or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Rumor: Schematic suggests NFC chip in 'iPhone 6,' RAM remains unknown [u]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rumor: Schematic suggests NFC chip in 'iPhone 6,' RAM remains unknown [u] - Page 2

post #41 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

ugg.

 

This is horrible.

 

How expensive is 1 extra GB of RAM?  $5?

 

I can't stand that Saffari has to constantly refresh after I switch to anther app, especially on my iPad

 

It hadn't occurred to me that memory was causing the Safari refresh rather than time away from the app for example. 

 

Even at $5 extra for the component that doesn't take into consideration all the other engineering concerns and design trade-offs such as space, heat, battery life etc. Though I suspect they have prototypes with more and as opposed to other companies who make spec changes simply because the component is available rather than because it provides value I think Apple gets it right far more often than the get it wrong. 

 

Would it be possible for Apple to release a quad core 7" screen iPhone with 24 hour batter life - sure, would that make an insanely great product that would fly off the shelves, probably not, especially if it cost $4996.66 and required oven mitts while using it. 

post #42 of 144

Electronics Engineer here!

 

This partial schematic shows external NAND Flash memory. It is not the on die RAM in the AX processor which wouldn't show up on a iphone schematic. You would only see one block that represents the entire Ax microcontroller.

 

This is a non-story.

post #43 of 144

1 GB is fine for iPhone. It does well now. 

 

iPad use is different, and I would not be surprised to see the iPad Air 2 get 2 GB of RAM.

 

Like others have said, I rarely have more than 1 Safari page open on iPhone, but often have many open on iPad....enough to cause them to reload due to insufficient memory. Its just a differences of use pattern, and the product should accommodate accordingly.

post #44 of 144

Even macrumors debunked this already simply but (GASP!) reading the information in the picture that states this is related to DDR and NAND FM. LMAO!

 

MacRumors:

"The schematic's references DDR and NAND suggests that it more likely refers to some aspect of the device's flash memory rather than DRAM included within the A8 chip."

post #45 of 144
RAM isn't the whole issue. Efficient processors and operating system can compensate for 'less' RAM. Inefficient ones can remain so no matter how many dozens of GB of RAM you put in the device.

This is something that Apple might understand even if bloggers, users etc don't. And perhaps even Samsung either doesn't get it or they know that the average person doesn't so they stuff in more RAM than is being efficiently used to impress users who don't know better.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #46 of 144

What on the schematic said Apple?

post #47 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

RAM isn't the whole issue. Efficient processors and operating system can compensate for 'less' RAM. Inefficient ones can remain so no matter how many dozens of GB of RAM you put in the device.

This is something that Apple might understand even if bloggers, users etc don't. And perhaps even Samsung either doesn't get it or they know that the average person doesn't so they stuff in more RAM than is being efficiently used to impress users who don't know better.
Users understand a crap experience with Safari though. And it is pretty crappy on the iPad. Aside from constant tab refreshes there are still periodic crashes.
post #48 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I'm not sure that what you said is quite the same thing. You also didn't respond to that post, so I never did find out what you meant. He's seems to be saying that we shouldn't be discussing this because performance is all that matters. You said that Apple knows best. Is that the same thing?

Kind of. Sorry if I wasn't more explanatory. Those things are what matters and if Apple can (and this is a rumor only) do everything they need in less RAM than other manufacturers of Android devices, I am sure it will work very well. I don't disagree with you, more is always better.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #49 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

Even macrumors debunked this already simply but (GASP!) reading the information in the picture that states this is related to DDR and NAND FM. LMAO!

MacRumors:
"The schematic's references DDR and NAND suggests that it more likely refers to some aspect of the device's flash memory rather than DRAM included within the A8 chip."
Seems to me the MO of most rumor sites is to throw stuff up and ask questions later. MacRumors knew a front page post about iPhone possibly keeping 1GB RAM would get a lot of posts and page views are more important than anything these days.
post #50 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krawall View Post


Dont gorget that flash writes aren't really battery friendly. I think true RAM would outperform flash based page files battery-wise. (Meaning doubling RAM vs flash based page files)

 

True. Also remember Apple bought Anobit, a Flash memory company. Who knows what technology they might incorporate from this purchase?

 

So maybe not an outright paging file, but some hybrid type of setup like Marvin said.

post #51 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by RalphMouth View Post
 

Electronics Engineer here!

 

This partial schematic shows external NAND Flash memory. It is not the on die RAM in the AX processor which wouldn't show up on a iphone schematic. You would only see one block that represents the entire Ax microcontroller.

 

This is a non-story.

