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.
Related
Am I the only one totally disappointed in the handsets that are coming out with Windows Phone 7.5? Who are they trying to sell the 3.x screens to? Munchkins? The screen size on the "new" HTC Titan is good but the rest of the specs on the screen are not. Look at the specs on the HTC Amaze and the Samsung Galaxy S II - THIS is what Windows Phone should be shipping on! Not this leftover crap from last years rejects. Hard to compete if you don't even try!
Well, screensize is a matter of personal preference. Millions of iphoners can attest to that.
I, personally, won't pass judgement on the Titan's screen until I see it in person.
Based on what you've posted, I'd recommend either waiting for Nokia devices or take a look at Samsung Focus S when it hits.
Although, I do agree that OEMS have been less than forthcoming with their cutting edge devices thus far. The Venue Pro could have been such an animal had it not had a myriad of issues early on.
Okbye.
yes because every single android device has monster specs and doesn't try to market to different audiences increasing share and permeability...
seriously this iteration is Microsoft and OEMs using different market points to create presence and alternatives
Dual core is next year, so either wait or not buy it...it's that simple
I think the screen sizes between 3.5 and 4.0 are awesome :-D just the way I want the screens to be;-) still hoped for some dual core, but wp is designed especially for one type of processor, so It's probably therefore it is still singlecore
sent with love from me to you
domineus said:
yes because every single android device has monster specs and doesn't try to market to different audiences increasing share and permeability...
seriously this iteration is Microsoft and OEMs using different market points to create presence and alternatives
Dual core is next year, so either wait or not buy it...it's that simple
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is Microsoft thinks that WP7 sales were slack because the handsets were too expensive. The reality is the handsets were a year (or more) out of date before they hit the shelves. They were pushing 3G phones with a series 1 CPU and no FFC in stores next to high end 4G phones with all the accessories. Now all we have are these puny low res screens on underpowered phones! Shameful!
What is this ridiculous obsession with 'power' and screen size?
I personally don't give a flying proverbial about anything with a screen size over 3.5", because it's just TOO BIG. It can't be used with one hand and frankly it's not necessary, I have a tablet for media and it does a MUCH better job.
And this ridiculous obsession with dual-core this and thousand-gigabyte that. When WP7 runs just as quickly on a 1GHz single core processor as Android runs on a 1.6GHz dual core, it just plain IS NOT NECESSARY. It's a PHONE for christs sakes. Hell Windows 7 can run on less power than that perfectly well.
And if you need 64 gigabytes of media on your phone, then you need to get yourself an actual media player. I don't know of anybody who actually NEEDS more than 8Gb of space on their phone - until WP7 I only ever had a 2Gb MicroSD.
Sorry, yes, it's my opinion, but frankly this specifications rubbish is getting out of hand. People don't buy Android because they know what it does - most people don't have a clue what Android is, they just know it's generally good and there's a stupid number of apps. They buy it because they're told to buy it by the salesman.
With the pace at which WP7 is catching up, with the right marketing it'll start to bring out significant followers. The key thing is getting devices out there and NOT letting operators/independents STOP stocking them. That needs people to want them - and a healthy budget for subsidy. Give a salesman more commission for a WP7 device than a theoretically 20-times better Android, and I can practically guarantee 90% of people that day will walk out with the WP7. And if WP7 doesn't need anywhere near the hardware expense, then there can be more budget for that if the OEMs play their cards right.
andrewkeith5 said:
Cut for size
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just wanted to come to this thread and say: Amen, brotha.
You couldn't have explained it better.
Xodium said:
I just wanted to come to this thread and say: Amen, brotha.
You couldn't have explained it better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! You can probably tell that little rant has been brewing up for quite some time reading some of the posts on here!
mlococo said:
Am I the only one totally disappointed in the handsets that are coming out with Windows Phone 7.5? Who are they trying to sell the 3.x screens to? Munchkins? The screen size on the "new" HTC Titan is good but the rest of the specs on the screen are not. Look at the specs on the HTC Amaze and the Samsung Galaxy S II - THIS is what Windows Phone should be shipping on! Not this leftover crap from last years rejects. Hard to compete if you don't even try!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. Guess what's going to happen when iPhone 5 hits? Long lines and a sellout.
