Fair enough. I'm not sure the situation is THAT similar, though, since the Cortex A8 was really brand new when they put it in the 3GS last year, and even if it's still fast this summer, it won't really be king of the hill anymore. The phones that came out in Q4 2009/Q1 2010, i. e. the Droid and the Nexus one, mostly featured higher clocked Cortex A8-based processors. The difference to the 3GS was negligible. However, the difference between the A4 and the multi-core Cortex A9 will most likely be vast. At least that's what I'm fearing.
Well, the difference might be big, but that's life in the cutting edge tech market. Something faster will always come along, and once in a while there's a big push. But right now, in June 2010, there's nothing faster available, so what should Apple do? It's not like every one else is putting faster chips in their smartphones, not for like 6 more months. And once Cortex-A9 will become widely available, you won't have to wait longer than a few months until the next iPhone is released, which will at least catch up to the fastest smartphones out there.
And by the way, I'm really skeptical that multicore Cortex-A9s will be used in lots of smartphones in H1/2011, the power requirements are pretty high @40nm/45nm. IMHO H2/2011 @32nm is when they become really usable.
PS: The Droid is not faster, and the Nexus One 3D performance is lower. Looks like the first phone that's gonna be faster in every (theoretical) aspect is gonna be the Samsung Galaxy S (S5PC110, 1GHz Cortex-A8, SGX540), and I'm not sure if it's gonna be available before the 4th-gen iPhone (depends on it's release date in June/July).
Well, the difference might be big, but that's life in the cutting edge tech market. Something faster will always come along, and once in a while there's a big push. But right now, in June 2010, there's nothing faster available, so what should Apple do? It's not like every one else is putting faster chips in their smartphones, not for like 6 more months. And once Cortex-A9 will become widely available, you won't have to wait longer than a few months until the next iPhone is released, which will at least catch up to the fastest smartphones out there.
And by the way, I'm really skeptical that multicore Cortex-A9s will be used in lots of smartphones in H1/2011, the power requirements are pretty high @40nm/45nm. IMHO H2/2011 @32nm is when they become really usable.
PS: The Droid is not faster, and the Nexus One 3D performance is lower. Looks like the first phone that's gonna be faster in every (theoretical) aspect is gonna be the Samsung Galaxy S (S5PC110, 1GHz Cortex-A8, SGX540), and I'm not sure if it's gonna be available before the 4th-gen iPhone (depends on it's release date in June/July).
OK, you've pretty much convinced me; I didn't know the A9s were so far off.
However, that doesn't excuse the 256 MB RAM (if that turns out to be a reality).
What are the misreporting? They posted the wrong image? That is quite different than "they dismantled and cross-sectioned the iPhone's processor, not the iPad's A4." which I shown to be incorrect as their site clearly shows evidence of the iPad's A4 being dismantled and cross-sectioned, unless you claim is that they are in fact lying.
PS: The Droid is not faster, and the Nexus One 3D performance is lower. Looks like the first phone that's gonna be faster in every (theoretical) aspect is gonna be the Samsung Galaxy S (S5PC110, 1GHz Cortex-A8, SGX540), and I'm not sure if it's gonna be available before the 4th-gen iPhone (depends on it's release date in June/July).
The specs look impressive, but so did the Nexus One. We're at a point in computing that you can't just look at the HW and say which one will be a better or faster experience, as you're well aware with your "theoretical" qualifier.
Surely Android v2.2 will get more refined to make the Nexus One perform closer to the 600MHz 3GS in some tasks but it's hard to compete with Apple who is refining the HW to to the OS to the UI with polished deftness.
They also have the numbers to make it worthwhile and inexpensive compared to other vendors. Apple will sell 1 million plus in the first weekend and the Samsung Galaxy S with a reported $1000 price tag will be lucky to sell half that in its lifetime. How many units has the Nexus One sold?
I recall reading that the 7 month only 3GS on the UK's forth and smallest carrier sold more units than the Nexus One in that same general time frame. Android will surely top the iPhone OS in sales on all smartphones, but I can't foresee any single vendor making a device as well oiled as the iPhone without risking an excessive amount of R&D on a phone that they haven't been able to sell in great quantity.
The specs look impressive, but so did the Nexus One. We're at a point in computing that you can't just look at the HW and say which one will be a better or faster experience, as you're well aware with your "theoretical" qualifier.