 

Or did Apple decide to have 1GB of fast memory in the A8 itself with another 1GB external RAM to use when memory runs low or to keep processes in the background?

post #52 of 144
Apple should bump it up to 2GB. Larger screens mean that the phone is going to be more and more for browsing web sites, news sites, pulling in more data from Facebook, etc..

Not to mention that, just once, I'd like to see Apple work on future-proofing a device.
post #53 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


Apple stayed with 256 a year too long. We were all having problems because of that. In addition, developers were complaining that they couldn't do what was needed because of it. They were right.

As I said, 1GB RAM might still be enough for the iPhone, though maybe not, what with some of the new features coming out this year, but for the iPad, 2GB is really required. I do photo editing, video editing, drawing and 3D CAD on my iPad Air, and developers tell me that a major reason why they don't support larger files is the lack of RAM. I think they know what they're talking about.

I have 32GB RAM in my Mac Pro, and I run out of RAM on some work. Another GB on my iPad would work wonders.

 

There's a difference between saying that Apple is not making a product with the best mix of features *for you* and saying that Apple is not making a product with the best mix of features *for them* (which is closely related to making the best mix of features for the majority of customers). You're well positioned to assess what's best for you -- I'm sure you would benefit from more RAM. But Apple is substantially better positioned to assess what's best for them and/or the majority. That doesn't mean they'll always be right, but in cases where you and they disagree, my guess is they are going to be right about 90% of the time. 

 

There are plenty of examples where I wish Apple would choose features that are a better fit to my needs. For example, I'd rather that the Mac Pro had two Xeons and one GPU rather than two GPUs and one Xeon. But clearly Apple has determined that more of their pro customers would benefit from a second GPU than a second Xeon. They are much better positioned than I am to make that assessment, so I'm guessing they probably made the right call. It's not that I think they can't make mistakes -- it's just that I think it's much more likely that I will make a mistake in assessing what's best for them than that they will. 

post #54 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by blazar View Post

 As a doctor I can barely use any apps or bluetooth without worrying.

What does being a doctor have to do with the price of tea in China?

 

Just get a battery case and stop worrying.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #55 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahmlco View Post

Not to mention that, just once, I'd like to see Apple work on future-proofing a device.

Um... there's a member of my family currently using a first-gen 2010 iPhone 4 on iOS 7, and still works reasonably well. I don't think there's another smartphone manufacturer that can come close to making a claim like that on a four-year old device.

 

Apple's products are future-proofed quite well.

post #56 of 144
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


Users understand a crap experience with Safari though. And it is pretty crappy on the iPad. Aside from constant tab refreshes there are still periodic crashes.

At what point is your usage demands a true Virtual Memory management system and  OS, e.g. a Macbook Air?  

 

I don't ask my Honda Accord to haul 3 ton of fertilizer, because it's not the right tool for the job.  But I do haul a couple hundred pounds at a time, knowing that for small jobs , and the occasional  repeat trips to Lowes, the extra round trip time is not that bad compared to the rental/purchase price of a pickup truck.  

post #57 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

lilgto64 mentioned a paging file. This to me seems the most logical. Neither iOS or Android use a paging file which is why you run into memory limits (and why Apps get suspended and closed when memory is low).

Paging files back in the days of hard disk drives sucked because of the speed compared to memory. Running Windows on a system with low memory was horribly slow. I'm sure we all remember the light for your hard drive blinking madly as Windows was constantly paging stuff to disk. This is the main reason people upgraded their RAM.

Now with Flash storage paging files are far more practical on systems with lower RAM.

ITs not practical because of the size of the flash drive.

I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #58 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post
 

 

Or did Apple decide to have 1GB of fast memory in the A8 itself with another 1GB external RAM to use when memory runs low or to keep processes in the background?

 

It is hard to say and I don't like speculating without more evidence. Searching for POP-FIJI-1GB-DDR-BO-BGA doesn't bring up any datasheet or other technical docs that I can review.

 

The fact is we don't even know if this is actually from an iPhone 6 schematic.

post #59 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post
 

 

There's a difference between saying that Apple is not making a product with the best mix of features *for you* and saying that Apple is not making a product with the best mix of features *for them* (which is closely related to making the best mix of features for the majority of customers). You're well positioned to assess what's best for you -- I'm sure you would benefit from more RAM. But Apple is substantially better positioned to assess what's best for them and/or the majority. That doesn't mean they'll always be right, but in cases where you and they disagree, my guess is they are going to be right about 90% of the time. 

