1) Shooting for. Not confirmed. Not guaranteed. Just crossed finger and wishful thinking.
2) Do you really think their statement was a medium average of some maximum under ideal conditions scenario? I bet 6 hours of video will be hard to get, compared to the 11.5 hours Pogue got from the iPad.
3) 80% of the battery capacity with ½ the display size where the majority of the power is used on the iPad, with less pixels to push to the display, and a newer, more power efficient CPU. Anything else from the FUD factory?
1) RIM has historically pretty good on their blackberry battery life claims. QNX is a embedded OS. It's not like the boy who cried wolf. Wishful thinking is somehow RIM/QNX would create the Playbook with a battery life that is worst than android tablets, as Shaw Wu have suggested.
2) Judging from the zillions of youtube videos of people playing with the Playbook at the CES, it doesn't seem to eat to much CPU to play just HD videos. Every CPU manufacturer has already highly optimized their CPU for mp3 and video playing.
3) Battery-sucking larger LCD screen vs. battery-sucking Adobe flash player. That's for the consumer to decide which one they want.
1) RIM has historically pretty good on their blackberry battery life claims. QNX is a embedded OS. It's not like the boy who cried wolf. Wishful thinking is somehow RIM/QNX would create the Playbook with a battery life that is worst than android tablets, as Shaw Wu have suggested.
2) Judging from the zillions of youtube videos of people playing with the Playbook at the CES, it doesn't seem to eat to much CPU to play just HD videos. Every CPU manufacturer has already highly optimized their CPU for mp3 and video playing.
3) Battery-sucking larger LCD screen vs. battery-sucking Adobe flash player. That's for the consumer to decide which one they want.
1) Battery life claims from shipping devices are not the same as consumption wishes and caviler* dreams from executives.
2) 93% of 5300mAh battery equates to 4 hours and 5 minutes of usage remaining. Awesome!
1) Battery life claims from shipping devices are not the same as consumption wishes and caviler* dreams from executives.
2) 93% of 5300mAh battery equates to 4 hours and 5 minutes of usage remaining. Awesome!
3) Nice straw man.
* See what I did there?
1) Battery life claims --- from a historical point of view --- by the same RIM executives have been pretty good. I am talking about consistency --- RIM ain't the boy who cried wolf on battery claims.
2) For a Playbook without power management.
3) Not my place to force consumer to accept a non-flash enabled internet experience.
1) Battery life claims --- from a historical point of view --- by the same RIM executives have been pretty good. I am talking about consistency --- RIM ain't the boy who cried wolf on battery claims.
2) For a Playbook without power management.
3) Not my place to force consumer to accept a non-flash enabled internet experience.
Consistent wishful claims vs real world undisputed screenshot. And who's crying wolf?
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab
QNX has all kinds of technologies for power management which they haven't implemented on the Playbook yet.
Hell, RIM hasn't even implemented portrait mode on the Playbook --- as that hasn't been shown in public yet.
And you think that's a good thing? Screen rotation is pretty trivial to do if you had adequate GUI design before coding. MacOS had that capability all the way back into the early 90's, meaning the patents are already expired and the methods are public domain.
Now why would RIM not NOT implement the full range of hardware and software based means to maximize what is arguably a mobile device's primary support feature - unplugged runtime?
That either requires us to think RIM engineers are unbelievably stupid, or the rest of your argument is wishful thinking and RIM is having an understandable technical challenge marrying the new technologies together under the timeframe they want to ship.
Consistent wishful claims vs real world undisputed screenshot. And who's crying wolf?
Undisputed what? --- for a device without proper power management software and running with apps in "all singing, all dancing" mode.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro
And you think that's a good thing? Screen rotation is pretty trivial to do if you had adequate GUI design before coding. MacOS had that capability all the way back into the early 90's, meaning the patents are already expired and the methods are public domain.
Now why would RIM not NOT implement the full range of hardware and software based means to maximize what is arguably a mobile device's primary support feature - unplugged runtime?
