Related
I had a chance to play with my old iPhone one last time before I sold it, and I really must admit, the homescreen is MUCH more responsive. This kind of polish makes the phone feel that much better, seeing as the homescreen is our desktop so to speak.
I don't know if this has been talked about yet, (as I didn't know what to search...) but if it can be done, I think some devs should get on this. it would make the whole interface feel brand new if it wasn't so sluggish when swiping your finger across the screen to get to the second page.
Sorry, just had to put this out there.
theres really not much that can be done on that end. the roms we have for the G1, especially CM are pretty much optimized to the gills. unfortunately, what it boils down to is a hardware problem. the G1, as much of a marvelous piece of machinery as it is, is terribly underpowered for all the things we want it to do. but if you take a look at the droid or any of the newer devices coming out (like the X10 or the nexus one), you're going to see lightning fast speeds compared to what we have now on the G1.
kusotare said:
but if you take a look at the droid or any of the newer devices coming out (like the X10 or the nexus one), you're going to see lightning fast speeds compared to what we have now on the G1.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quite the contrary actually. One of my regulars at my restaurant has a Droid, and I've played around with it a good bit. It actually seems quite laggy to me compared to my G1.
And hardware-wise, isn't the G1 better than the iPhone 2G? The iPhone 2G and 3G do indeed have a 667MHz processor, but it is clocked at a maximum of 412MHz.
phuKKah said:
Quite the contrary actually. One of my regulars at my restaurant has a Droid, and I've played around with it a good bit. It actually seems quite laggy to me compared to my G1.
And hardware-wise, isn't the G1 better than the iPhone 2G? The iPhone 2G and 3G do indeed have a 667MHz processor, but it is clocked at a maximum of 412MHz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The g1 is clocked at 384 stock, and we also have to remember that the G1 multitasks. That takes away all of the resources that it has pretty quickly, but it isn't something that iPhone's have to worry about- hence their seemingly faster appearance.
If you've found this website, you're probably already using non-stock ROMs, or are attempting to figure out how to do so, and most of these ROMs have the max clock speed topped out.
But it just seems so nice to me haha. Maybe when snapdragon comes around...
phuKKah said:
If you've found this website, you're probably already using non-stock ROMs, or are attempting to figure out how to do so, and most of these ROMs have the max clock speed topped out.
But it just seems so nice to me haha. Maybe when snapdragon comes around...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You'd be surprised how many people don't have root...or are trying to get it then fail horribly and blame the devs
I have a bought a Motorola Milestone 6 months back..currently I am running Foryo (GOT version) with overclock (1 Ghz).
After seeing galaxy I am thinking to change to Galaxy ( or iPhone 4, if it becomes available and affordable at my place, which is unlikely ) but I am confused whether it is a wise decision to upgrade to Galaxy.
Please suggest.
I switched from a non-overclocked Milestone with 2.1 to HTC Desire HD, and the performance increase is insane. Widgets, home screen, apps, games - everything runs so much faster.
I can't compare this with 1GHz OCed Milestone as i didn't overclock my phone, but compared to stock, it is a very, very big jump in performance.
mav3rick96 said:
I have a bought a Motorola Milestone 6 months back..currently I am running Foryo (GOT version) with overclock (1 Ghz).
After seeing galaxy I am thinking to change to Galaxy ( or iPhone 4, if it becomes available and affordable at my place, which is unlikely ) but I am confused whether it is a wise decision to upgrade to Galaxy.
Please suggest.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Run a benchmark test on your 1ghz milestone and run one on a Galaxy S or search the internet for benchmark test results for that phone and compare them
I personally run a milestone on a 800mhz cpu and it runs pretty smooth...
If you do a lot of reading on your Milestone, avoid the Galaxy S, which uses a terrible pentile matrix sub-pixel system. Essentially, you get 33% fewer sub-pixels than your average 800x480 RGB LCD. Small text looks awful, and everything is just "strange" looking after awhile, once the novelty of the oversaturated colors and really nice blacks wears off.
Should you demand more pure speed, your logical upgrade is the Milestone 2, or if you don't mind the lack of true multi-touch, the S-LCD Desire is worth looking at. Be prepared for a big downgrade in touchscreen accuracy though.
The voodoo color fix has vastly improved text sharpness. I agree though, it is pretty bad out of the box.
