I'm the camp that the A4 is a highly optimized Cortex A8. Now need to push the tech out of the gate to the latest and greatest when there is currently no viable competition to the iPad, no idea if the product category will work, and require less time to optimize a chip that would cost more money.
I think I am missing something in this paragraph solipsism.
Are you saying Apple picked the less advanced chip to get it out faster, and as lower risk strategy?
That is purely a subjective judgement based on your personal preference. It is copy-and-paste, no matter how you cut it.
Of course it's subjective judgment based on his personal preference/opinion, who's preference/opinion would he be talking about? Your's? What a fatuous thing to say.
Apple perfected cut and paste? For the iPhone, Apple merely copied the implementation from phones that have long had the feature before. Cut and paste has been around for decades for crying out loud. Apple perfected cut and paste?
You can't be serious.
Yeah, that's why MS can't even copy themselves and Win Mobile 7 won't have copy paste.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranReloaded
yeah.
Is it me the only one longing for "text search" inside webpages/emails?
Oh for sure me too, haven't noticed this, but does the ipad have this? I suppose being on the same os it probably doesn't.
I seriously doubt the very same A4 found on the iPad will find its way to the iPhone. First because I refuse to believe it is just a standard 1GHz processor: the nexus one's snapdragon is one and couldn't pull off such impressive performance on the iPad even it were dreaming. I'd bet the A4 is three or four-cored.
I do, however, believe in an Apple processor on the next-gen iPhone. A2 or whatever.
Yeah, this makes sense. And the name A2 would make sense from a marketing POV.
I'm the camp that the A4 is a highly optimized Cortex A8. Now need to push the tech out of the gate to the latest and greatest when there is currently no viable competition to the iPad, no idea if the product category will work, and require less time to optimize a chip that would cost more money.
Plus, they advertised some unknown chip designation they invented over the Cortex A9 with multiple cores, which is well known for its performance in this category.
That camp doesn't exist. The reality is the A4 is a stripped down version of the A8. Making something weak so you can get better battery life doesn't make it optimized.
Here is a link on the Cortex A9. I will give you another Apple fansite as a link.
Yeah, that's why MS can't even copy themselves and Win Mobile 7 won't have copy paste.
Only at launch, my friend. The iPhone didn't get it until after the second iteration of the hardware and OS 3.0. To use an argument that's been used many times, MS is waiting to optimize its version before releasing it into the wild.
You can never tell with Apple, perhaps they'll call it iPhone 4.
If it ends up being a 4G-enabled phone, then 4GS would fit.
But as someone had mentioned earlier, front-facing camera does mean a much higher data load on AT&T's network. Can it handle it? And full 3G/4G is still limited to the areas around a few major cities, so what happens when you verture into an area that's EDGE only? Will the video data be compressed enough that it'll remain smooth even with EDGE?
I think I am missing something in this paragraph solipsism.
Are you saying Apple picked the less advanced chip to get it out faster, and as lower risk strategy?
Yes of course, plus some cost cutting measures, plus, what I think is more important that they wouldn't have had the time to implement a custom A9 cortex design, so they went with the A8 that could afford them more developement time for their customisation.
I wonder what the p.a. semi folk are up to, since by most accounts it seems that the vlsi design team is behind the A4.
Only at launch, my friend. The iPhone didn't get it until after the second iteration of the hardware and OS 3.0. To use an argument that's been used many times, MS is waiting to optimize its version before releasing it into the wild.
Yes, well, with the slight exception that MS will be two years late to the party when they eventually implement copy paste. As Dan Dilger pointed out very succinctly in rd recently, their problem is not that their are copying apple's strategy (see zune, the courrier vapourware, and their new mobile platform), it's that they are copying the strategy 2-3 years too late every time. And strategies work in the right time frame, not when they are 2 years late to an already mature market.
Yes, well, with the slight exception that MS will be two years late to the party when they eventually implement copy paste. As Dan Dilger pointed out very succinctly in rd recently, their problem is not that their are copying apple's strategy (see zune, the courrier vapourware, and their new mobile platform), it's that they are copying the strategy 2-3 years too late every time. And strategies work in the right time frame, not when they are 2 years late to an already mature market.