 

There are plenty of examples where I wish Apple would choose features that are a better fit to my needs. For example, I'd rather that the Mac Pro had two Xeons and one GPU rather than two GPUs and one Xeon. But clearly Apple has determined that more of their pro customers would benefit from a second GPU than a second Xeon. They are much better positioned than I am to make that assessment, so I'm guessing they probably made the right call. It's not that I think they can't make mistakes -- it's just that I think it's much more likely that I will make a mistake in assessing what's best for them than that they will. 

 

More memory will benefit everybody. It seems a waste of a 64 bit chip to not try and beat Android, now where Apple has the chance. 

 

I don't care if they charged more, they do that for flash. 

I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #60 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
 
Um... there's a member of my family currently using a first-gen 2010 iPhone 4 on iOS 7, and still works reasonably well. I don't think there's another smartphone manufacturer that can come close to making a claim like that on a four-year old device.

 

Apple's products are future-proofed quite well.

That is the phone I use for my international travel phone since it is unlocked. Works great. I only upgrade every two years so I will be unlocking my iPhone 5 for travel as soon as the iPhone 6 is released. AT&T will unlock it for you when your contract is up. I plan to gift the iPhone 4 to my housekeeper who is currently using a feature phone. I have all the original packaging so it will look like brand new. I'm sure it will serve her well for a few years to come.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #61 of 144
Don't worry. This NOT the A8 DRAM configuration. It's for the NAND flash RAM which is DDR2. Courtesy of Macrumors:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=19492932&postcount=214
post #62 of 144

I don't really care about 1GB in the phone, but Apple had better put at least 2GB in the new iPad!

 

I use my iPad for heavy duty uses, and when I buy a new iPad soon, I definitely want to see it with more RAM.

post #63 of 144

I came here to read all the comments for the memory experts who know better than Apple and have travelled into the future and tested iOS8 on an iPhone6.

 

Jeez, you complain about analysts making up rumours of stuff that hasn't happened but you are happy to spout your own.

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm just saying that, at the moment, you can't know you're right. iOS8 might be a lot more efficient or the 1GB rumour might not be true.

 

We just don't know.

post #64 of 144
I am get the feeling that the specs on the two iPhones are going to be very different with the large one sporting twice the RAM and CPU cores as the smaller one.
post #65 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilgto64 View Post

Could be that the iOS operating system has a smaller memory footprint than Android. 



 



Or perhaps they are using a sort of paging to fee up memory with little or no impact on performance - or maybe the chip is powerful enough to do compression. 



 



If only they could prefect carbon nanotube batteries - and get a 10x increase in the charge density of the battery - or maybe it is micro crystal batteries - whatever the next major breakthrough in batteries. 


 


Or maybe they are just fucking greedy!
post #66 of 144
I don't have an opinion on whether they should put more RAM in the iPhone or not, but comparisons to Android are misleading. Android is horribly inefficient and using dalvik (java) VMs for apps ups the RAM requirements for sufficient performance. (My comments are only about the comparisons to Android, not the efficacy of additional RAM).
post #67 of 144
Of course 1Gb is sufficient because no developer will be stupid enough to build an app that needs more than 1Gb of memory if he knows the iPhone doesn't have more than 1Gb of memory! However this is NOT GOOD! Give developers more memory so they could build BETTER apps! Artificially limiting the iPhone memory is only bad for consumers but of course is great for Apple profits! Unfortunately, the average consumer and the brain washed Apple fan will never knew he is missing those potentially great apps that will never be build because of lack of memory.
post #68 of 144
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

How expensive is 1 extra GB of RAM?  $5?

Originally Posted by NelsonX View Post
Or maybe they are just fucking greedy!
 

Yes, the only possible consideration is cost. Not power draw or heat or anything else, Apple is just being cheap¡ :no:

 

Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post
It would seem to me that more RAM (within reason) would also improve battery life. 

 

What gives you that idea? It’s more hardware that has to be powered 100% of the time the device is on.

 

Originally Posted by Evilution View Post
I'm not saying I'm right, I'm just saying that, at the moment, you can't know you're right.

 

Words to live by on a rumor site. 

 

Originally Posted by GrangerFX View Post
I am get the feeling that the specs on the two iPhones are going to be very different with the large one sporting twice the RAM and CPU cores as the smaller one.


Why on Earth do you still think there are two iPhones being released? Why on Earth do you think the specs would be different in any way, anyway?

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #69 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by xgman View Post
 

No,  you really do need it to keep pace with the rest of the market. 1GB ram is a low end budget device spec at this point no matter how much so called optimization is going on. Maybe the 5.5 will come with 2gb? If not I'll be shocked, but not entirely surprised.

Apple leads the rest of the market.  

 

Comparisons to Android are invalid.  Android is inefficient and uses RAM in a different way.  So "keep pace with the rest of the market" has no meaning.