That either requires us to think RIM engineers are unbelievably stupid, or the rest of your argument is wishful thinking and RIM is having an understandable technical challenge marrying the new technologies together under the timeframe they want to ship.
I never said it's a good thing. I said that there are a zillion other things that RIM hasn't shown finished on the Playbook --- from portrait mode to universal search to video conferencing.
I stated that repeatedly --- the Playbook may be delayed for a million other things. But it would be wishful thinking to say that RIM/QNX would need months and months on power management because QNX doesn't know how to do it --- when QNX is a 30 year old embedded OS company.
Undisputed what? --- for a device without proper power management software and running with apps in "all singing, all dancing" mode.
That's just making excuses. Putting on a major show and allowing a future interviewer to take video at CES isn't something you do with advice that is so early in development it doesn't have major required functionality. I can't believe RIM is that daft or naive, so I'm left with management whistling Dixie.
Quote:
I never said it's a good thing. I said that there are a zillion other things that RIM hasn't shown finished on the Playbook --- from portrait mode to universal search to video conferencing.
I stated that repeatedly --- the Playbook may be delayed for a million other things. But it would be wishful thinking to say that RIM/QNX would need months and months on power management because QNX doesn't know how to do it --- when QNX is a 30 year old embedded OS company.
No, you used the lack of features you cited as "stuff that will appear!" "by magic!" trust me! Businesses that do that kind of product rollout fail miserable because they forfeit the impression their product makes to the marketplace. The early public impressions either need to be wonderful because the demo is carefully scripted, or the truth and limitations get out. This isn't rocket science, it is standard operating procedure covered in the equivalent of Real World Marketing 101.
Rim has failed that by going too public too early. They haven't delivered anything that appears to confirm their confidence. And public analysis of what is positively out there very clearly contradicts what management is saying. You can ignore that as long as you wish, but it's their fault. Until RIM presents something that runs 8 hours on a charge and does so in a third party's possession they are just mouthing words.
And I'm not bagging on QNX. It just takes months and months to do that level of hardware/software integration on a first generation product when it is on a scale the company, RIM, never tackled before. Take everything you know about how long it should take and double it, that's one of the first rules of estimation. And one of the first rules usually ignored.
No, you used the lack of features you cited as "stuff that will appear!" "by magic!" trust me! Businesses that do that kind of product rollout fail miserable because they forfeit the impression their product makes to the marketplace. The early public impressions either need to be wonderful because the demo is carefully scripted, or the truth and limitations get out. This isn't rocket science, it is standard operating procedure covered in the equivalent of Real World Marketing 101.
Rim has failed that by going too public too early. They haven't delivered anything that appears to confirm their confidence. And public analysis of what is positively out there very clearly contradicts what management is saying. You can ignore that as long as you wish, but it's their fault. Until RIM presents something that runs 8 hours on a charge and does so in a third party's possession they are just mouthing words.
And I'm not bagging on QNX. It just takes months and months to do that level of hardware/software integration on a first generation product when it is on a scale the company, RIM, never tackled before. Take everything you know about how long it should take and double it, that's one of the first rules of estimation. And one of the first rules usually ignored.
I never claim that stuff will just come out in thin air. I have always entertained the possibility that RIM may be late. And it is late --- webworks sdk was supposed to launch in Q4, which they only did a couple of days ago.
As you say it --- this isn't rocket science. This is an embedded device. QNX is an embedded OS company with 30 years of experience. If QNX thinks that they can deliver 8 hours of battery life --- who are you to judge?
Also 8 hours is not that much. This is not mount everest. We are just talking about beating android tablets --- with a OS kernel that Linus himself has zero interest in embedded space, with a million stuff like the Android UX not being hardware accelerated (which slashdot just wrote a story last week) and with all kinds of android tablets coming out with uncertified flash players sucking up batteries.
For QNX with 30 years of experience and with the real embedded os kernel --- beating an android tablet on battery life is not going to be that hard. You make it sound like it is more difficult than climbing up mount everest.
