Slashdot Mirror


Dual-Core Chips Coming To All Smartphones In 2011

An anonymous reader writes "All top of the range smartphones will be sporting dual-core chips this year. So is it time to ditch your current pocket rocket? Not necessarily — dual-core will give a bit of a boost to multitasking and media streaming but probably won't persuade iPhone owners to switch to Android, says the writer."

244 comments

  1. Re:First. by Nuno+Sa · · Score: 0

    Karma to spare, uh? :-)

    Or are you saying you have the first dual core smartphone from 2011? :-)

  2. iPhone by imamac · · Score: 2, Insightful

    probably won't persuade iPhone owners to switch to Android

    And who is to say that the iPhone 5 won't be dual core?

    1. Re:iPhone by Pojut · · Score: 1, Interesting

      ^This. With all the hubub surrounding Tegra 2 and various other dual-core SOC designs, I'd be very surprised if the next iPhone iteration maintained a single-core design, ESPECIALLY now that iOS supports multitasking. Same goes for the iPad.

    2. Re:iPhone by nibbles2004 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      i do , it wont be

    3. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, Steve! Thanks for letting us know...

    4. Re:iPhone by jgagnon · · Score: 2

      It would be truly hilarious if Steve Jobs used the handle "nibbles".

      --
      Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    5. Re:iPhone by tlhIngan · · Score: 3, Funny

      And who is to say that the iPhone 5 won't be dual core?

      Unlikely, really.

      First, a good reason to NOT be dual core is battery life - slower is better. iPhone hardware has always lagged the Android models - the original iPhone and iPhone 3G had 412MHz CPUs, while the G1 (same year) had a 524MHz CPU - nearly 25% faster. The iPhone 3GS sported a 624MHz CPU or so (50% faster than iPhone/iPhone 3G), at a time when the Android hotness was 1GHz CPUs (50% faster than iPhone 3GS). The iPhone 4 is supposed to have around an 800MHz CPU, and current gen Androids have 1.2GHz CPUs.

      The only thing to come close would be the iPad with its 1GHz processor.

      The iPad's also the most likely one to sport a dual core processor - it has the massive battery packs (it's what, 90% battery?) to have decent battery life with dual cores.

      If Androids of 2011 get dual core, it'll probably be 2012 at the earliest before Apple releases a dual core A5 chip or something for the iPhone, with the A5 debuting on the second gen iPad first at the absolute earliest. Or maybe it'll be 3rd gen iPad at that point.

      Remember, these are mobile devices, and even though I charge mine at the end of the day before I go to sleep, I'd still like to be able to get through the day without lugging extended battery packs.

    6. Re:iPhone by AvitarX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Considering my phone screen is 65%-85% of the battery, I am not too worried about a dual core.

      Also, I imagine with the ability to kill off cores when not needed a slower dual-core could use less than a single core, and run better.

      The iPad has massive battery because of the screen, which I bet is over 90% of the power used. Especially in one that is being used as a browser tablet without 3G (less going on when not being used).

      My current (4 hours since unplugged, not too much usage today vs a normal morning) has 65% display, 10% cell standby, 8% phone idle as the top 3. Not having the phone function would save 10% of my battery, but still the screen is the real killer. And on a typical day I use the screen a lot more in the morning.

      This is Tmobile G2 for reference.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    7. Re:iPhone by todorb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      two cores on lower clock rate may consume less energy than one core with fast clocking. energy use is proportional to the square of the clock rate, so it's a matter of tuning to achieve lower power. the only question is whether the slow cores will be fast enough for the important sequential tasks (if there are such at all).

    8. Re:iPhone by dagamer34 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Umm... the Android G1 had a 524Mhz Qualcomm processor and that was 2008. The first Android phone to come out with a 1Ghz Snapdragon was the Nexus One, and that wasn't until January 2010. And as far as current-gen Android phones having a 1.2Ghz processor, none of those have been released yet. All Android phones released in 2010 were capped at 1Ghz with chips from either Qualcomm or Samsung. The Samsung Infuse 4G is the first phone I'm aware of that at stock is greater than 1Ghz (it is 1.2Ghz).

      As for battery life, I'd like to direct you to this white paper: http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/tegra_white_papers/Benefits-of-Multi-core-CPUs-in-Mobile-Devices_Ver1.2.pdf

      Sure it's written by nVidia, but I doubt they are allowed to flat out lie, as that's some pretty bad PR. And it's the whole theory behind having dual cores in laptops anyway. 2 cores running at a lower clock speed is more power efficient than running one core at a higher clock speed.

    9. Re:iPhone by dc29A · · Score: 3, Informative

      iOS only supports true multitasking for a limited number of applications (phone, music player, voip, etc ...) , for everything else is it's not multitasking but swapping out programs left and right.

    10. Re:iPhone by Pojut · · Score: 1

      First, a good reason to NOT be dual core is battery life - slower is better. iPhone hardware has always lagged the Android models - the original iPhone and iPhone 3G had 412MHz CPUs, while the G1 (same year) had a 524MHz CPU - nearly 25% faster. The iPhone 3GS sported a 624MHz CPU or so (50% faster than iPhone/iPhone 3G), at a time when the Android hotness was 1GHz CPUs (50% faster than iPhone 3GS). The iPhone 4 is supposed to have around an 800MHz CPU, and current gen Androids have 1.2GHz CPUs

      Just for clarification, the clock speeds you cited are the downclocked speeds, not the "design spec" clock speeds. Look under "Processor" on this chart. Not saying you're wrong, just saying the performance is purposely reduced from its actual potential for extra battery life.

    11. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh god... you can't be suggesting that they're going to FRAGMENT the number of cores? IPhone users will hate that.

    12. Re:iPhone by icebraining · · Score: 2

      Which doesn't mean a single app can't use the two cores - iOS 4 comes with Grand Central Dispatch support. Could be useful for games.

    13. Re:iPhone by Pojut · · Score: 0

      Grade A, good sir :) Come on mods, parent said some funny shit. Mod it up!

    14. Re:iPhone by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Dual core could allow shutting down one of the cores when idle, which could save more battery than a single faster core.

    15. Re:iPhone by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      Still, that would be an improvement, and I'd have to think they'd do some tweaking on iOS for more true multi-tasking if they had >1 cores.

      I'm about to be eligible to trade up to a new iPhone from the 3GS. I'd been hearing rumors about an updated iPhone coming out maybe in Spring or around June...any thoughts on that?

      Anyone think if a new version comes out then, it will have multi-cores?

      I'd definitely wait on that.

      Damn..also hoping they'll grandfather in my unlimited data plan from the old phone to the new one.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    16. Re:iPhone by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      And the G1 is underclocked to 328 or something in stock ROMs. Mine runs at 576 now. Root is cool.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    17. Re:iPhone by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Battery life.

      Jobs wont allow the iPHone to become the battery pig that many Android phones are. Current 4G iphones are snappy as hell. Even my old 3Gs is very useable with the latest OS installed.

      Honestly, I dont WANT dual core if my battery life suffers at all. I like gong all day long without having to charge it, and that is running a GPS app in the background to update my Latitude location every 10 minutes.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    18. Re:iPhone by Pojut · · Score: 0

      Apple has typically released next-gen iPhones in June. If you have the patience, I'd say wait. Generally, there's little to gain when only jumping a single generation, especially when the newest version is closer to reality than the release date of the "current" version is in the past.

      If nothing else, I'd say at least wait until they reveal the specs and make your decision from there.

    19. Re:iPhone by kangsterizer · · Score: 1

      You're modded funny but i guess you meant it seriously.
      The new dual cores draw less power for the same tasks then their old counterpart (in the very case of the ARM8 vs ARM9 CPUs), partially due to their dual core architecture.
      So anyway just had to put that somewhere.

    20. Re:iPhone by BassMan449 · · Score: 1

      They will grandfather your data plan. I switched from an iPhone to a Android on AT&T and they let me keep my data plan so they should do the same for an iPhone upgrade.

    21. Re:iPhone by Pojut · · Score: 1

      Android phones aren't battery hogs because of their high clock speed...it's mostly a combination of poor battery design by hardware companies and the inherent way Android functions. Newer Android phones (and the 2.3 version of the OS itself) are supposed to have enhanced battery life quite noticeably. That being said, switching my data connection from 3G to WiFi when possible usually extends my battery life by a solid 2-4 hours, depending on usage.

      While the crap battery life on my Eris does kind of suck, I'm more or less always right next to a wall socket, so it doesn't bother me all that much.

    22. Re:iPhone by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      I get about four days with my G2 if I'm not making videos or watching videos or using map navigation and so on, just making a normal number of calls and browsing occasionally. Watching videos it lasts about 5 hours, which could be improved but its not a big issue. Call me satisfied with battery performance, though any improvement would be welcome.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    23. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, no. Power is proportional to the square of *voltage*. Power is linear with clock rate.

      However, lower clock rates can be run at lower voltages and so you get the effect that you're talking about.

    24. Re:iPhone by sznupi · · Score: 2

      ARM and Nokia also stated, during the last year or so, that multicore is likely to help with battery life.

      ARM is of course as (or more) "suspect" as claims by Nvidia. Not Nokia though; and many of their phones show some care when it comes to battery life.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    25. Re:iPhone by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Considering my phone screen is 65%-85% of the battery

      ...only when you look at it.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    26. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Droid 2 Global from Motorola has a 1.2 GHz chip.

    27. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BTW the Motorola/Verizon Droid 2 Global, available starting in late 2010, does indeed come with a 1.2Ghz processor. I have one and it's tasty.

    28. Re:iPhone by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      The cores can still run at the same rate as the current single-core chips. They'll be just as fast as they are now, only with the option for multiple cores.

    29. Re:iPhone by pz · · Score: 2

      Yes. There's a nice answer to essentially the same question that someone (not me) wrote about 6 months ago here:

      http://superuser.com/questions/163567/why-does-the-heat-production-increase-as-the-clockrate-of-a-cpu-increases/163570#163570

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    30. Re:iPhone by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ESPECIALLY now that iOS supports multitasking

      iOS has always supported multitasking. Run top on an old iPhone and you'll see lots of system daemons running in the background. It did not support more than one GUI application running at once, but this was due to memory constraints, not due to lack of CPU power. GUI apps tend to eat a load of RAM and the iPhone does not support swapping (well, actually, the kernel does, but you need to jailbreak it, install a terminal, and then turn it on). If you run more than one app, the others have to be aware of the increased memory constraints. This is less of a problem on the newer models, with more RAM, and will be irrelevant in a year or two when they all come with 2GB or so.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    31. Re:iPhone by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      All other things being equal, running two cores at 400MHz uses significantly less power than running one at 800MHz. Given that Apple is pushing things like libdispatch in iOS, they expect mobile apps to be multithreaded and so they may get the same performance from two underclocked cores as from one at full speed. This would give an improvement in battery life.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    32. Re:iPhone by scamper_22 · · Score: 1

      First of all, having dual cores is not just about switching between apps.
      There's a lot of background processing and signalling that goes on behind the scenes on smart phones. They use the CPU for lots of things. Not all cellphone IO is handled by dedicated chips. Your CPU sees some of the traffic. It is why your device slows down when downloading a file or something.

      Even if all the 'apps' stay on the one core, but all these background tasks run on the other core, it will make a huge improvement for the end user experience.

