or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Inside Apple's 64-bit iOS 7 and the prospects for a 64-bit Android
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Inside Apple's 64-bit iOS 7 and the prospects for a 64-bit Android - Page 5

post #161 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33 View Post
 

 

That was the Z3770 being tested at 2.4GHz (turbo).  Anand was using an Intel prototype, it will not be coming to market.  Final device specifications are up to manufacturers and they will be launching with improved drivers.  

 

So what you say is: there is no proof yet.

 

Quote:
The Clover Trail powered ThinkPad Tablet 2 was able to offer a ~10 hour battery life in a chassis thinner and lighter than the iPad 4.  Bay Trail is more powerful and more efficient than Clover Trail.  

 

From reviews I've read over the net, the battery life is more within 5 to 8 hours.  Been more lighter and more thinner is not a feat considering his poor build quality, all reviews report about hoflimsy the plastic is. 

post #162 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33 View Post
 

The Clover Trail powered ThinkPad Tablet 2 was able to offer a ~10 hour battery life in a chassis thinner and lighter than the iPad 4.  Bay Trail is more powerful and more efficient than Clover Trail.  

 

Not disagreeing that this is not a compelling new chip, but the tablet you referenced has a graphics core 2 generations older than the iPad 4, and has as third as many pixels than the iPad 4, yet just manages to achieve the same battery life. I think you made the point you were arguing against in so far as Intel's CPU efficiency….

post #163 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post
 

 

So what you say is: there is no proof yet.

 

 

 

From reviews I've read over the net, the battery life is more within 5 to 8 hours.  Been more lighter and more thinner is not a feat considering his poor build quality, all reviews report about hoflimsy the plastic is. 

How do you infer that means there is no proof?  The proof was reviewed and it will only be better in a production model from an OEM.  Blocking your ears and closing your eyes will not help your cause. The performance has been known and tested on a number of different devices.

 

 

Engadget rated it at 10:27 on their battery test.

 

"In our standard rundown test (video looping, WiFi on, fixed display brightness) we got 10 hours and 27 minutes of runtime"

 

http://www.engadget.com/2013/02/11/lenovo-thinkpad-tablet-2-review/

post #164 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebernet View Post
 

 

Not disagreeing that this is not a compelling new chip, but the tablet you referenced has a graphics core 2 generations older than the iPad 4, and has as third as many pixels than the iPad 4, yet just manages to achieve the same battery life. I think you made the point you were arguing against in so far as Intel's CPU efficiency….

 

The PowerVR SGX5445 is in the same generation 5 XT series of cores.  Intel had the GPU at the max clock 500MHz+.  The device had a lower resolution display, but it also had other features such as a digitizer and active Wacom Stylus.  The SoC used quite a bit more power than Bay Trail and was manufactured on a 32nm process.  

 

The battery inside the ThinkPad Tablet 2 is also smaller than the one inside the iPad 4: 

30Wh (TT2) vs 43Wh (iPad 4)

 

The A6X was never an efficient SoC, but Apple made up the difference with the large battery.

post #165 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesocyclone View Post

This analysis is pretty bad.

First, on the advantages of 64 bit to iOS, most of the analysis focuses on features of the 64 bit chip that are unrelated to the fact that it is 64bit. You could have those same features on 32 bit. Hence it is really discussing the advantages of a 64 bit ARM in particular, not 64 bits.

There are a couple of advantages to 64bit that are barely mentioned: faster at high precision math, and faster at handling >4GB memory in a single application.

Whoopee. For a few apps, the math is a big deal. In the future, >4GB memory will be of some interest.

The Android analysis gets an F- - it is extremely wrong.

I won't go into all the errors - it would take to much work.

Critically: the assertion is that it would be harder to port Android (and Android apps) to 64 bit. The opposite is true!

Porting Android requires porting *one* piece of code: dalvik. Applications don't have to even be touched, and there's no cost (unlike iOS) for using apps targeted at 32 bit.

If we were to believe the author's bizarre argument (apps aren't native code so they are harder to port), we'd have to turn upside down the whole reason people went to high level languages and VM's!

