Published Geekbench results are regularly done on hacked Android versions that have been modified specifically to run benchmarks - at the expense of actually doing anything useful.
Just another example of why Android benchmarks shouldn't be trusted.
Those are not stock devices as sold by OEMs and tested by reputable sites like AnandTech. if you really want to disparage the performance benchmarks of an OS simply because it's posted on Geekbench then you need to discount OS X as it's commonly measured by the Hackintosh community to see how well they perform on DiY HW under ideal conditions.
Those are not stock devices as sold by OEMs and tested by reputable sites like AnandTech. if you really want to disparage the performance benchmarks of an OS simply because it's posted on Geekbench then you need to discount OS X as it's commonly measured by the Hackintosh community to see how well they perform on DiY HW under ideal conditions.
Not true. OS X run on a Hackintosh is not a Mac. When a benchmark is reported for Macs, it is running a genuine OS on a genuine computer. If someone looks for the iPhone 5 on Geekbench, they get the actual results that they would see if they buy one at AT&T or the Apple Store.
The Android benchmarks are generally reported only by the phone hardware type. They don't explain that it's not a commercial system - and is bastardized and hacked to eliminate functionality so it runs the benchmark faster. So someone who looks on the Geekbench for a Note 3 is NOT getting the performance they'll get out of the box.
Whatever.
How many people actually BUY a phone based on benchmarks?
One or three?
I have a neighbor who keeps getting the latest galaxy phone because she thinks a faster processor will make her phone calls faster (yes she is crazy (really))
Ummm, I can find 5 posts in this thread alone that show you're wrong....and God forbid you venture over into that Obama topic. It felt like a Nazi meeting.
I dunno… since it’s more than one company, they can slip in “Android is lying to customers” somewhere.
Looks like "Jmpmia" is mostly right (so far). Two Google searches (wait, that's Google searches, but whatever) and the most mainstream organ I found covering the story was Yahoo News...
and every single web site review of these phonied up Android smartphones that ran benchmark tests on them and based their evaluation of their performance in any way on these falsified results has to rewritten! right? at least for the models still on the market today, right?
so will CNET and Engadget and Ars and Verge and all the rest go back and re-write their recent reviews based on facts instead of fraud? huh?
yeah, sure, right.
or just sweep it under the "no big deal" rug?
of course it were Apple, you know they would all be foaming at the mouth today about the Scandal of the Century ...
talk about sheep - these are the real sheep ... the Droid Sheep.
and every single web site review of these phonied up Android smartphones that ran benchmark tests on them and based their evaluation of their performance in any way on these falsified results has to rewritten! right? at least for the models still on the market today, right?
so will CNET and Engadget and Ars and Verge and all the rest go back and re-write their recent reviews based on facts instead of fraud? huh?
yeah, sure, right.
or just sweep it under the "no big deal" rug?
of course it were Apple, you know they would all be foaming at the mouth today about the Scandal of the Century ...
talk about sheep - these are the real sheep ... the Droid Sheep.
Don't those sites either not run benchmarks or run their own benchmarks?
I thought this article was about official benchmarks. Also what does this have to do with the userbase? Last I checked Joe Androiduser isn't Samsung or HTC or LG or whomever else.
Don't those sites either not run benchmarks or run their own benchmarks?
I thought this article was about official benchmarks. Also what does this have to do with the userbase? Last I checked Joe Androiduser isn't Samsung or HTC or LG or whomever else.
Find another reason to feel better than someone.
welcome, Dude Android Sheep!
of course they run their own benchmarks. which are deceived by the trick OS software, silly. that's the whole point! you clearly have not grasped what the story is.
Notice the similarity? American companies such as Apple and Google have a higher ethical standard and Asian companies lie and cheat regularly. Different cultures.
Yea, because it's not like Apple doesn't have any sweatshops in China or anything. Moreover, apparently you haven't learned about Google's antitrust case in the EU?
Not true. OS X run on a Hackintosh is not a Mac. When a benchmark is reported for Macs, it is running a genuine OS on a genuine computer. If someone looks for the iPhone 5 on Geekbench, they get the actual results that they would see if they buy one at AT&T or the Apple Store.
It's not genuine. It's been hacked — hence the name Hackintosh — so it can run on some other HW. This is why you see HW configurations that are very different from what Apple offers, which includes overclocked CPUs and high-end GPUs.
At least Android can be freely downloaded and altered legally which you not only fail to account for but go to the ridiculous end to say that a modified version of Android, which is the nature of Android, is somehow cheating.
