Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

244 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First. (-1, Offtopic)

superdreamkilla (1975432) | more than 3 years ago | (#34861840)

First.

Re:First. (0)

Nuno Sa (1095047) | more than 3 years ago | (#34861882)

Karma to spare, uh? :-)

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

HEY EDITORS! (1, Offtopic)

TrisexualPuppy (976893) | more than 3 years ago | (#34861978)

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

Re:HEY EDITORS! (0)

NewWorldDan (899800) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862232)

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.

Re:HEY EDITORS! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862250)

Slashdot has editors?

Re:HEY EDITORS! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862286)

Troll? Term is obviously used facetiously. Please retire now.

Re:HEY EDITORS! (0)

wilgibson (933961) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862500)

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

Re:First. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862348)

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...

Re:First. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34861896)

Watching your karma burn.
*popcorn*

iPhone already has dual core! (-1)

RocketRabbit (830691) | more than 3 years ago | (#34861906)

Of course, all new iPhones already have the dual-core Apple A4 processors, so it would be sort of stupid to switch to Android to get a dual-core processor.

Re:iPhone already has dual core! (4, Informative)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34861954)

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.

Re:iPhone already has dual core! (2)

Cornelius the Great (555189) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862028)

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.

Re:iPhone already has dual core! (0)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862696)

Just another fanboy needing to believe his choice is good despite all evidence to the contrary.

Have a nice day.

iPhone (2, Insightful)

imamac (1083405) | more than 3 years ago | (#34861930)

probably won't persuade iPhone owners to switch to Android

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

Re:iPhone (1, Interesting)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34861990)

^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.

Re:iPhone (3, Informative)

dc29A (636871) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862514)

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.

Re:iPhone (2)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862592)

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.

Re:iPhone (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862794)

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.

Re:iPhone (0)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863076)

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.

Re:iPhone (1)

BassMan449 (1356143) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863276)

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.

Re:iPhone (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862578)

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

Re:iPhone (0)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862650)

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

Re:iPhone (1, Interesting)

nibbles2004 (761552) | more than 3 years ago | (#34861992)

i do , it wont be

Re:iPhone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862026)

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

Re:iPhone (2)

jgagnon (1663075) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862204)

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

Re:iPhone (3, Funny)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862260)

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.

Re:iPhone (4, Insightful)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862454)

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.

Re:iPhone (5, Insightful)

todorb (169225) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862468)

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).

Re:iPhone (5, Informative)

dagamer34 (1012833) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862484)

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 [nvidia.com]

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.

Re:iPhone (1)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862918)

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

Re:iPhone (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862532)

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 [wikipedia.org] . Not saying you're wrong, just saying the performance is purposely reduced from its actual potential for extra battery life.

Re:iPhone (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863008)

What this guy said ^

Apple is so far ahead of the game right now they can underclock their CPU's to save battery life and still get better performance out of it. The original Iphone 2g model was actually a 620 mhz cpu underclocked to 412mhz and it still plays most games like a champ.

Re:iPhone (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862760)

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

Re:iPhone (1)

kangsterizer (1698322) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863136)

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.

Re:iPhone (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862926)

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.

Dual core smartphones (3, Insightful)

jgagnon (1663075) | more than 3 years ago | (#34861950)

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.

Re:Dual core smartphones (3, Funny)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 3 years ago | (#34861970)

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!

Re:Dual core smartphones (4, Insightful)

ciderbrew (1860166) | more than 3 years ago | (#34861984)

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.

Re:Dual core smartphones (3, Insightful)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862266)

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.

Re:Dual core smartphones (1)

joh (27088) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862400)

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...

Re:Dual core smartphones (3, Interesting)

awyeah (70462) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862572)

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 [motorola.com] . 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.

Re:Dual core smartphones (5, Insightful)

jgagnon (1663075) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862984)

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.

Why does it have to be dual core? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862032)

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?

