Slashdot Mirror


Qualcomm Ships Dual-Core Snapdragon Chipsets

rrossman2 writes "Qualcomm has issued a press release revealing it has started shipping new dual-core Snapdragon chipsets. These chipsets run each core at up to 1.2GHz, include a GPU that supports 2D/3D acceleration engines for Open GLES 2.0 and Open VG 1.1, 1080p video encode/decode, dedicated low-power audio engine, integrated low-power GPS, and support for 24-bit WXGA 1280x800 resolution displays. These chipsets come in two variants, the MSM8260 for HSPA+ and the MSM8660 for multi-mode HSPA+/CDMA2000 1xEV-DO Rev B. The press release also lists QSD8672 as a third-gen chipset like the two mentioned, but doesn't go into any detail of what its role is. With this announcement of shipping chipsets, how long until HTC makes a super smartphone?"

168 comments

  1. Nahh... by smithfarm · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'll wait until it makes a super ULTRA smart phone.

    --
    Om
    1. Re:Nahh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      With this, should be able get a 10 hour 12 inch ultralight netbook, that can do 8 hours playing video or gaming. Also they can put a non-windows on it and say android, and sell it really cheap.
      All this is directly good - further pressure in Intel and windows margins, and more people expecting instant 'on'. The question is, how soon before Windows 7 on ARM comes along?

    2. Re:Nahh... by rocketPack · · Score: 1

      With a 4-hour battery life. Sounds exotic!

    3. Re:Nahh... by imgod2u · · Score: 1

      Windows 7 won't be on ARM but Windows Embedded 7 will. That's the OS Microsoft is making to target tablets and it will come out on both ARM and x86 at the same time.

    4. Re:Nahh... by rdnetto · · Score: 1

      With this announcement of shipping chipsets, how long until HTC makes a super smartphone?"

      The term you are looking for is 'netbook'.
      I mean seriously, how could you an improve a device like the N900 (600 MHz ARM Cortex-A8) with more processing power? The interface of such a device is just too limited to push it like you would a laptop (unless you want to carry around Folding@Home with you), since the screen is just too small to look at more than one thing at once.

      --
      Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
  2. Enter... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Genius Phone.

  3. MSM has always been dual core by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One core for applications and one core for radio. TFA does not make it clear whether this is anything new or not.

    1. Re:MSM has always been dual core by AHuxley · · Score: 5, Funny

      One core for flash, one core for you.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:MSM has always been dual core by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's the SMP dual Cortex cores for apps and a whole host of other cores for audio, video, modems, control etc. Apart from the dual Cortex cores there's another 5 ARM cores (IIRC) plus the DSP core plus the specialised hardware.

    3. Re:MSM has always been dual core by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This has two cores for applications and one core for radio.

    4. Re:MSM has always been dual core by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is more or less what I thought when windows got multicore support. "Great, now the viruses (Yes, I know, you have opinions.) can run on a separate core, without hogging the core I use!"

    5. Re:MSM has always been dual core by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1.

    6. Re:MSM has always been dual core by Sephr · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be handled by the GPU using OpenVG?

    7. Re:MSM has always been dual core by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You're thinking of a processor which is a single-chip solution combining a ARM applications SoC(apps proc) and a specialized DSP(comms proc) that communicates with the radio transceiver. These are not considered dual core as the apps processor treats the comms processor as a special hardware peripheral. The DSP cannot see SoC interrupts or the apps cache as it is only intended to implement the radio algorithms.

    8. Re:MSM has always been dual core by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Adobe's programmers like both.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  4. ARM-based laptops by staalmannen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since the whole "smartbook revolution" seems to be a puff of hot air, the thing to hope for would be that some sort of "assembly kit" possibilities for computer-building hobbyists interested in RISC/ARM architecture could be available. This seems to be a market entirely owned by x86, with tons of pieces that can be stuck together like lego. I for one would love to have a full-size passively cooled laptop with low-energy processor and screen.

    1. Re:ARM-based laptops by qubezz · · Score: 4, Informative

      ...Already done. OSU student-developed Ultra-Mobile PC based on a 500MHz ARM Cortex-A8. Now playing Doom II on a campus near me. Not too bad, since when I went to OSU a dozen years ago I had to buy my own $2000 Pentium 75Mhz machine to do computer sci on...

    2. Re:ARM-based laptops by rdnetto · · Score: 1

      I for one would love to have a full-size passively cooled laptop with low-energy processor and screen.

      Not sure about passively cooled, but take a look at this: http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/ (very detailed specs available on site)

      --
      Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
  5. battery life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    battery life will be like 2 hours standby to power the dual core!

    1. Re:battery life by obarthelemy · · Score: 1

      I read somewhere that it's actually more efficient in a typical usage scenario to have 2 cores, one of which you can shut down, both that you can throttle, than to have just 1. In terms of power draw and heat dissipation.

      --
      The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    2. Re:battery life by imgod2u · · Score: 1

      Yes and no. It really depends on how the dual-core is architected. Assuming you had 2 cores with independent frequency and voltage scaling and assuming you were running two tasks that were fairly processor and memory intensive, it could indeed be beneficial to run them on 2 cores. Context switching is a killer on cache and memory and having a single CPU throttle between multiple processes is inefficient compared to two separate CPU's working out of their own caches.

      Moreover, power is a function of voltage squared; so two CPU's running at 0.8V at 400MHz would require less power than one CPU running at 1.0V at 800MHz.

  6. Give me an x86 phone... by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 1

    Give me a phone where I can run an x86 operating system and x86 software. Give it a USB port, HDMI (or similar) output, and a fast SSD drive. Then I can take it to work, plug it in, and use it. Then, at the end of the day, I can drop it in my pocket, take it home, plug it in, and use it. A consistent computing environment would be great. Right now, I use three machines on a regular basis. This is being typed through Remote Access.

    Oh, and I want a phone where I can play Wasteland! IJKL, baby. Gimme some blood sausage.

    1. Re:Give me an x86 phone... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure that in 12/24 months Intel will give you that with the next version of Atom. The question is, can you wait or not?

    2. Re:Give me an x86 phone... by Alien1024 · · Score: 1

      There you go.

      (coming soon)

    3. Re:Give me an x86 phone... by MachDelta · · Score: 1

      Does it have to be a phone? Why not just stuff a portable drive in your pocket and boot terminals off it to whatever OS you fancy?

    4. Re:Give me an x86 phone... by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

      Nokia 9110 communicator.

      AMD 486 processor and GEOS OS.

      Well you did say x86.

    5. Re:Give me an x86 phone... by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      because luck has it that you often want to use it when there aren't terminals around.

    6. Re:Give me an x86 phone... by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 1

      Touche... but it can't play Wasteland!

  7. Great Timing by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Great timing to reveal this just ahead of Steve Jobs iPhone 4/HD A4-processor equipped phone. I almost feel badly for Mr. Jobs getting beaten up like this. Even Dan Lyons (aka Fake Steve Jobs) is getting an HTC Incredible.

    I said almost.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:Great Timing by gig · · Score: 0

      You're right not to feel sorry for Steve Jobs. iPhone is outselling Android by more than 3:1, and outselling Android v2.x by over 10:1. Every July iPhone sales double when they introduce a new model and stay doubled all year. And nobody else has an iPod touch or iPad at all. There is no lack of speed in A4, and the software is fast also, and gets great battery life. So there really isn't any reason to feel sorry for him.

