Worried that we are going in the same direction with hardware in WP8 as WP7...

[mhans311]

Wish ppl would read like this guy....READ....

In the very beginning of the post I said PLEASE READ THIS: I AM NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT WINDOWS PHONE NEEDING MORE POWER....read ppl...

I also said the APPS WILL COME (thanks to native coding and porting) so there is no need to worry about hardware lacking because the apps we've been waiting for will come....

As blehbleh understands, this is only WISHFUL THINKING. i'm not complaining and saying I won't buy a Windows Phone with an S4 because I will. I would buy a Windows Phone on contract TODAY if it were to receive Apollo (can't for obvious reasons). I simply want us to be AHEAD of the pack and not just getting recycled chips. I am saying this:

"IT WOULD BE NICE IF WINDOWS PHONE 8 SHIPPED WITH HARDWARE THAT MADE OTHER DEVICES LOOK SHAMEFUL". Did I say "Windows Phone is doomed to fail because it's shipping with an S4". No.

Again....read instead of spitting the same non-sense that's recycled here a billion times....

Haven't you learned yet that if you say anything even remotely resembling concerns for weaknesses in WP or MS in these forums that you will be flamed?

As for the topic at hand, I think that WP is now much more apt to change to keep up with current specs. The S4 is the top of the line in phones in the USA for now, so I wouldn't be too concerned.

 

[jmshub]

The NT kernal should be able to accept different chipsets without causing fragmentation. Windows has been doing that pretty much since the beginning.

 

[socialcarpet]

I simply want us to be AHEAD of the pack and not just getting recycled chips.

Serious question...What constitutes a "recycled chip" to you? How new would a SoC need to be not to be "recycled" in your eyes? Would the Windows Phone need to the the first phone EVER to have it, or would it be OK if it was released 6 months earlier in an Android device?

I am saying this:

"IT WOULD BE NICE IF WINDOWS PHONE 8 SHIPPED WITH HARDWARE THAT MADE OTHER DEVICES LOOK SHAMEFUL"

Sure, it would probably help sell some phones. I agree from that standpoint. But truthfully hardware is overhyped in phones. All the Android idiots are freaking out because they can't get the quad-core Exynos chip, and what for? They have a dual core chip with 2 GB of RAM attached to it which already has more performance than 90% of them are going to ever need or use. Even then I've already read reports of stupid Android stuttering on that miraculous quad core chip. :lol:

Bottom line: People use software. Specs are some bullet points on the side of the box. Might get people to buy something, but it's virtually meaningless. If you told people the Lumia 900 had the quad-core exynos chip, 90% of them wouldn't know the damn difference. It's fast and responsive already, unless you actually have some software that's going to run amazingly fast on 4 cores that would run like *** on 1 core., YOULL NEVER NOTICE. What would really use 4 cores? Probably nothing other than a really high end phone game or video editing app, the likes of which doesn't exist on ANY phone platform yet. Believe me, the quad-core Exynos Samsung Galaxy 3 doesn't send text messages or update Facebook statuses any faster than my single core Lumia does.

Cliffs Notes:

I THINK IT WOULD BE MUCH NICER IF WINDOWS PHONE 8 SHIPPED WITH SOFTWARE THAT MADE OTHER DEVICES LOOK SHAMEFUL.

4 core processors and 2GB of RAM will just add unnecessarily to the price of the phone and aren't going to do anything for real-world performance at this point. They barely make a difference on Android phones which are much more targeted at making use of brawnier hardware. Besides, the real spec whores are ALWAYS going to go with Android anyway. Windows Phone is for grown-ups.

 

[crystal_planet]

Hardware specs mean zero if not matched with a good O/S. Case in point my single core phone is just as buttery smooth as my gf's iPhone 4S. If someone is going to brag about how many cores his phone has, chances are he's over compensating.

 

[blehblehbleh]

Sure, it would probably help sell some phones. I agree from that standpoint. But truthfully hardware is overhyped in phones. All the Android idiots are freaking out because they can't get the quad-core Exynos chip, and what for? They have a dual core chip with 2 GB of RAM attached to it which already has more performance than 90% of them are going to ever need or use. Even then I've already read reports of stupid Android stuttering on that miraculous quad core chip. :lol:

Bottom line: People use software. Specs are some bullet points on the side of the box. Might get people to buy something, but it's virtually meaningless. If you told people the Lumia 900 had the quad-core exynos chip, 90% of them wouldn't know the damn difference. It's fast and responsive already, unless you actually have some software that's going to run amazingly fast on 4 cores that would run like *** on 1 core., YOULL NEVER NOTICE. What would really use 4 cores? Probably nothing other than a really high end phone game or video editing app, the likes of which doesn't exist on ANY phone platform yet. Believe me, the quad-core Exynos Samsung Galaxy 3 doesn't send text messages or update Facebook statuses any faster than my single core Lumia does.

To be fair, it's not necessarily about speed. See mparker's post: http://forums.windowscentral.com/1663654-post18.htm

Which, you also commented in. It's a bit reductionistic to just simply focus on multicores benefiting in speed or that apps won't take advantage of them, even if that's the case at the moment.

 

[jimski]

I think the OP should wait for a WP with the most advanced, cutting edge, multi core processor. Might take a while so get comfortable.