Re:Why does it have to be dual core? (1)

blackraven14250 (902843) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862174)

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.

Re:Why does it have to be dual core? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862304)

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.

Re:Why does it have to be dual core? (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862248)

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".

Re:Why does it have to be dual core? (1)

joh (27088) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862446)

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.

Re:Why does it have to be dual core? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863110)

The CortexA9 CPU is already more powerful than the Atom

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

Re:Why does it have to be dual core? (1)

kangsterizer (1698322) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863198)

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

Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling point (4, Insightful)

samael (12612) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862070)

"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.

Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po (3, Insightful)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862228)

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.

Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po (4, Informative)

Cornelius the Great (555189) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862280)

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 [wikipedia.org] will have docks that allow them become netbook and HTPC replacements, people will find uses for that extra core.

Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po (1, Troll)

ktappe (747125) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862476)

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.

Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po (4, Informative)

Cornelius the Great (555189) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862892)

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.

Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862462)

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.

Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862552)

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.

Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po (1)

jgagnon (1663075) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862736)

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

Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po (1)

Lifyre (960576) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862830)

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.

Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863166)

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.

Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po (1)

kaiser423 (828989) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863268)

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.

Re:Can't see why "dual core" would be a selling po (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863016)

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?"

assault on battery (1)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862090)

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

Re:assault on battery (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862564)

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.

Is is all or not? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862102)

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?

Re:Is is all or not? (2)

jgagnon (1663075) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862236)

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

Re:Is is all or not? (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863032)

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!

dual? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862120)

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

Re:dual? (2)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862516)

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.

Deceptive Title (1)

BrendaEM (871664) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862152)

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.

Re:Deceptive Title (1)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862240)

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.

Re:Deceptive Title (1)

Stooshie (993666) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863084)

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

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

Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch (2)

EmagGeek (574360) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862282)

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?

Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch (1, Informative)

Krakadoom (1407635) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862402)

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.

Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch (2)

nprz (1210658) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863224)

...Your phone could make coffee...

This reminds me of the Pomegranate [pomegranatephone.com] phone.

Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch (1, Insightful)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862428)

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.

Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862616)

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

Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch (1)

1000101 (584896) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862646)

I'm switching. I currently own an iPhone 3GS which will be promptly handed over to my wife once the Motorola Atrix [engadget.com] 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

Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862820)

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.

Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863072)

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.

Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863236)

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.

Re:Nothing will persuade iPhone users to switch (1)

awyeah (70462) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863240)

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.

Frist 4sot?! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862298)

About who can ran7 to stick something If *BSD is to if desired, we incompa7ibilities OpenBSD wanker Theo the goodwill Discussion I'm

Surprise! (1)

dimethylxanthine (946092) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862332)

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

Cores don't matter at the moment (2)

hallucinogen (1263152) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862370)

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.

Re:Cores don't matter at the moment (1)

ThosLives (686517) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862904)

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.

Re:Cores don't matter at the moment (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863330)

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.

I must have missed that announcement... (1)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862470)

So is it time to ditch your current pocket rocket?

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

Will dual-core do anything useful? (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862494)

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?

Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862666)

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?

Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863220)

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.

Re:Will dual-core do anything useful? (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862954)

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.

Five or six years after the Nintendo DS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862598)

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.

Re:Five or six years after the Nintendo DS? (1)

NetNed (955141) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862782)

The DS has two processors but is not dual core.

Re:Five or six years after the Nintendo DS? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863292)

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.

dual battery (3, Funny)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862644)

Dual core with a dual battery would be nice

Phones have always been dual core! (1)

thisisauniqueid (825395) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862754)

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.

Re:Phones have always been dual core! (1)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862952)

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

Not so much.

Re:Phones have always been dual core! (1)

thisisauniqueid (825395) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863060)

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.)

Some guy with a soldering gun and a dual core chip (1)

PinchDuck (199974) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862956)

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

Android will most likely benefit most (0)

mswhippingboy (754599) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863214)

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.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>