    2. Re:Great Timing by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      Even Dan Lyons (aka Fake Steve Jobs) is getting an HTC Incredible.

      You say that as if Dan Lyons was some kind of strong Apple supporter.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    3. Re:Great Timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you just make up those stats? Android has been outselling iphone and just recently moved into the number two spot behind RIM - http://www.npd.com/press/releases/press_100510.html

    4. Re:Great Timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typical geek response. Haven't you learned yet? Apple's target customer base are not people who view their devices as a list of discrete component features in a package. They are people who look at an iPhone or iPad from the outside as a tool they can do stuff with. They don't care about the guts, just the experience of using it. And at that SJ and his team have excelled. At almost 2 million iPad units shipped in less than 2 months SJ isn't getting beaten up; he's the one doing the punching.

    5. Re:Great Timing by naasking · · Score: 1

      This is the introduction of a CPU, not a final product. The iPhone 4 will likely make it to market ahead of any phones based on this new chip, so you're right not to feel sorry for Jobs, he's laughing all the way to the bank.

    6. Re:Great Timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poor little guy, you still have trouble with math, don't you? Here, give it one more try: http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/10/05/10/195251/Android-Sales-Surpass-iPhone-Sales?from=rss

    7. Re:Great Timing by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Things that pass nowadays as "great battery life", ehh...

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    8. Re:Great Timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      There's already rumors of Android phones running these chips in the works. Meaning, now that the chip is officially released, it really might not be long until we get the an Android phone with the chip. Quite possibly not long at all after Apple releases their iPhone 4. Hell, HTC has definitely been rumoring a 1.5GHz phone for a little bit now (which looking at Wikipedia, that's a 1.5GHz dual core, though I don't know that for sure). Originally rumored to be 4G with WiMax on Sprint, though now the rumor's shifting to it being on Verizon (maybe it'll be both?). Apple needs to ride their "better" user interface to stay alive in the next couple of years, unless they can really step it up to the speed that Android phones are catching up and surpassing in hardware specifications. Hell, the Nexus One has been out for a while with higher hardware specs, and the iPhone 4 is catching up to that. The only rumors I've heard of the iPhone 4 though is 1GHz single core, speaking specifically of the CPU. That's looking like it's going to be behind the market pretty fast, now.

    9. Re:Great Timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not convinced that is relevant in the bigger picture.
      People do indeed just want devices that "just do stuff', but Apple doesn't have a monopoly on usability.
      So when a slew of affordable Android phones and tablets satisfy their messaging/Facebook/Twitter/appX needs, they will drastically outnumber the iFaithful.

    10. Re:Great Timing by eudaemon · · Score: 0

      HTC devices are notorious battery hogs, unfortunately. I speak from experience - HTC Developer's G1 and Nexus One: in each case I had to buy extended batteries, desk and car chargers to retain full use of my devices. Jumping up the processor speed will just make thing worse. Don't get me wrong - I'm a huge Android fan, but dual 1.5 GHz feels more like an ipad clone CPU than one meant for an HTC mobile phone, at least one that'll last for more than a few hours of use. I really hope HTC get their act together because they really do build nice phones.

    11. Re:Great Timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      USA != the whole fucking world

    12. Re:Great Timing by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      It's hard to beat the battery life of the TRS-80 Model 100.

    13. Re:Great Timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      HTC devices are notorious battery hogs, unfortunately. I speak from experience - HTC Developer's G1 and Nexus On

      This quote means you're an absolutely idiot.

      Basically the reason Android phones are widely believe they have poor battery life is because they can do soooo much more than is even possible with an iPhone. So you logic works out like this: Android has half the battery life because it did more than twice the work for me. Ergo, it has poor battery life. WTF?!?

      When you make your phone constantly work, doing shit which is completely impossible with an iPhone, and suddenly you have "short" battery life, that doesn't mean it really the device has poor battery life. When Apple can come close to doing half of what is possible with an Android device, then come back and whine about the poor Apple battery life. Until such time, you sound like a complete idiot.

      There are utilities, such as WiSyncPlus, which can drastically improve battery life for most devices. In doing so, it forces the device to function more iPhone-like during scheduled periods. As a result, it roughly doubles my battery life. The simple fact is, if you stop demanding your phone to constantly run, allowing it to sleep, battery life is absolutely fine. Very fine in fact.

      I easily see two days out of my phone G1 with a stock battery + WiSyncPlus. I get four days to five days with an extended battery. That means when using your Android device much like an iPhone, yet still are getting far more capability, you actually see far superior battery life than what you see with an iPhone.

      Bluntly, stop getting drastically more work out of your Android device and then condemning battery consumption on the fact you demanded your device to do far, far more than is even possible with an iPhone.

    14. Re:Great Timing by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Well...

      "standby battery time of up to six weeks" , and that seems cautious considering the specs say "up to 48 days", which would be just below 7 weeks (talk time "up to 13h" there, so realistically 10 probably)
      "up to 12 hours talktime (GSM) ... standby 26 days between charges"
      "18 hours and 30 minutes talk time (in GSM mode). 29 days standby time"

      The last two are smarthpones. Yes, those are largely best case scenarios, but they are easily felt in daily usage. Their touchscreen devices aren't that bad, either; so it seems some manufacturers do care.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    15. Re:Great Timing by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Android is catching up fast there, too. Generally, the rule for Apple is that they end up with quite small market share especially/specifically when looking worldwide.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    16. Re:Great Timing by vakuona · · Score: 1

      The fact some devices makers seem to love listing their features confirms the way they view the market. Secondly, I don't think Apple need to be dominant in the market to be wildly successful. Android's market share is divided among a fair number of manufactures, with an even larger number of unique devices. Apple has lower development costs per iPhone sold, higher margins, and can therefore survive on a much smaller market share. Apple isn't just chasing volume. if anything, they probably appreciate that once smartphones become mass market devices, they would rather be in the market for premium smartphones rather than just smartphones. I am not Apple's CEO, but I think if Apple can sustain sales of 50 million iPhones a year, they would be very happy indeed if they typically make $100 in profit on each (which they can do because they do not have many models of phones to design and support). They are in the business of chasing profits, not market share.

    17. Re:Great Timing by mischi_amnesiac · · Score: 1

      In the latest issue of c't (german computer magazine) there was an article about android 2.2, where it also said that google was activating 100 000 phones per day worldwide. Apple has sold 50 million IPhones in under 3 years, so based on 17 million sold IPhones per year that would roughly mean 50 000 IPhones per day. So Android is outselling the IPhone by factor 2.

