Related
Been wondering for a while now why there seems to be an abundance of overclocking apps out for the Android side of the HD2 but yet the Windows Mobile side (arguably the side that needs it most) is left with an app that allows me to overclock my phone to the phones specification . Just wondering what happened to NetRipper and if he's not working on this anymore why hasn't the handle been passed on or at least something put up in the software development section so that people can assist/take over?
Surely that's the whole point of this forum or is it a case of some software is open source but some are more open source than others?
I believe the point is that overclocking didn´t really result in any fruitful advantages - many people ran the device at 1 GHz permanently, only to notice that next to higher battery consumption and a warmer device, speed was not really drastically improved.
And btw, with the current choice of custom ROMs, HD2 is still one of the most performing devices on the market. I think it is more the operating system software as well as the apps which are not taking full benefit of the GHz processing power.
I have an overclocked Samsung Epic and it the improvement in speed in everyday use is significant. Because the processor voltage is set lower than stock there is no sacrifice in battery life. With the Asus Transformer do you get a definite and significant benefit from overclocking? I am not talking about test bench scores but real world noticeable responsiveness. When I skim through the forums it is difficult for me to tell? Some people swear by sticking with stock. I would appreciate others perspectives.
Thanks
The improvements from overclocking vary on the application.
Home screen switching is choppy regardless of overclocking simply because the launcher lacks optimization. Browser performance is improved a little bit, but mainly remains unchanged as well. Games run noticeably smoother, especially Fpse. Task switching gets a small boost, as some applications will be able to load faster.
If you're a big gamer, overclocking is definitely worth it. For everything else, it won't make much of a difference.
I haven't played too many games (mostly Stardunk and Stupid Zombies) on my TF, but I haven't noticed any issues with them. I have also played high profile 720p video with absolutely no stuttering or artefacts.
In other words, I haven't felt the need to overclock yet. But if you are doing heavy gaming and/or video processing of some kind, it might be worthwhile.
For me, there's hardly any need to OC. It all depends on what you wanna do. To many people who play a lot of games on their TF, they report increases in performance (especially with emulators) but on other things I never really noticed any difference. I'm currently underclocking my TF, and have been for about a week, with no noticable stutters or performance issues and have great battery life.
And it's not really an "effort" to flash a new kernel... the hardest thing is waiting for your device to boot up again...
I have a transformer, galaxy tab 10.1, and a xoom. I've used just about every kernel that can be overclocked for each one of them, and to be honest I haven't really seen any improvements from them. I don't really play many games on my tablets though, so maybe there really is some benefit in that area.
Galaxy's screen
How do you rate the screen of the Galaxy Tab 10.1? Is it as good as the Super AmoLED (+)'s from Samsung mobiles?
droidx1978z4 said:
I have a transformer, galaxy tab 10.1, and a xoom. I've used just about every kernel that can be overclocked for each one of them, and to be honest I haven't really seen any improvements from them. I don't really play many games on my tablets though, so maybe there really is some benefit in that area.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This seems so counter-intuitive to me. If you overclock a PC CPU there is a very direct correlation with performance. There are always limiting factors such HD acess, etc., but there is a definite and noticeable difference across applications. What is even more surprising is that we are talking about very large % increases vs what people can do in the PC world. People are overclocking these CPUs by 50% plus...You would think you would see a very noticeable improvement but that doesn't seem to be the case.
My main interest is in browser performance. For example, XDA forum pages load extremely slow in all browsers I have tried (stock, Opera, Dolfin) with 5-6s to refresh vs instant on desktop browser. Also flash video tends to freeze and stutter some times. My internet connection is over 20Mb/s down and 5Mb/s up. I was hoping that I would find overclocking safe and provide a noticeable improvement.
earlyberd said:
The improvements from overclocking vary on the application.
Home screen switching is choppy regardless of overclocking simply because the launcher lacks optimization. Browser performance is improved a little bit, but mainly remains unchanged as well. Games run noticeably smoother, especially Fpse. Task switching gets a small boost, as some applications will be able to load faster.
If you're a big gamer, overclocking is definitely worth it. For everything else, it won't make much of a difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So for web page loading you haven't noticed much of a difference? How about flash video?
Thanks.
Overclocking can be a bit like collecting .. 'string' , because it is mostly done for the sake of itself, kind of like the many Ham Radio fans who talk about their "rigs", etc etc.