Sent by a little green robot
http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/24/archos-70-and-101-internet-tablet-review/
Just $49 more for cameras, kickstands, Android 2.2, less headache, and more.
What do you think? Which one is better?
Anyone used both? Or considering returning the NC for an Archos?
I was just talking about this subject with some friends.
Nook has a much better screen. A 1024x600 res IPS with great angles and crispness. The Archos 70 has a crappy 800x480 TN screen with really bad viewing angles. Screen quality in a tablet is probably most important to me. I want to be able to hold this thing any any direction at any angle and still see it, can't do that with the Archos.
The Nook feels solid... maybe a little too solid, as it is certainly heavier than the Archos 70. The Archos is reportedly very flimsy feeling. This could go either way depending on how much you value solid feeling versus weight.
The Nook has 512MB of RAM and it looks like 1GB or more of app storage space (unfortunately I didn't look at it before installing a few things). The Archos 70 has 256MB of RAM and only a measly 256MB of app storage space. Maybe the modders can fix that if they haven't yet, not sure. But that is a big downer for the Archos to me, I've already installed about 400MB of apps on my Nook in that app space.
Archos seems to have performance on it's side. It's CPU runs at the full 1GHz and it's running Android 2.2 already. My Nook feels sluggish with web browsing (using Dolphin HD), but I'm hoping the Nook update to 2.2 in January can help pep it up some. And maybe someday we'll get a 1GHz kernel.
Archos has a few extra hardware features like Bluetooth, HDMI out, better speakers, and cameras (though probably not a big loss if they are as bad as Engadget says they are).
For me the WAY better screen more than makes up for the slightly slower performance and other features the Nook doesn't have.
Connectivity. Vs. Screen quality... Pick your poison.
Ravynmagi said:
The Archos 70 has 256MB of RAM and only a measly 256MB of app storage space. Maybe the modders can fix that if they haven't yet, not sure.
...
And maybe someday we'll get a 1GHz kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just to clarify, RAM, flash storage space, and CPU are not things that can be fixed/improved with software. These are determined by the physical chips that are soldered on to the board.
There are apps to boost CPU speed a bit, but you will start to run into stability issues if you bump it up too much above what the chip was binned at. A nice 2.2 build might improve things a bit on the NC, but the archos will likely always have an edge. Not just because of its higher clock speed, but also because it has fewer pixels to render.
candre23 said:
Just to clarify, RAM, flash storage space, and CPU are not things that can be fixed/improved with software. These are determined by the physical chips that are soldered on to the board.
There are apps to boost CPU speed a bit, but you will start to run into stability issues if you bump it up too much above what the chip was binned at. A nice 2.2 build might improve things a bit on the NC, but the archos will likely always have an edge. Not just because of its higher clock speed, but also because it has fewer pixels to render.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't you mean the nk will have the slightest edge once it gets 2.2?
that all depends on what soc graphics chip the archos 70 has because the ti omap proc at 800 can go blow for blow with alot of 1ghz chips
I think most important think is amount of RAM - 256MB is just to little to get going with highend apps like Flash or games.
The Archos 70 8GB model "feels" flimsy because there is a small gap on the inside center, so this flexes. This gap I believe is from the lack of a harddrive which is in the 250GB model. It only feels flimsy when you push on this gap, however it doesn't twist or anything (strong structure), where the 250 with the drive feels like a brick.
Im dying for the update in january. Let's pray for some decent video playback the hardware is there. cmon!!
Sent from my Nook Color
candre23 said:
Just to clarify, RAM, flash storage space, and CPU are not things that can be fixed/improved with software. These are determined by the physical chips that are soldered on to the board.
There are apps to boost CPU speed a bit, but you will start to run into stability issues if you bump it up too much above what the chip was binned at. A nice 2.2 build might improve things a bit on the NC, but the archos will likely always have an edge. Not just because of its higher clock speed, but also because it has fewer pixels to render.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought the Nook was using a 1GHz CPU that was underclocked to 800MHz. Maybe I'm mistaken?
Regarding the app space, that is a software issue though isn't it?. The Nook partitions what appears to be about 1GB of it's 8GB of flash space for apps. The Archos however only partitions 256MB for apps. Seems like a custom ROM on the Archos could change that up and give more space to apps, or so that is what they say on the archosfans.com forums.
Posted this reply in another thread ... worth repeating ...