This isn't very helpful to RIM. If you read that carefully, you will notice that it's applicable to just their system. It clearly says that power management modules MUST BE WRITTEN. That means that for every system, it needs to be done over. RIM has to do this all by themselves. All QNX provides apparently are the hooks for such a system.
No one is saying it can't be done, but it hasn't been done. RIM is doing it. RIM actually admitted quite clearly that right now, the Playbook is having power management issues. They didn't deny it. What they said was that the units out there are prototypes, and of course they have power issues, but that they expect to fix them by the time the (now late) tablet hits the market.
RIM is shooting for 8 hours of battery life --- 80% of iPad's battery life. The Playbook (5300mAh) also has 80% of the battery capacity of the iPad (about 6600mAh).
I haven't seen this 8 hour number. Where did you get it?
Considering that the screen is about 45% of the area of the iPads screen, a battery that's 80% of the capacity of the iPad's should be getting a lot more than 80% of the battery life. It should get at least the same life, likely more.
If not, then there is a power management problem. This is assuming that it does get 8 hours as you are saying they're shooting for. If it doesn't get that, then the problem is even bigger.
This isn't very helpful to RIM. If you read that carefully, you will notice that it's applicable to just their system. It clearly says that power management modules MUST BE WRITTEN. That means that for every system, it needs to be done over. RIM has to do this all by themselves. All QNX provides apparently are the hooks for such a system.
No one is saying it can't be done, but it hasn't been done. RIM is doing it. RIM actually admitted quite clearly that right now, the Playbook is having power management issues. They didn't deny it. What they said was that the units out there are prototypes, and of course they have power issues, but that they expect to fix them by the time the (now late) tablet hits the market.
They didn't really say that they are having power management issues --- they are essentially saying that they haven't even written the power management module.
Shaw Wu is essentially saying that it can't be done --- without months and months of deep OS tinkering because supposedly QNX is for cars. This is what I disagree with. The only place where you would find linux is in servers, not battery operated devices.
By the looks of their webworks sdk launch a couple of days ago, RIM is at least 3-4 weeks off their schedule.
1) Battery life claims --- from a historical point of view --- by the same RIM executives have been pretty good. I am talking about consistency --- RIM ain't the boy who cried wolf on battery claims.
2) For a Playbook without power management.
3) Not my place to force consumer to accept a non-flash enabled internet experience.
I don't recall RIM saying that there was NO power management on the Playbook right now, just that it was a prototype, and that they were working on it. It's awful late in the game for them to just begin working on power management issues. In fact, it's unbelievable.
Power management has to be understood fairly well from the very beginning, and they must have some ability to estimate about how well it will work before they even decide on the design. They can work on it during basic design. But this is software, and as such must be begun early. As the entire design depends on how long the battery lasts, how hot it gets, etc, this isn't something they can leave to the last two or three months.
They should know almost exactly how each component, such as the cpu can be power managed, as the manufacturer details this precisely. They also know pretty closely how much power every other component needs. It's a matter of knowing what the OS will enable them to write to control this.
What would happen if they now find that no matter what they do, the design is too power hungry, and they can't get decent life? They would either have to release a poorly performing product, like the EVO 4G, or scrap the design, and start from scratch with different components.
I've designed a number of battery operated devices, and it happens.
I haven't seen this 8 hour number. Where did you get it?
Considering that the screen is about 45% of the area of the iPads screen, a battery that's 80% of the capacity of the iPad's should be getting a lot more than 80% of the battery life. It should get at least the same life, likely more.
If not, then there is a power management problem. This is assuming that it does get 8 hours as you are saying they're shooting for. If it doesn't get that, then the problem is even bigger.
RIM executives said it in CES videos which was confirmed later in interviews.
As I stated earlier --- battery sucking larger LCD screen vs. battery sucking Adobe flash player. Steve Jobs wants the former, RIM wants the latter. Nothing wrong with picking either one --- it is a design choice.