      We hear the same arguments about people who say more cores are useless as programs are not written for such multi-threadedness... well yeah... having more cores might not improve the experience of one heavy app running at a time (like a compiler or simulator) if it's not optimized for it. But what it does do is allow lots of different applications to run at the same time... smoothly... for a much better end user experience.

    33. Re:iPhone by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      No,

      When I check battery history it uses 65% - 85% since last unplugged.

      followed by cell standby that is currently 9% (display is 67%).

      This leaves the CPU at 24% of total battery use (we're ignoring memory, and assuming my number 3 battery user, phone idle, primarily uses CPU as the drain).

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    34. Re:iPhone by markass530 · · Score: 1

      droid 2 global, 1.2 GHZ

    35. Re:iPhone by asdf7890 · · Score: 1

      Battery life.

      A modern dual core chip may consume less power on average than an older single core model, especially if the OS is bright enough to let one of the cores properly idle when it can. Anyway, if my cheap Android based phone is anything to go by, most of the battery charge seems to go into powering the screen when in use and keeping the radios running - only when I run something gamey or access web pages that really aren't designed for small low power devices does the CPU really do a lot.

    36. Re:iPhone by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      True, if you switched any single-core phone to a Marvell Armada or TI OMAP 4440 you'd save A LOT of energy and get a huge boost in processing power at the same time.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    37. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're going to find that unless you're doing some heavy lifting (i.e. something gaming-wise or doing something like what Moto's selling with the docked Atrix 4G...) you're going to see similar battery life to what you're seeing right now. These dual core systems don't work quite like many of the dual/quad core devices out there- think of it more like how the Core i7 does things with the clock speeds on a single core when it needs it without the overclock trick they're doing. All in all, unless you're doing something that needs the extra core, it's pretty much powered down. And not everything brings up the extra core.

    38. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iphone 4 proc = 1ghz snapdragon

    39. Re:iPhone by Facegarden · · Score: 1

      And who is to say that the iPhone 5 won't be dual core?

      Unlikely, really.

      First, a good reason to NOT be dual core is battery life - slower is better. iPhone hardware has always lagged the Android models - the original iPhone and iPhone 3G had 412MHz CPUs, while the G1 (same year) had a 524MHz CPU - nearly 25% faster. The iPhone 3GS sported a 624MHz CPU or so (50% faster than iPhone/iPhone 3G), at a time when the Android hotness was 1GHz CPUs (50% faster than iPhone 3GS). The iPhone 4 is supposed to have around an 800MHz CPU, and current gen Androids have 1.2GHz CPUs.

      The only thing to come close would be the iPad with its 1GHz processor.

      The iPad's also the most likely one to sport a dual core processor - it has the massive battery packs (it's what, 90% battery?) to have decent battery life with dual cores.

      If Androids of 2011 get dual core, it'll probably be 2012 at the earliest before Apple releases a dual core A5 chip or something for the iPhone, with the A5 debuting on the second gen iPad first at the absolute earliest. Or maybe it'll be 3rd gen iPad at that point.

      Remember, these are mobile devices, and even though I charge mine at the end of the day before I go to sleep, I'd still like to be able to get through the day without lugging extended battery packs.

      I don't think any current gen android phones have a 1.2GHz processor, and if there are any oddballs (maybe some models from asia?) it certainly isn't the norm. 1GHz is still the norm for current gen Android phones. I know plenty of 1GHz dual core models were shown off at CES though, and those will come out some time in the first quarter or first half. There may have been some 1.2GHz single core models as well, I don't remember. But none of those are shipping yet, so they can't be called current gen. I am a hardcore android fan, but facts are facts.

      --
      Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
    40. Re:iPhone by Tjp($)pjT · · Score: 1

      I thought the implication by the article author was an iPhone was not a top of the range smartphone.

      While iPhone currently does not use a dual core the CPU core of the A4 is based on IP that is dual core capable, so it would just mean a hypothetical A5 processor could easily be dual core on the CPU side.

      --
      - Tjp

      I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!

    41. Re:iPhone by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      There's a lot of background processing and signalling that goes on behind the scenes on smart phones.

      This isn't any different for traditional* computers either... Once I went dual core, I never wanted to go back, for precisely this reason.

      As long as the OS is smart about it, dual core fixes a lot of user experience issues - for example, the OS not responding well when I set off a single thread but CPU intensive program became a thing of the past.

      *I was going to just say 'computers', then 'standard', but let's face it, my smartphone is more powerful than the desktop computer I had a decade ago.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    42. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      who says the iPhone isn't a top of the range smartphone?

    43. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who modded this insightful? "Energy use is proportional to the square of the clock rate..." WHAT?! Who allowed you to pretend like you knew anything about EE?

    44. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      two cores on lower clock rate may consume less energy than one core with fast clocking. energy use is proportional to the square of the clock rate, so it's a matter of tuning to achieve lower power. the only question is whether the slow cores will be fast enough for the important sequential tasks (if there are such at all).

      The relationship between energy use and clock rate is actually a linear one. If you take a chip running at 1 GHz and up it to 1.2 (with everything else being equal), then the energy use will go up by 20%. The kicker is that energy use is proportional to the square of the voltage, and quite often you have to increase the voltage to get a higher clock rate to be stable.

    45. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not quite. Pover consumption is linear with the clock rate and square to the voltage. However running at a lower clock rate requires a lower voltage so 2 cores running at half speed and a lower voltage can can consume less power than one fast core.

    46. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It depends on your brightness settings, I think. The screen uses around 9-15% on my G2.

    47. Re:iPhone by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I use auto, and it does consistently appear too bright indoors, but at the same time, I don't want to have to brighten it outside, especially if it's low, as I won't even be able to see it.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    48. Re:iPhone by jspayne · · Score: 1
      Try again...

      P = VI = I**2 R

      When your frequency goes up, so does the number of current spikes due to the high frequency transients. You didn't think a square wave was actually square, did you?

    49. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your screen is 65-85%? Wow, on my EVO the Wi-fi, bluetooth, and cell standby are always my top three battery uses, typically between 20-25% each.

    50. Re:iPhone by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      First, a good reason to NOT be dual core is battery life - slower is better.

      Not so. Sometimes running faster uses less power. It depends on the operation and the CPU. Furthermore, the multi-core processors I've seen which target phones typically shutdown the second core when not needed. So for simple operations, battery life is equal to that of a single core system.

      Furthermore, Android (Linux actually) supports dynamic CPU scaling. So its very possible (actually commonly done with third party ROMs) to use two, three, or even four different clock rates depending on current load. Meaning, the CPU is only ever maxed for loads which last for some measurable duration.

      Long story short, for common, non-CPU bound tasks, multi-core can actually offer better battery life. Now then, for something like a game, which may leverage both cores and have them both CPU-bound, expect battery life to suffer accordingly.

      As for your clock rate comparisons - they are almost useless. There is a lot more to performance than simple clock rates. For example, when the G1 was introduced, it had slow memory and a slow bus. As a result, most devices which were introduced after it, ran at the same clock speed but were frequently 30%-60% faster.

      Furthermore, all too often the biggest battery draw for is the screen (especially when at maximum brightness) and GPS. Both of these can account for a huge portion of battery. WIFI should also not be forgotten as its impact can be considerable.

      For Android, multi-core is especially attractive because of various design decisions which are unique to Android. For example, you could potentially do JIT and GC on the second CPU, thereby improving UI responsiveness. Furthermore, Android has the notion of services, which means its frequently a natural fit to have a service running on one CPU and the UI running another.

    51. Re:iPhone by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing a "whoosh" is in order. I think he was making a joke. After all, your screen only uses power, "when looking at it."

    52. Re:iPhone by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      probably won't persuade iPhone owners to switch to Android

      And who is to say that the iPhone 5 won't be dual core?

      Didn't Lord Jobs decree that the iPhone doesn't need a dual-core processor?

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    53. Re:iPhone by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      When auto brightness came it, people said it saved battery life. Since that time, most people agree it uses even more. It frequently sets the display too bright and is constantly readjusting, not to mention is using yet another sensor to determine the brightness level.

      I personally use DimBot, which automatically adjusts based on sunrise/sunset. Aside from that, I frequently don't need to adjust. And when I do, it can a cool feature which allows me to set it by rotating the phone. Its called a "virtual knob."

    54. Re:iPhone by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      if a dual core CPU is twice a single core, wouldn't the processor be called the A3? :-)

    55. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      energy use is proportional to the square of the clock

      No, energy consumption increases with the square of the voltage, and linearly with the increase in speed. But it's possible that two cores with lower clock rate consume less power than one faster core.

    56. Re:iPhone by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      I've heard rumors (business insider site) that Apple's likely to have 4GS type of upgrade this year and iPhone 5 out next year. But it's all just yammering.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    57. Re:iPhone by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Which doesn't mean a single app can't use the two cores

      Then you end up with quite a fragmented platform (i know this is already the case with other platforms but this was the advantage of the iPhone), the iPhone4 will be only a year old - the white version still isn't even out yet - and it will already be effectively obsolete. There were a few iPhone4-specific apps but just about everything runs all the way back to the 3G. If apps are making effective use of multiple cores they will likely be unusable on older versions.

      iOS 4 comes with Grand Central Dispatch support.

      woo...theadpool

    58. Re:iPhone by Tharsman · · Score: 1

      iOS supports full true multitasking. It does not allow it, but it supports it. Difference? Extremely simple hacks can enable true multitasking throughout the full OS. There are some apps in the apple store (like System Lite) that can expose all running processes. This app shows true multitasking processes, it does not display apps that are just "parked" in the background doing nothing. I just did a quick count and have 26 processes running side to side, this without any hacks. All this can easily take advantage of multi-core chips.

      In addition any app can make use of multithreading, any app that does this would automatically take advantage of multi-core chips.

    59. Re:iPhone by mjwx · · Score: 2

      iOS has always supported multitasking.

      The issue is that you, the user or developer were never and still are not permitted to use it.

      Basically it's like a car that can drive brilliantly at 150 KM/h but it's has a speed governor limiting it's speed to 20 KM/h because the builder doesn't think you will ever need to go faster than 20 KM/h. Yes I could remove the speed governor and "jailbreak" my engine but why should the I have to.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    60. Re:iPhone by mjwx · · Score: 1

      First, a good reason to NOT be dual core is battery life - slower is better. iPhone hardware has always lagged the Android models

      To be fair, they've always played a game of leapfrog. Iphone 3G - HTC Dream - Iphone 3GS - Moto Droid - HTC Desire - Iphone4 - Nexus S/HTC Desire HD/Z. However I expect this to change, 2010 was really the year when manufacturers started taking Android seriously.

      First, a good reason to NOT be dual core is battery life

      This is only really an issue whilst the cores are being used. Idling will use very liitle power, as another poster has already pointed out, the display is the major power draw on todays phones, Iphone and Android alike. The newer 45 nm proc's in the HTC Desire Z are using less power then the same processors that were fab'ed in 65 nm.

      I do agree that the Iphone 5 won't be dual core. Apple are very slow at adopting new technologies, the current Macbook 13" is still being sold with a C2D a year after Dell started selling i3 and i5 procs in their Vostro and latitude lines.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    61. Re:iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is wrong on so many levels. iOS supports multi-tasking just fine. it just doesn't allow 3rd party apps running in the background without a very good reason. It is still running the phone and messaging app in the background, and who is to say Apple won't let 3rd parties have a limited amount of the spare core?