While the NC supplier (B&N and it's mfg'er) have a limited track record, the record of Archos is pretty clear ... roll out products that target the 'latest trend' with software that is usually not ready and move on to the next latest thing within a very short time leaving a trail of unsupported devices. If you can live with buying a new thing from Archos every 9-12 mos and knowing support will be GONE after that then go for it.
As said the Nook may not turn out better, but it can't be worse. It has an reasonably up-to-date system now, larger memory, better viewing for it's primary mission. A70 just getting 2.2 and who know what bugs with it (seems to be bugs aplenty); A101 still not very available, what does THAT tell you?
If you want an android multimedia device then the Archos family may be a way to go, but evaluate it against multimedia devices since that is Archos' focus (assuming they have one), not reading and/or tablet functions.
Probably most people on this thread have reading as a primary, tablet second and entertainment third. The screen is really great, pdf reading is real good other than the swipe down instead of swipe sideways, with the Dolphin browser, root, su, multitouch what's not to like? ... did I mention the screen is great?
zdrifter said:
Probably most people on this thread have reading as a primary, tablet second and entertainment third. The screen is really great, pdf reading is real good other than the swipe down instead of swipe sideways, with the Dolphin browser, root, su, multitouch what's not to like? ... did I mention the screen is great?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lawl i bought the Nook just to Root. Ive got books on it an thats nice but since my phone died i needed a micro-mobile device so i wouldnt have to switch from tv to pc (1 button but im lazy) the Nook simply had the specs to get it done.
Only plus about archos is the BT for a phone but just the possibility of it for the Nook made it a done deal, Having the 60mb wing i know what Devs can do. The screens obviously the best part but double the ram as similar tablets is amazing, Ive loaded tons of 3D games an still have 200Mbs of ram, and the fact that you can drive to a B&N in most towns. (i hate shipping)
I think there both 7" form factor? but the sexy knock the Nooks got was also a winner
Archos is lacking ram an screen, but if a 1.3mp camera an knowing BT will work makes it up there you go.
Ravynmagi said:
I was just talking about this subject with some friends.
Nook has a much better screen. A 1024x600 res IPS with great angles and crispness. The Archos 70 has a crappy 800x480 TN screen with really bad viewing angles. Screen quality in a tablet is probably most important to me. I want to be able to hold this thing any any direction at any angle and still see it, can't do that with the Archos.
The Nook feels solid... maybe a little too solid, as it is certainly heavier than the Archos 70. The Archos is reportedly very flimsy feeling. This could go either way depending on how much you value solid feeling versus weight.
The Nook has 512MB of RAM and it looks like 1GB or more of app storage space (unfortunately I didn't look at it before installing a few things). The Archos 70 has 256MB of RAM and only a measly 256MB of app storage space. Maybe the modders can fix that if they haven't yet, not sure. But that is a big downer for the Archos to me, I've already installed about 400MB of apps on my Nook in that app space.
Archos seems to have performance on it's side. It's CPU runs at the full 1GHz and it's running Android 2.2 already. My Nook feels sluggish with web browsing (using Dolphin HD), but I'm hoping the Nook update to 2.2 in January can help pep it up some. And maybe someday we'll get a 1GHz kernel.
Archos has a few extra hardware features like Bluetooth, HDMI out, better speakers, and cameras (though probably not a big loss if they are as bad as Engadget says they are).
For me the WAY better screen more than makes up for the slightly slower performance and other features the Nook doesn't have.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great points here and everyone else. The low amount of RAM is a shocker, and is a dealbreaker right there. That makes me glad I don't have an Archos.
zdrifter said:
Probably most people on this thread have reading as a primary, tablet second and entertainment third.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
camwinnn said:
Lawl i bought the Nook just to Root.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, same here, I bought the Nook Color with literally zero intention of reading anything. It's a pure 100% Android browsing/gaming tablet for me
-----
The only thing that gives me pause about my Nook Color purchase is the lack of Bluetooth and a front facing camera. One of my main uses for this device will be watching shows/movies while doing cardio at the gym. Using a wired heaset is dangerous as one wrong move of the arm and boom, your device goes to the floor. A Bluetooth headset and watching stuff on my phone was great (and safe).
And a front facing camera would be nice for video chat. I think all tablets will have this feature in the future and ones that don't will be knocked down a notch.
B&N have already stated that an update is happening "next year", informaton about it happening in January was not true, people seriously should stop repeating this.