In fact, it is the apps that use native code (C) that might, depending on the app, require some porting if they were to run as 64 bit apps. This is just like *all* Objective C apps - every one has the potential to require code changes for 64 bit. Some will actually require it even though they don't need 64 bit at all.

The erst of the Android stuff may sound fine to Apple fan bois, but to those of use working in the Android space, it's just nonsense.

 

fine. so let's wait and see what actually gets done - or not - ok?

post #166 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33 View Post
 

 

The PowerVR SGX5445 is in the same generation 5 XT series of cores.  Intel had the GPU at the max clock 500MHz+.  The device had a lower resolution display, but it also had other features such as a digitizer and active Wacom Stylus.  The SoC used quite a bit more power than Bay Trail and was manufactured on a 32nm process.  

 

The battery inside the ThinkPad Tablet 2 is also smaller than the one inside the iPad 4: 

30Wh (TT2) vs 43Wh (iPad 4)

 

The A6X was never an efficient SoC, but Apple made up the difference with the large battery.

 

Sorry I was looking at last year's Clover Trail. Yeah, these two are more similar in GHz/Watt then I was expecting...

post #167 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

 
He has no insider knowledge and apparently no specialist understanding of modern operating system architecture. 
Neither do you
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

I also love the way that he asserts that Android has no "console-style" games, despite the fact that several consoles are based on Android!
And they both suck
post #168 of 222
Quote:
but what we do know for sure now is:

 

- Apple is shipping 64 bit iPhones today with upgraded Apple apps, with iPads sure to follow next month.

- This already improves performance and supports new features (like the major advances in the camera app).

- They will sell 100+ million 64 bit iPhones/iPads in the next year.

- so developers will rush to produce upgraded/enhanced 64 bit apps for iPhone/iPad, because ...

- iPhone/iPad owners will pay for noticeably enhanced apps.

 

basically, everything the Android fan people here are saying boils down to "coulda, woulda, shoulda." but the truth is, Apple just cleaned Android's clock, and they know it.

 

Yes, but... all of the 'know for sure' is only vaguely related to 64 bit architecture. The same could be said if they had stuck with 32 architecture and just went to an upgraded 32 bit CPU. Sure, 64 bit is better, but right now, with all those devices mentioned, it is only slightly better than 32 bit.

So yes, this may indeed be a fine thing for the iOS ecosystem. But not because it is 64 bit. That is likely to only impact a very few apps that can take advantage of the wider math registers. Everything else is related to the future, which is just as iffy as anything said about Android.

As an engineer, I get really frustrated when marketing hype is used to blow up an engineering change into something gigantic, when it isn't. I get annoyed with articles that tout advantages that don't even exist, and slam the competition with arguments that are not only wrong, but actually backwards, painting the competitor's advantage (ease of porting) as  negative.

64 bit is real, but it is minor. It won't make or break Apple or Android this year or next. Beyond that, it could make a difference, but somehow you don't allow speculation if it's about Android, so you can't do it for Apple.

post #169 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33 View Post
 

How do you infer that means there is no proof?  The proof was reviewed and it will only be better in a production model from an OEM.  Blocking your ears and closing your eyes will not help your cause. The performance has been known and tested on a number of different devices.

 

 

Engadget rated it at 10:27 on their battery test.

 

"In our standard rundown test (video looping, WiFi on, fixed display brightness) we got 10 hours and 27 minutes of runtime"

 

http://www.engadget.com/2013/02/11/lenovo-thinkpad-tablet-2-review/

 

Ok I give it to you on the battery life, I wasn't up to date with those new tablet.  Still Intel can't win this battle, they can got higher (or lower) fab process but it only gives more rooms for further enhancement to ARM SoC.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33 View Post
 

The A6X was never an efficient SoC, but Apple made up the difference with the large battery.

