tmay

GeorgeBMac said:

aderutter said:

GeorgeBMac said:

So, what does 120Hz refresh do for you?   Is it only for gaming?

Likewise:

What is "10 bit color depth" and what does that do for you?   (actually, sounds suspiciously like "a two-bit frill").

Should I be excited about either of these?  Do they justify the 2/3's markup over the base iPhone 12?   (Yeh, I know there are other sifferences, but they don't interest me)

Personally I’m more excited by 10bit color than the 120Hz refresh.
I think at times color depth is even more important than resolution.
Going from 8 bit to 10 bit is not a small jump. 

“This means a 10-bit image can display up to 1.07 billion colors, while an 8-bit photo can only display 16.7 million.”

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/video/tips-and-solutions/8-bit-10-bit-what-does-it-all-mean-for-your-videos

Ahhh!
But I'm a guy -- and we only see Blue, Green and Red.   Why would I need billions?   I'm still trying to figure out "Chartreuse" and "Fuscia" -- I figure that they're just other names for green & red.

AppleSince1976 said:

tmay said:

My point is that Qualcomm is going to remain behind Apple in SOC performance, both in mobile and in notebook/desktop. The fact that Qualcomm has an architectural license yet has waited for Cortex X is telling, all the while Apple is innovating in the SOC space with the ARM ISA license. Apple's advantage is that it can provide synergy between its OS, development system and SOC designs, and other hardware.

Bzzt! Wrong!

Apple has held an ARM Architectural License since at least 2008. One of about 15 such licenses in the world.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arm_Holdings

avon b7 said:

lkrupp said:

Do we have ANY information about sales of the Galaxy Fold? Or any foldable for that matter? These were dropped on the market, received various positive and negative reviews, and have now disappeared from the limelight into obscurity. They look to me to be failed attempts at innovation and I don't understand why Apple would be interested in making something like this. Sure, play around in the lab, but bring one to market? Why?

Up until COVID-19 struck, Huawei was selling 100,000 a month mainly in China, as theirs was released there first. 

The decision by Johnson, who wanted Huawei’s market share in the nation’s telecommunications infrastructure capped at 35 percent, brings the UK back into alignment with the position Australia and the United States have taken on Huawei’s involvement in national communications networks, according to both The Guardian and The Telegraph.

The debate over Huawei’s role in international networking stems from the company’s close ties to the Chinese government and the attendant fears that relying on Huawei telecom equipment could expose the allied nations to potential cybersecurity threats and weaken national security."

2020 doesn't look that great for Huawei...

canukstorm said:

netrox said:

We need the courage to abandon x86 for good. The x86 is still plagued with backward compatibility legacy and technical issues while ARM has more possibilities. The BIG.little is a fine example - x86 cannot have cores that are of different speeds while ARM can. We need to change the technology where we can enable cores to support low speed for low priority tasks and high speed cores for demanding apps. It's called heterogeneous computing and that's how our computing should be. 

There is simply no economic benefit from having more cores of the same speed. Most applications don't need all cores at full speed. The OS and apps would benefit the most if each app is given low speed cores and apps given high speed cores when performance is demanded. 

Why would you want cores that have to be all of the same speed when you can easily have each low speed core to be dedicated for processing a certain task at a much lower clock speed? For example, if you build a core that is dedicated to processing a frame of a video and you decide that you only need say 500 Mhz per frame, it would be so much more economical to have 30 500Mhz cores along with a couple of 4GHz cores for tasks that require more complex calculations than to force all cores to have the same speed which actually degrade performance overall and not cost effective at all. 

False.  Intel just released their next generation Lakefield processor that is based on a BIG.little design

https://www.anandtech.com/show/15841/intel-discloses-lakefield-cpus-specifications-64-execution-units-up-to-30-ghz-7-w

SpamSandwich said:

lkrupp said:

apple ][ said:

I'm waiting on 2 trill!

And when it hits that, we'll just have to move on to the next target!

Those of us who have been around for most of Apple's forty plus years of existence have endured all the predictions of doom for the company. First it was the Windows fanboys, then the Amiga sycophants, now the Android bozos and the Linux dweebs. Apple should not exist in these people's minds and it messes with their psyches. So excuse some us for our exuberance at the progress made in the last 13 years. 

I just want to be around when Apple unveils their “Transport” and competes with Tesla in the growing self-driving electric vehicle market. I just read Tesla is rapidly approaching Toyota’s market cap(!)