If you say things that are true, you don't have to use all caps and big fonts to get attention.
Also, "QAMF,"your inaccurate, handwaving defense of Samsung's efforts to defraud anyone running benchmarks is reproachable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by QAMF
THE CLOCK RATE MAXES AT 480 INSTEAD OF 533. NOT 300 LIKE APPLEINSIDER IS CLAIMING.
is it bad still, yes. But not as bad as they are saying.
Probably because almost all companies do this in one way or another.
Why? Almost every company does this for different benchmarks? This would be like telling you family to avoid Intel because they do tons of optimizations when they run their benchmarks for their claims?
No, it does not. The chip runs at 533Mhz (well, 532 according to anandtech) during some benchmarks. Otherwise it caps at 480Mhz.
There is nothing that talks about the specifications on the feature page, and the fine print would take care of it.
You technically can get the GPU to hit the rate they provided, just not in a useful manner.
No. At least, I don't see what it would be about.
You can still hit that clock rate, you just cannot do it in a useful manner.
I am really curious as to what happens if the code is hacked to permanently set the clock at the higher frequency? Does the Galaxy S4 overheat and damage the chips? That would be cool (well hot really).
I'm waiting for Gatorguy and KDarling to weigh in on this issue!
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
Funny, so was I. KD's posts are like reading a good comic … 'Ive been an THE expert in / run the entire universe's IT / bla bla bla for thirty years so I know more than Apple and the Planet Grog combined …" LOL
They both provide historical facts and technical explanations to back up their opinions/posts. Their posts do not always go against Apple either. How balanced are your posts? How often do you provide technical insight? In fact, how much (little) do you understand the industry, either technically or from an investment perspective?
I am really curious as to what happens if the code is hacked to permanently set the clock at the higher frequency? Does the Galaxy S4 overheat and damage the chips? That would be cool (well hot really).
Probably wouldn't overheat unless the internals of the S4 were pretty poorly designed. It would definitely age the GPU cores faster and likely cause battery life to take a noticeable hit.
Predatory ethics! I guess honesty is just for the weak minded.
I fully agree with disagreeing. How is this not qualifying for a lawsuit? It's like advertising that some car runs at x mph and then you're told "well, YOU cannot. But generally it can. "
Pathetic and saying all about their business ethics. Fits nicely with paying for fake reviews.
It's Quack.exe all over again. Newsflash, people try to cheat in benchmarks, they've been doing it for a long time, and Beyond3D has been a community at the forefront of catching GPU cheaters.
Apple is guilty of cherry picking benchmarks themselves. There's no evidence of boosting (although it's a bit harder to analyze iOS firmware internals), but Apple classically cherry picks benchmarks presented at MacWorlds and WWDCs to make their products look better, by specifically avoiding benchmarks where they do very badly. For example, in Web Browser benchmarks, they run selectively, a single benchmark, either JSBench or Sun Spider, depending on, at that particular time, whether they are doing better, unlike say, AnandTech which runs Kraken, Octane, Dromaeo, et al.
They also have a habit of selectively omitting information in order to make things seem more innovative than they are, like Timer Coalescing in Mavericks, a feature which has been in Windows and Linux for *years* before Mavericks. Late to the party, but trumped up like something hugely innovative on their part.
Apple is guilty of cherry picking benchmarks themselves. There's no evidence of boosting (although it's a bit harder to analyze iOS firmware internals), but Apple classically cherry picks benchmarks presented at MacWorlds and WWDCs to make their products look better, by specifically avoiding benchmarks where they do very badly. For example, in Web Browser benchmarks, they run selectively, a single benchmark, either JSBench or Sun Spider, depending on, at that particular time, whether they are doing better, unlike say, AnandTech which runs Kraken, Octane, Dromaeo, et al.
This wasn't about cherry-picking the benchmarks. It was about lying and cheating at the benchmarks which as you state there is no proof Apple does. But you've still gotta try to find a way to smear them anyway, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjc999
They also have a habit of selectively omitting information in order to make things seem more innovative than they are, like Timer Coalescing in Mavericks, a feature which has been in Windows and Linux for *years* before Mavericks. Late to the party, but trumped up like something hugely innovative on their part.