 

That is baseless, comparing to what? Adding a third GPU core and doubling RAM channels don't make SoC inefficient to other equivalent. The CPU account only for a fraction of power usage, lightning the screen if what drain most the battery.  With higher pixel density the screen is less translucent therefor it need better lightning.

post #170 of 222
Wrong. It has already been stated that Kit Kat, Android's soon to be released new version, will have 64 bit support and Samsung clearly stated its next phone, likely the Galaxy S5, will have a 64 bit processor. These don't happen overnight. They've already been working on them before the iPhone and iOS announcements.
post #171 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesocyclone View Post
 

As an engineer, I get really frustrated when marketing hype is used to blow up an engineering change into something gigantic, when it isn't. I get annoyed with articles that tout advantages that don't even exist, and slam the competition with arguments that are not only wrong, but actually backwards, painting the competitor's advantage (ease of porting) as  negative.


64 bit is real, but it is minor. It won't make or break Apple or Android this year or next. Beyond that, it could make a difference, but somehow you don't allow speculation if it's about Android, so you can't do it for Apple.

 

I admit I've advocate the 64 bit a lot lately and  while I did not sound that way, I do not think this is a world changer breakthrough, or be way way over ahead the competition, but a normal evolution of a long predicted roadmap.  But I still love those architecture transition, on the developer side it normally cause a lot of cleaning old legacy relics and for the users it gives new breath.   

 

Beside there is not many way to add power to a CPU, where other have choose core multiplication tactics, I found Apple approach more forward looking. 

post #172 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf View Post
 

 

To be fair, iOS was also designed initially for low-memory low-powered devices like the original iPhone. Moreover, it debuted mainly as a platform for web apps, and only later were provisions for third-party apps added in.

 

To be fair iOS is based exclusively on OSX which is a full 64bit Unix OS.  The first version was called "iPhone OS" and was later switched to iOS once Apple and Cisco worked out the purchase of the iOS name from Cisco.  It is true that the first iteration of iOS was designed to run web apps but it was always based on OSX's unix core.  Here is a quote from wikipedia on iOS's History:

Quote:
 iOS is derived from OS X, with which it shares the Darwin foundation and various application frameworks. iOS is Apple's mobile version of the OS X operating system used on Apple computers. 

In fact iOS runs on the Darwin Mach microkernel, same as Mac OSX.  Darwin 14.0 is running iOS7

post #173 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesocyclone View Post
 

 

Yes, but... all of the 'know for sure' is only vaguely related to 64 bit architecture. The same could be said if they had stuck with 32 architecture and just went to an upgraded 32 bit CPU. Sure, 64 bit is better, but right now, with all those devices mentioned, it is only slightly better than 32 bit.

So yes, this may indeed be a fine thing for the iOS ecosystem. But not because it is 64 bit. That is likely to only impact a very few apps that can take advantage of the wider math registers. Everything else is related to the future, which is just as iffy as anything said about Android.

As an engineer, I get really frustrated when marketing hype is used to blow up an engineering change into something gigantic, when it isn't. I get annoyed with articles that tout advantages that don't even exist, and slam the competition with arguments that are not only wrong, but actually backwards, painting the competitor's advantage (ease of porting) as  negative.

64 bit is real, but it is minor. It won't make or break Apple or Android this year or next. Beyond that, it could make a difference, but somehow you don't allow speculation if it's about Android, so you can't do it for Apple.

 

honestly, just "no, wrong." the major improvements in the 5s camera software image processing alone simply would not be possible without the 64 bit computation power. now, we can't see with our own eyes how much a difference they make until this weekend so, yes, the jury is still out. but taking photos is certainly one of the top 3 uses of smartphones, and enabling "dummies" like me to get really good pix under all conditions - lighting is usually far less than optimal - without any extra effort is extraordinarily important for consumers. 

 
you're really missing the point. what matters most of all is what us "dummy" users - not you engineers - never have to even think about, because it Just Works.

Edited by Alfiejr - 9/17/13 at 6:25pm
post #174 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Because they’ve done no such thing? Restricting developers to a set and configuration of buttons is exactly the opposite of the idea of iOS devices. 

