cowon iAudio A3 (I got the A2), great rendering to high resolutions too in widescreen format, bigger and heavier than the TC but good for all your video/audio/FM radio/pictures/document needs. No input possible of course. That's why I needed the TC

SabbeRubbish said:
I wonder: why are we bashing this device more and more lately? The more we bash, the less people buy, the worse TC sales are, the less support we'll get and eventually we might wind up with NO software updates at all..
So let's try to think about the positive things shall we
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Simple.
Post cognitive dissonance:
http://www.ciadvertising.org/sa/fall_03/adv382J/mbabbott/advertising.htm
There have been high expectations from the device for a long time, combine that with the difficulty in actually getting hold of one and a couple of new models from other manufacturers on the horizon, and those expectations will change. Cognitive Dissonance is a much more difficult problem for companies to manage these days, mostly because of the internet.

I must say, truly interesting! And indeed I've caught myself luring to Eten and LG devices, but none are up to the TC challenge imho.

All i can say is i am right with rickgillyon.
Everyday, i am happy to have TC.
GPS, sound, screen, weight, radio, phone are perfect.
A lot of Applications are available.
I haven't buy this device for video but if it works well, i will use it some times.
Ziggy

fishes234 said:
Simple.
Post cognitive dissonance:
http://www.ciadvertising.org/sa/fall_03/adv382J/mbabbott/advertising.htm
There have been high expectations from the device for a long time, combine that with the difficulty in actually getting hold of one and a couple of new models from other manufacturers on the horizon, and those expectations will change. Cognitive Dissonance is a much more difficult problem for companies to manage these days, mostly because of the internet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True enough, although I have not yet made a decision to dissonate about. I had been somewhat interested in the ETEN X800 until some independent tests showed a slowness in its response - some people report it is now improved with some ROM changes, others don't think so.
My decisions tend to be based on the actual experience of the product - paper specifications simply weed out those that do not interest me to start with.
It's also interesting that the optimists here discount issues - eg. one reply to my "sand in my shoes" post suggested that by 2009 the Qualcomm Court injunction will be irrelevant as HTC will be using a different chip. But I don't really intend to change devices annually, so for me it is a potential issue, particularly as the outcomes cannot be easily predicted.
Supply is an issue - we've been given way too many false dates since August to believe "the next one". And there has been no real attempt at an explanation - but given the seemingly unglued screens and flimsy controls reported on some units, quality control on production issues may be a factor. Simply returning it is a very last resort, especially from O/S. It's far better to avoid the problems to begin with.
But then, without the optimists life would be dull I suppose. Even when they quote posts selectively ...

ianl8888 said:
It's also interesting that the optimists here discount issues - eg. one reply to my "sand in my shoes" post suggested that by 2009 the Qualcomm Court injunction will be irrelevant as HTC will be using a different chip. But I don't really intend to change devices annually, so for me it is a potential issue, particularly as the outcomes cannot be easily predicted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The outcome is already known, replacement chips are ready according to Qualcomm, and you won't have to change your device - they won't make us hand our phones back in...
As I say, it's a non-issue for the end user.

rickgillyon said:
The outcome is already known, replacement chips are ready according to Qualcomm, and you won't have to change your device - they won't make us hand our phones back in...
As I say, it's a non-issue for the end user.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've discussed this out in another thread - so repetition is pointless. If you believe Qualcomm's rationalisations (after they have been convicted of knowing patent infringement), then I have some shares in the Sydney Harbour Bridge for you. Cheap, too. Such chips need to be fabricated, then assembled in new devices for testing. Qualcomm's "new" chips are also subject to a further Court examination next February before design release- the time and results of that are not predictable.
I'm not suggesting that the devices already sold will be recalled - do you understand the term "straw man" ? If world wide sales of the P3650 are repressed through this issue, HTC will reduce development and support for this model as fast as it can ... that's the core of my comments.
It's racking up real negatives. The only defence to this is cool examination of potential outcomes, or risk wasting money.

Chips need to be fabricated? Really? I'd never have guessed...
Fact is that Qualcomm, naughty as they undoubtedly are, have been working on this problem for some time as they knew they would lose. I see no reason to doubt that chips will be ready, and will be available. The reason Qulacomm will be hurrying out a replacement is to avoid the punitive commission they are paying right now.
HTC support? Surely you're kidding?
If, as you say, the issue stretches beyond early 2009, and supplies stop in early 2009, what's the difference? How often have you seen real support or development of an HTC product after the first few months? IME that support and development only comes in the cooked ROMs.
This still looks to me like the best device available right now, and with Qualcomm and HTC able to use the chip until 2009, not much of an issue for us. What's the alternative?