According to the article, MS has already figured out how to implement copy/paste in a way that fits the WP7S OS. It's just a matter of getting it into the OS code via an update that will happen shortly after the release.
Could they take longer, as you imply? Sure, anything's possible. But after getting their sh*t together with WP7S, I'm willing to throw MS a bone on this one.
I don't understand your logic, the iPhone is a communications device, in which it is now a standard feature to have video chat facility. The iPad is not a communication device and therefore doesn't 'need' a front facing camera.
Odd, short-sighted logic.
My understanding of his comment is that an Ipad has a bigger screen, better battery and most likely to be used on a wifi connection. If, with those advantages, it does not have a forward facing camera then why would the iphone?
I am sure this will be a personal preference thing, but I have zero interest in using video chat when I am on the move. I do use video chat at home but I can't imagine video chatting in a restaurant, bar, etc.
Maybe at at a nudie bar but camera's are usually banned anyways. ;-)
If it ends up being a 4G-enabled phone, then 4GS would fit.
The idea with the 3G "S" was that it was faster than the 3G. There is no iPhone 4G, so 4G S wouldn't make sense. Besides, the networks for 4G just aren't there yet.
iPhone 4 makes sense, they may even simply call it: "the new iPhone". I.E.: "iPhone".
Comments
I'm the camp that the A4 is a highly optimized Cortex A8. Now need to push the tech out of the gate to the latest and greatest when there is currently no viable competition to the iPad, no idea if the product category will work, and require less time to optimize a chip that would cost more money.
I think I am missing something in this paragraph solipsism.
Are you saying Apple picked the less advanced chip to get it out faster, and as lower risk strategy?
front facing camera for what??? at&t's 3g network can barely handle regular calls... how and the h3ll will it handle data and voice simultaneously?
What are you talking about? I do voice and data at the same time all the time. Not one issue.
I agree though, I don't need a front facing camera. Each to their own.
That is purely a subjective judgement based on your personal preference. It is copy-and-paste, no matter how you cut it.
Of course it's subjective judgment based on his personal preference/opinion, who's preference/opinion would he be talking about? Your's? What a fatuous thing to say.
Yet another fantastic misuse of the HD moniker.
Yet another person who claims authority over the HD definition and how its used. Get. Over. It.
Cut to Steve or Phil (or whoever) up on stage hitting the usual 'lively' content on chat roulette. Priceless moment.
-Blurp
With their junk hanging out?
But it will also be just another luxury item from Apple that most people cannot afford.
Apple perfected cut and paste? For the iPhone, Apple merely copied the implementation from phones that have long had the feature before. Cut and paste has been around for decades for crying out loud. Apple perfected cut and paste?
You can't be serious.
Yeah, that's why MS can't even copy themselves and Win Mobile 7 won't have copy paste.
yeah.
Is it me the only one longing for "text search" inside webpages/emails?
Oh for sure me too, haven't noticed this, but does the ipad have this? I suppose being on the same os it probably doesn't.
I seriously doubt the very same A4 found on the iPad will find its way to the iPhone. First because I refuse to believe it is just a standard 1GHz processor: the nexus one's snapdragon is one and couldn't pull off such impressive performance on the iPad even it were dreaming. I'd bet the A4 is three or four-cored.
I do, however, believe in an Apple processor on the next-gen iPhone. A2 or whatever.
Yeah, this makes sense. And the name A2 would make sense from a marketing POV.
Gruber claimed nothing of the sort!
Looking at he tweets it appears his post was him claiming these exact things, he even admitted he has more info he didn't reveal.
http://twitter.com/gruber/status/11279387278
I'm the camp that the A4 is a highly optimized Cortex A8. Now need to push the tech out of the gate to the latest and greatest when there is currently no viable competition to the iPad, no idea if the product category will work, and require less time to optimize a chip that would cost more money.
Plus, they advertised some unknown chip designation they invented over the Cortex A9 with multiple cores, which is well known for its performance in this category.
That camp doesn't exist. The reality is the A4 is a stripped down version of the A8. Making something weak so you can get better battery life doesn't make it optimized.