I apologize that you did not hear but, they did this past summer when they introduced iOS 7. please read this article, 

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/06/13/apple-working-with-logitech-and-moga-for-mfi-game-controllers-details-framework-at-wwdc

 

 

Multiple people playing on a single iPhone or even an iPad wouldn't be a very good experience. That is why I still maintain that this is for the TV. And the reason AirPlay doesn't feel the same is because it doesn't work as well. I have all Apple products, including my TimeMachine wireless router and from time to time it lags especially with multiple players. This is just my experience though and maybe with a software update it will be remedied. And I believe that for certain styles of games, buttons and joysticks are superior.

post #175 of 222
Originally Posted by animositee View Post

 

But it’s not an Apple product.

 

Multiple people playing on a single iPhone or even an iPad wouldn't be a very good experience.

 

Well, that’s how consoles do it. Four people crowd around one single controller and they…

 

Oh, wait.

 
And I believe that for certain styles of games, buttons and joysticks are superior.

 

I believe that for certain styles of games, buttons and joysticks remain superior to contemporary touchscreen solutions.

post #176 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

But it’s not an Apple product.

 

Well, that’s how consoles do it. Four people crowd around one single controller and they…

I never said it was an Apple product. Although Apple did release these DESIGNS and created the API's to use them which means they intend people to use them with their products as an option.  And consoles crowd people around a much larger screen, called a TV, with MULTIPLE controllers. A small screen even with multiple controllers is a sub-par experience. Again, which is why I would imagine that a standalone controller is truly meant for a larger screen then an iPad.

post #177 of 222
Originally Posted by animositee View Post
A small screen even with multiple controllers is a sub-par experience.

 

I just… I don’t get why this was so difficult a conclusion to come to:

 

Use. Multiple. iDevices. On. The. Same. TV.

post #178 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

I just… I don’t get why this was so difficult a conclusion to come to:

 

Use. Multiple. iDevices. On. The. Same. TV.

That would be nice, if I had enough money to buy 4 iDevices to connect to a single ATV. A standalone controller would offer a lower-cost solution for this exact reason. Besides, as I said when friends do come over and we are able to use multiple iDevices on a single ATV using AirPlay it LAGS!

 

A dedicated TV gaming platform with a lower cost standalone controller would provide a better overall experience.

post #179 of 222
Originally Posted by animositee View Post
That would be nice, if I had enough money to buy 4 iDevices to connect to a single ATV.

 

Because you alone can use four of them at once? NO. Because your friends come over with their own iOS devices and you play some effing games together. Heck, quoted below PROVES you don’t mean that, so why would you even say it at all?!

 
Besides, as I said when friends do come over and we are able to use multiple iDevices on a single ATV using AirPlay it LAGS!

 

Yeah, that can’t possibly change in the future ever at any time for any reason.

post #180 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Because you alone can use four of them at once? NO. Because your friends come over with their own iOS devices and you play some effing games together. Heck, quoted below PROVES you don’t mean that, so why would you even say it at all?!

 

Yeah, that can’t possibly change in the future ever at any time for any reason.

 

True I alone can't use 4 of them, however not everyone likes Apple and is willing to throw down a couple hundred for even an iPod touch, therefore providing the controllers necessary to play would be nice. I even admit in an earlier post that Apple may come out with an update that fixes the lag. lol. I know it was only a couple hours ago, but try and remember. On top of all of this, for us to all play the same game, we all have to buy it separately.

 

The thing I don't understand is why you are arguing with me. My original post was only to point out that Apple has taken actions that could be viewed as an attempt to enter the console gaming market. I am not saying it's not possible to game on a TV using existing Apple products and technologies, only that the way it is currently setup makes it exceedingly difficult when compared to other dedicated consoles. lol. If Apple is serious about the Living Room market it would only make sense to try and alleviate some of these issues.


Edited by animositee - 9/17/13 at 8:22pm
post #181 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Specifically the Year 2038 bug. I honestly DO believe that there will be a large number of 32-bit machines and software, Windows or otherwise, left in important use in 2038. Mostly because Microsoft refuses to actually do anything for the betterment of mankind.