QNX has all kinds of technologies for power management which they haven't implemented on the Playbook yet.
Hell, RIM hasn't even implemented portrait mode on the Playbook --- as that hasn't been shown in public yet.
Exactly what technologies are those? Do you understand what this means? QNX knows nothing about any of the components being used in a design. It's up to the manufacturer of the device to WRITE the code that does the management. The kernel has the ability to run that specialized code. That's about it. RIM has to do the heavy lifting.
They didn't really say that they are having power management issues --- they are essentially saying that they haven't even written the power management module.
Shaw Wu is essentially saying that it can't be done --- without months and months of deep OS tinkering because supposedly QNX is for cars. This is what I disagree with. The only place where you would find linux is in servers, not battery operated devices.
By the looks of their webworks sdk launch a couple of days ago, RIM is at least 3-4 weeks off their schedule.
They said they were having issues. They said that they were working on it, but as they admitted that this product is pretty late already, has power management issues, and that they are working on it, I wonder where the problems are coming from.
Please, don't repeat that they are just now starting work on this. It's impossible.
I haven't seen this 8 hour number. Where did you get it?
Considering that the screen is about 45% of the area of the iPads screen, a battery that's 80% of the capacity of the iPad's should be getting a lot more than 80% of the battery life. It should get at least the same life, likely more.
If not, then there is a power management problem. This is assuming that it does get 8 hours as you are saying they're shooting for. If it doesn't get that, then the problem is even bigger.
Sounds like those Canadians are using the day length above the Arctic Circle right now. \
What’s completely ridiculous for Samab to defend is that they have done absolutely no power management — something he profusely stated was built into the core of QNX — yet somehow know what battery life they can get out of this device.
Also questionable is the lack of what 8 hours refers to. Video, web browsing over WiFi, reading email, etc. Apple lists very specific things and either matches or exceeds those times, and now will be using even more stringent tests.
Seems to me the PlayBook is the new Palm Pre. it’s just broken promise and poor execution over and over.
As I stated earlier --- battery sucking larger LCD screen vs. battery sucking Adobe flash player. Steve Jobs wants the former, RIM wants the latter. Nothing wrong with picking either one --- it is a design choice.
Apparently they shift around. But anyway, if they manage 8 hours with that battery and that small screen, I'm less than impressed.
Jobs may want the former, but most reviews said almost 11 hours playing videos constantly. What was that about the battery sucking larger screen?
We can also get 60 hours of music. That's with the screen off. I'd like to see what this gets in a similar situation. The iPad also has at least 300 hours of standby. That's a lot for a device like this, and is an excellent indicator of power management.
They said they were having issues. They said that they were working on it, but as they admitted that this product is pretty late already, has power management issues, and that they are working on it, I wonder where the problems are coming from.
Please, don't repeat that they are just now starting work on this. It's impossible.
The problems are they are late --- in a million things. This is a device that was never shown in the portrait mode, it was never shown with a working accelerometer...
They said they were having issues. They said that they were working on it, but as they admitted that this product is pretty late already, has power management issues, and that they are working on it, I wonder where the problems are coming from.
Please, don't repeat that they are just now starting work on this. It's impossible.
from January 5th article?
Quote:
Bidan says that in its beta release the power management software is absent, or hasn't been tuned or optimized.
They turned off power management to take it to CES after rampant rumours about the PlayBook having poor battery just so they can have its picture taken denoting 4 hours of use remaining with 93% of the battery remaining? I?m not buying that for a second.
Comments
1) Shooting for. Not confirmed. Not guaranteed. Just crossed finger and wishful thinking.
2) Do you really think their statement was a medium average of some maximum under ideal conditions scenario? I bet 6 hours of video will be hard to get, compared to the 11.5 hours Pogue got from the iPad.
3) 80% of the battery capacity with ½ the display size where the majority of the power is used on the iPad, with less pixels to push to the display, and a newer, more power efficient CPU. Anything else from the FUD factory?