It's clear that Samsung, LG, Asus and HTC have cheating by artificially throttling the CPU when different benchmarks so why do you feel the need to make shit up? All it does is make us reasonable Apple users look douchie when you make such foolish claims.
The idea of having Android free in the first place is not for Google to get revenue from mobile ads from those devices. It's even worst. If you think NSA snooping around is bad, then Google have it the worst. They gather unique user habits based on their use of the said device and whatever it is they share using their Android device to the social network, and with super advance algorithm that Google own, pin points what you might need and sell those data in form of "custom" advertising media effectively selling advertisers product to consumers.
For short, despite of their so called privacy policy, Google revenue is digital advertising, and Android is Google's mean of justifying their "advertising media" products to advertisers. Google is data-mining users habits. Google knows when a user farts, breath, eats, have a date, meeting up with friends, who are they, where they meet and Google even know whether the user recently broke up with his girlfriend and wanted to commit suicide (and do nothing about it).
For short, despite of their so called privacy policy, Google revenue is digital advertising, and Android is Google's mean of justifying their "advertising media" products to advertisers. Google is data-mining users habits. Google knows when a user farts, breath, eats, have a date, meeting up with friends, who are they, where they meet and Google even know whether the user recently broke up with his girlfriend and wanted to commit suicide (and do nothing about it).
Remember, Google always does what is best for their customers. And you are NOT their customers. You are their product. They sell you to companies. Enjoy that...
Stealing customer data and selling it to advertisers without their consent is bad enough. Lying about performance?!?!? I hate myself now for even trying to pehaps consider giving a though on may be purchasing an Android phone back in 2009.
This just invalidated tens of millions of idiotic arguments by millions and millions of idiot fandroids over the last 4 or 5 years. hahahaha I love it.
So much boasting... for what??? so that eventually the numbers align with the user experience??? hahahaha
This just invalidated tens of millions of idiotic arguments by millions and millions of idiot fandroids over the last 4 or 5 years. hahahaha I love it.
So much boasting... for what??? so that eventually the numbers align with the user experience??? hahahaha
The worse part is that OEMs that have used Android-based devices have had to use higher clock rates and more cores which then use more power and result in worse battery life for a given capacity just to keep up with the considerably more efficient iOS and smoother UI. You'd think they be able to get something right out of all this. well, perhaps they did get something right, albeit accidentally. It was Android OEMs that moved to larger displays when they wanted to usurp Apple and other vendors by adding LTE but had to resort to large, power hungry chips. Sure, those displays required more power but the greater footprint of the display allowed them to hide it better. It's funny now to think one of the biggest anti-Apple complaints about the original iPhone was that it was too big.
of course they run their own benchmarks. which are deceived by the trick OS software, silly. that's the whole point! you clearly have not grasped what the story is.
My bad, wasn't aware I had to be blindly raging at every Apple competitor in order to even post on this board.
Hell, my only mentions of Apple will be positive as I can't see any reason to legitimately dislike Apple. So good luck trying to paint me as anti-Apple.
Stealing customer data and selling it to advertisers without their consent is bad enough. Lying about performance?!?!? I hate myself now for even trying to pehaps consider giving a though on may be purchasing an Android phone back in 2009.
Nothing you said is even true. Who is selling any data and giving it to any customers?
Also this is OEMs lying. Not Google's own branded devices.
Comments
So again I ask, huh?
Those are not stock devices as sold by OEMs and tested by reputable sites like AnandTech. if you really want to disparage the performance benchmarks of an OS simply because it's posted on Geekbench then you need to discount OS X as it's commonly measured by the Hackintosh community to see how well they perform on DiY HW under ideal conditions.
I don’t understand. They’re allowed to lie in advertising–in TESTING, even–and they aren’t punished for it.
Not true. OS X run on a Hackintosh is not a Mac. When a benchmark is reported for Macs, it is running a genuine OS on a genuine computer. If someone looks for the iPhone 5 on Geekbench, they get the actual results that they would see if they buy one at AT&T or the Apple Store.
The Android benchmarks are generally reported only by the phone hardware type. They don't explain that it's not a commercial system - and is bastardized and hacked to eliminate functionality so it runs the benchmark faster. So someone who looks on the Geekbench for a Note 3 is NOT getting the performance they'll get out of the box.
Nope, that's left to the Fandroids.