Easily solved. Just invent time travel and send an agent back. It's the simplest solution to the 2038 problem! lol.gif
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Titor

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #182 of 222
Cue the "Apple created 64 bit and everyone else is copying" replies...
post #183 of 222
Isn't Mac OS the only OS to take advantage of this, like most windows still run 32 bit, so apple not only has its macs superior but its much less powerful IOS device to become more powerful than average anything else... I'm loving it... Apple really is taking its competition out, with this plus finger printing, and a new coprocessor that all 3 will be on there own android devices (android splits it featured per phone) and kill market.
post #184 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curtis Hannah View Post

Isn't Mac OS the only OS to take advantage of this, like most windows still run 32 bit, so apple not only has its macs superior but its much less powerful IOS device to become more powerful than average anything else... I'm loving it... Apple really is taking its competition out, with this plus finger printing, and a new coprocessor that all 3 will be on there own android devices (android splits it featured per phone) and kill market.

Windows has published both 64 bit and 32 bit builds since at least Vista, and Linux distributions were fully ported to x86_64 before either OS X or Windows. For a while Windows still had a few 32-bit userland utilities. OS X transitioned to a 64 bit kernel with the release of snow leopard in '09.

post #185 of 222

I there any book called "64-bit for Dummies"? I need it! :D

post #186 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


Sure it is irrelevant but not because of what you think. The fact is Apple is on a different path than Android, Android could stay 32 bits forever and it wouldn't matter for either platform. Android won't of course for the same reason Apple hasn't, and that is because it is an excessive limitation for the platform.

I actually don't think about Google's Android plans at all. High-end Android phones will obviously suffer should the platform stay 32-bit.

 

"Excessive limitation" is quite a strong statement. The PC stayed 32-bit for almost two decades. Actually, Microsoft managed to successfully move to 64-bits with Win7 in 2009 (excluding 64-bit servers, 32-bit Vista ran much better than 64-bit). 64-bit processors for consumer electronics are available since 2000.

 

And, as I stated in an earlier post, 32-bit CPUs can address more than 4GB of RAM. I am not sure if ARM architecture supports it, but Intel's x86 does. Actually, even the 16-bit 80286 CPU was able to address 16MB RAM (24-bit addressing). So, 32-bit architecture is a huge inconvenience, but not a limitation.

 

Now, as a few people pointed out, the extended memory range is great since it allows mapping of files greater than 4GB in memory and seamlessly access them as if they were fully loaded into memory, i.e. improved access to resources. With 32-bit architecture that will require splitting resources into separate 4GB blocks, i.e. more code on the developer side, more possibilities for errors, etc. But, that's inconvenience, not a limitation.

Quote:
 That idea that Mac OS runs fine on just 2GB is false and obviously so. It has been well known for years now that 2GB is a minimal allotment of RAM for Mac OS.

 

The OS requires around 1GB. Watching movies, browsing, image editing (not the Pro software, though), etc, manage to fit in an additional 1GB.

Heavy-weight tasks require more RAM, of course. I've been doing iOS development on 4GB of RAM for quite some time (until mid 2012), and didn't have issues with the system performance. And I'm usually running quite a few applications at once - 30+ browser tabs, playing a movie, and debugging at the same time.

Quote:
 While I can't argue that Androids are often sold to the spec obsessed, the funny thing here is that most of those phones are terrible performers compared to iPhones. Some people seem to not grasp the difference between real world usability and performance vs the spec sheet. As to necessity you do mis one thing, in the beginning Android phones actually did need that extra RAM verses the iPhone to work correctly.

I can't argue about Android's awful resource utilisation. Android still needs more RAM, and still needs more CPU, and still cannot achieve parity. That, however, does not change the fact, that 4GB of RAM is huge.

 

Nowadays, we've seem to have lost the idea how much 1GB of RAM actually is. My first computer had 4MB of RAM and 80MB HDD ...

post #187 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

What!? No more "all knowing" comments while clearly not reading or remembering what was said. lol I really was wondering why you were arguing with me. O well, I guess you're the reason people hate Apple fans. ROFL

post #188 of 222
Originally Posted by animositee View Post

What!? No more "all knowing" comments while clearly not reading or remembering what was said.