1) RIM has historically pretty good on their blackberry battery life claims. QNX is a embedded OS. It's not like the boy who cried wolf. Wishful thinking is somehow RIM/QNX would create the Playbook with a battery life that is worst than android tablets, as Shaw Wu have suggested.
2) Judging from the zillions of youtube videos of people playing with the Playbook at the CES, it doesn't seem to eat to much CPU to play just HD videos. Every CPU manufacturer has already highly optimized their CPU for mp3 and video playing.
3) Battery-sucking larger LCD screen vs. battery-sucking Adobe flash player. That's for the consumer to decide which one they want.
1) RIM has historically pretty good on their blackberry battery life claims. QNX is a embedded OS. It's not like the boy who cried wolf. Wishful thinking is somehow RIM/QNX would create the Playbook with a battery life that is worst than android tablets, as Shaw Wu have suggested.
2) Judging from the zillions of youtube videos of people playing with the Playbook at the CES, it doesn't seem to eat to much CPU to play just HD videos. Every CPU manufacturer has already highly optimized their CPU for mp3 and video playing.
3) Battery-sucking larger LCD screen vs. battery-sucking Adobe flash player. That's for the consumer to decide which one they want.
1) Battery life claims from shipping devices are not the same as consumption wishes and caviler* dreams from executives.
2) 93% of 5300mAh battery equates to 4 hours and 5 minutes of usage remaining. Awesome!3) Nice straw man.
* See what I did there?
1) Battery life claims from shipping devices are not the same as consumption wishes and caviler* dreams from executives.
2) 93% of 5300mAh battery equates to 4 hours and 5 minutes of usage remaining. Awesome!
3) Nice straw man.
* See what I did there?
1) Battery life claims --- from a historical point of view --- by the same RIM executives have been pretty good. I am talking about consistency --- RIM ain't the boy who cried wolf on battery claims.
2) For a Playbook without power management.
3) Not my place to force consumer to accept a non-flash enabled internet experience.
2) For a Playbook without power management.
There was a poster on AI that has been professing that QNX has excellent, built-in power management. What was him name again? Oh, yeah, SAMAB!
There was a poster on AI that has been professing that QNX has excellent, built-in power management. What was him name again? Oh, yeah, SAMAB!
QNX has all kinds of technologies for power management which they haven't implemented on the Playbook yet.
Hell, RIM hasn't even implemented portrait mode on the Playbook --- as that hasn't been shown in public yet.
1) Battery life claims --- from a historical point of view --- by the same RIM executives have been pretty good. I am talking about consistency --- RIM ain't the boy who cried wolf on battery claims.
2) For a Playbook without power management.
3) Not my place to force consumer to accept a non-flash enabled internet experience.
Consistent wishful claims vs real world undisputed screenshot. And who's crying wolf?
QNX has all kinds of technologies for power management which they haven't implemented on the Playbook yet.
Hell, RIM hasn't even implemented portrait mode on the Playbook --- as that hasn't been shown in public yet.
And you think that's a good thing? Screen rotation is pretty trivial to do if you had adequate GUI design before coding. MacOS had that capability all the way back into the early 90's, meaning the patents are already expired and the methods are public domain.
Now why would RIM not NOT implement the full range of hardware and software based means to maximize what is arguably a mobile device's primary support feature - unplugged runtime?
That either requires us to think RIM engineers are unbelievably stupid, or the rest of your argument is wishful thinking and RIM is having an understandable technical challenge marrying the new technologies together under the timeframe they want to ship.
Consistent wishful claims vs real world undisputed screenshot. And who's crying wolf?
Undisputed what? --- for a device without proper power management software and running with apps in "all singing, all dancing" mode.
And you think that's a good thing? Screen rotation is pretty trivial to do if you had adequate GUI design before coding. MacOS had that capability all the way back into the early 90's, meaning the patents are already expired and the methods are public domain.
Now why would RIM not NOT implement the full range of hardware and software based means to maximize what is arguably a mobile device's primary support feature - unplugged runtime?