    62. Re:iPhone by todorb · · Score: 1

      i know enough about EE, trust me. here are some facts for you and all that declared me wrong:

      power is not linear with frequency, electrical current is. this is because current flows through MOS transistors only when they're switching. so more switches cause more current linearly. since power is proportional to the square of current (P=I^2/R), it is also proportional to the square of frequency.

      all that argued that power is linear with voltage (which is true) should just have asked themselves how voltage and current relate (hint: linearly).

    63. Re:iPhone by dc29A · · Score: 1

      My bad, wrong choice of words. iOS supports multitasking but Apple won't allow it.

    64. Re:iPhone by Wovel · · Score: 1

      No, but it is funny when people like you try to put words into his mouth. He actually makes very little in the way of forward looking statements about what people need. Apple will discuss the CPU in the next iPhone when it is actually for sale..

    65. Re:iPhone by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      This leads me to believe there is a bug (as everyone is kinda saying the same thing).

      I don't have bluetooth or Wifi on very often.

      I am also somewhat concerned it may open the keyboard slightly in pocket (it doesn't stay closed very well) turning the display on.

      I generally use the phone actively for 4 hours or so a day.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    66. Re:iPhone by PipsqueakOnAP133 · · Score: 1

      You're using the Android battery logger thing on your G2?
      If my Nexus S counts for a point of reference, the percentage values it gives are total crap.

      It claims my screen is the thing that takes 68% of my battery power when my phone's screen has been on for about 10 minutes out of 8 hours and my battery's down to 20% from 100%.

  3. Dual core smartphones by jgagnon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I made a comment about dual/quad core phones a while back and was laughed at. It will happen folks and sooner than you suspect. Phones are quickly becoming our primary computing device, or at least the centerpiece of our electronic lives.

    It's not about playing Doom on a smart phone, it's about the phone being able to do everything we ask it to do without having to wait too long.

    --
    Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    1. Re:Dual core smartphones by jeffmeden · · Score: 3, Funny

      You saw the headline... Dual core chips coming to ALL smartphones in 2011. That old blackberry I have from 2008 that's gathering dust? Yep, it will be dual core in 2011! Oh the cores!

    2. Re:Dual core smartphones by ciderbrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have an htc desire. It fast enough. What I need is a 3G connection on the train to and from work. That is the slow part.

    3. Re:Dual core smartphones by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Key was Motorola's docking demonstrations at CES. Give it two years and everyone will be able to do it. Then you can park at for example a net cafe with a public monitor and plug in your phone and do some work, and a few games, then you keep your computing device (mostly) safely with you.

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    4. Re:Dual core smartphones by joh · · Score: 1

      It's not about playing Doom on a smart phone, it's about the phone being able to do everything we ask it to do without having to wait too long.

      I've been playing Doom on my iPod touch years ago and didn't have to wait too long for anything...

    5. Re:Dual core smartphones by awyeah · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Phones are quickly becoming our primary computing device, or at least the centerpiece of our electronic lives.

      Have you seen the Motorola Atrix (I think they showed it at CES)?

      This thing has a laptop dock. That's not a dock that you can connect to your laptop, it's an actual laptop, made for the phone - the phone docks in the back and is the computer. It basically is a big keyboard and screen for the phone.

      I'm not saying that it's a good or bad thing, but it certainly is interesting. Who knows if the rest of the industry will follow suit.

      --
      Why, no, I haven't meta-moderated lately. Thanks for asking!
    6. Re:Dual core smartphones by jgagnon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's exactly the way I see things headed. We will all be carrying around our "computer" and storage with us, and public places will simply augment it with larger screens and keyboard (as Motorola suggests) or in many other ways. In this way we buy the applications we use for our personal computing devices (PCD) and then have access to them everywhere we go. No more of this crap of buying software four times over for four machines at home.

      Imagine walking into the living room and your PCD magically becomes the remote for your TV, VCR, DVR, or whatever. Then you walk into the kitchen and you can control the microwave, stove, and other devices with it. Walk out of the house and your phone allows you to remotely set the alarm and lock the doors. It becomes the key to your car once you are in it or allows you to remote start it. You walk near a printer at work with it and print the document you grabbed from home. The possibilities are endless.

      --
      Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    7. Re:Dual core smartphones by DrXym · · Score: 1
      It that picture is illustrative of how the phone docks then Motorola needs to fire its designers. It would be more sensible to have it click into place with the screen or the keyboard. I expect some genius said "what happens if your phone rings" and that lead to the awkward design to accommodate people picking the phone up to answer. Which is fine until you consider what happens if you pick up the "laptop" bit to go a meeting room or whatever and the phone goes flying to the floor. Perhaps with ultra wide band there is no reason the two devices should even be connected unless the user wants to charge the phone.

      I do like the concept of docks with phones & tablets though. Despite what some people might say, a keyboard and mouse is essential for productivity. If tablets want to progress from being dumb consumption devices, they'll need to provide decent input controls. I think it would be nice if Android steering members formalised how docks would function so we don't get in a stupid situation where Samsung, HTC, Motorola et al all release mutually incompatible docking systems.

    8. Re:Dual core smartphones by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      its not so much the 'dual core-ness' of it but the general increase in power.

      ARM says their next CPU design is going to be called the A15, not the A10 as you'd expect. This because, although ARM designs have incremental performance, the next version is so good that they decided to skip A10 through A14 tags.

      The A15 BTW, has speeds upto 2.5Ghz, up to 8 cores, and virtualisation instructions. Although you might need a laptop battery to power the top-end version, the fact that there is a top-end spec suggests good stuff to come, even if the smartphones have only 2 cores throttled down to 1.5Ghz.

      Phones are going to be the new PCs, I'm sure of it. We're still in the days of the 386 at the moment, it won't take long to revolutionise our lives.

    9. Re:Dual core smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      you're talking like a stoner

    10. Re:Dual core smartphones by hedwards · · Score: 1

      You're just being obtuse. It means that all new smartphones introduced in 2011 will use dual core chips. Still a rather high goal, but definitely plausible at this point.

    11. Re:Dual core smartphones by Scyber · · Score: 1

      Videos from CES showed people holding the laptop dock with phone upside down and (gently) shaking it. The phone did not leave the dock.

      http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/07/gaming-on-the-motorola-atrix-laptop-dock-upside-down/

    12. Re:Dual core smartphones by andynugent · · Score: 2

      Symbian^3 phones (sort of) already have this, in that you can connect USB/Bluetooth mice/keyboard and attach it to a monitor using the HDMI port. Nokia just haven't packaged it together in a all in one, single connection product like this laptop dock. But the fact that so many phones are getting HDMI out sort of suggests that the manufacturers see them as being portable computers that you plug the extra dumb peripherals into.

    13. Re:Dual core smartphones by Kevin+Stevens · · Score: 1

      The future is already here to some extent- I can control my cable box from my iphone. If it had an IR transmitter, I could do a lot more with it, but even so, my blu ray player is connected to the network, and new TV's have network connectivity in many models now.

      I am a little fancy, but I actually have a NAS at home, with a webcam set up to it. I use it as a security camera of sorts and to see if my dog has destroyed the house yet if I am running late coming home.

      To be honest, I don't see the microwave and stove ever having these features (think of the security implications), but certainly I can see thermostats, security systems, A/V systems, etc being controlled this way- in fact I saw an apartment a few months ago that was wired up all crazy with speakers in each room and you could control it remotely through your phone.

    14. Re:Dual core smartphones by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      You're just being obtuse. It means that all new smartphones introduced in 2011 will use dual core chips. Still a rather high goal, but definitely plausible at this point.

      Although it hasn't technically happened yet, the iPhone 4 for Verizon is almost certainly being released in 2011, with a single core chip... So much for "ALL". The author should have just gone for "Some" and saved himself the ridicule. He is trying to read tea leaves when the writing is on the wall (as seen at CES) and as such he sounds like a pretty big idiot.

    15. Re:Dual core smartphones by lavacano201014 · · Score: 1

      That doesn't count, as iPhone4 wasn't introduced in 2011. Even if Verizon's support for it was.

      --
      A wise man once said, "Where is my other quotation mark?
    16. Re:Dual core smartphones by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I played Doom on my Nokia N70 (released in 2005). The screen was tiny so it was just a novelty, not something that was actually fun, but it did work...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    17. Re:Dual core smartphones by mlts · · Score: 1

      Those are the upsides. Actually, Intel was working on a personal server which was a HDD that used Bluetooth to communicate with things.

      The downsides: Walk into the living room. Fire up a terminal. Too bad that a remote attack flashed the keyboard to log keystrokes which got sent to a botnet. Then the attacker uses a remote exploit on the house alarm to drop in some malicious code that reflashes the PCD when the owner comes near, adding some malware. One then walks past their oven, the malware leaps to that, modifying the flash of that device so it will open the gas valve, disable the pilot light, then light the pilot light 12-24 hours afterwards, causing a nice natural gas explosion. Similar code shorts out the automatic lock on the door and disables the fire alarm. Another piece of malware jumps to the car, adding in a remote override code which a local chop shop then picks up the vehicle after the owner leaves. The PCD arrives at the workplace. A brief interaction with the work printer adds a slight reflash which sends a copy of documents coming out of it to machines in the attacker's botnet for later pickup. Another brief interaction with the work's microwave causes it to flip on the magnetron when someone opens the door, causing instant cataracts and third degree burns.

      I will pass. The fewer devices that are connected with each other, the better. Stuxnet showed us what can happen when embedded devices and the Internet intersect.

    18. Re:Dual core smartphones by HomelessInLaJolla · · Score: 1

      it's about the phone being able to do everything we ask it to do

      That's one core for you and one core for the people who keep you under surveillance. It's like data mining. You get one core, your carrier gets one core. Your carrier sells access time to that core (or its product data) to your employer, your bank, your insurance company, the local and regional law enforcement, your spouse, your parents in-law, etc. etc. etc.

      You think I'm being funny?

      --
      the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
    19. Re:Dual core smartphones by jgagnon · · Score: 1

      That would be the beauty of what I described... it wouldn't have to be connected to the Internet, it could just all be handled "locally" within your house network. The proximity of the device could be the key to making it work and not just remote commands sent. I realize there will always be risks, but there are ways to make it more safe.

      I do, however, agree that opening up your house and appliances to the Internet is a bad idea in general.

      --
      Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    20. Re:Dual core smartphones by jgagnon · · Score: 1

      I don't think you're being funny... but truth be told everything you describe could be done today without ever needing a second core or the ability to run multiple apps at the same time.

      --
      Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    21. Re:Dual core smartphones by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      ARM says their next CPU design is going to be called the A15, not the A10 as you'd expect

      You'd only expect that if you knew nothing about ARM's lineup. Last year, they had two Cortex lines, the A5 for low-end embedded systems and the A8 for smartphones and similar devices. The A8 is in process of being superseded by the A9, which has some tweaks to the pipeline and supports up to 4 cores, but is quite similar. The A15 is a new architecture aimed at servers. It has a much larger power envelope than the A9, but supports virtualisation and 40-bit physical addressing.

      The A15 is no more the successor to the A9 than the A8 is to the A5 or Intel's i7 is to the i5. They are products aimed at different markets.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    22. Re:Dual core smartphones by imgod2u · · Score: 2

      I believe the reason it's called the A15 is that it's a new tier. That is, it won't replace the current A9 (or future revisions, A10 for instance) that is targeted at smartphone-level performance and power.

