Dual core on smartphones... why?

[Spicedaddy]

The second core it to run Flash.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

I think there's two messages here.

1) Don't stop innovating. I agree here

2) Dual core is overkill. See, here is the point I side with. Before Android came out, we never really cared too much about clock speed. We cared about a smooth UI and that the phone did what we needed to. No one was obsessing about dual triple quad cores or clock speed on iOS, Windows Mobile, Symbian. We acknowledged WM6 was on the slow side.

Then came this fragmented OS named Android that started gobbling resources up. Remember when iOS used 128mb of RAM? That was more than sufficient. Hell 256mb on my iPod Touch is more than sufficient. But 256mb is nothing on my Android phone. So people cry that 512 is not enough and if you don't have 1gb it's a waste.

The fact is Android seems to gobble up resources like no other and now we are on this quest to go all out on our phones. I think this is the whole software vs hardware and innovation thing.

We need new hardware because our software keeps getting bloated. I mean shouldn't it be manageable where 1ghz is enough? I'm not saying stop at 1ghz, but I think the requirements of software on Android are getting too harsh it doesn't make sense. Like the fact that Angry Birds runs slow as a bitch on my Android phone but on my ex's iPod Touch 2G it's smooth as silk tells you that something's wrong.

It's one thing to go brute force dual, quad whatever core you need, but at the same time, I think it should be said that today's single core 1ghz processors should be MORE THAN ENOUGH to run today's software. But alas it isn't. So yes, I do think it's overkill that we're going brute force and upping hardware to match the pace of software that should just simply be refined.

It's kinda like Windows Vista was such a resource hog it turned a lot of people back to XP. Essentially what we did was wait out on XP til 7 came out. In that 3 year timespan, hardware progressed such that while 7 was really similar to Vista + SP2, the hardware caught up that people were ready to make the jump finally. Microsoft acknowledged it fucked up, and maybe something should be said here. iOS runs smoothly on a ARM11 processor, but Android struggles with anything less than 1ghz and 512mb of RAM.

 

[zerocool84]

I think there's two messages here.

1) Don't stop innovating. I agree here

2) Dual core is overkill. See, here is the point I side with. Before Android came out, we never really cared too much about clock speed. We cared about a smooth UI and that the phone did what we needed to. No one was obsessing about dual triple quad cores or clock speed on iOS, Windows Mobile, Symbian. We acknowledged WM6 was on the slow side.

Then came this fragmented OS named Android that started gobbling resources up. Remember when iOS used 128mb of RAM? That was more than sufficient. Hell 256mb on my iPod Touch is more than sufficient. But 256mb is nothing on my Android phone. So people cry that 512 is not enough and if you don't have 1gb it's a waste.

The fact is Android seems to gobble up resources like no other and now we are on this quest to go all out on our phones. I think this is the whole software vs hardware and innovation thing.

We need new hardware because our software keeps getting bloated. I mean shouldn't it be manageable where 1ghz is enough? I'm not saying stop at 1ghz, but I think the requirements of software on Android are getting too harsh it doesn't make sense. Like the fact that Angry Birds runs slow as a bitch on my Android phone but on my ex's iPod Touch 2G it's smooth as silk tells you that something's wrong.

It's one thing to go brute force dual, quad whatever core you need, but at the same time, I think it should be said that today's single core 1ghz processors should be MORE THAN ENOUGH to run today's software. But alas it isn't. So yes, I do think it's overkill that we're going brute force and upping hardware to match the pace of software that should just simply be refined.

It's kinda like Windows Vista was such a resource hog it turned a lot of people back to XP. Essentially what we did was wait out on XP til 7 came out. In that 3 year timespan, hardware progressed such that while 7 was really similar to Vista + SP2, the hardware caught up that people were ready to make the jump finally. Microsoft acknowledged it fucked up, and maybe something should be said here. iOS runs smoothly on a ARM11 processor, but Android struggles with anything less than 1ghz and 512mb of RAM.

I don't know why people keep trying to compare old versions of iPhone or iPod Touches when they couldn't do much at once. Older iPhones were really stripped down and could only do one thing at a time which is why it was so smooth. There's a reason why the older stuff doesn't support multitasking or many of the stuff the newer iPhones do. Let's just stop innovating hardware because you say so. Android runs perfectly fine on 1Ghz phones if you've ever read a review but we need to keep things progressing which is the reason why iPhones are going to get faster processors as well cus if they didn't need more processing power they wouldn't put it in it so iPhones need more power just as much as Android does. Do we really need to go into why iPhone is smoother than Android? A little child could figure that out. You obviously hate Android so much, did it rape you in your sleep?

 

[simonizor]

I don't see why there's an argument here. Sure, what we do now might not justify the need for dual core processors in a phone, but I'm sure that somewhere down the line they will be utilized. Now just shut up and buy one because they are in the same price range as phones with single core processors.