That either requires us to think RIM engineers are unbelievably stupid, or the rest of your argument is wishful thinking and RIM is having an understandable technical challenge marrying the new technologies together under the timeframe they want to ship.
I never said it's a good thing. I said that there are a zillion other things that RIM hasn't shown finished on the Playbook --- from portrait mode to universal search to video conferencing.
I stated that repeatedly --- the Playbook may be delayed for a million other things. But it would be wishful thinking to say that RIM/QNX would need months and months on power management because QNX doesn't know how to do it --- when QNX is a 30 year old embedded OS company.
Undisputed what? --- for a device without proper power management software and running with apps in "all singing, all dancing" mode.
That's just making excuses. Putting on a major show and allowing a future interviewer to take video at CES isn't something you do with advice that is so early in development it doesn't have major required functionality. I can't believe RIM is that daft or naive, so I'm left with management whistling Dixie.
I never said it's a good thing. I said that there are a zillion other things that RIM hasn't shown finished on the Playbook --- from portrait mode to universal search to video conferencing.
I stated that repeatedly --- the Playbook may be delayed for a million other things. But it would be wishful thinking to say that RIM/QNX would need months and months on power management because QNX doesn't know how to do it --- when QNX is a 30 year old embedded OS company.
No, you used the lack of features you cited as "stuff that will appear!" "by magic!" trust me! Businesses that do that kind of product rollout fail miserable because they forfeit the impression their product makes to the marketplace. The early public impressions either need to be wonderful because the demo is carefully scripted, or the truth and limitations get out. This isn't rocket science, it is standard operating procedure covered in the equivalent of Real World Marketing 101.
Rim has failed that by going too public too early. They haven't delivered anything that appears to confirm their confidence. And public analysis of what is positively out there very clearly contradicts what management is saying. You can ignore that as long as you wish, but it's their fault. Until RIM presents something that runs 8 hours on a charge and does so in a third party's possession they are just mouthing words.
And I'm not bagging on QNX. It just takes months and months to do that level of hardware/software integration on a first generation product when it is on a scale the company, RIM, never tackled before. Take everything you know about how long it should take and double it, that's one of the first rules of estimation. And one of the first rules usually ignored.
No, you used the lack of features you cited as "stuff that will appear!" "by magic!" trust me! Businesses that do that kind of product rollout fail miserable because they forfeit the impression their product makes to the marketplace. The early public impressions either need to be wonderful because the demo is carefully scripted, or the truth and limitations get out. This isn't rocket science, it is standard operating procedure covered in the equivalent of Real World Marketing 101.
Rim has failed that by going too public too early. They haven't delivered anything that appears to confirm their confidence. And public analysis of what is positively out there very clearly contradicts what management is saying. You can ignore that as long as you wish, but it's their fault. Until RIM presents something that runs 8 hours on a charge and does so in a third party's possession they are just mouthing words.
And I'm not bagging on QNX. It just takes months and months to do that level of hardware/software integration on a first generation product when it is on a scale the company, RIM, never tackled before. Take everything you know about how long it should take and double it, that's one of the first rules of estimation. And one of the first rules usually ignored.
I never claim that stuff will just come out in thin air. I have always entertained the possibility that RIM may be late. And it is late --- webworks sdk was supposed to launch in Q4, which they only did a couple of days ago.
As you say it --- this isn't rocket science. This is an embedded device. QNX is an embedded OS company with 30 years of experience. If QNX thinks that they can deliver 8 hours of battery life --- who are you to judge?
Also 8 hours is not that much. This is not mount everest. We are just talking about beating android tablets --- with a OS kernel that Linus himself has zero interest in embedded space, with a million stuff like the Android UX not being hardware accelerated (which slashdot just wrote a story last week) and with all kinds of android tablets coming out with uncertified flash players sucking up batteries.
For QNX with 30 years of experience and with the real embedded os kernel --- beating an android tablet on battery life is not going to be that hard. You make it sound like it is more difficult than climbing up mount everest.