Guess what's going to happen when the second generation of WP7 phones hit? Short lines and overstock.
mlococo said:
Am I the only one totally disappointed in the handsets that are coming out with Windows Phone 7.5? Who are they trying to sell the 3.x screens to? Munchkins? The screen size on the "new" HTC Titan is good but the rest of the specs on the screen are not. Look at the specs on the HTC Amaze and the Samsung Galaxy S II - THIS is what Windows Phone should be shipping on! Not this leftover crap from last years rejects. Hard to compete if you don't even try!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I sort of agree, but only a little. For WP7 to be successful, they need to push out some hardware that blows people away. Not necessarily in specs, but in design. The new Focus S or whatever it will be called is pretty impressive, but they need to stop developing behind the curve and start innovating on some hardware. Maybe that's MS's plan with Nokia and the newly signed HTC and Samsung contracts. I know that WP7 will outperform a dual-core Android with nothing more than a few generation past snapdragon, but why not throw in a dual-core anyway? My Focus is buttery smooth 99% of the time, but a dual-core and some extra RAM will speed up app loading immensely.
andrewkeith5 said:
What is this ridiculous obsession with 'power' and screen size?
I personally don't give a flying proverbial about anything with a screen size over 3.5", because it's just TOO BIG. It can't be used with one hand and frankly it's not necessary, I have a tablet for media and it does a MUCH better job.
And this ridiculous obsession with dual-core this and thousand-gigabyte that. When WP7 runs just as quickly on a 1GHz single core processor as Android runs on a 1.6GHz dual core, it just plain IS NOT NECESSARY. It's a PHONE for christs sakes. Hell Windows 7 can run on less power than that perfectly well.
And if you need 64 gigabytes of media on your phone, then you need to get yourself an actual media player. I don't know of anybody who actually NEEDS more than 8Gb of space on their phone - until WP7 I only ever had a 2Gb MicroSD.
Sorry, yes, it's my opinion, but frankly this specifications rubbish is getting out of hand. People don't buy Android because they know what it does - most people don't have a clue what Android is, they just know it's generally good and there's a stupid number of apps. They buy it because they're told to buy it by the salesman.
With the pace at which WP7 is catching up, with the right marketing it'll start to bring out significant followers. The key thing is getting devices out there and NOT letting operators/independents STOP stocking them. That needs people to want them - and a healthy budget for subsidy. Give a salesman more commission for a WP7 device than a theoretically 20-times better Android, and I can practically guarantee 90% of people that day will walk out with the WP7. And if WP7 doesn't need anywhere near the hardware expense, then there can be more budget for that if the OEMs play their cards right.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hey buddy, please correct your words...we didn't say that WP7 running on single core is slow,please get us right...the reason why we want dual-core is more future proof...
future proof,read it again...microsoft has disappointed me twice since I just love WP7 like you,1st is the HTC HD2 and it can't run a real or proper WP7 due to microsoft don't want to support it.Then,i went for Mozart just for wp7,and now Microsoft says that only one major update per year, therefore, I don't think mozart is up for the next update no new feature,secondary camera, gyroscope for better augmented reality, kinect integration&etc....
So, get us right,before you write man...everyone knows that WP7 is fast on single core,but no future proof...not everyone is rich a$$ and able to buy new mobile phone every year. We want something can last for at least 2 years.
Specs > Design. If Nokia ships phones with Titan/Focus S specs they will not be able to attract the amount of conversions they need.
What Microsoft needs is conversions, not turnover.
Conversion: Android/iOS/WebOS/BB users switching to WP7.
Turn-Over: Us upgrading because we want more up-to-date handsets.
Android got where it is because it was able to convert a ton of Windows Mobile/BB/WebOS and even some iOS people to Android, not through turn-over.
Cute phones don't make those people come to WP7, when the internals are a year or more behind the competition. It's not just about power. Newer SoCs allow for LTE and faster HSPA+ data connections (this is why T-Mobile is using a Qualcomm instead of Exynos in their Galaxy S II). It allows for high-def Video Chatting. NFC. WiFi Direct. Bluetooth 3.0, etc.
Keep in mind, a lot of those features were on phones a year ago.
Microsoft's hardware specs have really held OEMs back. Part of the reason why Advertising for WP7 is so bad is cause the carriers and OEMs are really struggling to find a story to tell. The handsets, even if the design is nice, simply won't have that with the way Microsoft keeps the OEMs on that leash...
And with users come more and better dev support.