Yeah, of course if you can get, like in the old old days, a celeron 300 that overclocks to 450, and is dead stable, it was noticeable, and if you had a droid 1, which overclocked (many did) with ease from 500 to 1000+ , then it was again, noticeable, just not a staggeringly 2 times increase, because there are too many other factors.
The number of bus errors, and retries and slowness of the original bus speeds, and other components makes for a not-quite-as-expected by the numbers 'increase'. I would still mess with it, but not for the obvious reasons. I like under-volting more, and over-clocking only the slightest bit where nothing ever crashes or FCs. The moment you overclock, you really shouldn't be asking questions about 'Why does blah blah netflix crash?' because it crashes because you overclocked, and nothing else matters until you stick a kernel back at stock in there.
The other thing I love about alternate kernels is that you've got control of what modules you either compile in or compile and load as .ko files. cifs, tun, ntfs, whatever, it is all very useful, so there are lots of good and not-as-good things about it.
One thing I hate is when a dev insists on creating a kernel that has a 'default' speed greater than stock so that you've instantly got an ordeal if you've got one of the many gizmos that will not overclock to his default (like 1.6 to pick a number out of a hat).. Just make them all start at default, then allow us , the users, to setup overclocking via testing with setcpu or some such thing. Much easier than basically bricking things right off.
I sometimes look at those guys that overclock 'seriously' (by 3-4 times) using a container of liquid nitrogen that lasts for ~5 minutes and it is all for bragging rights, setting records , etc and think they're insane, but that is also part of it. Some are happy if they can just post here that they got 9,000 mF on some test despite not being able to do anything else reliably.
hachamacha said:
Overclocking can be a bit like collecting .. 'string' , because it is mostly done for the sake of itself, kind of like the many Ham Radio fans who talk about their "rigs", etc etc.
Yeah, of course if you can get, like in the old old days, a celeron 300 that overclocks to 450, and is dead stable, it was noticeable, and if you had a droid 1, which overclocked (many did) with ease from 500 to 1000+ , then it was again, noticeable, just not a staggeringly 2 times increase, because there are too many other factors.
The number of bus errors, and retries and slowness of the original bus speeds, and other components makes for a not-quite-as-expected by the numbers 'increase'. I would still mess with it, but not for the obvious reasons. I like under-volting more, and over-clocking only the slightest bit where nothing ever crashes or FCs. The moment you overclock, you really shouldn't be asking questions about 'Why does blah blah netflix crash?' because it crashes because you overclocked, and nothing else matters until you stick a kernel back at stock in there.
The other thing I love about alternate kernels is that you've got control of what modules you either compile in or compile and load as .ko files. cifs, tun, ntfs, whatever, it is all very useful, so there are lots of good and not-as-good things about it.
One thing I hate is when a dev insists on creating a kernel that has a 'default' speed greater than stock so that you've instantly got an ordeal if you've got one of the many gizmos that will not overclock to his default (like 1.6 to pick a number out of a hat).. Just make them all start at default, then allow us , the users, to setup overclocking via testing with setcpu or some such thing. Much easier than basically bricking things right off.
I sometimes look at those guys that overclock 'seriously' (by 3-4 times) using a container of liquid nitrogen that lasts for ~5 minutes and it is all for bragging rights, setting records , etc and think they're insane, but that is also part of it. Some are happy if they can just post here that they got 9,000 mF on some test despite not being able to do anything else reliably.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great post!
+1
Very philosophical ! ;-)
I guess what I am getting at is if you overclock to 1.2Ghz-1.3Ghz on the Transformer can you have a stable system that shows an appreciable improvement in responsiveness? Moving from hypothetical to actual...have you done this? Any specific kernel?
The engineer in me is looking for a definitive answer. ;-)
Thanks.
sstea said:
Very philosophical ! ;-)
I guess what I am getting at is if you overclock to 1.2Ghz-1.3Ghz on the Transformer can you have a stable system that shows an appreciable improvement in responsiveness? Moving from hypothetical to actual...have you done this? Any specific kernel?