      --
      "Die endgueltige Teilung Deutschlands - das ist unser Auftrag." - Chlodwig Poth
    18. Re:Great Timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      umm yeah, with phones like the HD2 and EVO that already smack the pants off the "iphone 4g" spec wise other than screen resolution. sorry id rather have my larger HD2/EVO screen over more resolution and an even smaller screen than previous generations

      I think apple's R&D is moving a bit too slowly these days in a market where HTC is cranking out new phones every 4 months. HTC will have phones out with 1.5ghz snapdragons and likely these dualcore chips by next spring apple should have clocked that A4 somewhere over 1ghz if they want a product thats going to not be underwhelming at launch and still be relevant by the xmas season and next spring

      The people buying these iphones will be the same people that would drop to their knees for jobs and suck him dry. everyone else is looking at the greener pastures that HTC and others are providing without all the vendor lockin

    19. Re:Great Timing by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Two words: Palm Pilot. Got similar runtime on 2xAAA with more screen resolution AND more CPU power.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    20. Re:Great Timing by sznupi · · Score: 1

      PS. And if one were to run the smartphones I linked to in offline mode most of the time... (still with much greater capabilities compared to TRS-80 Model 100)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  8. 1080P by WarJolt · · Score: 1

    It can encode/decode 1080P, so why didn't they put a 1080P Display controller on it? Your new HD mobile device will still be limited to WXGA 1280x800....So much for an HD iPad competitor.

    1. Re:1080P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      HDMI Out a la HTC Evo 4g

    2. Re:1080P by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

      Your new HD mobile device will still be limited to WXGA 1280x800....So much for an HD iPad competitor.

      Funny, I don't recall the iPad having a 1920x1080 screen. You only have to compete with what the iPad is at the moment since Apple is slow to change their own standards. Just look at how long the iPhone has been stuck at the same screen resolution -- until tomorrow.

      --
      "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    3. Re:1080P by gbjbaanb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, a HDMI output port would make these things much more like a small PC. Wander around with it, reading your emails, then get to the office and plug a cable into it from your TV/Monitor. Add a bluetooth keyboard and you have something every salesman, accountant, and manager dreams of.

      I reckon that's the future of computing devices, not Windows anymore.

    4. Re:1080P by Simonics+Zsolt · · Score: 1, Troll

      That will be te Nokia N8. If they are not fucking up this time.

    5. Re:1080P by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Because "can" doesn't mean "should".
      There are plenty of applications for a CPU like this where you don't need a 1080p display controller, and the extra expense of one would prohibit this chip from being useful.
      What kind of applications? NAS boxes, automobile computers, industrial meters, audio equipment, mobile phones without video output, robot cleaners, routers, et cetera...

    6. Re:1080P by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      There are plenty of applications for a CPU like this where you don't need a 1080p display controller, and the extra expense of one would prohibit this chip from being useful.

      There are zero applications for HDMI output where people don't want 1080p support. They will settle for 720p but that doesn't mean that people don't want 1080p. Anything 720p but a notebook or something is a sad joke, and I'm talking about the built-in LCD, not the video output capabilities.

      With that said, this chip is said to output 1080p via HDMI; the smaller-resolution specification is the highest resolution of LCD panel the built-in device can drive.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  9. Power efficiency? by soupd · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Some power-draw information for H.264 decode, full tilt GPU utilisation, 25/50/100% CPU utilisation of one/both cores would be welcome.

    1. Re:Power efficiency? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Since it's a dual core ARM, that means it's the Cortex A9, which means the CPU going at full tilt uses at most 250 milliwatts per core. (I think the design is supposed to work at up to 2 ghz, and since this one is 1.3 ghz, it might use less than 250mw per core). Audio and video decode are supposed to be dedicated hardware and use a lot less power than a CPU core (compare to other similar devices where they give you the expected battery lifespan; it's usually 4x to 10x longer than for general purpose use).

      I would guess, but can't confirm, that the GPU needs as much power as 1 or 2 CPU cores? I don't remember seeing "battery life while gaming" estimates anywhere, so I can't pull the same trick I did above with video playback.

    2. Re:Power efficiency? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=25711300

      This site quotes 500mw for the power draw of the dual-core processor, im sure the full chipset draw will be significantly greater.

  10. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Give me a phone where I can run an x86 operating system and x86 software.

    That would be a very bad move since any x86 OS is both bloated, and not suited for a touch screen only interface. They all want keyboard/mouse inputs. Even Apple realized that OS/X was not the thing to run on a smartphone, while HP has dropped Windows 7 for their Slate, Google offers Android, not Chrome, for phones, and Microsoft Win 7 Mobile is really looking iffy to appear at all.

    This is also why Microsoft Office and Open Office aren't available on the Android phone yet. They are not suited for this type of hardware, memory limitations, screen limitation, and lack of keyboard/mouse.

    And most SSD drives these days are just about the size of your entire phone. Try to realize why a smartphone is a different paradigm altogether.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  11. The BBC micro by Kupfernigk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Those of us old British farts who remember the BBC Micro will be celebrating. Who would have thought that, nearly thirty years on, its descendants would at last become a threat to (at least the low end of) the Intel/Microsoft domination of personal computing?

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    1. Re:The BBC micro by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

      Those of us old British farts who remember the BBC Micro will be celebrating. Who would have thought that, nearly thirty years on, its descendants would at last become a threat to (at least the low end of) the Intel/Microsoft domination of personal computing?

      That could be because x86 stinks, x86 has always stunk, and even Intel doesn't execute it as x86 any longer, but instead translates it to its own RISC-like micro ops.

      --
      "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    2. Re:The BBC micro by sznupi · · Score: 1

      You say that like you don't have reasons to celebrate already. Who could have thought that its descendants would power mobile phones almost universally? Just a single category of devices, one that ships annually around the number of all PCs in operation wordlwide. Hell, you can possibly find ARM cores in an average PC already. There's also this detail of ARM CPU cores possibly, by now, shipping annually in greater numbers than total number of x86 cores Intel ever made.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    3. Re:The BBC micro by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      I remember being at high school around the time the RISC OS 3.5 wave of Arcs were coming out, and at the time it really seemed like a 3 horse race between Acorn, Apple and Microsoft in the UK. It was all downhill from there...till I started using linux and computers were fun again. I've been playing around with Beeb/Elk emulators recently and it's reminded of the difference between a Programmer and a Developer. I much prefer programming a computer as opposed to developing some software. I re-read the Electron user guide cover to cover - it's even more fascinating now that I'm not 9 years old and can understand the stuff towards the back of the book.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
  12. Re:MSM has always been dual core-MOD THIS by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 2

    One core for flash, one core for you.

    Good thing I don't have mod points today. I wouldn't know whether to mod you funny, insightful, or troll.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  13. I hate patent lawsuits by AndGodSed · · Score: 2, Insightful

    We will not get the great dream phones we all want until the current patent mess is sorted out. As soon as HTC brings out a proper iPhone competitor, Apple will sue the crap out of them, making sure that at least they drag the new product into a mire of fud and drawn out proceedings.

    Net result? The customer doesn't get a better device.

    1. Re:I hate patent lawsuits by Mr2001 · · Score: 4, Informative

      As soon as HTC brings out a proper iPhone competitor

      Nexus One? Droid Incredible? Evo?

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    2. Re:I hate patent lawsuits by plastbox · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hero? Tattoo? HD2? Legend? Desire?

    3. Re:I hate patent lawsuits by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

      Nokia N900 in addition to those posted by Mr2001 - there are loads 'dream phones' out there. Really, when your phone is quite a bit more powerful than desktops of only a hand full of years ago, things can only get better. Mine, I can ssh in to it, forward X, basically do everything available from within your average linux distro. It's all there.

    4. Re:I hate patent lawsuits by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm waiting for the C-3PO. It's fluent in over six million forms of communication.