I've spend the better part of 3-4 days going through the app market and there's hardly any non-game apps worth installing (outside of some obvious ones, of course). Hardly any of them have been updated to Mango, and there are apps that I paid for which haven't been updated in ~6 months...
Yes, WP7 has to catch up. Software isn't the only way they need to catch up. They need to catch up with device specs as well.
The 4G phones coming to AT&T are 14.4 Mbps HSPA+ devices. The Galaxy S II on AT&T is a 21 Mbps device. T-Mobile's Galaxy S II is a 42 Mbps device, I doubt the Radar 4G will be above 14.4 unless they use an SoC we don't anticipate. The Price of the phones didn't have anything to do with the slow uptake of WP7 on release. The state of the OS had everything to do with that. It's one thing to be told something. It's another thing for people to see what it really performed like when they went in the store (and by performed, I'm not talking about raw speed).
Even now that Mango is out. So little apps are taking advantage of its new features that they need to really push for developers to get on the ball to updating their apps and supporting them. To a consumer trying devices out in a carrier store (only choice for a lot of them, since most of their friends don't have WP7 devices), a lot of Mango's changes seem purely cosmetic because of that. Microsoft haven't even updated most of their own apps on the marketplace for Mango...
N8ter said:
Specs > Design. If Nokia ships phones with Titan/Focus S specs they will not be able to attract the amount of conversions they need.
What Microsoft needs is conversions, not turnover.
Conversion: Android/iOS/WebOS/BB users switching to WP7.
Turn-Over: Us upgrading because we want more up-to-date handsets.
Android got where it is because it was able to convert a ton of Windows Mobile/BB/WebOS and even some iOS people to Android, not through turn-over.
Cute phones don't make those people come to WP7, when the internals are a year or more behind the competition. It's not just about power. Newer SoCs allow for LTE and faster HSPA+ data connections (this is why T-Mobile is using a Qualcomm instead of Exynos in their Galaxy S II). It allows for high-def Video Chatting. NFC. WiFi Direct. Bluetooth 3.0, etc.
Keep in mind, a lot of those features were on phones a year ago.
Microsoft's hardware specs have really held OEMs back. Part of the reason why Advertising for WP7 is so bad is cause the carriers and OEMs are really struggling to find a story to tell. The handsets, even if the design is nice, simply won't have that with the way Microsoft keeps the OEMs on that leash...
And with users come more and better dev support.
I've spend the better part of 3-4 days going through the app market and there's hardly any non-game apps worth installing (outside of some obvious ones, of course). Hardly any of them have been updated to Mango, and there are apps that I paid for which haven't been updated in ~6 months...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very true. My sentiments exactly.
Part of it is good: They've added a lot of integrated functionality that reduces the need to install 3rd party apps. Shazam is useless on WP7 for me, for example (just one example).
Part of it is Bad: There are a lot of good apps on other platforms that seem like they don't care, and apps that were released early on, like Twitter/Birdsong that seem to have fallen out of support. Maybe the dev of Birdsong made enough cash and don't feel the need to update the app anymore?
Board Express Pro hasn't updated their app in forever as well, and that's a $3 app.
IMO, if you don't plan on supporting your app in the marketplace, it shouldn't cost anything. I have tended to ignore paid apps (don't even consider them, and don't even look at them) now unless they're a reputable app from a reputable developer. I'll buy BeejiveIM if it comes to WP7, I'll buy TapaTalk if it comes to WP7. If I had to do it again, I wouldn't buy Birdsong or Board Express Pro.
My days paying for apps are numbered. It's the developers' fault, too.
I think a lot of Microsoft's initial goal was Conversion of non-smartphone users. I don't have anything to prove it, but I wouldn't be surprised if a large amount of Android's marketshare comes from mid/low range devices.
N8tr,
Weren't you the one upset in an older thread that "all the apps are mango" and you couldn't use them because mango wasn't officially released yet... And now your upset that not enough apps are mango...
Sent from my SGH-i917 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
mlococo said:
The problem is Microsoft thinks that WP7 sales were slack because the handsets were too expensive. The reality is the handsets were a year (or more) out of date before they hit the shelves. They were pushing 3G phones with a series 1 CPU and no FFC in stores next to high end 4G phones with all the accessories. Now all we have are these puny low res screens on underpowered phones! Shameful!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
oh yes and the incredible spec'd devices that were on windows mobile were blockbusters in the market
Microsoft again will lose money if this is all about a specs war, and specs weren't the reason why android was (and is) successful. It's a part, but not the complete package.