The engineer in me is looking for a definitive answer. ;-)
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I've done this, just not on the TF yet. I'm working on a kernel right now that doesn't have OC built-in and activated at boot, so that we can use setcpu to screw around with it and find that 'sweet spot' that works for us, also under-over-volting. What I'd really like is to build in all the modules I like, setup over/under-clocking-volting and have it boot at 1 G. I mean, a dual-core 1G is nothing to sneeze at, and then try to ramp it up without screwing with over-volting immediately. I never like other peoples ROMs or Kernels because they have made their own crazy judgement calls. I like my own crazy judgement calls
Here's what I've noticed: When you have 'up-to-date' technology , as we do, in the TF, then overclocking that is totally stable makes a difference and it is noticeable. For me it's the FC's that kill the deal, but this chip and box appear to have plenty of headroom so I'm guessing that 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 are all good possibilities.
Example: My HTC Incredible phone has been overclocked to 1.1 from 1.0G for ~a year or so, and it doesn't FC, and it is faster, noticeably than at 1. It's only a 10% increase and yet it feels much quicker, so go figure. Those things are also subjective, so grain of salt... Example2: A stock droid1 is one I took to a double overclock, 550 to 1000, and yes it was faster at some things, but the underlying infrastructure didn't really support the faster CPU so I really never noticed a 100% increase that matched the clock speed. I left it that way for a year without any damages and it still boots up fine at 1 G.
In another post I started, I was asking what keys were required to boot 'safe mode' which exists in android OSs, and if I knew that, I'd try one of the OC'd kernels right now. IF not, I don't feel like unbricking again.
If you're interested, here's a good link for building your own: (generic android, not TF really:
http://www.droidforums.net/forum/rescue-squad-guides/31452-how-compile-your-own-kernel.html
Thanks for the response. With such a large community of Transformer users I am hoping to find a solid, conservative kernel that I can overclock with. Creating one myself is beyond my current technical capabilities.
My Charge is routinely running 275 - 300 MB of RAM even when "idle" and I receive a LOT of warnings that my memory is running low when I'm using Tasker or Evernote. While I use Linux at home on my personal computer, I'm by no means a professional in any real sense of the word. But my layperson's understanding of RAM is that, generally speaking, more is better and allows for a machine to run, boot, etc... faster and more reliably. I've read that the Charge is a RAM wannabe and I know there are phones with much more than is available with this device but does that mean anything for this phone? Should I be using something that will clear more RAM for me or is that just a pipe dream and I have to deal with the lack of RAM by buying a new phone at some later time?
I'm using Tweaked 3.1 and have to say that Dwitheral has made this phone one I'm happy with - my fiancee has the Charge as well and is paranoid about rooting / ROMing, so she is totally stock. Needless to say, her phone sucks eggs and mine doesn't. I'm looking for a replacement but will not do so until Black Friday next year - then I can get a device that's a little "older" for less than $50 that will be a huge improvement over the Charge. In the meantime, with Tweaked 3.1, a Hyperion 3500 mha extended life battery and Tasker, this phone is serviceable. But the high RAM usage nags at me and I'm wondering if this is really an issue and, if so, is there anything to do about it? When I look at running applications in task manager, it is usually none or one, maybe, on occasion, two running applications.
Can someone clarify this for me? Do I need to be concerned and, if so, is there a solution that doesn't start with "Upon entering the Verizon store, ask where the new DNA is located...."
Thanks in advance!
Forget what you know about RAM in Windows, because this isn't Windows. In Linux (and by extension in Android), unused RAM is generally considered to be wasted. The Android low memory killer (LMK) will take care of killing apps and freeing when it needs to make space for other things, and artificially killing stuff is going to make your phone perform worse and use more battery. You need enough free for apps to have room to start without waiting, but not so much that it kills background apps that you want there. You can tweak the LMK, but 275-300MB used (75-100MB free) is pretty close to the sweet spot for this phone.
I guess it is from since of the tweaks I am running, but I usually have an extra 50-80 MB from what you described.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Xparent Red Tapatalk 2
Did you know that Samsung has a system called DVFS that basically does nothing other than cripping your phone's performance with aggressive underclocking? There's a big thread about it here, but other than that, it seems that this issue is not very well known, which is surprising considering the SGS4 is a very mainstream phone. When I discovered about it I was shocked because this system does literally nothing useful, but it makes gaming or other high end smartphone activities (heavy browsing, 3D games, heavy multitasking, etc) lag like crazy.
It shocks me that Samsung has implemented such a thing and that you cannot disable without rooting (and obviously voiding the warranty and your Knox flag), and nobody except a few XDA users noticed.