I am surprised at the amount of stick this device seems to be generating. I bought it as a replacement for my original Touch as I missed 3G and I have to say it's a fairly stunning device. Build quality on my unit is excellent, the slider and the scroll wheel are firm and responsive. The unit itself performs what I expect of it: PDA, email, fast internet. I fully expect this to be my longest lasting phone for quite a while, easily until end of FY 2009/2010. Problems like video drivers etc I don't really understand, it's adequate for a phone. If I want to watch videos I tend to use a full video capable device (eg PSP) rather than try to watch them on a phone.

SabbeRubbish said:
I wonder: why are we bashing this device more and more lately? The more we bash, the less people buy, the worse TC sales are, the less support we'll get and eventually we might wind up with NO software updates at all..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But if we don't bash them, they think everyone's happy with the current performance and they don't bother improving it or doing anything about it.

andyturner said:
But if we don't bash them, they think everyone's happy with the current performance and they don't bother improving it or doing anything about it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No no, I do insist we bash them PERSONALLY, but not on the sales websites, as potential future customers may be scared in the future, even if the issue is already resolved, and therefore make the release of TC a fiasco, which would make HTC not distribute any sw updates...

Just a question:
How much would an external antenna help to get a better signal?
I would like to use the TC to track a short hike. Due to the test mentioned above, I would be forced to take the TC in my hand all the time. So I thougt I plug in an external antenna and fix the end somewhere to my clothes/backpack. Would that help?

Straputsky said:
Just a question:
How much would an external antenna help to get a better signal?
I would like to use the TC to track a short hike. Due to the test mentioned above, I would be forced to take the TC in my hand all the time. So I thougt I plug in an external antenna and fix the end somewhere to my clothes/backpack. Would that help?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Depends on the satellite coverage... My country has only 8 satellites covering it, so we couldn't utilize it fully even if we wanted to. (I don't know the background but thats the max number of lockons everyone gets around here)
But if your TC performs well in the city, i don't see any need for an external antenna, but an extra battery is a different story. And I hope you have other tracking softwares in your arsenal than the included TomTom...

gnick666 said:
...And I hope you have other tracking softwares in your arsenal than the included TomTom...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With TomTom it would be a very short trip.
No, I plan to use TrackMe which was created by someone here in the community. It allows you to turn of the display, so the device consumes less power.
The problem is, that the TC didn't perform that good and I was thinking if it performs better with an external antenna. Especially in wooden areas I hope to gain a significant better signal.

Straputsky said:
...Especially in wooden areas I hope to gain a significant better signal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You'd definitely get a better reception, but that would increase battery drainage. Bigger external antenna, heavier the drain on the battery.
But you can always pack the external antenna, and use it if needed. You won't loose anything, and we'd get some fieldtest results from the woods in Germany

@rickgyllion
Wot, no Harbour Bridge shares ? I'll even lower the price ! Oh well ...
"If, as you say, the issue stretches beyond early 2009 ..." I never said that, I simply pointed out that Qualcomm still faces unpredictable Court examination of its new designs. An inconvenient fact ...
"How often have you seen real support or development of an HTC product after the first few months?" Since the 1st non-English ROM devices have now been out a few months, one might think that stage has already been reached.
Between Qualcomm and HTC, it's a real stuff-up.
My attempt at resolution is that I have pre-ordered both the P3650 and an alternate non-HTC device. Both are due "in February" or "real soon now" or whichever comes first. When one or the other finally makes it to the retail market, then I'll make a decision.

Android: Does the OS sell the hardware? or is the hardware selling the OS?

When it comes to android, you know that you have an outstanding range of hardware. From the low-end Optimus T/S to the titans of the OS such as the Galaxy S2, and everything imaginable in between. These days, you can even find generic china phones running an, often dated, android. Every carrier has it, they come in all price ranges, and they're available on demand. The question I pose to you, "Is android's key selling point the hardware?"
I understand that numerous XDA members and even some outsiders enjoy the limitless customization options made readily available in android and that's awesome. However, the general consumer is happy to end customization at setting their own ringtone. It's not a breaking factor for the majority that you can swap out kernels. Overall, android is a decent enough platform, but for the masses, I see little that it offers, hardware aside, that it's competitors don't.
Here recently, a thread was posted regarding the ASUS Transformer 2, a pentacore processor in a tablet. Now, most people have yet to exhaust the resources on their dual core phones. A penta-core device seems to be pushing the limits. Considering that it is running a mobile OS, by the time those cores could be utilized, wouldn't the tablet be long outdated? However, I know it will sell well because the word "Penta-core" sounds too awesome for the masses to pass up.
Another occurrence I've seen, having worked in retail shops for some time. A lot of customers, when asked about what OS their phone is running, will reply, "HTC" or, "Samsung." A lot of them have no idea what our little green friend is. Another point towards my personal opinion that the hardware is a huge selling factor.
Overall, android is a very complete platform. It is not my daily driver, but I do enjoy it whenever I have time to tinker. I am inquiring about this matter to get your opinions, what sells? Hardware or software?