Android is diverse enough to reach several different price points to be pawned and given away for pennies. In America, that's important. The only one that feels the need to compare the specs is a bunch of idiots like you and me to see who has the bigger e credit
And I bet anyone on xda devs has done that once
But guess what? We're a growing population, but we are still a blip in comparison to the mass consumer. Go on, ask anyone if spec's matter. To many the answer is possibly, but when a person is selling a phone, they don't say
Hi this phone has a 1.5 gig dual core qhd screen.
They dumb it down to make it sound nice. If you speak techie 24x7 selling a phone, not many sales occur. Again, its about the casual customer.
That said, looking at the price points for android devices that are priced and have similar hardware to windows phone, windows phone does provide a far greater out of box experience. That matters, and it is a large reason why many ditched windows mobile and palm in favor for the iphone flavor in 2007.
Windows Phone has to be popular, and that is a key deterrent in both apple and android's success. This year is the year of getting Windows on equal footing with Android and apple in competitive pricing. Next year is popularity, and ironically, a lot of users will be looking to renew their contracts in America...that matters too
In other words
wait or use a different phone if you're after specs...It's what I used to tell my customers all the time
munkeyphyst said:
N8tr,
Weren't you the one upset in an older thread that "all the apps are mango" and you couldn't use them because mango wasn't officially released yet... And now your upset that not enough apps are mango...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know about N8ter, but I complained before the official release, when Microsoft was pushing Mango updates into the marketplace, and their policy was that any app updated to Mango caused the NoDo version to be locked (no more updates allowed). We didn't know how long it would be until the official release, and we didn't know how many NoDo apps would be dead-ended in the interim.
But now Mango is officially out, and Microsoft has admitted that their policy was a bad idea and reversed it. So now everyone wins. People with Mango can get Mango apps, and people with NoDo can continue to receive updates (at least until their numbers are so few that it no longer makes sense).
andrewkeith5 said:
What is this ridiculous obsession with 'power' and screen size?
I personally don't give a flying proverbial about anything with a screen size over 3.5", because it's just TOO BIG. It can't be used with one hand and frankly it's not necessary, I have a tablet for media and it does a MUCH better job.
And this ridiculous obsession with dual-core this and thousand-gigabyte that. When WP7 runs just as quickly on a 1GHz single core processor as Android runs on a 1.6GHz dual core, it just plain IS NOT NECESSARY. It's a PHONE for christs sakes. Hell Windows 7 can run on less power than that perfectly well.
And if you need 64 gigabytes of media on your phone, then you need to get yourself an actual media player. I don't know of anybody who actually NEEDS more than 8Gb of space on their phone - until WP7 I only ever had a 2Gb MicroSD.
Sorry, yes, it's my opinion, but frankly this specifications rubbish is getting out of hand. People don't buy Android because they know what it does - most people don't have a clue what Android is, they just know it's generally good and there's a stupid number of apps. They buy it because they're told to buy it by the salesman.
With the pace at which WP7 is catching up, with the right marketing it'll start to bring out significant followers. The key thing is getting devices out there and NOT letting operators/independents STOP stocking them. That needs people to want them - and a healthy budget for subsidy. Give a salesman more commission for a WP7 device than a theoretically 20-times better Android, and I can practically guarantee 90% of people that day will walk out with the WP7. And if WP7 doesn't need anywhere near the hardware expense, then there can be more budget for that if the OEMs play their cards right.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I couldn't agree more, I think 16GB is plenty for almost all needs
MartyLK said:
I agree. Guess what's going to happen when iPhone 5 hits? Long lines and a sellout.
Guess what's going to happen when the second generation of WP7 phones hit? Short lines and overstock.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
because of the fact that all the iNaives out there don't know better. people need to stop holding Microsoft to a higher standard than google and apple. the iOS5 betas so far have been unstable on the iPhone4 when compared to mango, also apple may not even release the iPhone 5 but more of a rehash of the iPhone 4,I've seen ur trolling on pocketnow over the mango update and u are just plain wrong, ur just mad because mango doesn't include ur precious Google- integration.