MarkMRL said:
Did you know that Samsung has a system called DVFS that basically does nothing other than cripping your phone's performance with aggressive underclocking? There's a big thread about it here, but other than that, it seems that this issue is not very well known, which is surprising considering the SGS4 is a very mainstream phone. When I discovered about it I was shocked because this system does literally nothing useful, but it makes gaming or other high end smartphone activities (heavy browsing, 3D games, heavy multitasking, etc) lag like crazy.
It shocks me that Samsung has implemented such a thing and that you cannot disable without rooting (and obviously voiding the warranty and your Knox flag), and nobody except a few XDA users noticed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You say it does nothing useful, but what does it do for battery life?
s14sh3r said:
You say it does nothing useful, but what does it do for battery life?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nothing? The phone already has extensive battery saving options, and it already has an underclocking option right there. Not to mention, swappable battery. Why is this thing enforced on everyone? If you use your flagship tier phone like it was an old Nokia from the nineties then it might not affect you. Since I use my phone for browsing internet, multimedia, and games, it does affect me a lot. I don't give a flying **** about one hour of additional battery when my phone slows down to a crawl. If I wanted to enable crawl mode I should have the option, the phone shouldn't decide arbitrarily when to slow down.
Also, if you really want to get into conspiracy theories, what makes you think this isn't a marketing ploy by samsung? To force users to get the S5 because the old one has such poor performance in games and stuff like that? The average smartphone user is so dumb he wouldn't realize it's all planned right in the system itself, they'd go " hurr, my phone can't run games well anymore, better go out and buy the S5, that will surely play games better, with it's multiple megapixels and cores and newer stuff I have no clue about".
MarkMRL said:
Nothing? The phone already has extensive battery saving options, and it already has an underclocking option right there. Not to mention, swappable battery. Why is this thing enforced on everyone? If you use your flagship tier phone like it was an old Nokia from the nineties then it might not affect you. Since I use my phone for browsing internet, multimedia, and games, it does affect me a lot. I don't give a flying **** about one hour of additional battery when my phone slows down to a crawl. If I wanted to enable crawl mode I should have the option, the phone shouldn't decide arbitrarily when to slow down.
Also, if you really want to get into conspiracy theories, what makes you think this isn't a marketing ploy by samsung? To force users to get the S5 because the old one has such poor performance in games and stuff like that? The average smartphone user is so dumb he wouldn't realize it's all planned right in the system itself, they'd go " hurr, my phone can't run games well anymore, better go out and buy the S5, that will surely play games better, with it's multiple megapixels and cores and newer stuff I have no clue about".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good points. I'm not arguing against you, btw, I'm not even sure how to tell if my phone is using it since I'm using Omega ROM.
s14sh3r said:
Good points. I'm not arguing against you, btw, I'm not even sure how to tell if my phone is using it since I'm using Omega ROM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, if you play any game or if you browse a lot you'd probably notice because performance drops a lot and lag increases. I don't know what Omega Rom is, this is an issue in stock rom. Of course it doesn't affect me anymore because I have the knowledge to research this stuff and eventually find a solution (even though I obviously have no idea how the solution is made), but for the average user this should be an issue, I mean everyone should know about it, it's too shady to be ignored, this is planned obsolescence at its finest.
Also, if this was introduced to save battery, how come so many people are complaining about battery drain on Kitkat?
It's obviously a marketing strategy, and I will spread the word about it.
There's a technical paper on dvfs around which goes through some of the techniques samsung uses to optimise performance and battery use. https://events.linuxfoundation.org/images/stories/pdf/lcjp2012_ham.pdf
Sent from my unknown using Tapatalk
planetf1 said:
There's a technical paper on dvfs around which goes through some of the techniques samsung uses to optimise performance and battery use. https://events.linuxfoundation.org/images/stories/pdf/lcjp2012_ham.pdf
Sent from my unknown using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't care and I don't have the knowledge to understand anything in that document.
What I care about is:
Galaxy S4 on 4.3 and under: great performance, no issues.
Galaxy S4 on 4.4: awful performance, issues.
Other phones on 4.4: great performance, no issues.
It's no coincidence this happened only a few months before the S5 is released.
Either Samsung did something wrong with this implementation, or they did indeed do it to force users to upgrade because the older model is no longer viable for high end smartphone use.
planetf1 said:
There's a technical paper on dvfs around which goes through some of the techniques samsung uses to optimise performance and battery use. https://events.linuxfoundation.org/images/stories/pdf/lcjp2012_ham.pdf
Sent from my unknown using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This has nothing to do with the user-space policies which you're complaining about.