I think for me its a little bit of both. I like the fact that the hardware is there in my 3d when I need to push the system really hard. Its not often I do, but its good that when I do, it executes the tasks with ease.
On the same hand there are huge software benefits for me. I love the UI and that I can set swype gestures to open particular apps or settings. It makes multi tasking tthat much easier and fluid for me.
Also, at least from what I have seen with iOS5 (my girl has the 4s) is that android seems to be ahead in certain areas of functionality. For example it is not an innovative thing (to me anyways, being an android user) to be able to back up your device without the use of a computer... I have been doing wireless backups and internal backups since I bought my first android phone.
I think one thing you mentioned before... I think it was you, anyways... was pretty much right on when you said that android is capable of meeting so many different needs in the sense that you have a wide range in variety of devices to choose from and at different costs. There are high end phones available such that perform to today's standards in the mobile world, and there are lower end ones available that are more cost effective.
I feel if you yourself are innovative and creative, you are way more capable of taking an android phone and building the UI to what you want/need. I don't sacrifice functionality for speed, ever. In the end it is still just a phone, but I prefer this platform because it caters to that need I have to customize my phone the way I want it to be, not what somebody else feels it should be.
---------- Post added at 02:19 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:13 AM ----------
And to address your comment about the bajjillion core tab....
Seems the hardware is way ahead of the software in this case... therefore, I am not impressed by it.
I have a Motorola xoom and it has plenty of power to do what I need it to do. I will not be taking it back to simply have two more cores under the hood. And somebody else mentioned the new kal el device only has 1gb of ram? In my opinion that is really disappointing for a device with that kind of processing power.

i buy phones based on hardware specs
the OS is optional
I prefer to load my OS of choice
just like my PCs / Laptops

z33dev33l said:
When it comes to android, you know that you have an outstanding range of hardware. From the low-end Optimus T/S to the titans of the OS such as the Galaxy S2, and everything imaginable in between. These days, you can even find generic china phones running an, often dated, android. Every carrier has it, they come in all price ranges, and they're available on demand. The question I pose to you, "Is android's key selling point the hardware?"
I understand that numerous XDA members and even some outsiders enjoy the limitless customization options made readily available in android and that's awesome. However, the general consumer is happy to end customization at setting their own ringtone. It's not a breaking factor for the majority that you can swap out kernels. Overall, android is a decent enough platform, but for the masses, I see little that it offers, hardware aside, that it's competitors don't.
Here recently, a thread was posted regarding the ASUS Transformer 2, a pentacore processor in a tablet. Now, most people have yet to exhaust the resources on their dual core phones. A penta-core device seems to be pushing the limits. Considering that it is running a mobile OS, by the time those cores could be utilized, wouldn't the tablet be long outdated? However, I know it will sell well because the word "Penta-core" sounds too awesome for the masses to pass up.
Another occurrence I've seen, having worked in retail shops for some time. A lot of customers, when asked about what OS their phone is running, will reply, "HTC" or, "Samsung." A lot of them have no idea what our little green friend is. Another point towards my personal opinion that the hardware is a huge selling factor.
Overall, android is a very complete platform. It is not my daily driver, but I do enjoy it whenever I have time to tinker. I am inquiring about this matter to get your opinions, what sells? Hardware or software?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First time I have to agree with you pal.BUT:
i)Those guys/gals whose customisation needs end with setting the ringtone are the ones who won't care or even won't realize if the OS is different between an iPhone and an Android device.
ii)Android offers most(if not all) of the things other OSes offer,plus the infinite customisation capabilities no other OS has.Now this is what matters for those of us who can do more than changing the ringtone.
Other than these two things,I generally agree.In the end,though,it's user preference that matters.And people's idiocy in fact.Hell,many people buy their phones depending on how many megapixels their camera can do!

AllGamer said:
I prefer to load my OS of choice
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd prefer that too, but mobile hardware is pretty much completely closed, so this is not really possible in practice, except maybe on very very few models.
To answer the title question: I don't know about others, but for me it's definitely the OS. Android is the closest to Linux as I'll probably get on a phone, people are free to cook up their own ROMs (not completely free in many cases, there's closed components in every ROM, but oh well), vast customization capabilities, for getting software you're not limited to one store with draconian rules and sometimes arbitrary decisions.