N8ter said:
The 4G phones coming to AT&T are 14.4 Mbps HSPA+ devices. The Galaxy S II on AT&T is a 21 Mbps device. T-Mobile's Galaxy S II is a 42 Mbps device, I doubt the Radar 4G will be above 14.4 unless they use an SoC we don't anticipate. The Price of the phones didn't have anything to do with the slow uptake of WP7 on release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and this matters how? at&t,tmobile and vz all have data caps, what good is 42mbps when u can't even use them without being slowed or overcharged?
andrewkeith5 said:
What is this ridiculous obsession with 'power' and screen size?
I personally don't give a flying proverbial about anything with a screen size over 3.5", because it's just TOO BIG. It can't be used with one hand and frankly it's not necessary, I have a tablet for media and it does a MUCH better job.
And this ridiculous obsession with dual-core this and thousand-gigabyte that. When WP7 runs just as quickly on a 1GHz single core processor as Android runs on a 1.6GHz dual core, it just plain IS NOT NECESSARY. It's a PHONE for christs sakes. Hell Windows 7 can run on less power than that perfectly well.
And if you need 64 gigabytes of media on your phone, then you need to get yourself an actual media player. I don't know of anybody who actually NEEDS more than 8Gb of space on their phone - until WP7 I only ever had a 2Gb MicroSD.
Sorry, yes, it's my opinion, but frankly this specifications rubbish is getting out of hand. People don't buy Android because they know what it does - most people don't have a clue what Android is, they just know it's generally good and there's a stupid number of apps. They buy it because they're told to buy it by the salesman.
With the pace at which WP7 is catching up, with the right marketing it'll start to bring out significant followers. The key thing is getting devices out there and NOT letting operators/independents STOP stocking them. That needs people to want them - and a healthy budget for subsidy. Give a salesman more commission for a WP7 device than a theoretically 20-times better Android, and I can practically guarantee 90% of people that day will walk out with the WP7. And if WP7 doesn't need anywhere near the hardware expense, then there can be more budget for that if the OEMs play their cards right.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who are you to decide what screen size is good for me?
"IS NOT NECESSARY" - who gave you the right to decide what is necessary? Don't be a smartass
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?
As of current development or better preferred term, Evolution, the current trend in the Android Phone genre is increasing the processor cores, size and resolution of the display etc. etc. But the real question is where they will stop.
First, there were the Single core phones like Samsung Galaxy S, iPhone 4
Now There are Dual Core like Samsung Galaxy S ||, LG 2X, HTC Sensation,
Now, it seems that even dual cores are not enough, that's why companies are launching Quad-Core phones like HTC's One X, LG 4X HD etc.
Now, the first question is,'' Do We Really Need Quad-Core Phones''
Nvidia started this buzz in the middle of the previous year with their Tegra 3, soon we heard Samsung joining this group with their announcement of their Exynos 5450.Having more cores means a faster phone, which everybody wants, is not a bad thing. Personally, i don't think that Quad-Core is the answer for mobiles, right now.
Having a latest hardware is of no use until the Software or Opreating System (OS) can utilize it properly, but following the latest trend, the hardware department seems to be developing at a much faster rate than the software's. We have seen this similar scenario in other aspects of technology too, for e.g. There was a time when PC games were really demanding and investing in a dual GPU sounds smart, but today you can easily get away with a two year old graphics card without having to compromise too much. There's a lot of buzz that ICS is gonna be agame changer, but you can see, that it is not very different from Honeycomb, just better optimized. ICS is better optimised, for sure, but whether it will be able to utilize more than two cores properly, is yet to be seen. Even though Honeycomb was “fully” hardware accelerated, Tegra 2 ( yeah, i'm talking to you, XOOM ) just couldn’t translate all that power it had in to the real world, which translated into sluggish performance.
While Tegra 3 fixes some of these issues, putting it in a phone just does not make sense. To start off with, it’s still using the 40nm fabrication, which doesn’t exactly sip power. You’ll need a really chunky battery for this, which could explain why all Tegra 3 phones have large screens, so the phones have to be made bigger to accommodate the larger battery, while keeping it slim.
But don't forget main part, Battery Life. More processing power automatically translates into more power hungry devices, which impacts battery life quite badly. Tegra 3 uses a 5th Companion core to save power, Even if the new quad-core SoCs have the ability to put their cores in idle mode, it’s still consuming a small amount of power all the time, even if you aren’t using them. Android users struggle with battery life, as it is to get a full day’s worth of heavy usage on single-core phones, so don’t get me started on quad-cores.
