madan
About
- Banned
- Username
- madan
- Joined
- Visits
- 29
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 309
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 103
Reactions
-
The Apple versus Microsoft hardware double-standard rears up again with the latest Surface...
This thread is an excellent illustration of how little the majority of Windows users know... about anything computer-related.
I will say that this article read my mind. When I read Ars Technicas breathless junk gobble on the Studio Pro (a regular there sent me a link fsfr), I pretty much had the same conclusions as this piece’s author.
The screens are comparable. Brightness is comparable. The Studio 2 has 1” more real estate and yeah it has a touch screen but if you’ve used a Studio 1 for any period of time, you’d know that natural drawing is tough on it. The hinge won’t support more than 20-25 lb. of weight. For that kind of detail work, you’re better off getting a proper Wacom Intuit’s Pro or hell even a Graphire. It’s also important to note that the iMac 27” has significantly denser screen, with much better PPI, especially when you take into account the different aspect ratio and 1” smaller diagonal size.
A laptop-based 7820HQ isn’t faster than a 7700 under any circumstances and is not only clocked 50% slower but also has more limited TDP. Hit Usebench and you’ll see that the 7700 is on avg 25-30% faster on most heavy tasks. Comparing the 7820HQ to an iMac Pro’s upgradable Core i9 isn’t even a good joke.
The top i’Mac 27” has a Radeon RX 580 which matches the 1060 in pretty much everything. Don’t take my word for it, just hit Tom’s hardware GPU hierarchy, Usebench or Vs. GPU: they all conclusively say the same thing. The Vega56 in an iMac Pro is faster than the Studio 2’s 1070 option. A Vega56 trades with a 1070 Ti. And an iMac Pro tops out at a Vega64 which trades with a 1080 - an option upgrade the Studio 2 lacks.
Comparing a rsn vaporware Studio 2 to an almost 1.5 yr old iMac is also funny. Let’s see how those comparisons look when Apple drops an iMac 27” refresh in June with 8-series Intels and AMD’s 680 GPU which they themselves mentioned would trade with a 1080 at Capcazic. That machine will retail for $1000 less than a Studio 2 and will have an essential feature the Studio 2 will never have for any serious creative professional : Thunderbolt 3.
-
Apple Watch's GymKit expands to UK, Apple says retrofits possible on some machines
Too cool.
-
Honor's new View 10 phone brings iPhone X-style Animoji to Android
The iPhone X and 8 don't offload so much to the neural processor because the A11 can handle the calculations.VRing said:
These specs have real world use. For example, Huawei leverages the NPU to allow for fast/accurate offline language translation and character recognition between 12 different languages. The language packs are also half the size of a traditional language pack.StrangeDays said:
Nah it’s just specs. Specs is specs. Specs aren’t the only thing that matter, especially when the total experience is worse off. The A11 specs are impressive because it’s best in class and the iOS experience is better than the knockoffs. The “neural” spec you’ve cited is rather meaningless because the knockoff experience is inferior to iOS.VRing said:
It's not useless. Through quantization you can use an 8-bit integer in a neural network prediction while maintaining useful accuracy. On that basis, it's very straight forward to compare.foggyhill said:VRing said:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11804/huawei-shows-unannounced-kirin-970-at-ifa-2017-dedicated-neural-processing-unitbaederboy said:
Can you provide me with a reference that the Kirin 970 neural processing unit is considerably more powerful than Apples Neural Engine?VRing said:
Huawei already announced their system a week or so back, but it's not being used in the V10 (http://winfuture.de/news,100794.html).AppleInsider said:
Huawei and fellow Chinese phonemakers Oppo and Xiaomi are expected to adopt 3D sensors on upcoming 2018 models, following in the footsteps of the iPhone X's TrueDepth camera.
It looks rather similar to Apple's system, no surprise there. It can capture 300,000 points in under 10 seconds (iPhone X does 30,000 points, but in a shorter amount of time). Huawei also claims their system will unlock in 0.4 seconds.
If it works as well as they claim, and that's an "if", then it would seem they're able to catch up to the hardware in a pretty short amount of time. Huawei also has a Neural Processing Unit as part of their Kirin 970 that's considerably more powerful than Apple's Neural Engine in the A11 Bionic, so all that remains is the software.
Kirin 970's NPU offers 1.92 trillion operations per second, Apple's Neural Engine offers 600 billion operations per second. For further comparison, both are well behind Google's PVC in the Pixel 2 / Pixel 2 XL which offers 3 trillion operations per second.Completely useless self defined spec with no standardization, but go on buddy spit it out if it makes you feel better.And as for insults, I insult just trolls who think parking here at Appleinsider will "teach us" and yeah you're not the first here to do that, Googlehead's been there spitting out useless stats and distorsions longer than you.
Remember, honey, not vinegar.
However, it's hard to take you seriously when you're making ridiculous blanket statements or name calling the competition.
The difference in philosophy between Huawei and Apple is that Apple utilizes sub-processors primarily for security purposes and for power-mitigation reasoning. Android licensees for the most part use it because up until now the Kirins, Snapdragons and their ilk have had horrible IPC performance vis a vis Hurricane-variant chips and they need to keep those spare cycles working on pushing data.