    5. Re:I hate patent lawsuits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say that a patent war on the Android platform wouldn't please the OHA.
      And their combined patent portfolio dwarfs Apple's.

    6. Re:I hate patent lawsuits by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      Nexus One? Droid Incredible? Evo?

      My new phone has a correction for you: "That's EVO 4G. Bitch."

      Look, just do what my phone says, okay? You don't want to know what it did to the last guy... *shudder*

    7. Re:I hate patent lawsuits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they were/are being sued over them.

    8. Re:I hate patent lawsuits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The competitors have already far surpassed apple, other than the vendor lock-in aspect of the iphone. Apple can keep those patents and fight them as vigorously as they please, i dont want to see the same kind of lock in on other platforms

      The "iphone 4g" already underperforms phones that HTC has had out for nearly a year in europe and several months now here in the states. apple will probably release a iphone 4gs about this time next year that might finally barely exceed the clock speed of HTC's current phones. and its only upgrade will be the clock speed just like the 3gs. the apple cock suckers will be happy to throw down the cash to reup their att contracts once again

      Once more of the market moves to android, and or the restrictions that come with iphone/ipad app development keep getting more restrictive as they make the rules up as they go. more app develops will go for greener pastures elsewhere.

      Apple is digging themselves into a hole, and unless some major changes are made i see them being irrelevant within 2 more iphone generations

    9. Re:I hate patent lawsuits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple filed suit against HTC in March.

    10. Re:I hate patent lawsuits by Totenglocke · · Score: 2, Informative

      As soon as HTC brings out a proper iPhone competitor

      Nexus One? Droid Incredible? Evo?

      He said comptetitor. Those are all phones that make an iPhone look like crap.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    11. Re:I hate patent lawsuits by Pros_n_Cons · · Score: 2, Informative

      dont know about those other phones but evo kicks the ever loving crap out of the iphone. Got mine friday and the hype is real. Battery life is fine, speed is excellent and the best part is when I drop my home inet connection i'll actually be paying the same monthly rate while still having this phone, faster speed at home and a mobile hotspot.

      I went from $60 inet bill + $40 unlimited voice/text a month (no data on the phone) to 109 bucks for unlimited data in my pocket, at home, anywhere, while having this lil gadget to play with for $10 more a month (well not really seeing i get a 13% discount so i actually break even)

      for you google voice users there is a perk to give you unlimited calling. just gotta check some forums. Tons of iphone users are switching I'm not sure iphones are king of the hill anymore as a device and certainly not with att

      --

      -- "of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong." --Dennis Miller
    12. Re:I hate patent lawsuits by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Dude, HTC has sold PDA phones four years before Apple. Who is imitating whom?

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  14. x86 is denser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instruction_set#Code_density

    sure risc might be more consistent and easily decoded etc, but the idosyncratic variable instruction size (there are single byte instructions that call an interrupt eg for debugging where as other interrupts require two bytes (in hex CD XX) where the second byte is the argument )

    this increase in code density allowed intel to get more economy from their caches.

    with more money for R and D and superior fabrication capacity and scale intel has had the ability to squeeze their competitors margins. but their attempts to jump to better instruction sets have always failed. in the 90's they had a chip that provided some object oriented (was it small talk based) aspect in hardware. the attempt to introduce the vliw itanium at the high end didnt really succeed. although you still buy an itanium 2 which is more than can be said for many other abandoned designs.

    forth stack machines have always held the record for power efficiency, apparently.

    1. Re:x86 is denser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iapx-432, which was actually produced in '81 as their 'next gen' 32 bit part (8086 era was still 16 bit, 80286 didn't come out for at least a year or two?)

      The part was a fiasco since it was so large it required 3 packages and had performance/timing issues due to the interconnects. As I understand it, it ended up as the predecessor to the Intel 960, in much the same way as the i860 was the predecessor to the Itanium. You'll note that both of these descendants, despite being key components of a niche market seem to be snubbed by intel's marketing in favor of x86 even in areas where code portability/compatibility is not a problem (the 960 development having been halted around '00, although some models may/were still being produced at least through '05)

    2. Re:x86 is denser by horza · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can improve ARM code density using the Thumb extension, but it's the variable instruction cycle length that kills x86. Pipelining, branch prediction, etc, is much easier with RISC.

      The ARM architecture is far superior to the x86 which is why one of the most competitive markets, mobile phones, has moved there. ARM has consolidated there as they do not have the marketing or R&D budget to take on Intel head to head. The margins have been much higher with desktop CPUs, with marketing and playing the GHz game driving sales more than processor efficiency.

      Once ARM processors take over the netbook market, there will then be an incentive to increase their maximum raw performance. The server market would be the next target. However, they are unlikely to challenge the desktop market any time soon. Intel is cash-rich enough to dump processors onto the market at as loss if necessary to drive them out. Shame, as my ARM-based desktop machine was incredibly fast.

      Phillip.

    3. Re:x86 is denser by Narishma · · Score: 1

      Before they take over the netbook market, they have to, you know, actually release a netbook. They've been talking about it for 2 years now and they still haven't released anything.

      --
      Mada mada dane.
    4. Re:x86 is denser by evilviper · · Score: 1

      The ARM architecture is far superior to the x86

      Never has been, never will be... ARM is popular because they're very low power, while x86 is not. ATOM is doing better in that respect, and ignoring the power requirements, vastly outperforming all ARM chips available.

      ARM has been fooling people for many years now with the same old MHz myth Intel used to use. That nice 1.2GHz ARM core is only getting perhaps 1.2MIPS/MHz if you're lucky, while even an ancient pentium3 does 2.8MIPS/MHz. Modern x86 chips with various incarnations of SSE absolutely wipe the floor with ARM, with astronomical MIPS/MHz ratings.

      And it's not like that's something they might work on... ARM has been around 1MIPS/MHz for a very, very long time. The 1.2MIPS/MHz is actually their new and improved performance.

      Shame, as my ARM-based desktop machine was incredibly fast.

      People have a hard time differentiating between hardware and software. When their computer crashes, they don't know whether some program is badly written, or if the memory is flaky. The same is true of performance. I'd be willing to bet an obscene amount of money that this "incredibly fast" "ARM-based desktop machine" was running a highly tuned OS. Install some common OS like Linux on an ARM system, and an x86 system, and prepare to be in awe at the performance of old x86 CPUs most of us throw in the trash, because ARM just can't match it. PowerPC is the only architecture commonly found in embedded devices that can come close to competing with x86 in performance, which is why it's still the undisputed king in high-performance embedded devices, though ARM is certainly trying desperately to integrate enough DSPs and extra cores to compete with PowerPC in that space.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    5. Re:x86 is denser by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Doesn't Cortex-A8 have already for some time quite a bit greater MIPS than what you write, "not like that's something they might work on" - up to 2MIPS/MHz? Cortex-A9, "that nice 1.2GHz ARM core" seems to be comfortably two times more than you said, per core of course. And ARM also has SIMD extensions...

      What "fooling people"? How many people even realise how large number of ARM cores surrounds them all the time? (nvm their speed) If Intel has such advantage, why they haven't released very low clocked (it wouldn't be a problem with people working on embedded stuff) part that is still significantly faster and taking the market from ARM?
      Why new Intel Atom "for smartphones" has probably at least two ARM cores to even approach sensible levels of efficiency? Why the talk about ARM servers?