      The numbers released for the A15 do not fit into a smartphone's power envelope. DMIPS/Watt is significantly lower than that of the A9 and it's going to target leaky, high-speed processes first.

      Eagle (A15) is ARM's push towards netbooks, tablets and notebooks (and possibly servers). Sure, some people may try to fit it into a smartphone chip (I'm looking at you, nVidia) but the thing's a beast both area and power wise. The damn thing takes 12 stages just to fetch and dispatch an instruction with another 3-12 to execute and write-back. That's a 24-stage pipeline.

      For reference, the A9's integer pipeline is 8-stages. The first Pentium 4's had a 20-stage integer pipeline.

    23. Re:Dual core smartphones by mlts · · Score: 1

      I am a cynic these days. It is a cool ideal to just carry around one device (or even a device with all personal details stored on a SIM-like card), but I keep thinking ways that can be abused. There are a lot of people out there who would go out of their way to cause someone else harm.

    24. Re:Dual core smartphones by jgagnon · · Score: 1

      For it to be truly secure there would have to be a non-maskable, hardware key combined with some biometrics that prove you really are who you say you are. So it would literally have to be YOU holding YOUR PHONE to make the stuff work.

      But, having said that, it would REALLY suck to lose your phone at that point, much worse than losing your wallet/purse.

      --
      Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    25. Re:Dual core smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why the fuck would I want to remote start my car when I'm sitting inside?

    26. Re:Dual core smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what do you do when you lose your PCD?

    27. Re:Dual core smartphones by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      I am surprised it hasn't happened already. I have a 4 year old CowOn MP3 player that has a dual-core MIPS processor. It makes perfect sense to do something simple like that. These devices need to be snappy, but are not expected to do anything really processing heavy, so multiple execution threads speeding up response-time is really the sensible thing to do.

    28. Re:Dual core smartphones by geschild · · Score: 1

      What he says. There's an XBMC android App that does most of what you want for A/V and I bet you can get apps for most home-automation systems if not now, then very soon :).

      --
      Karma? What's that again?
    29. Re:Dual core smartphones by migla · · Score: 1

      The "Smartbook" from Allways Innovating is similar. The computing power (a (measly) ARM cortex-A8) and storage is in the phone sized "mobile internet device" (no gsm/3g). It plugs into a larger touchscreen to make a tablet, which plugs into the keyboard with extra battery to make a netbook.

      https://www.alwaysinnovating.com/products/smartbook.htm

      --
      Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
    30. Re:Dual core smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      exactly, because:

      you don't have to wait 'till you get home, it's in your pocket
      you don't have to find an internet connection, it's over the cell net/wifi
      you don't have to wait for it to boot, it's always on

      now, finally (yes, thanks to apple) there is a very useable GUI and clear screen on which to view it, and a bag of apps which can distill those clunky old websites into a concisely formatted, useable display on your cellphone.

      Mobile Apps are the real "web 2.0"

      The iphone et al is a real web paradigm shift.

    31. Re:Dual core smartphones by rdnetto · · Score: 1

      Motorola wasn't the first to develop this idea - AlwaysInnovating announced a netbook with the same feature (they call it a mobile internet device) last year. It was supposed to be on sale by now, but they've had several delays. It wouldn't be the first time some of their ideas have been copied by larger and more well known companies.
      For reference, said netbook uses a ARM Cortex A8, which is single core.

      --
      Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
    32. Re:Dual core smartphones by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      http://www.smarthome.com/iphone_apps.html

      Yes, you can do it with Android too.

    33. Re:Dual core smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope you live alone in this utopia

      I can see it now, 2 people walk into a kitchen....

    34. Re:Dual core smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Talk about single point of failure. I lost my phone, and now I can't watch TV, I can't drive to the store, I can't bake a turkey, I can't even watch porn!

    35. Re:Dual core smartphones by hicksw · · Score: 1

      Aha! It's a plot to sell us more screens and keyboards.
      Will there be a VNC server alternative?
      --
      Advice is a form of nostalgia.

  4. Re:iPhone already has dual core! by Pojut · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A4

    Uh...no? Maybe you're confusing its SOC nature by combining a GPU and CPU, but it is most definitely not a dual-core CPU.

  5. HEY EDITORS! by TrisexualPuppy · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Journalism? COMPLETE misuse of the term, pocket rocket. Please retire now.

    1. Re:HEY EDITORS! by NewWorldDan · · Score: 0

      Nonsense. The phones can vibrate, and with a little creative programming, you can turn one into a very conveniant marital aid. How you get it clean afterwards is anyone's guess.

    2. Re:HEY EDITORS! by wilgibson · · Score: 0

      Then I am no the only one that thought of tiny motorcycles when I read that, correct?

    3. Re:HEY EDITORS! by xaxa · · Score: 1

      How you get it clean afterwards is anyone's guess.

      By wrapping it in a condom beforehand, presumably.

    4. Re:HEY EDITORS! by DeathFromSomewhere · · Score: 1

      Yeah, Henri Richard is going to be pissed!

      --
      -1 overrated isn't the same thing as "I disagree".
  6. Re:iPhone already has dual core! by Cornelius+the+Great · · Score: 2

    A4 is not dual core- it's an ARM Cortex A8 core with a PowerVR SGX 535 GPU. It's nearly identical to the Samsung Hummingbird CPUs used in the Galaxy S phones.

    The 5th gen iPhone is rumored to have dual core, but it won't be out until at least this summer.

    --
    Sigs are for losers
  7. Why does it have to be dual core? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I understand why the draw to dual core on previous generation ARM CPUs as they were in order processing only architectures. However, with the introduction of out of order processing in ARM CPUs, I don't see the huge need for multi core CPUs in a PHONE. Perhaps it would be useful in a media device such as a tablet or netbook/ultraportable notebook, but for my phone, my top priority is battery life. The CortexA9 CPU is already more powerful than the Atom and having a single CortexA9 in my phone will make it perform comparably to better than my netbook. I don't need it to have 2 of these cores eating at the battery.

    Why are there NO single core CortexA9 SOCs being made? Why can't this be an option for PHONES to have the benefits of the new architecture and really good battery life?

    1. Re:Why does it have to be dual core? by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      If it's a core that can be turned on and off, the second core would be very useful and not kill battery life at all.

    2. Re:Why does it have to be dual core? by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 1

      I think that smart phones and other handheld devices will start being used for more than just 'single consumer' purposes (if they haven't already). When you can load your presentation slideshow or video onto your "device", hook it up to a projector/display/TV and never worry about performance, stuttering or lags you'll be able to travel much lighter.

      Perhaps an iPad/Galaxy/Xoom/etc can be used as a bluetooth or WiFi 'server' for shared gaming on multiple handheld devices (or something along those lines). Don't forget that PC's & phones used to be basic devices that slowly got the kitchen sink stuffed into them to keep consumers coming back for the latest & greatest. By the time these hardware manufacturers are done with the phones/handhelds we'll need another 'client' device to consume their content. It's all about "cram more in, sell more devices & create new consumer needs".

    3. Re:Why does it have to be dual core? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it ever runs, IMO, it's killing off more battery life than I would prefer in a PHONE. It's a PHONE. Not a tablet. Not a full computer. It's designed for mobile communications, and mobility needs to have as much battery life as possible. It doesn't NEED a second core.

      Android runs great on CortexA8, Snapdragon, etc. Upgrading to a single core CortexA9 would be a pretty bug upgrade by itself. Upgrading to dual CortexA9 is unnecessary.

      Maybe I'm just speaking practicality. I would prefer having a single core CortexA9 SOC. Tegra2 is just overkill for a PHONE.

    4. Re:Why does it have to be dual core? by joh · · Score: 1

      It has to be dual core because Android renders its UI almost fully on the CPU and since even scrolling a dumb list can use nearly 100% CPU with a second core you then have some CPU power left to do other things...

      And I'm not really joking here.

    5. Re:Why does it have to be dual core? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The CortexA9 CPU is already more powerful than the Atom

      You forgot "per watt" and "except floating point".

    6. Re:Why does it have to be dual core? by kangsterizer · · Score: 1

      omap4, and all new dual core phones are based on the arm9.. aka cortexa9..
      I wouldn't say its more powerfull than an atom (of 2011) but they are sure damn close for a fraction of the energy useage

    7. Re:Why does it have to be dual core? by Pojut · · Score: 0

      Tegra2 is just overkill for a PHONE.

      640 KB should be enough for ANYBODY.

    8. Re:Why does it have to be dual core? by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Why are you capitalizing phone? Is there some acronym that I should know about.

      Your phone may have been designed for mobile communications, but that isn't how people are using them. It turns out, people like having a computer in their pocket that can also make phone calls. People are texting, using Facebook, playing games, and Binging more than talking. If the phone can make it through the day on a single charge (and for most people, the current generation of phones can do this), then why not consider adding more cores. I think it becomes especially interesting if the second core is different from the first. It could end up saving power by doing in hardware what was previously done in software (think GPU's and 3d graphics).

    9. Re:Why does it have to be dual core? by imgod2u · · Score: 1

      Most of Atom's advantage has to do with its relatively enormous memory bandwidth compared to mobile SoC's. When looking at DMIPS/MHz of relatively cache-bound tasks (Dhrystone, for instance), Atom's clock-for-clock performance is about the same as a Cortex A8.

      Atom, when used in a netbook, can of course afford to use high-power memory modules as well as high-powered multi-channel memory interfaces. Most dual-core SoC's announced (except OMAP4) use single-channel, 32-bit, LP-DDR2.

    10. Re:Why does it have to be dual core? by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      Then buy a Jitterbug. I mean, you don't need bluetooth, you don't need games, you don't need a calendar, you don't need internet access, you don't need an alarm.

      I personally want the high end phone that can do more than my computer did 10 years ago, and two cores with the potential to disable one is the obvious way to go for that goal of increased mobile computing power - which is the entire point of this conversation.

    11. Re:Why does it have to be dual core? by kangsterizer · · Score: 1

      Let's say atom-based device vs arm-based devices. But i'm pretty sure the author meant CPU's as "devices based on CPU x" ;-)

      Doesn't make ARM's any less impressive. I'm pretty much fan of the OMAP4 actually -

  8. Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling point by samael · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Runs smoothly" would be a selling point. "Amazing graphics" would be a selling point. "Long battery life" would be a selling point. But the number of bits of silicon inside the phone really isn't going to attract many consumers.

  9. assault on battery by tverbeek · · Score: 1

    I think the battery needed for my current single-core processor is big enough already.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    1. Re:assault on battery by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      You're making the assumption that an increase in cores necessitates a decline in battery life. [citation needed]

      It's possible that battery life could slightly improve if the load is spread across cores and hence the CPU takes less time (and juice) to perform certain tasks.

    2. Re:assault on battery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, because that second core runs on pixie dust, so it doesn't draw any additional current.

    3. Re:assault on battery by Pojut · · Score: 0

      It will draw "additional" current, but you're also assuming a 1-3 year old single-core CPU would draw as much power as a brand new multi-core CPU.

      You do realize that as things are made with smaller fabrication processes (90nm -> 65nm -> 45nm, or whatever progression you want to compare), their power requirements drop SIGNIFICANTLY. For example, check out this older comparison. Looking at an Athlon X2 5000+, the difference in power requirements are huge. 90 watts for the 90nm with the CPU pegged at 100%, while the 65nm drops to 72 watts at 100%. Keep in mind these are A) old CPUs, and B) aren't tweaked for use in a mobile setting...yet there is an 18 watt difference based on die size ALONE, much less comparing one generation of chips to another (and their relative power consumption and computing power.)

      tl;dr: you can't compare an old single-core model to a new dual-core model, especially when they use completely different architectures and die sizes.