Here is a link on the Cortex A9. I will give you another Apple fansite as a link.
http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/16/...essor-designs/
Here are the "unknown' specs on the A9
http://www.arm.com/products/processo.../cortex-a9.php
I hope they don't call it iPhone HD - first cause of zune, second cause of App HD is used for iPad now.
You can never tell with Apple, perhaps they'll call it iPhone 4.
Yeah, that's why MS can't even copy themselves and Win Mobile 7 won't have copy paste.
Only at launch, my friend. The iPhone didn't get it until after the second iteration of the hardware and OS 3.0. To use an argument that's been used many times, MS is waiting to optimize its version before releasing it into the wild.
http://www.phonedog.com/2010/03/18/w...et-copy-paste/
You can never tell with Apple, perhaps they'll call it iPhone 4.
If it ends up being a 4G-enabled phone, then 4GS would fit.
But as someone had mentioned earlier, front-facing camera does mean a much higher data load on AT&T's network. Can it handle it? And full 3G/4G is still limited to the areas around a few major cities, so what happens when you verture into an area that's EDGE only? Will the video data be compressed enough that it'll remain smooth even with EDGE?
I think I am missing something in this paragraph solipsism.
Are you saying Apple picked the less advanced chip to get it out faster, and as lower risk strategy?
Yes of course, plus some cost cutting measures, plus, what I think is more important that they wouldn't have had the time to implement a custom A9 cortex design, so they went with the A8 that could afford them more developement time for their customisation.
I wonder what the p.a. semi folk are up to, since by most accounts it seems that the vlsi design team is behind the A4.
Only at launch, my friend. The iPhone didn't get it until after the second iteration of the hardware and OS 3.0. To use an argument that's been used many times, MS is waiting to optimize its version before releasing it into the wild.
http://www.phonedog.com/2010/03/18/w...et-copy-paste/
Yes, well, with the slight exception that MS will be two years late to the party when they eventually implement copy paste. As Dan Dilger pointed out very succinctly in rd recently, their problem is not that their are copying apple's strategy (see zune, the courrier vapourware, and their new mobile platform), it's that they are copying the strategy 2-3 years too late every time. And strategies work in the right time frame, not when they are 2 years late to an already mature market.
front facing camera for what??? at&t's 3g network can barely handle regular calls... how and the h3ll will it handle data and voice simultaneously?
Exactly. Besides, talking on the phone is way more efficient and a nicer experience.
Yes, well, with the slight exception that MS will be two years late to the party when they eventually implement copy paste. As Dan Dilger pointed out very succinctly in rd recently, their problem is not that their are copying apple's strategy (see zune, the courrier vapourware, and their new mobile platform), it's that they are copying the strategy 2-3 years too late every time. And strategies work in the right time frame, not when they are 2 years late to an already mature market.
According to the article, MS has already figured out how to implement copy/paste in a way that fits the WP7S OS. It's just a matter of getting it into the OS code via an update that will happen shortly after the release.
Could they take longer, as you imply? Sure, anything's possible. But after getting their sh*t together with WP7S, I'm willing to throw MS a bone on this one.
I don't understand your logic, the iPhone is a communications device, in which it is now a standard feature to have video chat facility. The iPad is not a communication device and therefore doesn't 'need' a front facing camera.
Odd, short-sighted logic.
My understanding of his comment is that an Ipad has a bigger screen, better battery and most likely to be used on a wifi connection. If, with those advantages, it does not have a forward facing camera then why would the iphone?
I am sure this will be a personal preference thing, but I have zero interest in using video chat when I am on the move. I do use video chat at home but I can't imagine video chatting in a restaurant, bar, etc.
Maybe at at a nudie bar but camera's are usually banned anyways. ;-)
If it ends up being a 4G-enabled phone, then 4GS would fit.
The idea with the 3G "S" was that it was faster than the 3G. There is no iPhone 4G, so 4G S wouldn't make sense. Besides, the networks for 4G just aren't there yet.
iPhone 4 makes sense, they may even simply call it: "the new iPhone". I.E.: "iPhone".