 

[Gamingphreek]

DLeRium have you ever looked into Android and studied it from a low level? Have you ever looked at Vista on a low level? That second point is seriously flawed.

Android is running various stripped down version of Linux Kernel 2.6. Additionally, the Dalvik VM (Essentially a mobile optimized Java VM) is pretty efficient even for a garbage collected language (Java).

Memory constraints come into play when you get people developing and running poorly written apps. Memory constraints come into play when people run a Task Killer and can't figure out why memory usage increases. Memory constraints come into play when people are trying to run 7000 widgets on 15 different home screens that are all doing I/O at the same time.

Vista suffered in a similar way. Microsoft idiotically essentially ran a Single-User environment with Single-User security in Windows XP and earlier by giving every single user Administrator privileges. Programmers began to assume that the user running the system was given Administrative rights and coded everything in that insecure manner- thus, when Vista came out everybody's software broke and they blamed it on MS.

Furthermore, outside of some ill advised caching methods, Vista managed memory and other resources much better than XP and any other Windows Operating System.

People need to get out of the trend of whining and complaining that a previous OS used less resources than a current OS. This is supposed to happen, if you don't like it, go back to running a Linux Shell or Windows 3.11 which use less resources also. You have memory for a reason, it increases for a reason, USE IT.

 

[Brian Stirling]

Certain computing tasks require more computing power than is currently available. Example is editing RAW picture files. This is not a task that requires precision like editing in Photoshop but it does require some computing power. Again, there is no RAW editor similar to Lightroom or Aperture that I know of but it is a task that seems suitable to a tablet. Then there is video editing which is doable on a tablet provided an app is programmed with a proper UI suited to tablets and finger control. I'm sure that developers can come up with other tasks.

Until a tablet or phone has more than 1MP resolution editing a decent sized RAW image would be a waste of time in my view. I have a Canon 1DsM2 with 16.7MP resolution and the only mobile platform I'd consider using to edit is my 18" HP laptop with 1920x1080 resolution. For full on editing you really want the highest resolution calibrated display you can get and a physically large one at that. Now, if the editing is limited to weeding out bad shots etc you can get by with less.

What I'd like for a phone and tablet is a good image viewer that can handle RAW files and do minor editing. PS is overkill and the resource requirements will be too much for phones/tablets for the foreseeable future...


Brian

 

[gar655]

So that you can look forward to charging your phone twice a day instead of just once.

Battery technology is where "they" should be concentrating on in the mobile market.

 

[Gamingphreek]

So that you can look forward to charging your phone twice a day instead of just once.

Battery technology is where "they" should be concentrating on in the mobile market.

The phones are very comparable (if not better) than other single core phones. Please read something relevant before you mislead people.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4144/...tegra-2-review-the-first-dual-core-smartphone

 

[akugami]

Until a tablet or phone has more than 1MP resolution editing a decent sized RAW image would be a waste of time in my view. I have a Canon 1DsM2 with 16.7MP resolution and the only mobile platform I'd consider using to edit is my 18" HP laptop with 1920x1080 resolution. For full on editing you really want the highest resolution calibrated display you can get and a physically large one at that. Now, if the editing is limited to weeding out bad shots etc you can get by with less.

What I'd like for a phone and tablet is a good image viewer that can handle RAW files and do minor editing. PS is overkill and the resource requirements will be too much for phones/tablets for the foreseeable future...


Brian

Well, all signs pointing to at the latest the iPad 3 getting a high res display similar to what's on the iPhone 4. Incidentally one of my major requirements in a tablet would be a high res display similar in DPI to what's on the iPhone 4. I don't think tablets will go much larger than the iPad.

Again the tasks I'm imagining would mostly be slightly adjusting the exposure or fixing white balance and that type of stuff and of course exporting to JPG and uploading to a website would probably be invaluable to a lot of people. Probably exactly the tasks a lot of photographers need on the road. I'm sure that if you can get that, on a 10-12" tablet, and considering the portability and light weight of a tablet, it'd replace your huge and heavy laptop which is likely to not be battery friendly.

 

[zerocool84]

Well, all signs pointing to at the latest the iPad 3 getting a high res display similar to what's on the iPhone 4. Incidentally one of my major requirements in a tablet would be a high res display similar in DPI to what's on the iPhone 4. I don't think tablets will go much larger than the iPad.

Again the tasks I'm imagining would mostly be slightly adjusting the exposure or fixing white balance and that type of stuff and of course exporting to JPG and uploading to a website would probably be invaluable to a lot of people. Probably exactly the tasks a lot of photographers need on the road. I'm sure that if you can get that, on a 10-12" tablet, and considering the portability and light weight of a tablet, it'd replace your huge and heavy laptop which is likely to not be battery friendly.