Certainly a combination of software + hardware with a little bit of company preference.
But considering the range of manufacturers for android based phones, I find it hard to lag behind hardware wise.

1) I look for a device that I think will last me the three years of my contract or at least the majority of it
2) I look here on XDA and see what the dev community is like
3) I buy the phone

I would guess that for 80%+ of phone buyers the main factor is price. Sure they know about the iPhone and the Samsung Galaxy devices, but for most those phohnes are out of their price bracket. So they find the device which has the same sort of idea but in a cheap package, which has helped Android no end since there are low end Android devices, and Apple have little interest in that.
For myself as a more techie person, I use Android becuase of the freedom to do what i want with my hardware. At least that's why i got into Android. Now I will continue to buy Android devices, but the major reason is I've invested in the app market, I have tens of pounds worth of apps for Android. To jump to anotehr platform now would mean having to start over with that. That's the power of these stores and markets, once you are invested changing platform is a lot more of a jump that just deciding which you like the most at the time.

countstex said:
I would guess that for 80%+ of phone buyers the main factor is price. Sure they know about the iPhone and the Samsung Galaxy devices, but for most those phohnes are out of their price bracket. So they find the device which has the same sort of idea but in a cheap package, which has helped Android no end since there are low end Android devices, and Apple have little interest in that.
For myself as a more techie person, I use Android becuase of the freedom to do what i want with my hardware. At least that's why i got into Android. Now I will continue to buy Android devices, but the major reason is I've invested in the app market, I have tens of pounds worth of apps for Android. To jump to anotehr platform now would mean having to start over with that. That's the power of these stores and markets, once you are invested changing platform is a lot more of a jump that just deciding which you like the most at the time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've seen the price comment being made multiple times but aren't these devices pretty close to each other in terms of price after a 2 yr contract? In fact if you shop around, you can find some of these highend units for nearly nothing from online stores such as amazon
As for me, overall package is what sold me to galaxy s2. Form factor, hardware specs, overall implementation of the OS (gpu acceleration various places), etc. Version number really doesn't really bother me (2.3.3 vs 2.3.4/5/6/7) as long as there aren't any key features missing in the current revision that exists in the newer revisions.

Gusar321 said:
I'd prefer that too, but mobile hardware is pretty much completely closed, so this is not really possible in practice, except maybe on very very few models.
To answer the title question: I don't know about others, but for me it's definitely the OS. Android is the closest to Linux as I'll probably get on a phone, people are free to cook up their own ROMs (not completely free in many cases, there's closed components in every ROM, but oh well), vast customization capabilities, for getting software you're not limited to one store with draconian rules and sometimes arbitrary decisions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HD2 was a great example
then there are many other HTC devices that did the same
and a few Samsung devices as well
and there's the HP Touchpad
and...

For most people it's both.
They're attracted for the first time by the look and find the OS easy to use.
Despite people stating that the iphone is for people who just want to use a smartphone for the first time etc and Android is for techies and geeks to customise, if that were actually true then that would mean that there are a hell of a lot of geeks out there, which obviously isn't the case.
I would guess the majority of Android users' extent of customisation is changing the picture of their wallpaper, and that's the thing, with Android you can do that, it's easy to use, with the extra buttons it can seem more logical to new users compared with the single button on the iphone for instance.
It has the "apps and the wifis" that average users want, it looks good and you can make it look pretty much how you like.
Being able to just plug it into another computer and transfer files is a huge boon too, something a colleague was very disappointed with the iphone4 because of it's lack of ability.

There is 500+ android devices on the market globally, its the brand name and hardware specs that sell. Not the os.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App

I'd rather say that that none of those sell the other: it's actually the price selling both, plus the "status symbol" factor thatbhas to do with Apple things. Androids are generally cheaper then both the iPhone and WP7 phones. This, plus the fact that most people don't seem to like WP7 tiled ui, basically because it doesn't "look like an iPhone" enough. That might sound harsh, like saying that most people are dumb, but it's not (only) that actually: people got used to icons since the day they got their first pc, no wonder they go for something that looks more familiar to them when they wanna buy a smartphone. Maybe Win8 will totally change the name of the game, but that's it for the moment (sadly enough I dare say).

I think we have to remember that 'most' people don't include the tiny fraction of the consumer market that are active on XDA. We make choices on a range of factors as we are better informed about both hardware and software. When we walk into a phone shop we want to assess the phone on build quality, size, Android version, display type, etc.
When the average punter walks into the same shop their buying choice usually boils down to no more than, 'Oh look, a shiny thing. I want that one'.