 

Now, I am not voicing an opinion on whether the iPhone should get more RAM or not.  That is a different question with both positives and negatives from the technical side.

post #70 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post
 

 

More memory will benefit everybody. It seems a waste of a 64 bit chip to not try and beat Android, now where Apple has the chance. 

 

I don't care if they charged more, they do that for flash. 

A bigger battery, a faster CPU, and more flash would benefit everybody too. But with every benefit comes a cost. Apple has to find the right mix of benefits and costs. There are no free lunches. 

 

edit -- just to clarify, I'm not arguing whether adding more RAM to the iPhone 6 is the right thing to do or not. It might be, it might not be. I'm arguing that Apple is better positioned to make that decision than anyone here is. 

 

I would also say that many companies are not able to make these types of decisions about tradeoffs as well as Apple, and instead just produce every possible permutation of features until they find one that people like -- that's the Samsung way, for example. Both approaches have advantages. I personally prefer Apple's approach, and I think they implement it well. But I can definitely understand that others might prefer the Samsung way. 

post #71 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

Why on Earth do you still think there are two iPhones being released? Why on Earth do you think the specs would be different in any way, anyway?

 

There were last year, and they had different specs.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #72 of 144
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

There were last year, and they had different specs.


You know what he means. :p

 

But thank you for that wonderful image you’ve put back into my head of an iPhone 5SC. Really feels good to dwell on that garbage again¡ :grumble:

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #73 of 144
None of your programs need anywhere near 1GB of RAM.

It comes down to OS needs and multi-tasking.

iOS is probably very frugal with RAM and multi-tasking is limited to specific tasks that the OS allows...so it's probably able to achieve much more than you imagine with that amount of RAM.
post #74 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post

At what point is your usage demands a true Virtual Memory management system and  OS, e.g. a Macbook Air?  


I don't ask my Honda Accord to haul 3 ton of fertilizer, because it's not the right tool for the job.  But I do haul a couple hundred pounds at a time, knowing that for small jobs , and the occasional  repeat trips to Lowes, the extra round trip time is not that bad compared to the rental/purchase price of a pickup 
truck.  
So iPad is not the right tool for browsing the internet using Safari?

Btw, at most I maybe have 5-6 tabs open. But even if I have half of that open I still get constant tab refreshes. This certainly isn't something unique to me.
post #75 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by schlack View Post

None of your programs need anywhere near 1GB of RAM.

It comes down to OS needs and multi-tasking.

iOS is probably very frugal with RAM and multi-tasking is limited to specific tasks that the OS allows...so it's probably able to achieve much more than you imagine with that amount of RAM.

 

I am not calling for Apple to up the RAM as there are tradeoffs, but to say that "None of your programs need anywhere near 1GB of RAM" is just ignorant.  With a "desktop class" 64bit CPU, you can do things with your phone that you wouldn't have thought possible and some of those need RAM.  Things like signal processing and synthesis, etc. can all benefit from RAM.

post #76 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


So browsing the internet using Safari is too demanding for the iPad?

 

I have no problem browsing the internet using Safari on my iPad as it stands now.

post #77 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadbag View Post

I have no problem browsing the internet using Safari on my iPad as it stands now.

You never have tab refreshes? Safari never crashes on you? If so consider yourself lucky. I had constant tab refreshes on the 3rd gen iPad running iOS 6 so it's not a new problem (for me at least).
post #78 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krawall View Post

I am aware of this but hte situation is worse when you (as it is right now for many users)have to load 32 and 64 bit libraries at the same time. And guess what - memory was sufficient until now even under less than ideal conditions. Somebody also mentioned memory compression a la Mavericks. Again a reason to believe ios8 wil rock.

Apps may not have to load both libraries. Apple knows the device the app is intended for. The correct libraries could be loaded upon download.

I am not sure, that is, I don't believe that iOS will use memory compression, but I could be wrong.
post #79 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

RAM isn't the whole issue. Efficient processors and operating system can compensate for 'less' RAM. Inefficient ones can remain so no matter how many dozens of GB of RAM you put in the device.

This is something that Apple might understand even if bloggers, users etc don't. And perhaps even Samsung either doesn't get it or they know that the average person doesn't so they stuff in more RAM than is being efficiently used to impress users who don't know better.

That sounds good, but OS efficiency is one thing, large data files are something else.
post #80 of 144
Originally Posted by schlack View Post
None of your programs need anywhere near 1GB of RAM.

 

You’re sure about that, are you?

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Rumor: Schematic suggests NFC chip in 'iPhone 6,' RAM remains unknown [u]
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Rumor: Schematic suggests NFC chip in 'iPhone 6,' RAM remains unknown [u]