Yes, Windows has had Timer Coalescing since Windows 7,butit also requires that applications specifically opt-in for it according to this whitepaper on the subject. Mavericks does not so that makes it a more useful. Either way both Windows and Linux have only really had Timer coalescing for a handful of years. You make it sound like they've had it for much longer which simply isn't true. Also, innovation is more than simply doing something first. It is also about taking existing ideas and doing them in a much better way than anyone before you.
What a bunch of hypocrites you all are. I bet you wouldnt dare to talk shit about apple, you were all the first to defend when apple was guilty of price fixing and could possibly be fined 500 mill, or foxconn workers suiciding because of poor working conditions. Pathetic. Wow, defending multi billion dollar companies that don't give a shit about you.
Apple insider, why don't you grow a pair and adopt professional journalism? Do you see android central talking shit about apple? This site is a joke.
How much spittle landed on your keyboard when you typed up that irrelevant, non-sensical, rage-filled post? Why don't you "grow a pair" and make an intelligent comment about the topic at hand? Are you ok with companies misleading their customers so blatantly when it comes to performance? Exposing this is called "talking shit"? Why did this story enrage you so much? Instead of looking at everything in a "us vs them" way, why can't you comment on the actual data? AppleInsider didn't come up with the story, a benchmarking site did. The only one who is a joke here is you, who is too much of an intellectual coward to touch on the subject at hand, avoiding it in order to troll. Instead of being appalled about this underhanded tactic Samsung was exposed using, you seem to be enraged that they were exposed at all. Then you talking about "defending" companies?
It's Quack.exe all over again. Newsflash, people try to cheat in benchmarks, they've been doing it for a long time, and Beyond3D has been a community at the forefront of catching GPU cheaters.
Apple is guilty of cherry picking benchmarks themselves. There's no evidence of boosting (although it's a bit harder to analyze iOS firmware internals), but Apple classically cherry picks benchmarks presented at MacWorlds and WWDCs to make their products look better, by specifically avoiding benchmarks where they do very badly. For example, in Web Browser benchmarks, they run selectively, a single benchmark, either JSBench or Sun Spider, depending on, at that particular time, whether they are doing better, unlike say, AnandTech which runs Kraken, Octane, Dromaeo, et al.
They also have a habit of selectively omitting information in order to make things seem more innovative than they are, like Timer Coalescing in Mavericks, a feature which has been in Windows and Linux for *years* before Mavericks. Late to the party, but trumped up like something hugely innovative on their part.
You are comparing apples with ... samsung. If this is entirely true, then I challenge you to come up with examples of how Apple has done something similar. There is difference between highlighting one's strengths and selling a strength that is not available. Unlike the over-zealously defensively natives here, I don't think what Samsung is doing is illegal. But it is certainly not something that Apple has come close to doing, AFAIK.
As for timer coalescing, what Apple is doing with Mavericks is different than what Microsoft did in Windows and how it is done in Linux. Please don't cherry-pick some headlines from the web and make snap judgement. Apple trumped this as something new in Mac OS, which is just fine. I challenge you to show me where they claimed this had never been done before. Please stop making stuff up. You are as dishonest in attacking Apple as others here are in defending it.
I fully agree with disagreeing. How is this not qualifying for a lawsuit? It's like advertising that some car runs at x mph and then you're told "well, YOU cannot. But generally it can. "
Pathetic and saying all about their business ethics. Fits nicely with paying for fake reviews.
It probably won't generate a lawsuit because Samsung doesn't advertise the results of that particular benchmark. They let their shills do it for them.
I'm going to enjoy watching the Samsung apologists come out of the woodwork to attack Apple or DED on this one, even though Samsung did it to themselves.
They both provide historical facts and technical explanations to back up their opinions/posts. Their posts do not always go against Apple either. How balanced are your posts? How often do you provide technical insight? In fact, how much (little) do you understand the industry, either technically or from an investment perspective?
You're quite right, neither one of them is as annoying as you. And your technical and investment language reeks of coaching.
Unlike the over-zealously defensively natives here, I don't think what Samsung is doing is illegal.
That's funny because the vast majority of posts in this thread didn't make any such claim and only a handful of posts made such an intimation. Most people just pointed out how this was unethical and slimy not claiming it was illegal. You might want to use a less broad brush next time.
You're quite right, neither one of them is as annoying as you. And your technical and investment language reeks of coaching.
You have a point - I'd find myself annoying, too, if I caught myself bragging about things I had no clue about. So, I apologize for exposing you as an ignorant fraud.