Will deleting the twDVFS.apk be sufficient to disable this frequency scaling on my S4? Or is using the Xposed module necessary?
delete
According to some news, the so called "Game Optimizing Service" is availeable on S22 Ultra devices - which potenially controlls about 10.000 Apps of the App-Store.
Can someone confirm if it is installed / active on S22 Ultra on SD & Exynos ?
[Update: Samsung reponds] Galaxy phones appear to be throttling 10,000 Android apps, like OnePlus did
According to recent findings, Samsung is throttling thousands of common Android apps on its Galaxy devices, and without a clear reason.
9to5google.com
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1499009797035008002
Package Disabler Pro
krogoth said:
Package Disabler Pro
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pay for the money greedy developer.
Here's a link to my thread, i debloat Samsung firmware including GOS (Game Optimizing Service) for the best performance and battery.
[DISCONTINUED] Samsung Galaxy One UI - Optimization Guide
THIS IS A SUGGESTED CONFIGURATION FOR SAMSUNG DEVICES OUT OF SUPPORT/CLOSED I - RECOMMENDED SETTINGS To Start With - Factory Reset before starting optimisations - Factory Reset after every Major update (One UI/Android) - Remove SIM before first...
forum.xda-developers.com
I remember that Samsung used something like this in my Note 5 and S7 Edge from Android 6 to limit game performance on purpose.
I advise you all to disable this "optimization".
Reports say that the GOS cannot be disabled the old way b'cos it's now system app since One UI 4.0?
Will it help to uninstall insted of disabling?
You can't disable it in OneUI 4.x
It's part of the Kernel now.
Maybe instead of panicking and basing decisions on headlines and mob mentality you think about the reasons why this might have been done to start with?
Most of if not all of these apps will be very poorly optimised in general but especially for the hardware in the S22 series of devices - this means that left unchecked they will use more resources than they really need to, warming up the devices causing thermal throttling to kick in and draining the battery fast (as well as possibly reducing the lifespan of certain components).
This APK keeps these things in check, but for games where you really need more performance you can use gamebooster to switch to performance mode and recovery virtually all the lost power (if not all of it) - making it your choice to sacrifice heat and battery life for performance when you need it, not all the time.
Yeah, I uninstalled it via ADB but it returns after reboot.
Yeah only thing working from the sounds of it is being rooted and using a package disabler but yeah then you lose widevine currently.
I've disabled all it's permissions including "Change system setting", maybe that helps.
Also here it's mentioned that it's possible to disable the GOS for non-game apps, still waiting for answer to how though:
https://www.reddit.com/r/samsung/comments/t56kta
Lennyuk said:
Maybe instead of panicking and basing decisions on headlines and mob mentality you think about the reasons why this might have been done to start with?
Most of if not all of these apps will be very poorly optimised in general but especially for the hardware in the S22 series of devices - this means that left unchecked they will use more resources than they really need to, warming up the devices causing thermal throttling to kick in and draining the battery fast (as well as possibly reducing the lifespan of certain components).
This APK keeps these things in check, but for games where you really need more performance you can use gamebooster to switch to performance mode and recovery virtually all the lost power (if not all of it) - making it your choice to sacrifice heat and battery life for performance when you need it, not all the time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is more or less the same discussion as we had with the oneplus 9 pro.
I am not seeing bad intend - but i dont't support the overall approach.
Most of theses apps are poorly optimized .... Even if so: That's none of the OS to take care of - especially not if you can't change / edit the overall parameters as a user on a "per App" Solution. I would love to see MS introduce something like this into windows....
Also the oem now actively could impact the performance of an App and the developer ist reliable anymore: "Well Samsung decided our app has to run like this, thanks for buying the pro version, but we can't help you". Wonderfull. And if Samsung has a bad day - maybe we are dropping the performance of some famous apps even more.... cause samsung would love to push the own alternative. Which includes some new advertising service... One could get creative with this stuff.
The reduction of lifespan is also a argument which is... at least questionable. I would argue that this is then poor product design or use of wrong or not fitting-quality components for the job. Makeing up "flaws" in Hardware by Software isn't really a solution to the overall problem
OK, so apparently this GOS thing is what the "Processing speed" option controls. It enables all apps to run at native speeds. I thought it just raised the clock speeds or something. Hmm..