In addition to everything written above Archos has a resistive touchscreen which is said to be really unresponsive.
candre23 said:
There are apps to boost CPU speed a bit, but you will start to run into stability issues if you bump it up too much above what the chip was binned at. A nice 2.2 build might improve things a bit on the NC, but the archos will likely always have an edge. Not just because of its higher clock speed, but also because it has fewer pixels to render.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The NC and the Archos Gen8s have the same cpu at different speeds. We've been able to run the NC stable up to about 1.15GHz. Froyo + JIT will go further than oc towards responsiveness.
As for bluetooth, the hardware is at least partially there. I'm still trying to figure it out, so if you know someone who's done ports to a platform with TI bluetooth send them my way.
Thanks for the information everyone, this cleared up my doubts and worries of purchasing the nc.
inferniac90 said:
B&N have already stated that an update is happening "next year", informaton about it happening in January was not true, people seriously should stop repeating this.
In addition to everything written above Archos has a resistive touchscreen which is said to be really unresponsive.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So no update in jan?
Sent from my Nook Color
inferniac90 said:
B&N have already stated that an update is happening "next year", informaton about it happening in January was not true, people seriously should stop repeating this.
In addition to everything written above Archos has a resistive touchscreen which is said to be really unresponsive.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, the new Archos models (70 and 101) have capacitive screens.
jaydon34 said:
So no update in jan?
Sent from my Nook Color
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
zdnet.com/blog/gadgetreviews/barnes-noble-confirms-android-22-update-for-nook-color-updated/20759
//not allowed to post links yet
UPDATE: Looks like that confirmation wasn’t really a confirmation after all. There will be an update, but just probably not in January. Here’s the statement from a B&N PR rep:
B&N plans to update the OS sometime in 2011. Regarding applications, we are committed to the NOOKdeveloper program and on track to add apps to our store in early 2011, but do not have plans enable Android Marketplace at this time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
stwallman said:
Actually, the new Archos models (70 and 101) have capacitive screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right, forgot about that, but the viewing angles are still really bad
http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/24/archos-70-and-101-internet-tablet-review/
I bought the NC over other devices for many of the reasons already stated (basically THE SCREEN), also because it has very good wifi reception. I believe I read that Archos was having issues with that.
I've seen a lot of discussion on various Android/Droid forums on the web over the past month or two about the Bionic, and it having 512MB of RAM. A lot of people don't seem to mind, and some people have even said it doesn't matter because it's DDR2, which is faster than regular DDR.
Well, 512MB of RAM is not enough for a dual-core phone you plan to use for 2 years or more. Here's why, in a rather lengthy post that I also put on MyDroidWorld the other night. I've been on the XDA forums for a long time, though I don't post very frequently and I'm curious to see what people will think of my admittedly long post. So, here is why I think people should think long and hard about whether to buy the Bionic when it does come out, assuming it still ships with 512MB of RAM.
Caching.
Ok - let me explain. The single most important factor in performance of a computer is having enough RAM. When a computer runs out of RAM, it starts to use what's called a page file. It's basically a file on your hard drive that acts as additional RAM. Now, DDR3-1600 speed RAM transfers data at 12.8 gigabytes per second. Phenomenally fast. It also has a reaction time of around 5 nanoseconds, also ridiculously fast. When your operating system has to start using the page file because the physical RAM is full, the performance hit is EXTRAORDINARY. Even the best hard disk drives (not counting SSDs) like the latest Raptor from Western Digital cap out at around 155 megabytes per second for reading and writing, and it has a peak latency of 7 milliseconds for reaction time. 1 nanosecond is 1 million milliseconds, which makes the DDR3 RAM over a MILLION times faster reacting than the hard drive, and the transfer rate of the RAM over 80 times faster than the transfer rate of the hard drive.
In real-world terms, it's like you're talking about an ant versus a Porsche 911 Turbo. Most old computers that have long pauses or hang for several seconds doing even basic tasks, it's because they don't have enough RAM and it's caching stuff between the hard drive and the RAM.
Now, whenever Android runs out of RAM, (same with any operating system) it has to start using its page file, which means it starts using this monstrously slow flash memory as RAM. It's like merging onto a freeway that is gridlocked with traffic when you were going hundreds of miles per hour. The flash memory is a lot slower than the Raptor hard drive for data transfer rates, but it has a read time a lot faster; the best-performing ones are generally under 1 microsecond. 1 microsecond is a thousand times slower than 1 nanosecond. The write times are closer to hard drives, though; generally less than 1 millisecond, so like 10x faster than a hard drive but still 100,000 times slower reaction time to writing data than the RAM is.