 

You can read the posts. They’re literally right there above you. Click the links and trace the line backward. Stop acting like an idiot, stop pretending you need your hand held through understanding the English language. Siri is better at conversational context than you have exhibited here.

post #189 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

Terrible, baseless FUD on Android. 64-bit mobile ARM processors have been in the pipeline for a long time. Everyone in the industry has known this because ARM are very good at communication their long-term strategy. If you don't think that Google has been aware of this coming event for many years then you're highly deluded. Google and ARM both have large dev teams in the UK and there's a lot of staff who've worked for both organisations.

I'm certain that Google has been building and testing a 64-bit version of Android for years, just like they've been doing with their x86 port.
If they have been testingit(Google) for long peri end of time, the. They have not got it right to work. So use forward thinking sorry
post #190 of 222
"Terrible, baseless FUD on Android. 64-bit mobile ARM processors have been in the pipeline for a long time."
So, please do tell us which Android (or other OS) based phones are using 64 bit processors right now . Go ahead, we'll wait.


One of the beautiful things about Apple and iOS? One company, one device. Android? Don't even get me started. That water is so muddied that it's just bad, bad news. IF they ever get to the 64 bit area, it'll be quite a bit down the road. Yet another victory for Apple.

Now, what will the benefits to this 64 bit changeup be? Truth be told, we do not know. Most apps won't care, because, for now, we'be just got one device running it. Get the next gen iPod, iPad, iPad mini, and a couple generations down the road running x64 and we'll be seeing more and more and more apps working with this, utilizing this.

This is a good thing hardware wise, as well. It shows that Apple is thinking forward, instead of being stuck in 32 bit mode, with smaller memory limits (not that they've hit them yet, by any means). We'll just have to wait and see how this turns out
post #191 of 222
Just a note ARMv7 supports 48 bit addressing via PAE...so 4 gigs wouldn't be the limit. Android phones could indeed use over 4 gigs, so that's not an excuse to jump on the 64 bit bandwagon... However their is a 4 gig limit per process
post #192 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

honestly, just "no, wrong." the major improvements in the 5s camera software image processing alone simply would not be possible without the 64 bit computation power. now, we can't see with our own eyes how much a difference they make until this weekend so, yes, the jury is still out. but taking photos is certainly one of the top 3 uses of smartphones, and enabling "dummies" like me to get really good pix under all conditions - lighting is usually far less than optimal - without any extra effort is extraordinarily important for consumers. 
 
you're really missing the point. what matters most of all is what us "dummy" users - not you engineers - never have to even think about, because it Just Works.

An 8M picture doesn't need 64 bits. In any case picture manipulation is best done on the GPU. Try playing a game on the 64 bit CPU in your mac if you doubt that.

The 64 bit GPU might be overpowering the GPU refinements which are more interesting.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #193 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post


"64-bit mobile ARM processors have been in the pipeline for a long time" is somewhat true, but you're missing the fact that they were targeting server applications. Nobody had any inkling of putting a 64-bit SoC in a phone.

That's why the tech media refused to believe it was real, and why exVPs from AMD rushed out to say it was hogwash and made no sense to attempt.

If you've been paying attention, you'll recall this all happened before when Apple released the iPhone. RIM BB & Microsoft scoffed at the idea of putting a desktop OS on a high end mobile phone. A mixture of contempt and disbelief.

Also: does Google have its own x86 port of Android or was that just an effort by Intel to enter the mobile market? Who uses it?

(Crickets)

 

Android is already running on 64-bit intel & MIPS architecture. I admit that outside prototypes and a few low-scale experiments there is no real hardware to speak of but the software support has been available for over a year.

post #194 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

"64-bit mobile ARM processors have been in the pipeline for a long time" is somewhat true, but you're missing the fact that they were targeting server applications. Nobody had any inkling of putting a 64-bit SoC in a phone.

That's why the tech media refused to believe it was real, and why exVPs from AMD rushed out to say it was hogwash and made no sense to attempt.