Another issue we shouldn’t ignore is apps. About 90 percent of the apps, you’ll ever use on a smartphone work absolutely fine on a 1GHz single-core CPU. It’s just a handful of games (mostly from Nvidia) or specialized apps that actually take advantage of two cores. Realistically, you will very seldom be using these apps when you’re travelling, since these drain the battery like crazy, so your only option is to not use it, which defeats the whole purpose of having a multi-core phone.
P.S. It is my first post, suggestions are always welcome.....
They will stop - when the consumer stops foaming at the mouth to buy the newest, most cores/biggest screen piece of technology to brag to their iPhone owning friends about.
I agree with everything you're saying, however it's all about marketing.
Why would anyone buy a new phone if it comes out with the same specs as the phone they currently own? They won't. They'll hang on to their current phone until they break it, brick it, or lose it.
But if you can show them a new phone with better hardware and specs, they're going to feel like theirs is outdated or inferior.
And since the buying frenzy is driven by the unending need to have something better than everyone else, they will continue to facilitate the satisfaction of that need so that they, in turn, can line their pockets with our hard earned money.
Personally, the only reason I'm going to buy the next phone (Galaxy S3 perhaps?) is so that I can hand my SGS2 down to my wife, who currently has my original MT4G (which btw is still an awesome phone that runs everything like a champ). The only justifiable reason she would need the SGS2 IMO is because the hardware buttons on the MT4G will eventually wear out.
Once she has my SGS2, and I have my new phone, I doubt I will be interested in buying another phone for quite some time unless they introduce some completely new technology that I feel is worth the money (Like project glass, which really isn't a phone per se)
Just my two cents.
I agree completely. It's not about whats realistic or necessary. It's about making money. As long as they're making money, they keep churning out what's making them money. And people will continue to buy the bigger and the better specs because they're looked at with envy by those with last year's model.
I wonder the same when i see new cellphones every day on the news... do they sell all this stuff?
Very, very, very, very, very true!!!
I am also from the crowd who wants always the new phones. But whats the point.
They are keep convincing us like the car manifactures more HP better the car and less the fuel. Quadcore is like you have car with 700 HP but no road to drive?!?!
Optimization is the keyword.......
It would be nice if our hardware held value and prowess for more than 6 months. Although the technology advances are nice. The good thing about it, is that we can sell our devices to fund the replacement. It's a trade off I suppose.
Sent from my Galaxy Note (SGH-i717) using XDA Premium.
I don't know. I don't know ,whether their is a need for tablets, either. It seems like that the big companys found something that everyone wants to have, so they are just want to make money i guess.
Hi, I'm thinking of selling away my DZ to try on a Wp7 phone. I have to admit, to me, Android isn't really fulfilling what I need. Android isn't very snappy I feel (pls dont throw apples at me, I may be wrong!), web browsing isn't too fun, and somehow, the dream that Android would achieve the same level of speed in iOS when I changed to an Android phone, is slightly diminishing. I feel that too many daemons are running in the background, lagging the phone up. Though I must say, Android is best at eye candy. So, is the Wp7 better? Does Wp7 feel 'snappier' in that sense, similar to the performance of an iPhone? Thank you!
EDIT: Thank you for the people who voted!
WP7 will feel much smoother than anything except the highest-end Android phones (one reason why WP7 still tends to come on phones 1000-1500 MHz single-core CPUs is that it just doesn't need more power than that for everyday tasks). Poorly-written apps can still lag, of course, but throwing more hardware at it isn't the correct way to solve that problem anyhow.
I recommend that you try out a Windows phone for at least a few minutes, and form your own judgement. Most people who do this find they like them, but depending on the stores in your area it may take some work to find a live display model.
GoodDayToDie said:
WP7 will feel much smoother than anything except the highest-end Android phones (one reason why WP7 still tends to come on phones 1000-1500 MHz single-core CPUs is that it just doesn't need more power than that for everyday tasks). Poorly-written apps can still lag, of course, but throwing more hardware at it isn't the correct way to solve that problem anyhow.
I recommend that you try out a Windows phone for at least a few minutes, and form your own judgement. Most people who do this find they like them, but depending on the stores in your area it may take some work to find a live display model.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I totally agree with ur point that throwing more hardware is ridiculous! In the case of Android, no matter how powerful android gets, it doesnt really solve the prob. Android probably needs a code revision. Thank you for your opinion, I did get my hands on on one, and i quite like Metro. I'm probably gonna spend more time checking it out
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!