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  15. Re:MSM has always been dual core-MOD THIS by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Well Adobe is back into your handheld devices.
    Flash likes it cpu time on some operating systems so we will have to see what the real world tests show.
    More cores vs battery needs vs flash

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  16. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by Mr2001 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Microsoft Win 7 Mobile is really looking iffy to appear at all.

    Uh, what?

    --
    Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
  17. Him and I both, just give us a 386 wristwatch. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you haven't seen a Sharp Zaurus 5500 or 6000, then you haven't seen what a PDA should be about: with extendability of a USB CDMA adaptor from the likes of Sierra or even a WiFi adaptor then it is a complete solution.

    Similarly interesting projects have already filled this gap, but we just want one of these on an early native x86 instruction set: shrink down a 386 and bus to the smallest footprint, no FPGA or virtual machines! Stop running from American heritage!

  18. Wow, more marketing hype from qualcomm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who could have guessed

  19. Waiting for the tablet... by Alien1024 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sounds good for a phone, but awesome on a tablet, where there is more room for battery. The iPad got the right form factor and weight, but I also need a SD slot, HDMI output, user freedom and uncrippled USB. That's one tablet I would buy.

    1. Re:Waiting for the tablet... by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Me too. Further, I would probably pay what Apple is charging. Your feature set is also my feature set, but I also demand GPS and a back-mounted camera of at least 3MP. Bluetooth and GPS are uneasy partners and I don't want a dongle dragging on the ground; a camera is mandatory for reality overlay.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Waiting for the tablet... by Cjstone · · Score: 1

      It sounds like you both want the Notion Ink Adam. IMO, it's the most impressive tablet concept I've seen yet; a Tegra 2 based Android tablet with all the features listed above, and a PixelQi display. Unfortunately, it looks like the PixelQi version will be pretty pricey, and the launch is being delayed because they're trying to get Flash working properly on it. I just hope it comes to market and doesn't flop.

    3. Re:Waiting for the tablet... by Alien1024 · · Score: 1

      I thought the iPad 3G did have GPS...?

    4. Re:Waiting for the tablet... by Alien1024 · · Score: 1
  20. All dressed up but nowhere to go... by eugene259 · · Score: 1

    What's the point of a chipset capable of 1080p playback if it cannot drive a 1080p screen? Fair enough you won't have a 1920x1080 resolution screen in your phone or tablet device (not yet) but I for one wouldn't mind being able to connect my new 1080p capable device to a TV or monitor to playback 1080p at proper resolution.

    1. Re:All dressed up but nowhere to go... by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      you can do that even with existing phones like n8. the quoted limit is for the inbuilt screen. hdmi out can do full 1080p.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
  21. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by Alien1024 · · Score: 1

    All the limitations you mention are in the software that's currently available for x86, not in the architecture itself. Mobile OSes and apps could be ported to x86 without much hassle (in fact the kernels already are). The x86 of today is perfectly suited for a cell phone (whether we need that or not is another matter... anyway, the more competition the better).

    But until very recently Intel simply hadn't made efforts to adopt it to the power and size requirements for a smartphone. And ARM has market momentum, which x86 doesn't.

    Open Office on Android would be just impractical due to input methods and screen size, but there's no issue with architecture or memory. It would definitely make sense on a bigger screen, such as the iPad's. In fact, the Open Office team stated the show-stopper for Open Office on iPad is its extremely closed OS and app store, nothing about hardware. So the idea of Open Office on an Android tablet (when somebody makes it) isn't that far-fetched.

  22. What's so bad about x86? by mangu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I did a lot of assembly programming in the 1980s, for nearly every major processor available at the time. The 8086 rocked, in comparison to the others, at least until the 68000 came out.

    The one processor that really stunk, IMHO, was the z80, and that's why its lineage died after being so popular. But the others, like the 6809 and 6502, were rather limited in comparison to the 8086.

    Of course, virtual memory is a different beast and adapting x86 was a kludge. But I don't see RISC as being any improvement. If anything, they should have gone to a *more* complex instruction set, otherwise you start losing efficiency at the lowest level with all the library function calls that are needed. One example of a superb implementation of CISC for virtual memory was the VAX instruction set. The VAX was easily the winner in ease of assembly programming.

    In the end, I'd rather have a good CISC implementation than RISC. For an example of how RISC sucks, take the Microchip PIC architecture. They even claim "only 35 instructions to learn" in their marketing, as if this was an advantage.

    In conclusion, here's the car analogy: RISC is like a muscle car, all power but cannot make curves.

    1. Re:What's so bad about x86? by sznupi · · Score: 1

      And how do you reconcile the ending of your post with how ARM owns markets where efficiency is king? (and where there's often not that much of a need to maintain binary compatibility, so also much easier to switch if there was something better; where high competitiveness is much less stalled by external factors)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    2. Re:What's so bad about x86? by hattig · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Z80 was a major improvement over the 8080 that it was derived from. It became the most popular 8-bit CPU, and still sells millions every year in variants such as the eZ80 and Z8 microcontrollers.

      The 8086 was an extension of the 8080, and thus inherited all of its limitations as well, and they held x86 back for a long time. As you say, a new design, the 68000, was far more pleasurable to use.

      However where the 8080 succeeded was being the fourth major Intel CPU design (4004, 8008, 4040, 8080) which gave Intel a massive amount of developer feedback as to what the essential operations they needed to support in their CPU were.

      As for "Reduced" in RISC, it actually stands for "Simplified", meaning orthogonal instructions, a reduced number of instruction formats, and so on.

    3. Re:What's so bad about x86? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What kind of efficiency? The kind where the market is dominated by pic, avr and hc11?

    4. Re:What's so bad about x86? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Of course, virtual memory is a different beast and adapting x86 was a kludge. But I don't see RISC as being any improvement. If anything, they should have gone to a *more* complex instruction set, otherwise you start losing efficiency at the lowest level with all the library function calls that are needed.

      This is what macros are for. RISC actually reduces the number of cycles an operation requires in most cases because all RISC ops take one cycle. If it takes more than one cycle, it's not RISC. So operations for which we have a single instruction but which take multiple cycles have to be implemented as more instructions, it's true, but not only do they not take any more time to execute but if you don't need all the steps, you can leave some out. Thus RISC provides additional opportunities for optimization.

      The flip side is that x86's variable-length instructions provide a kind of instruction/operand compression, so x86 code can actually wind up being smaller than RISC code, and further the instructions can be loaded into the processor faster. And of course, all modern x86 processors are internally RISCy and they simply execute multiple micro-ops for a single instruction, and further they use register renaming and other tricks to mitigate the problems of register starvation.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:What's so bad about x86? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is the market where ARM Cortex M3 is making some very serious inroads.

    6. Re:What's so bad about x86? by renoX · · Score: 1

      Bah, you're talking about *manual* assembly programming, which don't really matter much currently: the design of the ISA for RISC are optimised for compilers..

      Some RISC sucks sure, but it's the same for CISCs (x86 sucks big time), so I'm not sure why you do this comparison..

    7. Re:What's so bad about x86? by mangu · · Score: 1

      From your post it's obvious that you never did assembly programming.

      The Z80 was a major improvement over the 8080 that it was derived from

      The major advantage the z80 had over the 8080 was a reduced chip count. Its architecture and instruction set are ridiculous.