If you've been paying attention, you'll recall this all happened before when Apple released the iPhone. RIM BB & Microsoft scoffed at the idea of putting a desktop OS on a high end mobile phone. A mixture of contempt and disbelief.

Also: does Google have its own x86 port of Android or was that just an effort by Intel to enter the mobile market? Who uses it?

(Crickets)

Instead of "(Crickets)" you also could've ended your post with a picture of a fat lady singing¡
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #195 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post
 

 

Of course ARM (a corp co-founded by Apple and Acorn Computer) discuss a lots with their partner, since they doesn't sold any hardware, they only licences their hardware to anyone who want to mfg.  Problem is Google doesn't do any ARM development internally, they got no production hardware to work on a 64 bit version of Android and Samsung and Qualcomm, 2 of the most prominent ARM SoC maker chooses the cores multiplication way, look at the Exynos 5 Octa non-sense. 

 

Google has never designed/manufactured a CPU still they own 80% of the smartphone market, what are you trying to imply with your post?

 

ARMv8 has been available to everyone since 2011, Apple didn't design it. They didn't manufacture it (TSMC did back in April)

post #196 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by krisneph View Post

Just a note ARMv7 supports 48 bit addressing via PAE...so 4 gigs wouldn't be the limit. Android phones could indeed use over 4 gigs, so that's not an excuse to jump on the 64 bit bandwagon... However their is a 4 gig limit per process

 

Actually, I believe it's 40 bit addressing (1TB).
 
And it is already running on all 2013 Android smartphones such as Galaxy S4 and HTC One. Maybe even last years Galaxy S3.
post #197 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruel24 View Post

Wrong. It has already been stated that Kit Kat, Android's soon to be released new version, will have 64 bit support and Samsung clearly stated its next phone, likely the Galaxy S5, will have a 64 bit processor. These don't happen overnight. They've already been working on them before the iPhone and iOS announcements.

Kit Kat "will have 64-bit support".

 

iOS7 runs in 64-bit.

 

One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn't belong.

post #198 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Kit Kat "will have 64-bit support".

iOS7 runs in 64-bit.

One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn't belong.

I've never seen Google comment on Kit-Kat 64-bit support anyway. With the latest Nexus reference smartphone supposedly being released within a very few weeks Kit Kat is probably complete for all intents. Besides, something like a 64-bit build would likely be a 5.x update rather than a continuation of 4.x. IMO. Just like with NFC or Thunderbolt there's no urgent need for it at the moment nor do I expect to see a 64-bit Android version in the next few months.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #199 of 222

FWIW, I just played around with a friend's Note II using 4.1.1, which is the latest OS he has for it.  I don't know how else to say this, but that has to be the worst OS's I've ever seen.  The way it's laid out is just too confusing.  My friend HATES using that stupid stylus, it's HORRIBLE.  I don't how one can use that OS and not want to take their device and throw it on the ground and proceed to smash it with a hammer.

 

I'm watching him fumble around with the device trying to do what should be VERY simple and not being able to do something within  a few seconds.    He actually got the point where he almost threw the thing on the ground in frustration.

 

Just to get the thing to tether to his iPhone 4 was a 10 minute ordeal.  It would constantly disconnect.  Tethering my iPad to my iPhone 4 literally takes about a minute and the connection is rock solid.  Rarely does it disconnect.  I usually have to stop using my iPad for an extended period of time before the thing disconnects.

post #200 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatjoe View Post
 

 

Google has never designed/manufactured a CPU still they own 80% of the smartphone market, what are you trying to imply with your post?

 

ARMv8 has been available to everyone since 2011, Apple didn't design it. They didn't manufacture it (TSMC did back in April)

 

Google owns nothing, Samsung is owning Android market, they are the one who make most profit from it.  

 

Besides ARM doesn't sold hardware, they licence IP only. while specs for ARMv8 is available since few years ago, beside the A7 all other ARMv8 available on the market (X-Gen and Denver) was made for server application.  And you're wrong Apple has design their Ax chips from A to Z using their ARM architectural licences.  

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Inside Apple's 64-bit iOS 7 and the prospects for a 64-bit Android