  10. Is is all or not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    subject: Dual-core Chips Coming To All Smartphones In 2011
    body: All top of the range smartphones will be sporting dual-core chips this year

    So is it all smartphones or not?

    1. Re:Is is all or not? by jgagnon · · Score: 2

      I'm sure old ones won't magically spawn a second core... :p

      --
      Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    2. Re:Is is all or not? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Yes they will!

      You click your heels together while chanting..... There's no CEO like jobs.... There's no CEO like Jobs.....

      And Poof! a second core grows inside your old phone! It's a Apple Miracle!

      What? Why cant I have a reality distortion bubble of my own? Stop poking me you penguins!

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  11. dual? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, uhh, does this mean that phones will be able to do TWO things at once?

    1. Re:dual? by gmuslera · · Score: 2

      Most top smartphones right now are multitaskers, already perform more than 2 things at once even with single core processors. Having multiple cores means doing it somewhat better as you split the tasks over separate processors.

      Would had been nice if the N900 had multiple cores, is just too easy to run a lot of things at once, at least, if that don't kill the battery.

  12. Deceptive Title by BrendaEM · · Score: 1

    The title suggests that all smartphones will be dual-core this year, and we know that that has not, and cannot happen.

    I have come to expect a certain amount of journalistic integrity from Slashdot, better than the major news networks, and that has been thinned this morning by the headline on this article.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
    1. Re:Deceptive Title by JSBiff · · Score: 1

      Man, welcome to the club. I've been perusing slashdot since, I dunno, 1997. I've actually come to expect a lot of slashdot headlines and summaries to be one or more of the following: just plain wrong, unnecessarily inflammatory, or very, very confusing.

      Basically, slashdot are not journalists. They are link aggregators and a discussion forum. As a 'central' discussion forum with a pretty decent threaded comment system, it's much nicer to discuss news here than at most other news sites (which have next-to-useless discussion systems, mostly), but I definitely do NOT come to slashdot for the quality of the editing and article summaries.

    2. Re:Deceptive Title by Stooshie · · Score: 1

      " ... I have come to expect a certain amount of journalistic integrity from Slashdot ... "

      My screen is now covered in coffee. Thanks a bunch!

      --
      America, Home of the Brave. ... .and the Squaw.
  13. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For the same reason that 2GHz is better than 1.4GHz. The number is bigger, so the PHBs and yuppies will clamour for them. Meanwhile, those of us with an eye for detail will look at things like battery capacity, sound quality, compatibility with existing architectures and applications, and make informed decisions, instead of pawing at the latest shiny-shiny like a kitten with a toy.

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  14. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by Cornelius+the+Great · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why not? Multi-core was marketed successfully for PCs, what makes smartphones any different? Tech specs are pretty important to the Android crowd. Besides, now that certain devices will have docks that allow them become netbook and HTPC replacements, people will find uses for that extra core.

    --
    Sigs are for losers
  15. Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by EmagGeek · · Score: 2

    to Android. Have any of you ever talked to an iPhone user about the possibility that another phone might even exist, let alone be a better choice than the iPhone?

    1. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by Krakadoom · · Score: 1, Informative

      I have. I have never tried to talk to an Applevangelist since about their tech habits. Your phone could make coffee, iron shirts, cook dinner and give you a hummer - iFetishists would still tell you about how glorious THEIR device is, because it has a shiny interface.

    2. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yes.

      Just yesterday, one of my best friends, a diehard Apple guy, was asking me about my DroidX and I was showing it to him. He has a iPhone with AT&T right now, and with the iPhone coming to Verizon in a couple weeks, he is considering switching not only carriers but also phones. He wanted to know how I like the DroidX and I was showing him everything on it. He was impressed. He especially liked the widgets on the home screen (ie Multitiasking)

      I don't know how impressed he was, of if he was impressed enough to switch, I'll know when he's got a new phone.

      But suffice it to say, he is looking at other phones. I wouldn't bet that he gets a Droid, he'll most likely end up on iPhone/VZ, but that isn't exactly what you asked. He's at least considering it.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    3. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I switched about 8 months ago, and haven't looked back.

    4. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by 1000101 · · Score: 1

      I'm switching. I currently own an iPhone 3GS which will be promptly handed over to my wife once the Motorola Atrix becomes available. I actually really like the iPhone, but I don't like Apple. My wife has a MacBook (which I really, really can't stand), so it will be a no-brainer for her to have an iPhone as well. I was actually really close to upgrading my phone to the iPhone 4 due to the screen alone, but now that other manufacturers are releasing comparable resolutions, I feel like I can finally make the switch. I won't consider any Samsung phone due to the fact that 50% of Samsung electronic devices that I've ever purchased have broken (for no apparent reason) well short of their expected lifespan (but just out of warranty).

      TL;DR - I'm switching from iPhone to Android

    5. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      to Android. Have any of you ever talked to an iPhone user about the possibility that another phone might even exist, let alone be a better choice than the iPhone?

      I've probably been Apple's least faithful customer since the Mac Plus. I look for alternatives *every* time. There's always some brand that does something far better than Apple product X or has more bits or GHz. But... 80% of the time, there's some core feature (like battery life, durability or usability) that it's far worse on, and their customers service will tend to be garbage, if not outright crooked. 20% of the time it will be comparable and maybe 5% of the time it's better than what Apple's got... and then a few revisions later they lose their minds and do something stupid, or there's some problem and their customer service is garbage. So I switch back.

      But most of the time, I'm looking for (say) a phone and I look at the various brands and I say to myself, "okay, now I *could* carefully research all these phones, borrow people's phones and finally find one of the really good ones." In 20 phones, there's going to be one that's better than what Apple's got, but I've got no way of knowing that until I've personally tested all 20, and I certainly can't tell what their customer service is like. So I can just buy Apple's and beat the market 80% of the time.

    6. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      yes.

      I have. myself in fact. I looked really hard at the Droid II. I really want a real keyboard.

      But it came down to the fact that android just does not have the apps I need. So I stay with Iphone.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    7. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by nprz · · Score: 2

      ...Your phone could make coffee...

      This reminds me of the Pomegranate phone.

    8. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the last year, I've seen more smug Android evangelists than Apple fanboys. In fact, if you go through threads like this one, you're more likely to find an Android fan "claiming" that Apple fans do this, and Android fans orgasming about the next OS update or hardware specs, than an Apple fan behaving the way you describe.

      In short, many Android fans have become exactly the fanboys they claim to hate.

    9. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by awyeah · · Score: 1

      That's something that I just don't understand (from a psychological standpoint, I guess). I use an iPhone, and I like it a lot. But when it comes time to get a new phone, I'm not just going to automatically get the then-current iPhone model. Every time I've gotten a new phone, I evaluated every carrier available to me and many of the phones available. You've got to make an informed decision.

      Last April when I got this phone and decided to stick with AT&T, I decided it was the best carrier and device to meet my needs at that time. Who knows, maybe next time it will be another iPhone - or maybe not. (And if you look through my previous posts before last April, you'll see that I was a big BlackBerry fan, and somewhat against the iPhone - because at that time, the iPhone was not the right device for me. It couldn't even do copy and paste).

      Anyway, I don't identify myself by my phone, and I find fanboys to be really annoying. It's a phone, FFS. Oh, speaking of which, the iPhone isn't all that great at being a phone. My last phone was a BlackBerry Bold (3G, AT&T), and it dropped far fewer calls than this iPhone does. People like to blame AT&T for it, but my usage patterns haven't really changed, so my guess is that it's the phone.

      --
      Why, no, I haven't meta-moderated lately. Thanks for asking!
    10. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by hedwards · · Score: 1

      What's going on there is fairly typical of the in group out group aspect of culture. iPhone users need to feel superior to the users of other brands of phones so they selectively ignore the facts to highlight that they made the right decision. I've seen the same sort of pathetic behavior out of Kindle owners, who introduce features that my Nook has as being Kindle only.

      That's not to say that I don't ever do that, but seeing those iPhone owners practically dry humping their devices makes me wonder why Apple doesn't just release the iDildo and get it over with.

    11. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      I liked the Nokia N900 on paper, but it seemed a bit flawed in real life and I found out about it relatively late in its lifecycle.

      The upcoming N9 however looks really tasty. Hardware keyboard, Nokia's generally high quality hardware, 800x480 4" screen and it'll be Meego-based. Which means it can probably replace my netbook completely. I hear it even makes phone calls!

      And apparently, it's about the same size as an iPhone, which is important to me, since I refuse to own a phone I can't carry in the front pocket of my jeans.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    12. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by mlts · · Score: 1

      It is interesting the comparisons if you drop an iPhone and a Droid X side by side.

      To me, where the iPhone wins are apps and standardization. Where the Droid X wins is almost everywhere else. I blow up the OS on the Droid X? Boot recovery, nandroid restore, load app data from Titanium Backup that have changed since the last restore.

      To the average person, I'm sure their needs can be met with either device. Exchange support? If the Android device isn't up to par, Nitrodesk Touchdown can support Exchange and all the requirements without issue. Same with apps needed to open and read Word, Excel, and other files.

    13. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm disappointed in the selection of apps for the droid. I'm not sure how many "sexy girl" of the day apps we need, but it seems clear there is a huge demand for naked and scantily clad girls. And Sports Teams.

      How about filters that work? Having to scroll through the chaff to get to the nuggets is painful.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    14. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by Tran · · Score: 1

      I have.
      And I can't wait to get off of this piece of crap Android phone I am stuck with.

      My ipod touch runs circles around my Android - except that it does not make phone calls.
      I see both Android, Blackberry and iPhones around me, and none of these people have any of this supposed blind superiority complex that is attributed to any one group. The iPhone guys/gals are the least arrogant of the bunch. The Android guys keep talking about how superior their phone is technically and supposedly open, and the blackberry guys just get the work done but wish they could run decent apps (or games). The lone Window mobile 6( or 6.5) guy just keeps showing off the hacks that circumvents any given Verizon lockout.

      Of all the current phones I am exposed to everyday, only the iPhone gets things done the way I need them to get done: A tool that works quickly, efficiently, elegantly and I don't have to spend as much maintenance time on as I do productive time.

    15. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by mlts · · Score: 1

      That is the problem with Android. Because of misconceptions, the big gaming companies are ignoring the platform. However, they are perceptions, not reality. A couple:

      1: Piracy. Android has a mechanism independent of rooting as a guard against piracy, the LVL, or License Verification Library. The iPhone depends solely on if the device is jailbroken or not. Toss in JVM/DVM code obfuscation, and Android APKs are much tougher nuts to crack than iPhone apps. Click on copy-protected when the app is being uploaded and that provides another layer of shielding.

      2: Faster update cycles. On Android, you upload your APK, and it is available for update almost at once. With this, even if someone cracked your 1.0.1, your 1.0.2 forces them back to the drawing board. This allows for tight development cycles and fast bug stomping.

      3: Hardware/"fragmentation". This is what the manifest file is for. Don't want anything but the latest Android? Something in the uses-configuration/uses-api/uses-library/uses-feature settings in the manifest file will keep the app from being seen in the Marketplace unless someone has a device with those features [1].

      4: Faster hardware development cycles than iOS.