      The 8086 was an extension of the 8080, and thus inherited all of its limitations as well

      The 8086 was *truly* a major improvement over the 8080. It had exactly the registers a compiler needs, which the z80 lacked. While the z80 tried to extend the 8080 by duplicating the registers, the 8086 extended the 8080 by adding the registers and instructions needed to run efficiently structured code.

      The 8086 had a set of four index registers, the Stack Pointer, Base Pointer, Source Index, and Destination Index, with which one could do efficiently operations with arrays and create a context for a subroutine very easily, allocating space for local variables in the stack. In the z80 such operations would need much more effort from the programmer.

      This may seem irrelevant with the CPUs we have now, but in the 1980s any decent program needed at least some assembly language functions and the time the programmers spent on them could be crucial to a project.

      The 68000 was better than the 8086, except for one detail: the 8086 was available, while the 68000 was vaporware. One of the first tasks I did in my first job in 1980 was to migrate a system that was aborted from the 68000, because Motorola couldn't deliver the chips, to the 8086. Sometimes being good is better than being perfect.

    8. Re:What's so bad about x86? by hattig · · Score: 1

      I did Z80 and 68000 assembly programming. I also did a bit of 8080 programming via the CP/M assembler on the Z80 system I had.

      The Z80 had IX and IY index registers - one of the improvements over the 8080. It also had a stack pointer registers.

      It also had the shadow register set.

      I think you are rushing to denigrate a CPU that actually was a significant improvement over what it replaced, whilst not pretending to be anything more.

  23. if only microsoft had never existed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    if only microsoft hadnt parasitically drained and hindered development of the computer industry.

    we might have operating systems that actually used the sophisticated features that chip designers were imagining and implementing. even the 386 provided features far more sophisticated than those used by the backwards compatibility driven windos nt, the unused rings of security, the io permission maps and virtualisation of memory. its a testament to microsoft's marketing department that many people believed that these features were somehow microsoft's innovation, and not the creation of intel.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_iAPX_432

    imagine the alternate history that could have been!

    1. Re:if only microsoft had never existed by sznupi · · Score: 1

      MS, for all their failings, was a large part of "bringing PCs to every home" (their stated goal BTW); tried to commoditize the hardware and succeeded. That also brought us cheap boxes for OSS, btw...

      Yes, commoditizing the hardware on some decent common ground that's available was a good thing. What you wish for we already had back then - many different incompatible lineages, high prices.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    2. Re:if only microsoft had never existed by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Their goal has always been to ride the desire for commodity hardware and slip their proprietary software in through the back door... It worked because compared to the cost of hardware, software was irrelevant.. By the time that changed, MS were too entrenched so now people are screwed.
      Now they are pushing this ridiculous idea that hardware should be free and given away with expensive software, when in reality it needs to be the other way around.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    3. Re:if only microsoft had never existed by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Well, not exactly "the other way around" - hardware should be inexpensive, and software too. All things considered, we're getting there.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    4. Re:if only microsoft had never existed by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Hardware can be inexpensive, but it still incurs per unit costs to produce so can never be free...
      Software can be reproduced without per unit costs, so can easily be distributed for free.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    5. Re:if only microsoft had never existed by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Free is inexpensive, don't you think?

      (nvm that not all software has to be explicitly free)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  24. Finally a Tegra 2 competitor by Khenke · · Score: 1

    Been waiting for a Tegra 2 Android phone for a long time. But finally an alternative come.
    I love competition, I don't care who makes the cpu of my super smartphone, as long as I get it soon. :)

    It will be interesting to see how Nvidia will counter this, like make sure that we actually can buy a phone with the Tegra 2 would be a good start...

    1. Re:Finally a Tegra 2 competitor by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Tegra doesn't have radio interface built-in, right? Well, that's its huge inferiority right there; and probably the main reason why it doesn't show up in any smartphones.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    2. Re:Finally a Tegra 2 competitor by Khenke · · Score: 1

      As far as I have found it don't have a radio interface built in. But that cant be so hard to overcome.
      What made me a bit worried is that Nvidia is generally fast to get new hardware out to products (excellent reference designs), their Tegra series has been painfully slow, even to products that don't need a radio interface.
      This makes me think there is something flawed with the whole Tegra series if hardware makers stay away from them.

    3. Re:Finally a Tegra 2 competitor by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Hard to overcome - no, of course not. But Nvidia hasn't done so; and you can't expect device manufacturers to make the effort (if Nv would even allow it...) while they can just take some ready, integrated solution.

      As for other reasons, who knows. My personal impression from the first Tegra was that it's a bit unballanced - having powerful GFX and quite ancient ARM cores in the time when much better ones were already on the market (and trying to hide it with the hype of "everything will be accelerated by GPU"). Now maybe OEMs just don't like the rules of Nv...

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    4. Re:Finally a Tegra 2 competitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      agree. Tegra is too slow. Fusion, on the other hand, is a CPU with built-in stream coprocessors that could greatly simplify the phone parts of a phone, provided it came with a secure, hard real time OS.

    5. Re:Finally a Tegra 2 competitor by sznupi · · Score: 1

      What? Why bring Fusion into this? Running "phone parts of a phone" on it instead of dedicated silicon? Yeah, it would greatly simplify things for sure - a phone which drains its battery in minutes has quite simple mode of "operation" after that...

      There's signalling / protocol stack too, of course - but that can run even on quite old ARM cores.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  25. Anti virus software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wasn't that what one hacker said? "the security hole exists in safari for iPhones too, but the phone doesn't have the power/hardware to run the code properly"?

    I guess the hackers can now finally rejoice, pat themselves on the back and roll up their sleeves... While the antivirus developers can earn more money on making antivirus and firewall software for smartphones. Interesting future ahead with smartphone botnets. ^^

  26. Re:Give me an x86 phone...who cares? by sznupi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Mobile usages are limited by available battery technology at least as much as processing power; and the former moves forward much slower. Process lead of Intel doesn't quite work the same as before in this case...

    Sure, there's one future, unreleased, next year Intel product; as you can see from the article, basically "smartphones only", no Win for you or generic Linux distro (not a big deal so far). But now it gets interesting..."southbridge" has "system controller/32 bit risc" - would be surprising if that's not some ARM (plus at least another one in radio interface; that's already probably more ARM cores than x86 ones, to keep power consumption at merely acceptable levels; Intel just couldn't do it without ARM). Less efficient and more expensive multichip solution (and of course other manufacturers are expected to make this effort, for miniscule portion of the market...while Intel doesn't risk anything; but anyway, there are no announcements - while phones would need to get certs quite some time before release; Android players have no incentive to switch; Apple has none, either, considering their inhouse ARM team; Samsung goes its own way, their own SoCs; Nokia devices with MeeGo are an uberniche product - they will certainly ride on Symbian for a long time)

    Plus Intel doesn't even tell everything - they show those nice power usage numbers only in scenarios...when x86 core is idling; when the "supporting" hardware (with a great help of ARM cores :D ) does the real work. Power usage when x86 is doing something intensive (using its "impressive" speed) is strangely absent...

    It will be still probably around an order of magnitude difference. Plus ARM won't stand still, look at the progress in the past decade from, say, ARM7TDMI to latest Cortex.
    Again - a progress constrained by battery technology; Intel offering doesn't help that, quite the contrary - their greatest strength, process shrinking, no longer works quite the way as before.