.
Thread moved to Android. Would advise you to read forum rules and post in correct section.
Failure to comply with forum rules will result in an infraction and/or ban depending on severity of rule break.

Do you review the content of my threads before moving them or do you see my name and play pin the tail on the donkey with the final location of the thread?

[Discussion]Power Race In Android

I can't believe the ATI(Adreno in spirit) and Nvidia(Tegra 1,2,3) battle is now in the mobile era, although the cpu core race is even more daunting...
It was not that long ago when 1 core dominated the market, but now we have Dualcores & Quadcores...My issue with this change is that I don't feel either are exactly required; for instance, WP7 & iOS are faster than Android, but are able to run on older hardware. And lets not forget the iPhones normally run at surprisingly low speeds, however they can get a lot done still.
I mean Samsung's SIII has a Quadcpu, but I doubt that's even necessary, what's wrong with staying in the dualcore/single range and focusing on improving the UI and general performance!?
I know I'm gonna get a lot of backlash for thinking this way, but developers will be lazy with programming if they know the HW will run whatever crap they throw at it. It's just hard to understand the logic behind increasing the core count/speed without actually fixing the problems that plagued the software(android in this case) , if you just take the time to fix the quirks then the device will run smoother. Though, it just seems companies are just interested in marketing gimmicks that most end users won't actually notice, plus most dual cores(S3, exynos,T2, etc) are competent with intensive apps.

The race for now is to produce phones with the most potential. Quad cores, when correctly optimized anyway, have much higher processing capacity and much lower power consumption when doing trivial tasks. The goal is to create interfaces that don't stutter or lag no matter how much you have going on and do so efficiently. There's also the backing of chipsets like the Tegra for high-end mobile entertainment. The end game is superphones, and the game is well afoot.
As to the necessity of it, just depends. I think most business users will be fine on dual core offerings with plenty of ram and a well-implemented overall system. For those who like to max their phones out the possibilities of the high-end development coming out is pretty great. Think about something like the Note with enough processing ability to act as a full input tablet for graphic designers, or that allows programmers to run and edit complex code on the go instead of having to drag a full-size tablet around with them. Think about doctors or researchers being able to monitor multiple sets of real-time data directly from their phones. There's certainly a market for all this, and I don't think it's an arms race just for the sake of showing off.
My $.02; hope that was all coherent.

MissionImprobable said:
The race for now is to produce phones with the most potential.
There's certainly a market for all this, and I don't think it's an arms race just for the sake of showing off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your points are all valid, but I still fear that the Software remains on a level much lower than the hardware; there are tons of Android configurations out there that prevent High Quality HW from performing optimally, due to this, the "potential" of certain devices may never be recognized.
I understand that more cores promotes a sense of efficiency and less power draws, but this tends to lead programmers to optimizing less often. Sense 3.0 was extremely sluggish, same with 4.0, but do you notice the trend? Both Sense 3/4 were made for fast SoCs, to my surprise the result was still horrid. And for your point about the mini tablet(Note), I personally feel you would see those types of Apps on iOS devices instead. For the sake of it, I don't want you to think I am an Apple fan boy(just playing devil's advocate).

Maybe those were the kind of things you only saw on Apple previously, but clearly Samsung and others are serious about competing with them.

I am on a bent for the new Google phones that are going to be being produced. Now, I am not the largest fan of quad core yet but I see great potential in dual cores. Like for running Ubuntu Android, an Ubuntu desktop from your phone to a monitor!
These new phones are looking to have 28nm cortex A15 dual core chips, that would be one hot cookie!
Sent from my PC36100 using xda premium

First, for the dispassionate stuff:
Ace42 said:
but developers will be lazy with programming if they know the HW will run whatever crap they throw at it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Developers should be able to be "lazy" with programming: you don't see anyone going back into assembly in order to optimize their programs. Programmer cycles are a lot more valuable than machine cycles, and here more power is a good, not a bad thing.
Ace42 said:
I mean Samsung's SIII has a Quadcpu, but I doubt that's even necessary, what's wrong with staying in the dualcore/single range and focusing on improving the UI and general performance!? ...It's just hard to understand the logic behind increasing the core count/speed without actually fixing the problems that plagued the software(android in this case)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The "logic" required is elementary economics. A competitive market causes innovation: each firm has to distinguish itself, and match the features of the others in order to stand a chance. Now, some features are more important in consumers' eyes than others, and in particular, core count/speed are very comprehensible, very easy numbers, and viable to innovate. They have to go up asap in order to compete. And so they have.
This does not mean, of course, that your "problems" must remain. In fact, looking at the S3 demos so far, I haven't yet noticed any lag at all, so perhaps they really did "fix" your problems, as you desired.
Now, for the bashing part.
Ace42 said:
My issue with this change is that I don't feel either are exactly required; for instance, WP7 & iOS are faster than Android, but are able to run on older hardware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This comes at a cost of so much less customizability. I find WP7 to be particularly guilty of this: only supports 480x800 resolution, no start screen background or landscape? My Launcher 7 is already more powerful than that and, thanks to not attempting any serious 3D stuff, shows no lag at all.
Ace42 said:
And lets not forget the iPhones normally run at surprisingly low speeds, however they can get a lot done still.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The iPhone, however, makes us pay with user speed as well. Scrolling is slow, in order to maintain the illusion of smoothness, and the simplistic launcher without widgets forces you to switch around and manage everything yourself, getting data only by clicking on the appropriate app. As I hinted at the beginning, people cycles are so much more valuable than computer cycles, and sacrificing the former for the latter is nothing less than a travesty.