Ummm, I can find 5 posts in this thread alone that show you're wrong....and God forbid you venture over into that Obama topic. It felt like a Nazi meeting.
i bet you wont wsj taking about this or cnbc
Quote:
I dunno… since it’s more than one company, they can slip in “Android is lying to customers” somewhere.
Looks like "Jmpmia" is mostly right (so far). Two Google searches (wait, that's Google searches, but whatever) and the most mainstream organ I found covering the story was Yahoo News...
http://news.yahoo.com/samsung-isn-t-only-smartphone-maker-boosting-benchmark-191555987.html
OMG, this is Benchgate!
and every single web site review of these phonied up Android smartphones that ran benchmark tests on them and based their evaluation of their performance in any way on these falsified results has to rewritten! right? at least for the models still on the market today, right?
so will CNET and Engadget and Ars and Verge and all the rest go back and re-write their recent reviews based on facts instead of fraud? huh?
yeah, sure, right.
or just sweep it under the "no big deal" rug?
of course it were Apple, you know they would all be foaming at the mouth today about the Scandal of the Century ...
talk about sheep - these are the real sheep ... the Droid Sheep.
These are very sad and desperate bastards indeed!
Don't those sites either not run benchmarks or run their own benchmarks?
I thought this article was about official benchmarks. Also what does this have to do with the userbase? Last I checked Joe Androiduser isn't Samsung or HTC or LG or whomever else.
Find another reason to feel better than someone.
Don't those sites either not run benchmarks or run their own benchmarks?
I thought this article was about official benchmarks. Also what does this have to do with the userbase? Last I checked Joe Androiduser isn't Samsung or HTC or LG or whomever else.
Find another reason to feel better than someone.
welcome, Dude Android Sheep!
of course they run their own benchmarks. which are deceived by the trick OS software, silly. that's the whole point! you clearly have not grasped what the story is.
Notice the similarity? American companies such as Apple and Google have a higher ethical standard and Asian companies lie and cheat regularly. Different cultures.
Yea, because it's not like Apple doesn't have any sweatshops in China or anything. Moreover, apparently you haven't learned about Google's antitrust case in the EU?
It's not genuine. It's been hacked — hence the name Hackintosh — so it can run on some other HW. This is why you see HW configurations that are very different from what Apple offers, which includes overclocked CPUs and high-end GPUs.
At least Android can be freely downloaded and altered legally which you not only fail to account for but go to the ridiculous end to say that a modified version of Android, which is the nature of Android, is somehow cheating.
It's clear that Samsung, LG, Asus and HTC have cheating by artificially throttling the CPU when different benchmarks so why do you feel the need to make shit up? All it does is make us reasonable Apple users look douchie when you make such foolish claims.
For short, despite of their so called privacy policy, Google revenue is digital advertising, and Android is Google's mean of justifying their "advertising media" products to advertisers. Google is data-mining users habits. Google knows when a user farts, breath, eats, have a date, meeting up with friends, who are they, where they meet and Google even know whether the user recently broke up with his girlfriend and wanted to commit suicide (and do nothing about it).
For short, despite of their so called privacy policy, Google revenue is digital advertising, and Android is Google's mean of justifying their "advertising media" products to advertisers. Google is data-mining users habits. Google knows when a user farts, breath, eats, have a date, meeting up with friends, who are they, where they meet and Google even know whether the user recently broke up with his girlfriend and wanted to commit suicide (and do nothing about it).
Remember, Google always does what is best for their customers. And you are NOT their customers. You are their product. They sell you to companies. Enjoy that...
So much boasting... for what??? so that eventually the numbers align with the user experience??? hahahaha
The worse part is that OEMs that have used Android-based devices have had to use higher clock rates and more cores which then use more power and result in worse battery life for a given capacity just to keep up with the considerably more efficient iOS and smoother UI. You'd think they be able to get something right out of all this. well, perhaps they did get something right, albeit accidentally. It was Android OEMs that moved to larger displays when they wanted to usurp Apple and other vendors by adding LTE but had to resort to large, power hungry chips. Sure, those displays required more power but the greater footprint of the display allowed them to hide it better. It's funny now to think one of the biggest anti-Apple complaints about the original iPhone was that it was too big.
My bad, wasn't aware I had to be blindly raging at every Apple competitor in order to even post on this board.
Hell, my only mentions of Apple will be positive as I can't see any reason to legitimately dislike Apple. So good luck trying to paint me as anti-Apple.
Nothing you said is even true. Who is selling any data and giving it to any customers?
Also this is OEMs lying. Not Google's own branded devices.