      None of this is to say that iOS is bad; it just states that Android is just as good as Apple's offerings for making apps.

      [1]: http://developer.android.com/guide/appendix/market-filters.html

    16. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      None of that fixes MY problem with the MarketPlace. It is that there is a bunch of CRAP apps that don't do anything except show T&A or Sports Logos.

      I don't need or want to see those, and why can't they be put in their own section? Then people who want to put that crap on their phone can find what they want quicker and easier, and I don't have to sort through the crap to find something useful.

      I mean I just looked for something new / interesting and saw one app with several dozen versions, one for each sport team skin for the app. Signal Noise is way too low.

      And why would a developer do it that way? Give the app away, charge for skins. If your app is good, it should stand alone, and not have to depend on Logos or T&A girls.

      My $.02

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    17. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by mlts · · Score: 1

      +1. I've seen this also on Cydia, when looking for a command line application like bc. Why does one need calculators with sports logos dumped in the UNIX utility section? Stick that stuff in some sports memorabilia section. The Google App store, same thing... For example, a dialing program that is just a skin, have a category that it drops into separate from non-branded utilities.

      Oh, for Google's store, have a way to drop in an "X/NC-17" setting. Apple states this for file managers, but for obvious pr0n apps, it would be nice if those would go to their own section, because if I'm searching for a "grep" utility, I don't really care about apps with people being "grepped".

    18. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by mjwx · · Score: 1

      It is interesting the comparisons if you drop an iPhone and a Droid X side by side.

      Actually I've found that if you drop an Iphone and Droid side by side the Iphone will crack and break because it is a uni-body design made from rigid plastic or glass where as the Droid battery cover will come off because it's designed to break apart and is made from more tensile plastic, aluminium and rubberised plastic.

      I've actually done this test,
      Iphone - 0
      Droid - 1

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    19. Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      Have you given this feedback to the people who run the Android app store?

  16. Surprise! by dimethylxanthine · · Score: 0

    Good. Everything is going just as I had foreseen it.

  17. Re:First. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    probably won't persuade iPhone owners to switch to Android? OH yes it DOES, putting my eyephone in the blender as we speak....
    damn, forgot to sync my iphone......
    damnit twice, syncing is useless, since nobody ever thinks of exchanging backups between different phones...

  18. Cores don't matter at the moment by hallucinogen · · Score: 2

    The number of cores or their speed doesn't matter at the moment. For example look at Nokia. Their phones tend to have much slower CPUs, but because of better software they run just as fast as the latest & greatest from Samsung etc. I think number of cores and speed will only become a selling point once smartphones become our only computers that we just dock to our keyboard/display terminals at home.

    1. Re:Cores don't matter at the moment by ThosLives · · Score: 1

      I agree with this one. That much computing power means it's not a phone but a highly portable computer that happens to have access to a certain specific communications network ("telephony") in addition to the general Internet.

      Calling these devices "phones" is a misnomer, and I think if we are more honest about what the devices actually represent we'll be better off. Mobile "phones" stopped being phones quite some time ago. And I'm not the first one to make this observation by any means.

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    2. Re:Cores don't matter at the moment by tepples · · Score: 1

      That much computing power means it's not a phone but a highly portable computer that happens to have access to a certain specific communications network ("telephony") in addition to the general Internet.

      Then why is it so hard to find such "a highly portable computer" without telephony access? All the PDA makers seem to have switched to making only smartphones.

    3. Re:Cores don't matter at the moment by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      probably because most of the SoCs come with telephony chipsets baked in. The manufacturer could disable them, but considering the capability is there "for free", they might as well enable it and offer it as an added extra feature.

      You don't have to use it you know, get a emergency-call-only sim (ie a PAYG sim with no credit) and use that.

    4. Re:Cores don't matter at the moment by imgod2u · · Score: 1

      Not that I disagree that better software is needed, but Nokia is probably a bad example. The reviews of the N8 (their current flagship device) have all come to the conclusion that web browsing is annoyingly slow. Not intolerable, but certainly not what you'd expect from a smartphone in 2011.

      A better example would be the iPhone 3GS. 600MHz Cortex A8 and it largely provided better browsing experience than most of the 1GHz Android devices out there. At least, before Android 2.3.

    5. Re:Cores don't matter at the moment by imgod2u · · Score: 1

      "Most" SoC's don't. IIRC the only chipsets that integrate the baseband are from Qualcomm. All of the others (Tegra, OMAP, A4) are CPU+GPU+MCU combos with some dedicated DSP functions here and there.

      But then again, considering just how much of the SoC marketshare Qualcomm has, I guess "most" might be correct....

    6. Re:Cores don't matter at the moment by thaig · · Score: 1

      No that's just the age of the N8's version of webkit. Try Opera for example or, when it comes out, try the 7.3 version of the browser

      --
      This is all just my personal opinion.
    7. Re:Cores don't matter at the moment by thaig · · Score: 1

      The N8 has very good battery life in my experience, for a smartphone anyhow but don't imagine that dual-core is off the radar for any manufacturer. It is an advantage to have two slower cores over 1 fast one in terms of battery life and they can all see it.

      --
      This is all just my personal opinion.
  19. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If all you advertise is "dual core", then yeah it's a lousy selling point. But dual core brings you, to some degree or another, all three things you just mentioned. So dual core is the reason behind the selling points.

  20. I must have missed that announcement... by MikeRT · · Score: 1

    So is it time to ditch your current pocket rocket?

    So Jimmy Johnson is now creating a line of Extendz-branded Android phones?

  21. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by ktappe · · Score: 1, Troll

    Why not? Multi-core was marketed successfully for PCs, what makes smartphones any different?

    Several things:

    1) Most users do not find themselves waiting for their phone to accomplish a task whereas most PC users can easily remember waiting for their PC to perform a task.

    2) Almost every phone owner has found themselves running out of battery. Thus battery life is frontmost in the minds of users and Apple can easily come out with a "Double core? Double battery usage. No benefit." campaign to combat this trend.

    --
    "We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
  22. Will dual-core do anything useful? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

    What are the two biggest complaints with smart-phones? Download speeds and battery life. Download speeds are not processor restricted. Battery life, however, would seem to suffer with dual core.

    Smartphones need dual core to compete with pads and netbooks. However, they, being larger devices, can pack more batteries inside. What good will the fastest smartphone be if you have to recharge it every hour?

    1. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Battery life, however, would seem to suffer with dual core.

      My desktop system has a three-core processor that uses less power than many single core processors which do less work than one of its cores, all of which (AFAIK) are older than it is. These are new processors. Why do you imagine they will necessarily consume more power?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      ARM is notorious for power management. Let's wait for the benchmarks, on real devices, before concluding that multi-core is a significant drain on battery life.

      Further, the CortexA9 is a revision ahead of the A8. So potentially it brings improved architectural efficiencies.

    3. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Battery life, however, would seem to suffer with dual core.

      My desktop system has a three-core processor that uses less power than many single core processors which do less work than one of its cores, all of which (AFAIK) are older than it is. These are new processors. Why do you imagine they will necessarily consume more power?

      More transistors = more power use. Obviously, there are many things that impact power usage of a CPU and low power variants are readily available. However, if those same techniques that are used to make dual core processors use less power are applied to single core processors, then the single core processor will use less power. It's simple math. Each transistor requires x amount of power. Dual cores, while having less transistors than two separate processors, still have more than the equivalent single core using the same technology.

    4. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      More transistors = more power use.

      You have no idea what you are talking about. In most of the latest multicore processors, portions of cores can be turned off when not in use where this was not possible before, and even whole cores can be shut off. More transistors of the same feature size and composition in use == more power use. In any other situation there's a lot more to be considered than what you're thinking about. The end result is often lower power consumption.

      There's even yet another factor, which is that given power-saving techniques like simultaneously reducing clock and vcore, some designs are so efficient at idling that it makes the most sense to clock them up all the way, get work done, and then drop the clock rate again. The ideal clock rate for a given piece of work is determined by a variety of features including how CPU-bound the task is, and the power consumption at various CPU power states.

      Or in short, it is most certainly not "simple math", and you should go read about 23480572348 more articles on Ars Technica before you make declarative statements about CPU power consumption.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      ARM is notorious for power management. Let's wait for the benchmarks, on real devices, before concluding that multi-core is a significant drain on battery life.

      Further, the CortexA9 is a revision ahead of the A8. So potentially it brings improved architectural efficiencies.

      Mathematically, all things being equal, multi-core must use more energy, because it has more transistors and each transistor requires some discreet amount of power.

      Think of it as the difference between a four cylinder vehicle and an eight cylinder. An eight cylinder, by having a larger displacement uses more fuel.

      All sorts of things can be done to make an eight cylinder engine more fuel efficient, however if these same things are applied to the four cylinder, then it becomes more efficient, too (thus the all things being equal statement).

      You can improve the power consumption numbers for a dual core processor quite dramatically, by shutting off one of the cores (almost 50%). However, then you lose the efficiency of having multiple cores. You can only turn the core on, when it's really needed, but then at those times, it will use more power. Plus, the circuit that needs to be running to determine whether the second core is really needed or not will use additional cpu cycles on the first core, causing it to use more power than if it didn't have to be wasting cpu cycles trying to determine if it needs to turn the other core on or not.

      For the record, I agree that ARM is great at power management. However, unless they have figured out how to power transistors without using power, adding additional cores will always use more power - again, all things being equal.

    6. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by imgod2u · · Score: 1

      Transistor count is just one (and possibly a minority) factor in chip power. The single-biggest impact on chip power is operating voltage. For the same task/compute power, 2 cores running at a lower voltage (which correlates with lower frequency) will use less power than a single core running at a higher voltage (and thus higher frequency).

      This of course, assumes the software is smart enough to downclock the two cores if it's a relatively low-priority task that can be threaded.

    7. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by imgod2u · · Score: 1

      I don't think there have really been any benchmarks that measure SoC power; nobody's taken these phones apart and put a current meter on them. As for overall performance of the phone, there are far bigger factors (power management on the board, software configuration, type of display, etc.) that simply dwarf the power of the SoC.

    8. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      The point I am trying to make is that just about any power saving measure you take with a dual core can also be implemented on a single core.

      If you lower the voltage to a single core and it will use less power. Now, at some point, you get to the point were the single processor can't get any real work done (becomes less responsive from the user perspective) running at lower voltage, whereas two cores running at such low voltage still could (of course chances are they'd both be "on" most the time if the voltage was low enough).

      Then the question becomes does the single core running at reduced voltage use more/less than the dual core at reduced voltage when both cores have to be active? Assuming both cores are "on" and the chip design is the same, then the transistor count does come back into play.

      The other thing that gets lost in all of these discussions, is what exactly are the processors doing in the smartphone? We already know, because they already exist, that it is possible to have low spec processors running smart phones. These phones play video and music, surf the web, etc. What exactly would we be adding to a smart phone that would need the extra computing power of multiple cores? It's not like many people are going to be doing cad/cam on them.

      We've already seen this in the netbook market. While desktops and high end laptops kept getting faster and faster processors, the processor in most netbooks is lower voltage and frequency to a) extend battery life and b) their intended use does not warrant higher processing power.

      Using the car analogy, again, you can make an eight cylinder engine which is pretty fuel efficient by doing things that turn off cylinders, change compression, etc. But, no manufacture would do so and stick one in, something like a prius or even a smart car. Instead, they use a smaller, less powerful engine that is optimized for the task at hand.