What this means is, when your permanent storage is flash-based, it has a much faster reaction time than a hard drive but it's still dog-slow compared to RAM; so when Android runs out of RAM, it caches to the page file on the flash memory, and you'll have the same slowdown effect as you do on an old POS computer, but it's not as noticeable because flash memory reacts faster than disk-based hard drives.
The point of all of this is that, 1GB of DDR1 memory on a phone is FAR better than 512MB of DDR2 memory. The 1GB will prevent you from hitting that metaphorical brick wall of caching data to your flash memory when the 512MB won't. We already use 400MB, or more, of our 512MB of RAM on our existing phones just by turning it on and having a couple of widgets/services in the background above & beyond the stock ones. How do you expect to take advantage significantly higher-end applications and games, which also means (for games, primarily) that they take up more RAM, as well?
You can't have higher-quality graphics without needing more RAM, so when that new version of Angry Birds comes out this fall or something that requires two cores and looks amazing, but uses 250MB of RAM to run instead of the 80MB or whatever the regular one uses now, what do you think has to happen? That's right. Android has to cache that much extra data to your flash memory so it can unload it from the RAM, freeing the necessary space to load Angry Birds HD. This causes more of a delay as it's writing data, and will cause extra choppiness, etc. Another thing to keep in mind is that, as resolutions increase, so do the texture sizes for all applications and widgets that you use, assuming they support the new resolution. More size needed, which takes up more space in RAM.
Don't be fooled. When truly good and proper dual-core benchmarks come out, 1GB RAM dual-core phones will spank their 512MB RAM dual-core brethren for real-world performance in games, and other high-memory applications. Also, excessive caching greatly increases the chance of flash memory going bad. Not a common occurrence if it was fine when shipped, but still something to think about.
So, in summary, even though the performance hit from caching to flash memory isn't as bad as caching to hard disk drives, it's still a tremendous slowdown and it will matter for dual-core phones way more than for single-core ones. The average amount of RAM installed on dual-core desktop computers from Dell/HP/etc. was significantly higher than what the average was for the previous single-core generations were, and there are reasons for that. Primarily, the same reasons I just outlined. In simple terms, faster processors can do more things, which necessarily requires more RAM.
Sorry for the wall of text, I tried to be more concise but it kind of got away from me. I'm not buying a Bionic because it has 512MB of RAM. After owning it a year, it'll be having performance issues on top-end dual-core-required games that run just fine on phones like the Atrix.
I'm sorry because I know this is probably going to come across the wrong way, but WOW, you spent a lot of time writing that up, and too much time for me to read it alll, especially considering Motorola has pulled back on the Bionic and it's receiving "enhancements". I guess what I'm saying is why all the speculation/conjecture until we know the revised specs? Maybe it'll land with 8GB of DDR 6 RAM.
I'm hoping Motorola gives Verizon a phone that is higher end than the Atrix. Afterall Verizon has done much more than ATT in the way of supporting Moto..when they needed it. Anxious to see what Big Red winds up with.
Sent from my ERIS using XDA Premium App
I disagree that ram is the single most important factor of performance of a computer.
hard drives are the biggest bottleneck in a computer. this is why I use a vertex 3 ssd.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
gemro311 said:
I'm hoping Motorola gives Verizon a phone that is higher end than the Atrix. Afterall Verizon has done much more than ATT in the way of supporting Moto..when they needed it. Anxious to see what Big Red winds up with.
Sent from my ERIS using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I concur, really hope VZW pushes for a premier device
I disagree. Android isn't expanding as an OS at some breakneck pace and 512MB is definitely suitable for the near future. 1GB is absolutely not necessary for great performance in a phone. RAM is a bottleneck, but it is not something that magically allows for better performance if the device isn't hitting the pagefile anyway.
The way that Android manages applications will allow 512MB phones to be relevant for some time. The Bionic will be a solid phone for the next year, but there will always be something bigger and better next year. Phones aren't future-proof.