Surely Android v2.2 will get more refined to make the Nexus One perform closer to the 600MHz 3GS in some tasks but it's hard to compete with Apple who is refining the HW to to the OS to the UI with polished deftness.
They also have the numbers to make it worthwhile and inexpensive compared to other vendors. Apple will sell 1 million plus in the first weekend and the Samsung Galaxy S with a reported $1000 price tag will be lucky to sell half that in its lifetime. How many units has the Nexus One sold?
I recall reading that the 7 month only 3GS on the UK's forth and smallest carrier sold more units than the Nexus One in that same general time frame. Android will surely top the iPhone OS in sales on all smartphones, but I can't foresee any single vendor making a device as well oiled as the iPhone without risking an excessive amount of R&D on a phone that they haven't been able to sell in great quantity.
Of course, I was only talking about pure hardware specs and theoretical performance. That says nothing about how good the user experience is gonna be. You could combine a 2GHz Cortex-A9 quadcore with a shitty OS and the user experience would be terrible even though the hardware would be like 10 times more powerful than anything else out there...
Regarding Android OS(!): IMO the iPhone OS offers the best user experience right now, but I think with OS 2.5/3.0 at the latest (or whatever major version comes after 2.2), Android is gonna be as user friendly and well rounded as the iPhone OS so that I could equally recommend the two OSs to even my technophobic grandfather and it would really just be a matter of personal preference.
You can use http://analyze.websiteoptimization.c...vices/analyze/ to check the size of any website you want. Nytimes.com comes in at 411KB by the way. Things like flash are what use the most RAM on desktops, and obviously that is not much of an issue on the iPad .
It looks safari (at least in the desktop version) is taking up more memory than other browsers. I just tried to compare Safari to Firefox on my Mac, and with the some 4 tabs open, Firefox is at 100MB, whereas Safari is at 250MB (though it has been running for a while). However adding a tab or to increases the memory with at least 20-30MB, whereas the same in firefox does only ad a couple of MB.
Any thoughts/explanations for that.
P.S. I believe that the url you posted only gives the size of the html code, not the rendered version of the page.
Comments
Fair enough. I'm not sure the situation is THAT similar, though, since the Cortex A8 was really brand new when they put it in the 3GS last year, and even if it's still fast this summer, it won't really be king of the hill anymore. The phones that came out in Q4 2009/Q1 2010, i. e. the Droid and the Nexus one, mostly featured higher clocked Cortex A8-based processors. The difference to the 3GS was negligible. However, the difference between the A4 and the multi-core Cortex A9 will most likely be vast. At least that's what I'm fearing.
Well, the difference might be big, but that's life in the cutting edge tech market. Something faster will always come along, and once in a while there's a big push. But right now, in June 2010, there's nothing faster available, so what should Apple do? It's not like every one else is putting faster chips in their smartphones, not for like 6 more months. And once Cortex-A9 will become widely available, you won't have to wait longer than a few months until the next iPhone is released, which will at least catch up to the fastest smartphones out there.
And by the way, I'm really skeptical that multicore Cortex-A9s will be used in lots of smartphones in H1/2011, the power requirements are pretty high @40nm/45nm. IMHO H2/2011 @32nm is when they become really usable.
PS: The Droid is not faster, and the Nexus One 3D performance is lower. Looks like the first phone that's gonna be faster in every (theoretical) aspect is gonna be the Samsung Galaxy S (S5PC110, 1GHz Cortex-A8, SGX540), and I'm not sure if it's gonna be available before the 4th-gen iPhone (depends on it's release date in June/July).
Well, the difference might be big, but that's life in the cutting edge tech market. Something faster will always come along, and once in a while there's a big push. But right now, in June 2010, there's nothing faster available, so what should Apple do? It's not like every one else is putting faster chips in their smartphones, not for like 6 more months. And once Cortex-A9 will become widely available, you won't have to wait longer than a few months until the next iPhone is released, which will at least catch up to the fastest smartphones out there.
And by the way, I'm really skeptical that multicore Cortex-A9s will be used in lots of smartphones in H1/2011, the power requirements are pretty high @40nm/45nm. IMHO H2/2011 @32nm is when they become really usable.