Currently mobile phones are more powerful than my laptops and i think this will not change. In the next few years we will have quad-core processors in watches

goompas said:
Currently mobile phones are more powerful than my laptops and i think this will not change. In the next few years we will have quad-core processors in watches
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
completely agree

Google sells ads, not software, they don't really give a crap about optimizing it to the max. They leave this dirty job to OEMs, and OEMs want to sell hardware, so they only optimize it for the tiny bit that is strictly necessary in order to sell. They'd rather make better hardware than better software, and no need to blame them: they just do what they know better. Microsoft and Apple instead sell either software or a complete package of both software and hardware, so guess why they care more about it...just my 2 cents. Btw, not that one approach is better than the other, choice is good, you pick what you want.
Sent from my Lumia 800 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App

vnvman said:
Google sells ads, not software, they don't really give a crap about optimizing it to the max. They leave this dirty job to OEMs... Microsoft and Apple instead sell either software or a complete package of both software and hardware, so guess why they care more about it...just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This analysis doesn't make sense (at least, not as gross as it is right now). A company optimizes software when there's some form of competitive pressure, not because they "sell software". Just look at internet explorer: that didn't get seriously worked on for years, until alternative browsers started to become rightfully popular (that is, while microsoft is surely a software company, they still managed not to "give a crap").
Maybe you mean to say that companies only bother to improve something so that it's "good enough" to face off against the competition - and that's pretty much true. For example, after grabbing the market share, apple has only been innovating just hard enough not to be too far behind its competition.
Maybe you also mean to say that companies innovate better, the closer their incentives are aligned with the innovation. This is also true, but highly misleading. For one thing, the factor most affecting one's incentives is not "the thing they are selling", but (you guessed it from above) competition. Selling software or hardware when you have a monopoly, for instance, gives you little or no incentive to innovate (whereas your criteria would've suggested the opposite).
Mind you, I think you are hitting on something; it just requires a much more thorough analysis of the incentives than just "are they selling software or ads?"
And the incentive situation is itself weird. On one hand, android ad profit is (supposedly) pretty low for google, but on the other hand, they are able to delegate the whole manufacturing and execution to other firms. Fewer rewards, but also lower costs. They do have the majority of the phone market right now (getting dangerously close to monopoly there), but this is a fragile equilibrium, with tablets a whole 'nother story. And, since they are dying to get more stock phones out (with those giant "Google" permanant search bars), one can indeed argue that they've started to care not only about selling ads, but the whole damn thing. It's gotten to the point where they need to improve stock itself (and probably the phones too, hence the motorola acquisition + multiple Nexii partnership) in order to improve their ads. And so you see that the incentives may not be nearly as maligned as you'd originally supposed.