Comments
If you say things that are true, you don't have to use all caps and big fonts to get attention.
Also, "QAMF," your inaccurate, handwaving defense of Samsung's efforts to defraud anyone running benchmarks is reproachable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by QAMF
THE CLOCK RATE MAXES AT 480 INSTEAD OF 533. NOT 300 LIKE APPLEINSIDER IS CLAIMING.
is it bad still, yes. But not as bad as they are saying.
Probably because almost all companies do this in one way or another.
Why? Almost every company does this for different benchmarks? This would be like telling you family to avoid Intel because they do tons of optimizations when they run their benchmarks for their claims?
No, it does not. The chip runs at 533Mhz (well, 532 according to anandtech) during some benchmarks. Otherwise it caps at 480Mhz.
There is nothing that talks about the specifications on the feature page, and the fine print would take care of it.
You technically can get the GPU to hit the rate they provided, just not in a useful manner.
No. At least, I don't see what it would be about.
You can still hit that clock rate, you just cannot do it in a useful manner.
-QAMF
I hope you're not waiting for me to suddenly become a Samsung supporter.:rolleyes:
Need such articles to be published all across the internet and let the trolls trip on each other!
About time for big money to rip up the AAPL stock which they have accumulated since last few months
The faster the processor, the better the unavoidable malware can steal and distribute your personal information!
Quote:
Originally Posted by diplication
I'm waiting for Gatorguy and KDarling to weigh in on this issue!
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
Funny, so was I. KD's posts are like reading a good comic … 'Ive been an THE expert in / run the entire universe's IT / bla bla bla for thirty years so I know more than Apple and the Planet Grog combined …" LOL
They both provide historical facts and technical explanations to back up their opinions/posts. Their posts do not always go against Apple either. How balanced are your posts? How often do you provide technical insight? In fact, how much (little) do you understand the industry, either technically or from an investment perspective?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrangerFX
I am really curious as to what happens if the code is hacked to permanently set the clock at the higher frequency? Does the Galaxy S4 overheat and damage the chips? That would be cool (well hot really).
Probably wouldn't overheat unless the internals of the S4 were pretty poorly designed. It would definitely age the GPU cores faster and likely cause battery life to take a noticeable hit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuddyRevell
Cheating on benchmarks? I have nothing against Samsung's phones (they're pretty good products imo), but this is just pathetic, lol.
Unfortunately the Android world is about spec and benchmark whoring. The Fandroids lap that shit up.
I fully agree with disagreeing. How is this not qualifying for a lawsuit? It's like advertising that some car runs at x mph and then you're told "well, YOU cannot. But generally it can. "
Pathetic and saying all about their business ethics. Fits nicely with paying for fake reviews.
It's Quack.exe all over again. Newsflash, people try to cheat in benchmarks, they've been doing it for a long time, and Beyond3D has been a community at the forefront of catching GPU cheaters.
Apple is guilty of cherry picking benchmarks themselves. There's no evidence of boosting (although it's a bit harder to analyze iOS firmware internals), but Apple classically cherry picks benchmarks presented at MacWorlds and WWDCs to make their products look better, by specifically avoiding benchmarks where they do very badly. For example, in Web Browser benchmarks, they run selectively, a single benchmark, either JSBench or Sun Spider, depending on, at that particular time, whether they are doing better, unlike say, AnandTech which runs Kraken, Octane, Dromaeo, et al.
They also have a habit of selectively omitting information in order to make things seem more innovative than they are, like Timer Coalescing in Mavericks, a feature which has been in Windows and Linux for *years* before Mavericks. Late to the party, but trumped up like something hugely innovative on their part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjc999
Apple is guilty of cherry picking benchmarks themselves. There's no evidence of boosting (although it's a bit harder to analyze iOS firmware internals), but Apple classically cherry picks benchmarks presented at MacWorlds and WWDCs to make their products look better, by specifically avoiding benchmarks where they do very badly. For example, in Web Browser benchmarks, they run selectively, a single benchmark, either JSBench or Sun Spider, depending on, at that particular time, whether they are doing better, unlike say, AnandTech which runs Kraken, Octane, Dromaeo, et al.