PS: The Droid is not faster, and the Nexus One 3D performance is lower. Looks like the first phone that's gonna be faster in every (theoretical) aspect is gonna be the Samsung Galaxy S (S5PC110, 1GHz Cortex-A8, SGX540), and I'm not sure if it's gonna be available before the 4th-gen iPhone (depends on it's release date in June/July).
OK, you've pretty much convinced me; I didn't know the A9s were so far off.
However, that doesn't excuse the 256 MB RAM (if that turns out to be a reality).
I didn't say anyone was lying, just that many (including AppleInsider) were misreporting.
See here: AppleInsider vs. iFixit
What are the misreporting? They posted the wrong image? That is quite different than "they dismantled and cross-sectioned the iPhone's processor, not the iPad's A4." which I shown to be incorrect as their site clearly shows evidence of the iPad's A4 being dismantled and cross-sectioned, unless you claim is that they are in fact lying.
PS: The Droid is not faster, and the Nexus One 3D performance is lower. Looks like the first phone that's gonna be faster in every (theoretical) aspect is gonna be the Samsung Galaxy S (S5PC110, 1GHz Cortex-A8, SGX540), and I'm not sure if it's gonna be available before the 4th-gen iPhone (depends on it's release date in June/July).
The specs look impressive, but so did the Nexus One. We're at a point in computing that you can't just look at the HW and say which one will be a better or faster experience, as you're well aware with your "theoretical" qualifier.
Surely Android v2.2 will get more refined to make the Nexus One perform closer to the 600MHz 3GS in some tasks but it's hard to compete with Apple who is refining the HW to to the OS to the UI with polished deftness.
They also have the numbers to make it worthwhile and inexpensive compared to other vendors. Apple will sell 1 million plus in the first weekend and the Samsung Galaxy S with a reported $1000 price tag will be lucky to sell half that in its lifetime. How many units has the Nexus One sold?
I recall reading that the 7 month only 3GS on the UK's forth and smallest carrier sold more units than the Nexus One in that same general time frame. Android will surely top the iPhone OS in sales on all smartphones, but I can't foresee any single vendor making a device as well oiled as the iPhone without risking an excessive amount of R&D on a phone that they haven't been able to sell in great quantity.
The specs look impressive, but so did the Nexus One. We're at a point in computing that you can't just look at the HW and say which one will be a better or faster experience, as you're well aware with your "theoretical" qualifier.
Surely Android v2.2 will get more refined to make the Nexus One perform closer to the 600MHz 3GS in some tasks but it's hard to compete with Apple who is refining the HW to to the OS to the UI with polished deftness.
They also have the numbers to make it worthwhile and inexpensive compared to other vendors. Apple will sell 1 million plus in the first weekend and the Samsung Galaxy S with a reported $1000 price tag will be lucky to sell half that in its lifetime. How many units has the Nexus One sold?
I recall reading that the 7 month only 3GS on the UK's forth and smallest carrier sold more units than the Nexus One in that same general time frame. Android will surely top the iPhone OS in sales on all smartphones, but I can't foresee any single vendor making a device as well oiled as the iPhone without risking an excessive amount of R&D on a phone that they haven't been able to sell in great quantity.
Of course, I was only talking about pure hardware specs and theoretical performance. That says nothing about how good the user experience is gonna be. You could combine a 2GHz Cortex-A9 quadcore with a shitty OS and the user experience would be terrible even though the hardware would be like 10 times more powerful than anything else out there...
Regarding Android OS(!): IMO the iPhone OS offers the best user experience right now, but I think with OS 2.5/3.0 at the latest (or whatever major version comes after 2.2), Android is gonna be as user friendly and well rounded as the iPhone OS so that I could equally recommend the two OSs to even my technophobic grandfather and it would really just be a matter of personal preference.
You can use http://analyze.websiteoptimization.c...vices/analyze/ to check the size of any website you want. Nytimes.com comes in at 411KB by the way. Things like flash are what use the most RAM on desktops, and obviously that is not much of an issue on the iPad
It looks safari (at least in the desktop version) is taking up more memory than other browsers. I just tried to compare Safari to Firefox on my Mac, and with the some 4 tabs open, Firefox is at 100MB, whereas Safari is at 250MB (though it has been running for a while). However adding a tab or to increases the memory with at least 20-30MB, whereas the same in firefox does only ad a couple of MB.
Any thoughts/explanations for that.
P.S. I believe that the url you posted only gives the size of the html code, not the rendered version of the page.