I think that we can only benefit from this race

thebobp said:
First, for the dispassionate stuff:
Developers should be able to be "lazy" with programming: you don't see anyone going back into assembly in order to optimize their programs. Programmer cycles are a lot more valuable than machine cycles, and here more power is a good, not a bad thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Being "lazy" is the reason why so many Android apps run poorly across the board; fine, I understand more power allows you to offload more work to the cpu, but that doesn't mean that's the correct method. If I were to make an app for a Dual environment I would specifically make sure each core is sharing the burden. When Dual core phones & Ginger were(and still are) united, the result was simply stunning—Ginger was definitely not optimized for dualcores. And it showed, my Sensation was so laggy under 2.3.x, it was so disheartening to see my single core devices could challenge the dual beast with ease.
thebobp said:
Now, some features are more important in consumers' eyes than others, and in particular, core count/speed are very comprehensible, very easy numbers, and viable to innovate.
This does not mean, of course, that your "problems" must remain. In fact, looking at the S3 demos so far, I haven't yet noticed any lag at all, so perhaps they really did "fix" your problems, as you desired.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The average consumer doesn't know or can't even comprehend the raw power that certain SoCs are capable of, so I doubt they care if X phone has 2GHz and the other has 1Ghz. Apple normally doesn't boast about the CPU count in commercials, they boast about their OS & siri, that's how they win over millions each year. Everyone and their grandmothers know how flawless iOS is. Now I know I'm bashing Android severely, though I am a long time Android user and these are some of my views.
thebobp said:
This comes at a cost of so much less customizability. I find WP7 to be particularly guilty of this: only supports 480x800 resolution, no start screen background or landscape? My Launcher 7 is already more powerful than that and, thanks to not attempting any serious 3D stuff, shows no lag at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, WP7 offers the bare minimum when it comes to customization, which is an unfortunate sacrifice for speed. And Microsoft has set HW limitations to prevent fragmentation, which if I may, is devastating the Android market. We have Exynos over there, Snapdragon under there, and Tegra round yonder, and a large variety of screen types.
thebobp said:
The iPhone, however, makes us pay with user speed as well. Scrolling is slow, in order to maintain the illusion of smoothness, and the simplistic launcher without widgets forces you to switch around and manage everything yourself, getting data only by clicking on the appropriate app. As I hinted at the beginning, people cycles are so much more valuable than computer cycles, and sacrificing the former for the latter is nothing less than a travesty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Scrolling is slow? Are you using the 1st iPhone or something? Last time I tried my friend's 4S is was quite speedy, iOS has always been the fastest mobile OS available. If memory serves, iOS has also been GPU accelerated since the old days, a feature relatively new to Android and maybe WP7. I pretty sure you can visit every Android forum on XDA & at least 10 users will report that they have lag in X, Y, Z app. However if you did a poll with random iOS users I doubt if you would even find a black sheep.

Do we have reached the limit ?

Hello,
(excuse me for errors in my language)
Do you think we have reach the limits of performance and usability with the latest hardware available on the market for our smartphone ?
We can put it this way: Do you think it is still useful to buy smartphone with more powerful hardware than S4 or this type of phone ?
They are definitly smooth, and for their use, I think pay for more is useless.
But maybe their use will change, they will somehow replace our desktop pc in the way we can connect them to screen and mouse everywhere we go (I know that ubuntu touch already does this).
Thanks

I'm sure we haven't reached out limits. Android owns the phone market right now and I'm sure it will go a long way. As for the price the price will always be crap. I think the highest phone for a no contract I have seen was a iPhone 5 for 700. I'm sure the prices will keep going up.
Sent from my LG-LG730 using xda app-developers app

The industry will always strive to develop faster, smaller and more efficient hardware. And software developers will always find new ways to make use of that hardware.
Smartphones are becoming more and more multi-purpose platforms. With USB OTG, this direction is clearly defined. The increasing screen size is also a product of that. You can already use many phones as a more grown-up multimedia device, connected to your AV equipment and external controllers. This opens up a whole different arena, both in regards to software possibilities, and harware requirements accordngly.
There really is no real limit as to how far this train will go - especially considering the ammount of money people are willing to pay for their phones. And with the chinese marked and developement coming rushing up like a mountain on wheels from behind - both development time and price level is likely to drop a little, rather than increase.

Moore's law. A model that predicts the experiential increase of computing power. As for cellphones, I think it is about demand and supply. The processors in the latest phones have reached a limit threshold on what a consumer would use it for. Before when processors was lacking, consumers wanted better ones resulting in manufacturer competition on who has the fastest phone. First the 1GHz race then the quad core race and now we have 2GHz quad cores. There is now not as much demand for faster CPUs in phones atleast so manufacturers and focusing on other areas to compete for who has the best phone such as better battery, better screen, fast 4G, lighter, etc.

do we need all this in a phone!?

with the launch of Nexus 5 i saw many people switch over to it..
Reasons may be many,the one which seems most evident is its configuration!
which makes me think that when Google launches a "nexus" product with such hardware does it mean that quad cores or octa cores or the massive 2 gigs of memory are really required??
do we actually need that kind of hardware for daily purposes?
Or is it just a market hype or an induced inflation that is being generated by the multinational corps?
one releases a quad... and then the other is ready to pack 8 cores...
i don't posses much of technical knowledge but do we really need all those krait cores and those exynos!
60 years back we sent people on moon with a computer that had 64kb of memory..
now don't get me wrong I am not against the technology its just that all this advanced tech is being put to the same use,which is quite capable of being handled by far less powerful machines.