I was just checking out this thread and wanted to say maybe the reason that the atrix comes with 1gb of ram is because of the extra contraption that you can buy along with. It looks like a netbook but is not very well performing and who would even care to rely on it for anything I don't know.
gemro311 said:
I'm hoping Motorola gives Verizon a phone that is higher end than the Atrix. Afterall Verizon has done much more than ATT in the way of supporting Moto..when they needed it. Anxious to see what Big Red winds up with.
Sent from my ERIS using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I certainly hope Motorola makes the required improvements, but you also need to keep in mind Verizon approves and in many if not all cases specs the phones they want. They chose the specs, they had to live with the specs. I think once they saw what was coming they figured it was no longer premiere and wanted changes made.
Regardless of why its been pulled back the fact that it was is good, but if its going to take 4-5 months to get it out the door they should have just scrapped it altogether.
E30kid said:
I disagree. Android isn't expanding as an OS at some breakneck pace and 512MB is definitely suitable for the near future. 1GB is absolutely not necessary for great performance in a phone. RAM is a bottleneck, but it is not something that magically allows for better performance if the device isn't hitting the pagefile anyway.
The way that Android manages applications will allow 512MB phones to be relevant for some time. The Bionic will be a solid phone for the next year, but there will always be something bigger and better next year. Phones aren't future-proof.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, wait for Ice Cream and we'll see. Since the future Android version will also run in tablets, it is likely that it will have huge memory requirements.
By the way, my Acer Liquid A1 can't be officially upgraded to Froyo because it only has 256Mb. Later Liquid models with 512Mb are upgradeable. At the time I bought it, 512Mb seemed unnecessary because the Nexus One operating system only supported 256Mb, having the other 256Mb wasted. This was only 12 months ago...
galaxyjeff said:
I was just checking out this thread and wanted to say maybe the reason that the atrix comes with 1gb of ram is because of the extra contraption that you can buy along with. It looks like a netbook but is not very well performing and who would even care to rely on it for anything I don't know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you are on to something here. I think I read somewhere that the atrix only uses 512 mb when not connected to the dock. I have the inspire which has 768 mb, and I came from the captivate which was 512 mb, and I done know if is the ram or what but this phone performs way better than the captivate. Even when I bought the inspire, right out the box stock, preformed much better than a captivate overclocked with an ext4 filesystem kernel. Not that this is empirical evidence, but hey.
Sent from my HTC Desire HD using XDA Premium App
cryptiq said:
I'm sorry because I know this is probably going to come across the wrong way, but WOW, you spent a lot of time writing that up, and too much time for me to read it alll, especially considering Motorola has pulled back on the Bionic and it's receiving "enhancements". I guess what I'm saying is why all the speculation/conjecture until we know the revised specs? Maybe it'll land with 8GB of DDR 6 RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I lol'd. But seriously 512 MB of RAM is more than enough... It's a PHONE not a high end desktop system. I play tons of games on my x2 and with alot of crap in the backround open, and I notice zero performance hits. If you are spending all day monitoring your RAM on your phone and trying to measure FPS loss, load time differences, etc. I suggest that you try to pick up a new hobby ASAP, OCDing will be the end of you. Best of luck!
Edit: I wouldn't worry about it either! Bionic probably won't come out anyways, and if it does, another phone with 1GB to satisfy your OCD probably will be out by then.
As of now, I feel ALL future top tier smart phones need to come equipped with at least 1GB of DDR2. The G2x, for example, will most likely have issues running a custom ice cream rom. And people will be upset.. especially after putting up with all of the other various problems that particular phone has.
OP, I don't agree entirely with your explanation of the use of caching by the OS - for all 3 major computer OSes, no matter how much excess RAM you have, they will start caching data to the hard drive, whether you like it or not. Obviously if you run out of RAM, it has to do so, but it'll even do it long before you've hit that cap - just because it determines an application has gone "inactive". Now I haven't read up on Android enough to know whether this is 100% true for it, too, but considering it's running a linux kernel, I would imagine so. So just like the 8GB of RAM in my desktop doesn't necessarily help for everyday computing needs, 1GB vs 512mb on the Bionic may not make a huge difference.
raptordrew said:
OP, I don't agree entirely with your explanation of the use of caching by the OS - for all 3 major computer OSes, no matter how much excess RAM you have, they will start caching data to the hard drive, whether you like it or not. Obviously if you run out of RAM, it has to do so, but it'll even do it long before you've hit that cap - just because it determines an application has gone "inactive". Now I haven't read up on Android enough to know whether this is 100% true for it, too, but considering it's running a linux kernel, I would imagine so. So just like the 8GB of RAM in my desktop doesn't necessarily help for everyday computing needs, 1GB vs 512mb on the Bionic may not make a huge difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i beg to differ
my captivate; even though its a single core...is still quite capable at most everyday tasks...only thing lacking is the RAM
my phone will slow to a crawl after entering twitter, switching to pulse and then going back to my homescreen....