    BTW, how is the i960 or Itanium going?

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  27. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by wgoodman · · Score: 1

    Uhm.. as much as i really dislike Apple, I feel obligated to point out that the iphone/pad run stripped down versions of OSX. Apple just removed a bunch of the crap that doesn't need to be there.

  28. Mobile Phones ain't done, until Flash does run!!! by master_p · · Score: 1

    99% of time we use our computers on the internet, and most sites nowadays contain some sort of Flash video. Well, no mobile plays them all out of the box, as we speak. It's not the hardware that is the problem, it's the software.

    There are lots of things that make Flash video necessary on mobile devices. For example, there are lots of video presentations about newest technologies. It's a shame that I have to sit in front of a PC for one hour to watch these, when the same thing could have been done on the way to work, saving valuable time.

  29. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

    People have tried x86 processors, the Intel Atom and found they just aren't suited to a mobile device like a tablet or smartphone. The battery life just wasn't good enough.

  30. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by obarthelemy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Regarding Open Office on Android: Android Tablets are coming, Android phones take a BT keyboard, and some have video out...

    Regarding Win7 and other regular OSes on mobiles: it may be impossible to get Win7 to be energy efficient, and keep the oodles of power-sucking services (and the basic architecture) of that server/desktop OS. Unlickily, those are probably required for compatibility.

    Regarding x86 mobile: x86 was never designed as a low-power, high-efficiency CPU. Attempts to backport that are somewhat succesful, but I can't imagine x86 ever being as efficient as ARM cores that have been designed from the ground up to be precisely that. The one advantage Intel has is process technologies. See http://netbooked.net/blog/arm-vs-atom-size-vs-power-vs-performance/ for a biased source :-p

    Other than that, I agree with you. Oh, wait ...

    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
  31. 1280x800? by RichiH · · Score: 1

    Bleh, so I will have to wait for Beagleboard 2.0 with OMAP4.

    DO WANT!

  32. Re:Mobile Phones ain't done, until Flash does run! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    n900 does flash out of the box just fine with it's default browser.

  33. good spec for netbook or tablet by hyartep · · Score: 1

    from the spec it seems to me this chipset could be great for netbook or tablet, probably better than for smartphone

  34. Stop that and make a new version of Eudora! by Snaller · · Score: 1

    What are you thinking about Quallcomm!

    (And no, there aren't any emails with the feel of Eudora, just a cheap reskin of some lesser mail program)

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    1. Re:Stop that and make a new version of Eudora! by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      there aren't any emails with the feel of Eudora, just a cheap reskin of some lesser mail program

      Wow, you're pining for the 'feel' of Eudora, when the crappy feel of Eudora ... is what killed Eudora. I guess there's something for everyone, but I wouldn't get my hopes up, if I were you.

  35. ARM processors versus general purpose computers by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1

    The ARM has been very successful in what have been, in effect, embedded applications. Even the iPhone and the iPad are, basically, embedded. Android and Maemo are general purpose platforms with optimisation for communications, but Android and Maemo devices are too limited to be general purpose (much as I nowadays wonder how I managed without my N900, it is not a computer replacement.) These new dual-core SOC designs mean that ARM will be back driving true general purpose computers. The original BBC Micro (though of course not ARM-powered) was a general purpose machine with, for its day, a very high level of on-board system integration. Hence my comment.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  36. Re:Mobile Phones ain't done, until Flash does run! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The N900 supports flash just fine. Why do people always ignore this phone? It's almost like they think the iPhone and Android devices are the only choices out there.

  37. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by Jenming · · Score: 1

    They are not suited for this type of hardware, memory limitations, screen limitation, and lack of keyboard/mouse.

    Ummm, he was asking for a phone without those hardware limitations (i.e. USB, HDMI, SSD drive). It would probably need some rather impressive energy modes in order to switch from desktop to battery modes, but thats all in the software.

    --
    Morpheus, God of Dreams.
  38. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by Russellkhan · · Score: 1

    Can you link some evidence of this? I've looked around and haven't found anything other than Apple (I think it was Steve Jobs, but can't remember clearly enough to say for sure) claiming it's OS X.

    --
    Information doesn't want to be anthropomorphized anymore.
  39. Jebus! by oldhack · · Score: 1

    Someone should put a package together for tiny and quiet PC/set-top/file server setup.

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  40. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by sznupi · · Score: 1

    Well, it does have at least very close underlying OS, similar libs used for usermode apps, etc. Does not make it full OSX of course; is not that different from what Android or, especially, MeeGo do.

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  41. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by sznupi · · Score: 1

    You surely need to work hard with software to make sure it exploits the possibilites of power savings given by hardware...but it's not the same as "thats all in the software"

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  42. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by catmistake · · Score: 1

    Even Apple realized that OS/X was not the thing to run on a smartphone

    Actually, Apple is using OS X on the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad, and soon, the Apple TV. They changed the name of the OS from OS X to iPhone OS, but it's the same thing. Apple is attempting to differentiate the OS that runs on their desktops, servers, and laptops by calling it "Mac OS X," but it is, in fact, the same underlying BSD operating system, basically, FreeBSD userland and a Mach kernel. Mac OS X uses Quartz with the Aqua theme for it's GUI window management, which is absent from iPhone OS. The equivalent in iPhone OS is Springboard.

  43. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by catmistake · · Score: 1
  44. Re:Give me an x86 phone...who cares? by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    Yeah. The sprint's HTC Evo is sexy, but it sucks the battery down like nobody's business. You're going to want to carry the charger cable with the phone. What we need is one of those plutonium power cells like the one they put in Voyager. Then your battery would last 20+ years! Disposal would be a bitch, though...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  45. ARM-based pad as the new desktop by Misagon · · Score: 1

    In the netbook/smartbook marketplace, what I think people want is not just a new gadget for serfing the web. They want something with the same capabilities as their old PC, only smaller. I think this is the reason why ARM netbooks never really took off. Their specs were crippled and they could run only custom software. Something that I am hoping for, is that I could get a ARM-based touchpad or netbook and use that to replace my noisy old intel desktop PC for web-browsing and simple programming. The CPU horsepower is more than enough, plus it would be fan-less and have three times the battery time. If it only had the capabilities: a decent amount of memory, proper graphics with hardware-accelerated video and HDMI out to a proper screen, USB ports for a keyboard, bluray and storage. I am eagerly awaiting an ARM-based touchpad to appear with these capabilities, so that I can start hacking.

    --
    "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
    1. Re:ARM-based pad as the new desktop by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1

      If it only had the capabilities: a decent amount of memory, proper graphics with hardware-accelerated video and HDMI out to a proper screen, USB ports for a keyboard, bluray and storage.

      A built in Bluray player on a tablet..........I think what you're looking for is called a laptop.

      Frankly it is to the point now where I should hand in my geek card because I'm understanding why people like Apple's approach. When I go home, I don't want to deal with crap. I do enough at that at work. When I'm at home I just want things to work. Over the past 8 years, I've not had any problems with Apple's DRM. Yes it maybe there, but it has never inconvenienced me. And that's the point. A lot of people around here object because of philosophical reasons, but to the average user, so long as it works as they expect and doesn't get in their way, they don't care.