-
Honor's new View 10 phone brings iPhone X-style Animoji to Android
avon b7 said:
Using both iOS and Android daily, I can tell you I would not voluntarily go back to iOS as a main use phone OS.StrangeDays said:
Nah it’s just specs. Specs is specs. Specs aren’t the only thing that matter, especially when the total experience is worse off. The A11 specs are impressive because it’s best in class and the iOS experience is better than the knockoffs. The “neural” spec you’ve cited is rather meaningless because the knockoff experience is inferior to iOS.VRing said:
It's not useless. Through quantization you can use an 8-bit integer in a neural network prediction while maintaining useful accuracy. On that basis, it's very straight forward to compare.foggyhill said:VRing said:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11804/huawei-shows-unannounced-kirin-970-at-ifa-2017-dedicated-neural-processing-unitbaederboy said:
Can you provide me with a reference that the Kirin 970 neural processing unit is considerably more powerful than Apples Neural Engine?VRing said:
Huawei already announced their system a week or so back, but it's not being used in the V10 (http://winfuture.de/news,100794.html).AppleInsider said:
Huawei and fellow Chinese phonemakers Oppo and Xiaomi are expected to adopt 3D sensors on upcoming 2018 models, following in the footsteps of the iPhone X's TrueDepth camera.
It looks rather similar to Apple's system, no surprise there. It can capture 300,000 points in under 10 seconds (iPhone X does 30,000 points, but in a shorter amount of time). Huawei also claims their system will unlock in 0.4 seconds.
If it works as well as they claim, and that's an "if", then it would seem they're able to catch up to the hardware in a pretty short amount of time. Huawei also has a Neural Processing Unit as part of their Kirin 970 that's considerably more powerful than Apple's Neural Engine in the A11 Bionic, so all that remains is the software.
Kirin 970's NPU offers 1.92 trillion operations per second, Apple's Neural Engine offers 600 billion operations per second. For further comparison, both are well behind Google's PVC in the Pixel 2 / Pixel 2 XL which offers 3 trillion operations per second.Completely useless self defined spec with no standardization, but go on buddy spit it out if it makes you feel better.And as for insults, I insult just trolls who think parking here at Appleinsider will "teach us" and yeah you're not the first here to do that, Googlehead's been there spitting out useless stats and distorsions longer than you.
Remember, honey, not vinegar.
For various reasons I'm stuck on iOS 8 on the iPad Mini 2 and have iOS 11 on the Air 2 but don't have an Android tablet to compare to, so that comparison isn't an option for me.
I can't see where the iOS experience is inferior for phone use. Can you give some examples?
As for specs, what do you say about specs that simply don't exist on iPhones?
When you say 'best in class' you certainly weren't talking about the modem on the SoC, or dual simultaneous VoLTE or fast charging or the AI that enhances call quality, voice recognition or motion blur on the camera etc.
As for the NPU, there are no benchmark tools to compare them on real world tasks but I have seen some numbers (from HiSilicon no less) of the Kirin 970 NPU running head to head against the A11 NPU. The Kirin 970 was ahead of the A11 (quite far ahead in some results). I've not mentioned those numbers before because I think they are largely worthless. AI for the NPU largely depends on the training pumped into it. We are seeing the first infant steps in this regard and Huawei are strong out of the gate here. They are supporting both FaceBook and Google AI on the NPU through the Android OS APIs but have added their own API to Android and opened the whole platform up to developers. We will see how things go but the local translation capability, camera AI and under the hood use of AI are all looking good. Huawei has promised to release updates for AI use through the NPU on existing phones.
Since its release in September, the Kirin 970 has already been adopted for two platforms (Mate 10 and Honor 10) with many more to follow. It won't take long to filter down the price range.
The animated emojis are obviously a copy of the iOS 11 options but Apple's original emojis were hardly 'original' back in the day. It would be ridiculous to think the idea would remain unique to iOS11. It really isn't a big deal. Just like it wasn't for Apple to finally embed a QR reader in the camera app.
It was also ridiculous for some to claim Apple was years ahead of the pack with regards to Face ID. Competitors have been using similar component technologies for a long while now but for slightly different purposes. The main difference isn't so much the hardware (Apple bought some companies and used their technology as a base for FaceID but it didn't buy them all) but the timing.
Competitors have no real need for FaceID functionality in the same timeframe as Apple but the fact that Honor was able to provide details on its own system (which on paper would seem to offer ten times the hardware precision of Apple's) just weeks after Apple announced theirs, shows that this is certainly nothing new for them. They have been working with this idea for a long while. They are just working at a different pace because there is no pressing need (beyond marketing at least) to introduce the technology today. Apple was in a completely different situation on timing. The fingerprint scanner is still present too. The Honor Magic used Face detection for screen unlocking using AI, a full year ago. This time round, it seems that they will use the idea to fully unlock (possibly using technology from Sensory) the Honor View 10 (but activating it via an OTA update).
What makes FaceID a nice solution is the software behind it and how the NPU can help in the 'learning' process. Hardware wise, Huawei has had everything it needs for full FaceID for a long time. The software angle for successful implementation is the only doubt but as long as their is another biometric option available on the phone, it just isn't as important as it is on the iPhone X for example.
As far as being a 'knock-off' is concerned, this has been continuously debunked and you have yet to back up your incessant claims with anything solid.
There have even been reports of Apple paying Huawei millions in exchange for use of its IP. If true, it would be somewhat ironic seeing as some people say that Huawei (and most Chinese tech companies) simply steal what they need (ignoring the fact that Huawei alone often invests more than Apple in R&D). IIRC, those reports put Huawei as licencing around 80 Apple patents and Apple licencing around 800 Huawei patents. It would be interesting to know how much truth there is in those numbers.
Android is inferior to iOS in a variety of ways. Apart from less secure (fact), and having fewer phones that update for lesser periods of time (fact), you also struggle as a developer on Android. Dalvec is a horrible language and full-on Java isn't much better. As a former Java developer, I'd never go back to that slow, plodding mess ever again. Objective C and Swift are infinitely faster, more efficient, more elegant programming platforms.
Huawei is a photocopier. That isn't in question. What is in question is if their hardware and design is sufficiently well-executed to validate that philosophy. You may think so. Most people do not.