    9. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by imgod2u · · Score: 1

      The point I am trying to make is that just about any power saving measure you take with a dual core can also be implemented on a single core.

      Your point completely ignores performance. Of course if you lower the performance expectation, you can get lower power.

      If you lower the voltage to a single core and it will use less power. Now, at some point, you get to the point were the single processor can't get any real work done (becomes less responsive from the user perspective) running at lower voltage, whereas two cores running at such low voltage still could (of course chances are they'd both be "on" most the time if the voltage was low enough).

      And if you stuck a Cortex M3 in there instead of a Cortex A8, you can save even more power! But your device will be slow as balls.

      You're essentially arguing that if you're willing to accept lower performance, you can get lower power. Well no shit.

      The point is, for the same processing power -- to accomplish the same task in an equal amount of time -- a dual-core solution is more power efficient than a single-core solution. This of course, has the caveat that the task must be parallelizable and that the software is smart enough to control the hardware efficiently.

      What exactly would we be adding to a smart phone that would need the extra computing power of multiple cores? It's not like many people are going to be doing cad/cam on them.

      As I've pointed out, even if you wanted to just maintain the performance level of today's single-core chips, a dual-core implementation is more efficient; you can accomplish the same performance using lower voltage cores.

      We've already seen this in the netbook market. While desktops and high end laptops kept getting faster and faster processors, the processor in most netbooks is lower voltage and frequency to a) extend battery life and b) their intended use does not warrant higher processing power.

      You forgot c) run annoyingly slow for more complex websites and anything with flash or high-def video.

      Netbooks are a bad example. But again, we're not talking about the ramifications of increasing the performance wall. We're talking about maintaining the same performance at lower power, which dual-core solutions provide over single-core.

      Using the car analogy, again, you can make an eight cylinder engine which is pretty fuel efficient by doing things that turn off cylinders, change compression, etc. But, no manufacture would do so and stick one in, something like a prius or even a smart car. Instead, they use a smaller, less powerful engine that is optimized for the task at hand.

      Using the car analogy, if you can get the same torque and horsepower out of an 8-cylinder but use less gas compared to the 4-cylinder, why wouldn't you.

      Your argument essentially boils down to "a pinto would use less gas than a Ferrari". Well no shit.

    10. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      i am not a physicist... Don't CPUs use less power when they're idle and more at peak load?
      I reckon a dual 600mhz cortexA9 would compute things faster than a single core A8 @ 1ghz. Hence spending more time idle. With the lower clock speed, i'd expect it to have competitive power usage.
      So i'd expect the folks at htc and other companies to defy basic mathematics.

    11. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      that's kinda my point. There's a lot of conjecture on here that having 2 cores will drain a phone's battery life rapidly but no hard evidence. Real world usage may demonstrate little difference.

    12. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Your argument essentially boils down to "a pinto would use less gas than a Ferrari". Well no shit."

      That is my argument exactly, but not in the way you envision it. If you live in New York City, other than a cool factor, what exactly is all of that extra horsepower in a Ferrari going to get you? There is no place to use the extra HP. So, it may be super efficient at 100mph compared to the pinto, but there is nowhere to use it (legally) as such. So, how is it's efficiency at the 25mph to 40mph (or less) that is common in the big city.

      Likewise, a dual core is more efficient in raw computing power than a single core. That's not my argument. My argument is that with a smart phone as a platform, where are you going to use that extra power?

      Take the EVO, for example. Will a dual core give me 4G speeds? No. Things like video are constrained by bandwidth not the processor that is in the phone. Will it allow for better multitasking, maybe, depending on what you are multitasking. If what is being multitasked is constrained by bandwidth or memory, then a faster processor won't help.

      Even if bandwith isn't an issue, if memory is constrained, then the faster processor won't help. Look at all the discussion in Linux forums about adding RAM instead of faster processors for performance.

      The real question is not about which is more efficient overall, but only for the task at hand.

    13. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      But you are comparing apples and oranges. A cortexA9 is not the same as an A8. The comment is based on all things being equal. Since they are different internally (more than how many cores)all things are not equal.

      Before you state that all dual cores will be different internally than single cores, that is not the point I am making. I am saying that the power saving features added to a dual core, if used in a single core would still make the single core use less power.

      In your example, I would posit that even the single core is sitting idle most the time as would be both cores of the dual core.

      But this is an easy argument to determine. We just need to wait a few months and see what the current draw is on the new phones. That will tell whether there is increased battery life from switching to dual core.

    14. Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? by imgod2u · · Score: 1

      That is my argument exactly, but not in the way you envision it. If you live in New York City, other than a cool factor, what exactly is all of that extra horsepower in a Ferrari going to get you? There is no place to use the extra HP. So, it may be super efficient at 100mph compared to the pinto, but there is nowhere to use it (legally) as such. So, how is it's efficiency at the 25mph to 40mph (or less) that is common in the big city.

      For any given performance level, a dual-core solution -- within the vicinity of today's smartphone performance level -- will be more power efficient than a single-core.

      Your argument isn't "a pinto is more efficient at 25mph", it's "a pinto going 25mph uses less gas than a Ferrari at 100mph". Again, no shit.

      In this analogy, the Ferrari going at 25mph will use less gas than the Pinto.

      Likewise, a dual core is more efficient in raw computing power than a single core.

      No, a dual-core is more efficient at any level of computing power -- barring extreme cases such as a wristwatch. If you have to reach performance level x, and you have two choices: either make a dual-core solution that can achieve x or a single-core solution that can achieve x -- again, we're not talking about a case where the dual-core is more powerful, just the same level of performance -- you are much better off power-wise to go dual-core.

      Or, to put it simply, if you take today's 1GHz SoC's and instead, put in two 500MHz processors -- again, with the caveat that this will only apply to parallel processes -- the two 500MHz processors will be more power efficient even if it's not any faster than the single core 1GHz CPU.

      If again you want to use circular logic and say "well a 500MHz single-core will use less power", a dual 250MHz dual-core would have been a better choice for power efficiency.

  23. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I respectfully disagree. The who "Jaguar Syndrome" is still alive and well in consumer electronics. The more bits, gigahertz, farknuckles your doo-dad has in comparison to the guy next to you, the more satisfied you are.

  24. Five or six years after the Nintendo DS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The DS is dual core. Not everything on it uses both but many things do. Smartphones are very slow to advance this way probably because the software has only recently been able to do multiple tasks or even have multiple threads.

    1. Re:Five or six years after the Nintendo DS? by NetNed · · Score: 1

      The DS has two processors but is not dual core.

    2. Re:Five or six years after the Nintendo DS? by tepples · · Score: 1

      The DS is dual core. Not everything on it uses both but many things do.

      The second core on the DS handles audio playback, wireless, the touch screen, and nothing else. Nintendo writes all the code for the second core "for security reasons". It's comparable to the baseband processor on smartphones: a less powerful core than the application processor dedicated to radio communication, on which execution is more locked down.

  25. dual battery by digitaldc · · Score: 3, Funny

    Dual core with a dual battery would be nice

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:dual battery by tooslickvan · · Score: 1

      Dual core with a dual battery would be nice

      You can have it right now; just buy two phones.

  26. Re:iPhone already has dual core! by Dishevel · · Score: 0
    Just another fanboy needing to believe his choice is good despite all evidence to the contrary.

    Have a nice day.

    --
    Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
  27. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by jgagnon · · Score: 1

    If you weren't AC, I'd mod you up just for using "farknuckles".

    --
    Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
  28. Phones have always been dual core! by thisisauniqueid · · Score: 1

    Phones have always been dual core, at least recently. The G1, for example, had (at least) two ARM cores. The only problem was, you couldn't actually run anything on the baseband processor "for wireless security reasons" and so that calls were smooth. But it was sitting idle most of the time. If anyone hacked the radio image they could probably have produced dual-core capability.

    1. Re:Phones have always been dual core! by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      So you're telling me my 486DX-2/66 was dual-core because it had a graphics processor on the board?

      Not so much.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    2. Re:Phones have always been dual core! by thisisauniqueid · · Score: 1

      No, your graphics processor was not another 486 core. But the baseband proc on most modern phones is a locked ARM core that is perfectly capable of running non-baseband code if it were to be unlocked. May not be a good idea to mess with the radio firmware, but the point is most phones already have more than one core. (Some probably have other embedded ARM cores that are not as easy to unlock or get to as the baseband, such as in the phone's GPU, like the 486 example you give -- but the baseband is not too special.)

    3. Re:Phones have always been dual core! by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Um, if its locked, it's closed. Knowing how things work just a little, unlocking the radio core is not a good idea, even if it seems unused. Incoming calls do not respect threading.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  29. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by Lifyre · · Score: 1

    Exactly. the iPhone sells because it provides such an amazingly refined experience. I have yet to meet an android phone that delivers the same experience. Many of them are very nice but when the open source projects like Cyanogen provide a better phone and environment that the manufacturer there is a very large and glaring problem with the android handsets.

    --
    I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
  30. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by Cornelius+the+Great · · Score: 4, Informative

    1) The same argument was made before dual core made it to consumer PCs. If you build it, they will come.

    In any case, waiting on either PC or phone is usually due to some IO task, not heavy CPU usage. By far, the most waiting I'm going to be doing is when web pages are being loaded.

    Media playback and games are primarily where users will see the most benefit from dual-core in the foreseeable future. Having a heavy webpage with Flash running smoothly doesn't hurt either. :)

    2) Today, chips have very good power-gating. If only one core is being used, only one core is being powered. Also, the power usage increase is logarithmic. For this reason, having a second core doesn't double the TDP of the entire chip.

    Also, most of these dual-core chips add a fraction of die space in return for an extra core. The SOCs already only dedicate a minority of space to the ARM core- the rest is taken up by the GPU, Memory, radio, and other misc controllers.

    And due to die shrinkages with every generation, many dual-core chips will be drawing less power than their single-core counterparts. Case in point: the 3rd generation Snapdragon with dual-Scorpion cores is claimed (at least by Qualcomm) to use less power than the Snapdragons in current smartphones. Going from 65nm to 45nm (28nm expected by end of 2011!) provides that kind of headroom.

    Besides, the biggest user of battery space is usually the screen, then radio (wifi, 3G/4G, bluetooth, etc), then the CPU at a distant third.

    Double core- Double battery usage? Right, whatever.

    --
    Sigs are for losers
  31. Some guy with a soldering gun and a dual core chip by PinchDuck · · Score: 1

    Is going to sneak into my house and install the new CPU? I guess that's cool, but kind of creepy.

  32. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You underestimate the hardware fetishists. They're a minority, but they're vocal on sites like Slashdot, Fark, etc. When dual core phones come out, they will be all "OMFG this thing is dual core, like, OMG HOLY SHIT *drool* this is the best thing ever, OMG your phone only has a single core? What GARBAGE, can you even do anything on it?"

    Then when quad-core phones come out, they will be all "OMFG quad cores, OMG this is the best thing ever. This phone beats everyone else's. What, your phone only has 2 cores? ROFL, what GARBAGE, how do you even manage with that piece of crap?"

  33. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's because everything Google does stays in a perpetual state of beta. Google products are for geeks, not grandma's. Much like a race car analogy, they are always updating and tweaking and tuning, to the point where they never stop long enough to wax and polish the finished product.