This wasn't about cherry-picking the benchmarks. It was about lying and cheating at the benchmarks which as you state there is no proof Apple does. But you've still gotta try to find a way to smear them anyway, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjc999
They also have a habit of selectively omitting information in order to make things seem more innovative than they are, like Timer Coalescing in Mavericks, a feature which has been in Windows and Linux for *years* before Mavericks. Late to the party, but trumped up like something hugely innovative on their part.
Yes, Windows has had Timer Coalescing since Windows 7, but it also requires that applications specifically opt-in for it according to this whitepaper on the subject. Mavericks does not so that makes it a more useful. Either way both Windows and Linux have only really had Timer coalescing for a handful of years. You make it sound like they've had it for much longer which simply isn't true. Also, innovation is more than simply doing something first. It is also about taking existing ideas and doing them in a much better way than anyone before you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron Watson
What a bunch of hypocrites you all are. I bet you wouldnt dare to talk shit about apple, you were all the first to defend when apple was guilty of price fixing and could possibly be fined 500 mill, or foxconn workers suiciding because of poor working conditions. Pathetic. Wow, defending multi billion dollar companies that don't give a shit about you.
Apple insider, why don't you grow a pair and adopt professional journalism? Do you see android central talking shit about apple? This site is a joke.
How much spittle landed on your keyboard when you typed up that irrelevant, non-sensical, rage-filled post? Why don't you "grow a pair" and make an intelligent comment about the topic at hand? Are you ok with companies misleading their customers so blatantly when it comes to performance? Exposing this is called "talking shit"? Why did this story enrage you so much? Instead of looking at everything in a "us vs them" way, why can't you comment on the actual data? AppleInsider didn't come up with the story, a benchmarking site did. The only one who is a joke here is you, who is too much of an intellectual coward to touch on the subject at hand, avoiding it in order to troll. Instead of being appalled about this underhanded tactic Samsung was exposed using, you seem to be enraged that they were exposed at all. Then you talking about "defending" companies?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjc999
It's Quack.exe all over again. Newsflash, people try to cheat in benchmarks, they've been doing it for a long time, and Beyond3D has been a community at the forefront of catching GPU cheaters.
Apple is guilty of cherry picking benchmarks themselves. There's no evidence of boosting (although it's a bit harder to analyze iOS firmware internals), but Apple classically cherry picks benchmarks presented at MacWorlds and WWDCs to make their products look better, by specifically avoiding benchmarks where they do very badly. For example, in Web Browser benchmarks, they run selectively, a single benchmark, either JSBench or Sun Spider, depending on, at that particular time, whether they are doing better, unlike say, AnandTech which runs Kraken, Octane, Dromaeo, et al.
They also have a habit of selectively omitting information in order to make things seem more innovative than they are, like Timer Coalescing in Mavericks, a feature which has been in Windows and Linux for *years* before Mavericks. Late to the party, but trumped up like something hugely innovative on their part.
You are comparing apples with ... samsung. If this is entirely true, then I challenge you to come up with examples of how Apple has done something similar. There is difference between highlighting one's strengths and selling a strength that is not available. Unlike the over-zealously defensively natives here, I don't think what Samsung is doing is illegal. But it is certainly not something that Apple has come close to doing, AFAIK.
As for timer coalescing, what Apple is doing with Mavericks is different than what Microsoft did in Windows and how it is done in Linux. Please don't cherry-pick some headlines from the web and make snap judgement. Apple trumped this as something new in Mac OS, which is just fine. I challenge you to show me where they claimed this had never been done before. Please stop making stuff up. You are as dishonest in attacking Apple as others here are in defending it.
It probably won't generate a lawsuit because Samsung doesn't advertise the results of that particular benchmark. They let their shills do it for them.
You're quite right, neither one of them is as annoying as you. And your technical and investment language reeks of coaching.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
Unlike the over-zealously defensively natives here, I don't think what Samsung is doing is illegal.
That's funny because the vast majority of posts in this thread didn't make any such claim and only a handful of posts made such an intimation. Most people just pointed out how this was unethical and slimy not claiming it was illegal. You might want to use a less broad brush next time.
I advise Apple to family & friends but a lot have moved to Android reluctantly to get bigger screens
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
You're quite right, neither one of them is as annoying as you. And your technical and investment language reeks of coaching.
You have a point - I'd find myself annoying, too, if I caught myself bragging about things I had no clue about. So, I apologize for exposing you as an ignorant fraud.
Friends?