not to mention my launcher keeps getting killed by android as it keeps running out of RAM
droid_does said:
i beg to differ
my captivate; even though its a single core...is still quite capable at most everyday tasks...only thing lacking is the RAM
my phone will slow to a crawl after entering twitter, switching to pulse and then going back to my homescreen....
not to mention my launcher keeps getting killed by android as it keeps running out of RAM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have to lol at this one. Absolutely none of those issues have to do with amount of RAM. In fact the launcher problem has nothing to do with RAM at all.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
While I appreciate other people who have the same amount of passion for phones as I do, I just have two words to say about anyone saying phones with 512 mb ram will not get Ice Cream Sandwich. Nexus S.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
mb02 said:
I have to lol at this one. Absolutely none of those issues have to do with amount of RAM. In fact the launcher problem has nothing to do with RAM at all.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it does as android keeps killing it to free up more RAM to use......
droid_does said:
it does as android keeps killing it to free up more RAM to use......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea the task manager is killing the apps to keep ram freed up, as in stopping unused processes etc. That's just the aggressive working of the management software that would run just the same if you even had 8GB of ram.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
timothymilla said:
While I appreciate other people who have the same amount of passion for phones as I do, I just have two words to say about anyone saying phones with 512 mb ram will not get Ice Cream Sandwich. Nexus S.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember when everyone thought Gingerbread would require a 1GHz processor as a system requirement, which was later debunked?
http://www.talkandroid.com/23041-so...ngerbread-update-due-to-1ghz-cpu-requirement/
Nobody can say what will and will not get updated for sure, although I will venture to say that it's HIGHLY likely the Nexus S will be getting 2.4, you're right.
zetsumeikuro said:
I lol'd. But seriously 512 MB of RAM is more than enough... It's a PHONE not a high end desktop system. I play tons of games on my x2 and with alot of crap in the backround open, and I notice zero performance hits. If you are spending all day monitoring your RAM on your phone and trying to measure FPS loss, load time differences, etc. I suggest that you try to pick up a new hobby ASAP, OCDing will be the end of you. Best of luck!
Edit: I wouldn't worry about it either! Bionic probably won't come out anyways, and if it does, another phone with 1GB to satisfy your OCD probably will be out by then.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
512 mb is not enough for a dual core 4G phone it just isnt. the thunderbolt has 768 mb and its only single core and 4G and let me tell you it would be way faster with the 1024 mb of ram i cant imagine how laggy the bionic would be if you start doing anything with it! the 512 ram will be ate up in no time! i sure hope verizon reconsiders and adds more ram or i probably wont use this device as my daily phone either keep the thunderbolt with more ram which is sad cause it has been out for awhile now and the droid x also has 512 ram and it has been out for a year and they cant make improvements?? and they are going to want $299+++ for this phone ON CONTRACT! it better have more than 512 ram or it aint worth a lick! rip this phone open and put my own ram in it!
I've had my Tab S 10.5 for quite a while now and have been less than pleased with its performance. Stock, Bliss, and down the list, no matter what I've put on it- it seemed something was inherently wrong with the Tab S. It has always been a bit sluggish considering the specs. My Note 3 and Nexus 10 seemed more responsive. I've been rather disappointed until today. I've been running the Slim build and noticed today F2FS was now supported. Flashed it with F2FS and its pretty unbelievable what a difference it has made. I've tried F2FS on other devices and seen little if any noticeable difference until now. No lag, smooth, responsive, and benchmarks are great. Highly suggest trying it and truly encourage further development on this.
Mine was lagging pretty badly as well but then I did a factory reset and reflashed it with the same rom I had (IronRom) and it was like night and day difference. Plus I found out the kernel didn't work without busybox being installed so it was pretty bad.
Now with the new 2.4.1 version, it's so smooth, it's smoother than my ipad air 2 on webpages when navigating. (Granted, I did force the GPU to be at 300mhz instead of 144)
Can someone explain what f2fs means please and what you do to get iy
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=3139716