  34. Android will most likely benefit most by mswhippingboy · · Score: 0

    One of the complaints about Android is that it's UI is not as smooth as iOS, occasionally stalling and providing a generally more "jerky" user experience. Some of this is due to the garbage collection that (somewhat randomly) occurs within the Dalvik VM. A second core that can perform GC in the background will be a major benefit to achieving a smoother UI experience on par with iOS 4. Since iOS (Objective-C specifically) does not have GC, it will not gain as much of an improvement.

    As an aside, another improvement coming in Gingerbread (Android 2.3) is an updated NDK (r5) that will allow native applications to be coded directly in C or C++ instead of only being a callable library as is the case in the current NDK. For the first time, developers will be able to develop C/C++ applications for Android without writing a single line of Java. This will usher a new wave of high performance applications we haven't seen on any previous mobile platform.

    --
    Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an oncoming train.
    1. Re:Android will most likely benefit most by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1
    2. Re:Android will most likely benefit most by mswhippingboy · · Score: 1

      No kidding. When I ran across this the old Steam song started running though my head...

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaG2Acg8n60

      --
      Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an oncoming train.
  35. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by kaiser423 · · Score: 1

    Cyanogenmod does provide a very nice experience. It's what I use. LauncherPro Plus also helps a lot.

    But you and I have different definitions of "refined". Just the pull down bar on Android makes it a much more refined experience than iOS for me. Based upon my workflow, having that is a better experience where on an iPhone I was always furiously swiping, clicking, etc. to hop between apps, get back to what I was doing, and so on. When I switched it was like night and day, for me at least. Android's workflow just seemed more refined to me.

  36. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by Envy+Life · · Score: 1

    Absolutely incorrect. On Android if you have your processor pegged with a game, browsing the web, etc, and a call comes in, there's typically some lag time while the phone switches tasks to bring up the image of the caller and allow the answer. That and all the email/im/sms push/pull that goes on constantly, live wallpaper, multi-cores become a godsend. I can't tell you how many times I have to deal with this on my phone.

    The iPhone gets away with more consistent response by limiting the multitasking and incorporates strict process prioritization, and that's also how they accomodate a slower processor (foreground process gets all the CPU) which helps increase battery life. It's ingenious, but limiting. They have no such thing as live wallpaper, and that's on purpose. Android is a full multi-tasking operating system, and that's why multiple cores benefit it more at this point. When iPhone goes multi-core they will start lifting the multitasking restrictions in iOS and catch-up to Android, and this will no longer be a differentiator between the two.

  37. Not very exciting by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

    Of all the things that I wanted my Droid to do that it couldn't, dual-core multitasking wasn't one of them.

    --
    while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
  38. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by awyeah · · Score: 1

    I think different people define "good experience" differently. For the general crowd here on /., I'd expect "good experience" to mean "I can tinker with it," or "it's FLOSS," etc. And that's fine. People need to buy the devices that will give them the experience that they want.

    Hell, a member of my family recently switched from his iPhone to a BlackBerry Torch. He likes it better. Personally I'm no longer a big fan of BlackBerry, but to each is own.

    (Disclaimer: I use an iPhone and believe it gives me a "good experience" - but I'm not married to it).

    --
    Why, no, I haven't meta-moderated lately. Thanks for asking!
  39. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by eulernet · · Score: 1

    But the number of bits of silicon inside the phone really isn't going to attract many consumers.

    Two processors for the same price as one ?

  40. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by Pojut · · Score: 1

    ^This, a thousand times this. Any potential benefits (from a hardware or software perspective) that I could gain by switching to an iPhone would be instantly wiped out by the loss of the pull-down notification bar.

    That one feature alone instantly makes Android a better choice...IMO, of course.

  41. Contradictory Topic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The summary says that all top of the range smartphones will have dual cores and subsequently questions whether iPhone users will switch. Does anyone else see a fundamental flaw in logic here in somehow excluding the iPhone from "all"?

  42. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by SoupGuru · · Score: 1

    That's your opinion and you are entitled to that. I've been disillusioned with the megapixel hype and I'm not sure I agree with you.

    --
    What doesn't kill you only delays the inevitable
  43. TI OMAP4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one am eagerly waiting for an OMAP4-based smartphones.

    It integrates a dual core A9, as well as many-many hardware accelerators for audio and video codecs, and a PowerVR 3D controller.

    Let's roll out superb 3D-accelerated games and HD videos!

  44. Compare iPod touch 4 pricing by tepples · · Score: 1

    probably because most of the SoCs come with telephony chipsets baked in.

    Then how does Apple make money selling its iPod touch 4 for half the price of an unactivated smartphone, when it's mostly the same hardware as iPhone 4? It appears to be a case of pick two:

    • Unactivated Android phone: general-purpose, Android Market access, not cheap
    • Archos 43: general-purpose, cheap, no Android Market access
    • iPod touch: cheap, iOS App Store access, not general-purpose
  45. dual-core means lower power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    two cores going 500MHz uses less power than one core at 1GHz even though there are double the transistors. When you drop the frequency you can lower the voltage which has a better than linear effect on power consumption.

  46. Re:Some guy with a soldering gun and a dual core c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, its going to be an OTA update, using the latest in Quantum Teleportation technology.

  47. You can lead a sheep to water... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "probably won't persuade iPhone owners to switch to Android"
    Um, duh? Yhe android could do everything in the world and most apple fanboys/morons would still prefer to do things the way steve jobs tells them.

  48. distributed computing on phones.... by schlachter · · Score: 1

    how long before we have distributed computing on phones? dynamically initiated as users subscribe to problems of interest, or link a bunch of phones via wifi to do real time image processing? would be nice for the military out in the field...providing soldiers with a way to do some heavy data analysis with minimal overhead. and why waste all these increasingly powerful CPU/GPUs sitting dormant in our phones at night?

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
  49. welcome to 2008 by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

    my old nokia n96 had dual arm9 cores, sure it were probably two seperate chips instead of 1 die, but the principle is the same

    still, it absolutely SUCKED ASS compared to any phone of the day, i junked it and went back to my nokia 6120 classic, single cpu phone, which just worked way better (both symbian s60 phones by the way)

    As all smartphones out today prove, you dont need two cpu cores to be a good phone

    --
    People, what a bunch of bastards
  50. Quite so by __aailob1448 · · Score: 1

    It makes perfect sense. When docked AND plugged in, the cores can be turbo boosted with a doubling of the Ghz. Bam, double the speed, fast enough to compete with a budget laptop.

    When it's unplugged, the cores are underclocked again, and battery life is good.

    Of course, such phones would be expensive and the dock will eat up some mainboard/battery space.

    But we would need a universal dock to make such devices convenient enough. If there are terminals everywhere for you to plug your cellphone into, your cell will become your backup laptop.

  51. All Android what? by Tintivilus · · Score: 2

    All Android phones released in 2010 were capped at 1Ghz with chips from either Qualcomm or Samsung. The Samsung Infuse 4G is the first phone I'm aware of that at stock is greater than 1Ghz (it is 1.2Ghz).

    Almost all the Motorola Android phones, and all the high-end ones currently shipping, use TI OMAP processors.

    First, Droid (Milestone) in 2009 used a TI OMAP 3430

    Later, Droid X in 2010 used a TI OMAP 3630 at 1Ghz

    Finally, Droid 2 Global Launched on Nov 9 2001 with a 1.2 GHz TI OMAP processor

  52. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by southpolesammy · · Score: 1

    I think the Sony POS bit on The Onion from a couple years ago just about sums it up. Consumers are lemmings and will buy any stupid piece of crap as long as it's got more bells and whistles than the stupid piece of crap that came before it.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AyVh1_vWYQ

    --
    Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
  53. A4 is NOT just a Hummingbird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A4 is not dual core- it's an ARM Cortex A8 core with a PowerVR SGX 535 GPU. It's nearly identical to the Samsung Hummingbird CPUs used in the Galaxy S phones.

    If by "nearly identical", you mean the A8 core is the same, which makes up for only a small fraction of the total gates. You would have to ignore the fact that all peripherals are different, RAM is different, caches are different, and so on. It's like saying a Xeon is just a Core 2 Duo.

    1. Re:A4 is NOT just a Hummingbird by Cornelius+the+Great · · Score: 1

      You're right, I was referring to the A8 core within the two SOCs. However, they both use the same PowerVR SGX 535 and were designed by the same firm (Intrinsity, which was acquired by Apple last year) in collaboration with Samsung. The A4 is slightly smaller, owing its decreased die size to smaller cache and other tweaks. Functionally, they're very similar, much moreso than any other A8-based SOC (TI OMAP, Qualcomm Snapdragon, etc).

      --
      Sigs are for losers
  54. Re:First. by rainmouse · · Score: 1

    Or are you saying you have the first dual core smartphone from 2011? :-)

    I'm desperate to know when they will invent a pocket sized smart device capable of impersonating a phone. Oh wait they had that? And they are uninviting them? So they are still replacing phone functionality, signal reception and call reliability with more flashy shit I don't need?

    What's that? You can now get a pretty good tricorder app? Damn I genuinely take it all back now.

  55. Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po by Lifyre · · Score: 1

    I have an Eris and love it after I got rid of the factory software which is basically my point.

    I never really thought about how awesome the pull down bar is though. I'm just speaking from the perspective of someone who has watched people go both ways between the iPhone and Android gardens.

    --
    I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
  56. Re:First. by Mitchell314 · · Score: 1

    Given that karma is composed of alkanes, it burns very well.

    --
    I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
  57. There's a gaping hole in your point by Brannon · · Score: 1

    Which is that 99/100 iPhone users don't know the clock rate of their phone. They buy it specifically for "battery capacity", "sound quality", and "compatibility with existing architectures and applications" and a host of other usability criteria.

    Unless your point was to say that iPhone users are making rational decisions about their phones and that Android-humping tech junkies are the ones obsessed with useless metrics.

  58. Re:iPhone already has dual core! by RocketRabbit · · Score: 1

    Yeah, while the Android phones feel slow and clunky, and the Apple ones have a buttery smooth GUI, I guess the evidence is right in my face.

    Maybe if Android ditched their crappy Java knockoff they'd have a product people would line up for.

  59. Re:iPhone already has dual core! by Dishevel · · Score: 1
    Make sure when you reply to my previous post the you do not in any way comment on my attack the FUD you were spreading about the iPhone having a dual core proc.

    Oh. NM. You already did. :)

    --
    Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
  60. There's a gaping hole in your point by mjwx · · Score: 1

    Which is that 99/100 iPhone users don't know the clock rate of their phone.

    or the battery capacity vs draw, or the sound quality or the compatibility with existing standards.

    Iphone buyers purchase an Iphone because the marketing tells them it's the bestest thing evar and it will make them cool and sexy and hip.

    Unless your point was to say that iPhone users are making rational decisions

    Unless your point was that Android users are the ones making rational decisions while Iphone users are obsessed with buying something that they can show off to gain some kind of status.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  61. What!!?!? by Brannon · · Score: 1

    Please teach me something. What is wrong with the iPhone's battery capacity or sound quality or compatibility with existing standards?

    Or did your mom already put you to bed for the night?

    Have fun running SETI@home on your Droid, loser.

    1. Re:What!!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Owned.

  62. Re:iPhone already has dual core! by kashif1246 · · Score: 1

    The iPad is a tablet computer designed, developed and marketed by Apple primarily as a platform for audio-visual media including books, periodicals, movies, music, games, and web content.Now a days it is available at online shopping sites. One should use it.