When it comes to octo cores I really don't feel it's necessary for everyday use. The software is always trying use the least amount of cores possible to maximize battery life anyway. The RAM on the other hand I think is an absolute must. I remember when buying this phone thinking that 1gb of RAM (or whatever the actual usable RAM is, 787mb) was going to be great, oh how I was wrong. Just look at the multi tasking ability (or inability) on this device and that should answer the question of whether we need more RAM.
Sent from my Evita

i agree with you that RAM is a must but my point is even with all those high end specs, what you actually use the phone for has not changed over the years....
there is nothing "exceptional" people are doing with 3 gigs or RAM and 8 cores.
and everyone here must be well acquainted to the good old Nokia days and their Symbian or BB OS (or those java OS's that ran on most mobiles) at that point of time when 'Processor' and what 'GPU' and what 'Pixel density' your phone was actually never a matter of discussion or a way in which those products were advertised.
Now i don't advocate Nokia for keeping their loyal customers ignorant of the specs but it was only when "ANDROID" emerged that 'specs' started becoming a matter of concern.
because Android being a universal OS that could be ported to any device,created kinda a platform for all the companies to battle out each other with increasing specs!
now when a developer phone is launched with such hardware config it silently somehow creates a standard for all the later devices to be more advanced or atleast in par. its like a snowball effect!
and PS M not being like a child who craves for not getting those expensive toys :laugh: but as a consumer who is deluded into believing that all of these specs do matter and can somehow bring a drastic change in the way we utilize these devices.
and secondly these corporations are just giving us the technology and i feel that even they are skeptical about how to put it to use!

I agree with timmaaa, more RAM would be great to have, as the constant reloading of browser tabs (and other apps) every time you try to multi-task on this device is annoying, to say the least. Yes, the aggressive memory management is a part of the issue. But the fundamental lack of RAM is at least partially to blame.
The number of cores on the other hand, seems like one of those near-useless specs that manufacturers just flaunt for marketing purposes to those that don't really have the knowledge to even know what it means ("Look at this awesome 43 MP camera phone!"). Many folks assume more cores is better, but this is actually seldom the case.
However, a fundamentally faster/newer CPU is always going to be a welcome upgrade (similar to the RAM). A faster, smoother, and more responsive device is always going to be desirable. And as fast as smartphones and other computers have become, it always seems the software developers just add more and more bloat to the OS and apps. I know Google is talking about "one Android version" for all devices, including low end ones. But I really don't believe the hype. Consumers are always going to hunger for more features and more eye candy, and the desire for faster and faster CPUs is not going to end anytime soon.
Do we "need" this type of computing power? Heavens no. But we will "want" it nonetheless!

redpoint73 said:
I agree with timmaaa, more RAM would be great to have, as the constant reloading of browser tabs (and other apps) every time you try to multi-task on this device is annoying, to say the least. Yes, the aggressive memory management is a part of the issue. But the fundamental lack of RAM is at least partially to blame.
The number of cores on the other hand, seems like one of those near-useless specs that manufacturers just flaunt for marketing purposes to those that don't really have the knowledge to even know what it means ("Look at this awesome 43 MP camera phone!"). Many folks assume more cores is better, but this is actually seldom the case.
However, a fundamentally faster/newer CPU is always going to be a welcome upgrade (similar to the RAM). A faster, smoother, and more responsive device is always going to be desirable. And as fast as smartphones and other computers have become, it always seems the software developers just add more and more bloat to the OS and apps. I know Google is talking about "one Android version" for all devices, including low end ones. But I really don't believe the hype. Consumers are always going to hunger for more features and more eye candy, and the desire for faster and faster CPUs is not going to end anytime soon.
Do we "need" this type of computing power? Heavens no. But we will "want" it nonetheless!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i totally agree about the one android version hype i dont think it will materialize ever.
for all the manufacturers who are just pilling up cores and claiming that their phones are 'the best' please develop something that I can take to my 70 year old granny and really blow her mind :laugh: who knows nothing about the hardware.
I know its a poor joke but think about it there is really nothing that the most high end device does which probably can be considered to be state of the art or a miracle to those people who especially no nothing about the chip inside!
i had this thought when i saw an old fellow asking for a dual core long back and his need were just texting,calls and alarms,hell he dint even have internet on his device but still the market forces persuaded him that he needs a dual core.
but then i thought even a person who has a fair technical know how about it purchases a dual core,even he doesn't use it for firing missiles(again a poor joke) but you get the point technology if its not utilized to its potential,is useless.
and forget its use,the sad part is its creating this hype of high end devices!
little off topic apple introduces 64 bit correct me if m wrong all the apps are 32 bits how will they make use of the 64 bit architecture.
its like having an Ultra HD when you don't even have a service provider that offers HD transmission!
and this is not pertaining to any device or a software upgrade issue as it may likely sound!