Actually more recent updates have the iPad 2 display rez the same as the current one. Also you're insane to have a requirement as the same DPI as the current iPhone 4 as there would be no mobile processor/gpu powerful enough to drive it as it'd need to be some insane resolution.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/02/ipad-2-display-leaked/

 

[Spicedaddy]

The phones are very comparable (if not better) than other single core phones. Please read something relevant before you mislead people.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4144/...tegra-2-review-the-first-dual-core-smartphone

Comparable but not better. I remember my old dumbphones would last me a week without recharging, my old BB Curve would do 4-5 days easily. My iPhone 4 I have to charge every 2 days, sometimes every day, and that's one of the smartphones with the best battery life.

I don't like this trend. What's next, 3 hour battery life like a laptop?

Remember when Intel and AMD were doing the GHz race? More power consumption until it became insane... Then they started improving power consumption as well as processing ability.

 

[akugami]

Actually more recent updates have the iPad 2 display rez the same as the current one. Also you're insane to have a requirement as the same DPI as the current iPhone 4 as there would be no mobile processor/gpu powerful enough to drive it as it'd need to be some insane resolution.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/02/ipad-2-display-leaked/

That's why my post said iPad 3 and not iPad 2.

A small clarification is needed. In all honesty, I'm not expecting a high rez iPad to have the same DPI as the iPhone 4. It's more along the lines of a higher resolution display similar in concept to their "Retina Display" on the iPhone 4 where it's of such high resolution that at normal viewing distances, most people won't notice the individual pixels.

I haven't kept up with every single Android (or other OS) tablet announcement but I haven't seen one with a higher rez display. Originally the iPad 2 was rumored to have a high rez display but current rumors are that it won't hit until the iPad 3. Some side evidence of one coming eventually to the iPad are certain graphic files in betas of iOS that have double the pixel size of what's in the current iPad.

 

[zerocool84]

That's why my post said iPad 3 and not iPad 2.

A small clarification is needed. In all honesty, I'm not expecting a high rez iPad to have the same DPI as the iPhone 4. It's more along the lines of a higher resolution display similar in concept to their "Retina Display" on the iPhone 4 where it's of such high resolution that at normal viewing distances, most people won't notice the individual pixels.

I haven't kept up with every single Android (or other OS) tablet announcement but I haven't seen one with a higher rez display. Originally the iPad 2 was rumored to have a high rez display but current rumors are that it won't hit until the iPad 3. Some side evidence of one coming eventually to the iPad are certain graphic files in betas of iOS that have double the pixel size of what's in the current iPad.

My mistake about the iPad number but I am correct on the resolution. It'd need to have a very high resolution to have the same DPI as the iPhone to not notice the pixels. It'd take an insane amount of power to run it at the rez you want. Double the iPad resolution is 2048×1536 which still isn't "Retina" close. It's only 265ppi. That's much too high of a resolution for the power it'd have and would kill battery life.

 

[chocobosandwich]

Jeesuz. If you don't like dual-core, buy a single-core phone. There are tons of those out there. Sony-ericsson doesn't even have a dual-core phone in its new lineup. The second core is used for multitasking. If you don't multi-task, don't use it. It's not gonna suddenly rev up to full speed and burn through your battery by displaying Hello World! messages indefinitely. Reviews of the Optimus 2x have shown it has minimal battery impact. Specific applications like 1080p recording already utilize it. It doesn't cost any more than single-core phones either. Like complaining that you can get two tacos for the price of one.

Although I suspect this has more to do with buyer's remorse and self-justification more than anything else. Welcome to the tech world!

 

[Gamingphreek]

Comparable but not better. I remember my old dumbphones would last me a week without recharging, my old BB Curve would do 4-5 days easily. My iPhone 4 I have to charge every 2 days, sometimes every day, and that's one of the smartphones with the best battery life.

I don't like this trend. What's next, 3 hour battery life like a laptop?

Remember when Intel and AMD were doing the GHz race? More power consumption until it became insane... Then they started improving power consumption as well as processing ability.

I don't ever remember getting a full week out of a cell phone (Not to say it couldn't have happened).

My Mom has a BB Curve and has to charge it every single night.

It is really a matter of how much you use it, what you use it for, and your location. My HTC Hero (Sprint) can typically go 3 days before it needs a charge (That includes using it as an MP3 player on runs, calling, texting, occasional web surfing...). If you are smart about it, the hardware really does a pretty good job.

Not that I disagree with you though. I personally would love to see a phone I only have to charge like 1x a week or less. This would definitely be a niche market and wouldn't be as cool as some of the phones, but en eInk display phone might achieve that...

-Kevin

 

[shortylickens]

I will not be happy until I can hold a Cray 2 in the palm of my hand.