People have been doing robust power management with Neutrino for years.
http://www.qnx.com/developers/articl...cle_296_2.html
This isn't very helpful to RIM. If you read that carefully, you will notice that it's applicable to just their system. It clearly says that power management modules MUST BE WRITTEN. That means that for every system, it needs to be done over. RIM has to do this all by themselves. All QNX provides apparently are the hooks for such a system.
No one is saying it can't be done, but it hasn't been done. RIM is doing it. RIM actually admitted quite clearly that right now, the Playbook is having power management issues. They didn't deny it. What they said was that the units out there are prototypes, and of course they have power issues, but that they expect to fix them by the time the (now late) tablet hits the market.
RIM is shooting for 8 hours of battery life --- 80% of iPad's battery life. The Playbook (5300mAh) also has 80% of the battery capacity of the iPad (about 6600mAh).
I haven't seen this 8 hour number. Where did you get it?
Considering that the screen is about 45% of the area of the iPads screen, a battery that's 80% of the capacity of the iPad's should be getting a lot more than 80% of the battery life. It should get at least the same life, likely more.
If not, then there is a power management problem. This is assuming that it does get 8 hours as you are saying they're shooting for. If it doesn't get that, then the problem is even bigger.
This isn't very helpful to RIM. If you read that carefully, you will notice that it's applicable to just their system. It clearly says that power management modules MUST BE WRITTEN. That means that for every system, it needs to be done over. RIM has to do this all by themselves. All QNX provides apparently are the hooks for such a system.
No one is saying it can't be done, but it hasn't been done. RIM is doing it. RIM actually admitted quite clearly that right now, the Playbook is having power management issues. They didn't deny it. What they said was that the units out there are prototypes, and of course they have power issues, but that they expect to fix them by the time the (now late) tablet hits the market.
They didn't really say that they are having power management issues --- they are essentially saying that they haven't even written the power management module.
Shaw Wu is essentially saying that it can't be done --- without months and months of deep OS tinkering because supposedly QNX is for cars. This is what I disagree with. The only place where you would find linux is in servers, not battery operated devices.
By the looks of their webworks sdk launch a couple of days ago, RIM is at least 3-4 weeks off their schedule.
1) Battery life claims --- from a historical point of view --- by the same RIM executives have been pretty good. I am talking about consistency --- RIM ain't the boy who cried wolf on battery claims.
2) For a Playbook without power management.
3) Not my place to force consumer to accept a non-flash enabled internet experience.
I don't recall RIM saying that there was NO power management on the Playbook right now, just that it was a prototype, and that they were working on it. It's awful late in the game for them to just begin working on power management issues. In fact, it's unbelievable.
Power management has to be understood fairly well from the very beginning, and they must have some ability to estimate about how well it will work before they even decide on the design. They can work on it during basic design. But this is software, and as such must be begun early. As the entire design depends on how long the battery lasts, how hot it gets, etc, this isn't something they can leave to the last two or three months.
They should know almost exactly how each component, such as the cpu can be power managed, as the manufacturer details this precisely. They also know pretty closely how much power every other component needs. It's a matter of knowing what the OS will enable them to write to control this.
What would happen if they now find that no matter what they do, the design is too power hungry, and they can't get decent life? They would either have to release a poorly performing product, like the EVO 4G, or scrap the design, and start from scratch with different components.
I've designed a number of battery operated devices, and it happens.
I haven't seen this 8 hour number. Where did you get it?
Considering that the screen is about 45% of the area of the iPads screen, a battery that's 80% of the capacity of the iPad's should be getting a lot more than 80% of the battery life. It should get at least the same life, likely more.
If not, then there is a power management problem. This is assuming that it does get 8 hours as you are saying they're shooting for. If it doesn't get that, then the problem is even bigger.
RIM executives said it in CES videos which was confirmed later in interviews.
http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/2011...mod=ATD_skybox
As I stated earlier --- battery sucking larger LCD screen vs. battery sucking Adobe flash player. Steve Jobs wants the former, RIM wants the latter. Nothing wrong with picking either one --- it is a design choice.