@omnimax
not really. The thing is that the term - "Game Optimizing Service" is a bit missleading.
It is not about allowing named applications to run "native" or "unristricted". Named applications run with predefined ressourcess which aren't by any means "native". It's not about "raising" clockspeeds. It is about restriction of availeable ressourcces.
Lennyuk said:
Maybe instead of panicking and basing decisions on headlines and mob mentality you think about the reasons why this might have been done to start with?
Most of if not all of these apps will be very poorly optimised in general but especially for the hardware in the S22 series of devices - this means that left unchecked they will use more resources than they really need to, warming up the devices causing thermal throttling to kick in and draining the battery fast (as well as possibly reducing the lifespan of certain components).
This APK keeps these things in check, but for games where you really need more performance you can use gamebooster to switch to performance mode and recovery virtually all the lost power (if not all of it) - making it your choice to sacrifice heat and battery life for performance when you need it, not all the time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nah, this is the same situation as OP did with OP9 series, except US SD user's cant even root and remove it completely so you're stuck at their mercy. If it was configurable, not enabled by default, only affected games and didn't phone home all the time, they might get a pass.... but the way it's implemented is pretty much the definition of malware.
Can't even opt-out
Always runs, with permissions or not.
Phones home with potentially identifying information. (EU people, check out how GDPR is handled here, it's probably not)
Makes your device slow.
The road to hell is paved on good intentions and what not...
I am really amused to see so much discussion on this here on XDA and social media as well. For 98% of the folks, as long as your phone runs smooth and gives you an all day battery life, enjoy it. Many app developers are also not saints. They may leak data and bloat code etc so OEMs need to take the matter in their hands. For avid gamers, they should probably get a gaming machine and use phones only for casual gaming. With current tech limits, gaming on phones will necessitate some tweaks to optimize performance. Apple is polished because it simply stops everything else in the background and focuses ONLY on 1 task on the foreground. And iPhones also do heat up after sometime while gaming.
linom said:
I am really amused to see so much discussion on this here on XDA and social media as well. For 98% of the folks, as long as your phone runs smooth and gives you an all day battery life, enjoy it. Many app developers are also not saints. They may leak data and bloat code etc so OEMs need to take the matter in their hands. For avid gamers, they should probably get a gaming machine and use phones only for casual gaming. With current tech limits, gaming on phones will necessitate some tweaks to optimize performance. Apple is polished because it simply stops everything else in the background and focuses ONLY on 1 task on the foreground. And iPhones also do heat up after sometime while gaming.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's really not the OEM's place to "take matter into their own hands". Don't push your use case on everyone else. Samsung does not know my user case, just like Apple does not know my use case, just like YOU don't know my use case. People bought this (and other, like the OP9) phone partially due to benchmark scores that should translate into performance metrics for their use case. When that's not the case, then they should be mad they got a paperweight. Check out the GOS enabled geekscore, it's basically a GS10. Why should users be happy they got a smooth UI experience when the things they actually want to do on a phone is gimped?
Your sentiment on a gaming machine... are you serious? This phone costs more than an actual mid-upper tier gaming PC. Some people like to play games on their phones, and some games are mobile only.
Again, optimizing by itself is not necessarily a bad thing. They just need to make it an opt-in experience, explain what it does clearly, let the users choose which apps to "optimize", and start letting people use their hardware like their own.
craznazn said:
It's really not the OEM's place to "take matter into their own hands". Don't push your use case on everyone else. Samsung does not know my user case, just like Apple does not know my use case, just like YOU don't know my use case. People bought this (and other, like the OP9) phone partially due to benchmark scores that should translate into performance metrics for their use case. When that's not the case, then they should be mad they got a paperweight. Check out the GOS enabled geekscore, it's basically a GS10. Why should users be happy they got a smooth UI experience when the things they actually want to do on a phone is gimped?
Your sentiment on a gaming machine... are you serious? This phone costs more than an actual mid-upper tier gaming PC. Some people like to play games on their phones, and some games are mobile only.
Again, optimizing by itself is not necessarily a bad thing. They just need to make it an opt-in experience, explain what it does clearly, let the users choose which apps to "optimize", and start letting people use their hardware like their own.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, maybe you're right. They need to be transparent on the optimization choices.
lokto7 said:
Reports say that the GOS cannot be disabled the old way b'cos it's now system app since One UI 4.0?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cannot disable, adb fails...