      I bought an iPad 3G and gave my MacBook Pro to a new developer we hired at work. Over the past year I've found that all I was using the laptop for was email, skype, and writing proposals. And most of the time I was using my iPhone for email and skype. (we do voice conferencing not video usually). I was already using iWork more than Office these days, but I still have a Mac Mini at home and at the office. So I bought two docking stations (one for the office and one for home) and I really like the iPad so far.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  46. Re:Mobile Phones ain't done, until Flash does run! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Can I go into Verizon and by the N900? Or even test it out? What about AT&T? Sprint? T-Mobile? ... if you can, that's news to me. And that's why we forget it exists.

  47. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

    Apple TV currently runs a modified version of Tiger.

  48. Re:MSM has always been dual core-MOD THIS by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Good thing I don't have mod points today. I wouldn't know whether to mod you funny, insightful, or troll.

    Troll is for things you don't believe but say anyway to get attention. The mod you were thinking of was 'flamebait'. Modding the above as troll is abuse of moderation, and further, abuses the spirit of slashdot moderation (focus on up-mods.)

    Are you a regular abuser of moderation?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  49. Re:Give me an x86 phone...who cares? by sznupi · · Score: 1

    No need for RTGs. More generally, what you describe is a function of people getting wooed by "sexy" and forgetting about also looking at battery life when making their choice.
    Well, TBH I can almost see this new Intel "smartphone Atom" to be reasonably popular in such environment...

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  50. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by drsmithy · · Score: 1

    Even Apple realized that OS/X was not the thing to run on a smartphone [...]

    Apple run a stripped down version of OS X on the iPhone and iPad.

    There's no reason to think Microsoft couldn't do the same with Windows, either, if they were sufficiently motivated.

  51. Re:MSM has always been dual core-MOD THIS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you a wizard?

  52. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by osho_gg · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Give me a phone where I can run an x86 operating system and x86 software.

    That would be a very bad move since any x86 OS is both bloated, and not suited for a touch screen only interface.

    This is pure BS. Look at the upcoming Moorestown and the OSes available to run on them. MeeGo runs on it - completely touch-based OS. And, Android also runs on it. There is nothing inherent in the x86 to make it touch-averse. Where it has been lacking so far was performance for the limited power envelop. Moorestown will fix that. The next thing where it will still be lacking is not tight enough integration of communications capability - which is key to create a mobile platform that runs well with limited power consumption. Osho

  53. Re:MSM has always been dual core-MOD THIS by sznupi · · Score: 1

    I put on my robe and wizard hat...

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  54. Re:MSM has always been dual core-MOD THIS by BertieBaggio · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't know whether to mod you funny, insightful, or troll.

    Aw hell, I'm a fan of all three!

    --
    If all you have is a grenade, pretty soon every problem looks like a foxhole -- MightyYar
  55. Re:Mobile Phones ain't done, until Flash does run! by cbhacking · · Score: 1

    I take it you've never heard of the Nokia N900? Runs Linux (Maemo), comes out of the box with full Flash 9 capability (in a Gecko-based browser) and Flash 10 will be available soon. Even on the older N800 (which, unlike the 900, isn't actually a phone) I could load Pandora or watch YouTube videos using Flash - in fact, either AdBlock or FlashBlock are near-essential for browsing on those devices, due to all the Flash. Fortunately, they (and at least one other Firefox extension) are available, as is full Firefox (and therefore all its extensions).

    I've also heard that Flash is available on WinMo phones, but never tried it.

    --
    There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  56. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 1

    My first Smart Phone was a Kyocera 6035. I've used them for longer than most people. I know all about the so-called "paradigm" you're talking about. It's crap. Give me a 800x480 screen for mobile use; and a real OS, video out, USB, and BT for desktop use. Then I'll have all the mobile devices in one, which is the proper "paradigm".

    Apple switched the OS because they want to lock in the software market. If the iPhone was a real computer, Apple couldn't do that. They also want to get away from x86 so they can pay less for processors. I'd rather pay more to get a massive choice of software, freedom, and far greater utility.

    And as for x86 being bloated, the interpreters take a smaller and smaller portion of the die. Meanwhile, instruction extensions have increased performance dramatically, and production technology has far more dto do with overall performance. x86 bloat has been a non-issue on the desktop for many years, hence the death of all its competitors. The G5 was crap compared to a Core Duo. So where does that leave the mobile space? We've reached the point where x86 can work fine in a phone, and in a couple more generations, there won't be any important difference in power usage between an x86 and ARM processor. 1/2 watt versus 1? Do we really care if the phone gets 48 hours or 72 hours of battery life? No, we usually don't.

  57. Battery pack not optional by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    20 Cell belt pack L-ion battery pack will not be optional

  58. Not for long,my Desire might be up for replacement by Johan+Welin · · Score: 1

    These specs tickle some of my nerdy genes. Any phone-maker that use these chips definitively attracts my attention. At least with a decent SW support to make good use of the hardware. Without it; a phone with these chips would be just a slightly faster [UI-wise] phone.. - Has competent software become a more valuable commodity than it used to be a few years ago?

  59. HTC makes a super smartphone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HTC can make a super smartphone anytime, but the real Q is whether the 2D/3D acceleration will be enabled in its drivers, cuz history says it usually isn't (due to licensing)

    1. Re:HTC makes a super smartphone? by Cornelius+the+Great · · Score: 1

      The 2D/3D acceleration fiasco died off with the 7200 series of Qualcomm chips. I had an HTC Kaiser (AT&T Tilt) that had no acceleration, and then an HTC Raphael (Fuze/Touch Pro) that had iffy 3D acceleration and poor video decoding performance, so the driver issue bit me firsthand.

      Luckily, the Snapdragon line (QSD8xxx) have all had working graphics drivers for the platforms it's been released with (WM 6.5 and Android, AFAIK).

      My current Nexus One has full OpenGL ES 2.0 capability and hardware MPEG4 and h264 decoding. I'm a happy camper. :)

      --
      Sigs are for losers
  60. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by jo42 · · Score: 1

    From one of the 2009 WWDC session slides: iPhone OS 3.0 and Mac OS X core share over 80% of their source code.

  61. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by Russellkhan · · Score: 1

    Nice, thanks. Dunno why I didn't think to look there.

    --
    Information doesn't want to be anthropomorphized anymore.
  62. Re:Give me an x86 phone...who cares? by Meski · · Score: 1

    I want a fuel-cell! One that I can have as carry on and use in a plane!

  63. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by Meski · · Score: 1

    Now if only they'd release it for their desktop version :^)

  64. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well yes, but it's stripped down to the extent that the user doesn't see any of OSX, it won't run any OSX apps, as far as the user is concerned it might as well be a completely different OS.

  65. Re:Mobile Phones ain't done, until Flash does run! by Cornelius+the+Great · · Score: 1

    N900 is a GSM phone, so no go for CDMA-based carriers (VZW, Sprint/Nextel). It'll run fine on AT&T and T-Mobile's network, but it will only do 3G on the latter.

    --
    Sigs are for losers
  66. Re:Give me an x86 phone...BAD MOVE by Jenming · · Score: 1

    you are right of course, "thats all in the software" is a joke that fails because you can't read my body language and haven't heard me say it before :)

    --
    Morpheus, God of Dreams.