QNX has all kinds of technologies for power management which they haven't implemented on the Playbook yet.
Hell, RIM hasn't even implemented portrait mode on the Playbook --- as that hasn't been shown in public yet.
Exactly what technologies are those? Do you understand what this means? QNX knows nothing about any of the components being used in a design. It's up to the manufacturer of the device to WRITE the code that does the management. The kernel has the ability to run that specialized code. That's about it. RIM has to do the heavy lifting.
They didn't really say that they are having power management issues --- they are essentially saying that they haven't even written the power management module.
Shaw Wu is essentially saying that it can't be done --- without months and months of deep OS tinkering because supposedly QNX is for cars. This is what I disagree with. The only place where you would find linux is in servers, not battery operated devices.
By the looks of their webworks sdk launch a couple of days ago, RIM is at least 3-4 weeks off their schedule.
They said they were having issues. They said that they were working on it, but as they admitted that this product is pretty late already, has power management issues, and that they are working on it, I wonder where the problems are coming from.
Please, don't repeat that they are just now starting work on this. It's impossible.
I haven't seen this 8 hour number. Where did you get it?
Considering that the screen is about 45% of the area of the iPads screen, a battery that's 80% of the capacity of the iPad's should be getting a lot more than 80% of the battery life. It should get at least the same life, likely more.
If not, then there is a power management problem. This is assuming that it does get 8 hours as you are saying they're shooting for. If it doesn't get that, then the problem is even bigger.
December 17, 2010: ”Way ahead” of competition
December 30th, 2010: ”Comparable" battery life to competition
January 5, 2011: ”Target” of 8 hours battery life
January 13, 2011: ”Goal" of 8 hours, what they consider a full day of use
Sounds like those Canadians are using the day length above the Arctic Circle right now.
What’s completely ridiculous for Samab to defend is that they have done absolutely no power management — something he profusely stated was built into the core of QNX — yet somehow know what battery life they can get out of this device.
Also questionable is the lack of what 8 hours refers to. Video, web browsing over WiFi, reading email, etc. Apple lists very specific things and either matches or exceeds those times, and now will be using even more stringent tests.
Seems to me the PlayBook is the new Palm Pre. it’s just broken promise and poor execution over and over.
RIM executives said it in CES videos which was confirmed later in interviews.
http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/2011...mod=ATD_skybox
As I stated earlier --- battery sucking larger LCD screen vs. battery sucking Adobe flash player. Steve Jobs wants the former, RIM wants the latter. Nothing wrong with picking either one --- it is a design choice.
Apparently they shift around. But anyway, if they manage 8 hours with that battery and that small screen, I'm less than impressed.
Jobs may want the former, but most reviews said almost 11 hours playing videos constantly. What was that about the battery sucking larger screen?
We can also get 60 hours of music. That's with the screen off. I'd like to see what this gets in a similar situation. The iPad also has at least 300 hours of standby. That's a lot for a device like this, and is an excellent indicator of power management.
We'll see how the Playbook does on these fronts.
They said they were having issues. They said that they were working on it, but as they admitted that this product is pretty late already, has power management issues, and that they are working on it, I wonder where the problems are coming from.
Please, don't repeat that they are just now starting work on this. It's impossible.
The problems are they are late --- in a million things. This is a device that was never shown in the portrait mode, it was never shown with a working accelerometer...
They said they were having issues. They said that they were working on it, but as they admitted that this product is pretty late already, has power management issues, and that they are working on it, I wonder where the problems are coming from.
Please, don't repeat that they are just now starting work on this. It's impossible.
from January 5th article?
Bidan says that in its beta release the power management software is absent, or hasn't been tuned or optimized.
They turned off power management to take it to CES after rampant rumours about the PlayBook having poor battery just so they can have its picture taken denoting 4 hours of use remaining with 93% of the battery remaining? I?m not buying that for a second.