Sent from my HTC Surround using Board Express

 

[jrdatrackstar1223]

I'm only gonna say this one more time and give up. I am not under the "throw faster hardware at it" Android spell. Please believe. It is THE REASON that I went with windows phone in the first place. I'm typing this on a Galaxy Nexus with Jelly Bean and "Project Butter". Smoother? Yes, (and I give Google props for at least acknowledging the problem even though it took forever) . Windows Phone smooth? Still not close. With that being said...

A rational human being can't sit here and say that a game like Modern Combat 3 or Infinity Blade would run "just fine" on windows phone currently because it wouldn't. That's not an opinion. That is fact based on physical limitations. Does everyone need a gaming device? No. Does everyone need 64GB of space for music. No. Will the core OS be fine without these things? Yes. Does that mean that it's dumb to want those things? No.....

Say you see a Ford Fusion with Bluetooth sync technology for hands free speaking, and you see another one that is the exact same model and color but without the technology. Would you say "that's dumb....why would Ford release a car with the Bluetooth when I would never use that?", or would simply not buy it and go for the cheaper model without it?Its called reaching a wide array of audiences. Just because you don't use it that doesn't mean it just doesn't belong in the marketplace. And everyone is also reading over the fact that I would STILL BUY an Apollo device even if it shipped with hardware being beaten by the competition. I'm saying IT WOULD BE NICE, not "quadruple core processors or I'm abandoning ship".

 

[jrdatrackstar1223]

Serious question...What constitutes a "recycled chip" to you? How new would a SoC need to be not to be "recycled" in your eyes? Would the Windows Phone need to the the first phone EVER to have it, or would it be OK if it was released 6 months earlier in an Android device?



Sure, it would probably help sell some phones. I agree from that standpoint. But truthfully hardware is overhyped in phones. All the Android idiots are freaking out because they can't get the quad-core Exynos chip, and what for? They have a dual core chip with 2 GB of RAM attached to it which already has more performance than 90% of them are going to ever need or use. Even then I've already read reports of stupid Android stuttering on that miraculous quad core chip. :lol:

Bottom line: People use software. Specs are some bullet points on the side of the box. Might get people to buy something, but it's virtually meaningless. If you told people the Lumia 900 had the quad-core exynos chip, 90% of them wouldn't know the damn difference. It's fast and responsive already, unless you actually have some software that's going to run amazingly fast on 4 cores that would run like *** on 1 core., YOULL NEVER NOTICE. What would really use 4 cores? Probably nothing other than a really high end phone game or video editing app, the likes of which doesn't exist on ANY phone platform yet. Believe me, the quad-core Exynos Samsung Galaxy 3 doesn't send text messages or update Facebook statuses any faster than my single core Lumia does.

Cliffs Notes:

I THINK IT WOULD BE MUCH NICER IF WINDOWS PHONE 8 SHIPPED WITH SOFTWARE THAT MADE OTHER DEVICES LOOK SHAMEFUL.

4 core processors and 2GB of RAM will just add unnecessarily to the price of the phone and aren't going to do anything for real-world performance at this point. They barely make a difference on Android phones which are much more targeted at making use of brawnier hardware. Besides, the real spec whores are ALWAYS going to go with Android anyway. Windows Phone is for grown-ups.

Recycled chips are what we have in the flagship windows phone device (and all 2nd gen devices for the matter)....the Lumia 900. Adreno 205 was new and considered powerful back in like 2010...

 

[scottcraft]

I don't have any issue with wanting powerful hardware in WP. I know this os is really smooth on the old single core processors we have now, but that doesn't mean more power is a bad thing. I'm using a dual-core android right now and quite often I've wondered exactly how fast would WP be on this hardware. I do think the changes Microsoft is making for WP8 will let them keep up to date hardware in the phones. I know android will always be a bit ahead in the arms race, but WP will be close enough that the os will more than make up for the processors.

 

[socialcarpet]

Recycled chips are what we have in the flagship windows phone device (and all 2nd gen devices for the matter)....the Lumia 900. Adreno 205 was new and considered powerful back in like 2010...

Agreed.

I think you'll be happy with the WP8 phones in that case. I don't think we will have to worry about that since that was only because of the limitations Microsoft placed on WP 7.5, they won't have that in WP8 so I would expect them to use the same range of processors you have in Android.

What we all have now in the Lumia 900, will probably be relegated to the mid-low end where it belongs.

I apologize if I misunderstood you earlier, I thought you were implying that Windows Phones should all be shipping with the highest specs available or higher than anything else. I think we agree though, we just want the same options that Android users have. :happy:

A Windows Phone with the same processor, GPU and RAM as an Android will probably run faster and smoother than the Android in nearly every case.

 

[socialcarpet]

I'm only gonna say this one more time and give up. I am not under the "throw faster hardware at it" Android spell. Please believe. It is THE REASON that I went with windows phone in the first place. I'm typing this on a Galaxy Nexus with Jelly Bean and "Project Butter". Smoother? Yes, (and I give Google props for at least acknowledging the problem even though it took forever) . Windows Phone smooth? Still not close. With that being said...

A rational human being can't sit here and say that a game like Modern Combat 3 or Infinity Blade would run "just fine" on windows phone currently because it wouldn't. That's not an opinion. That is fact based on physical limitations. Does everyone need a gaming device? No. Does everyone need 64GB of space for music. No. Will the core OS be fine without these things? Yes. Does that mean that it's dumb to want those things? No.....

Say you see a Ford Fusion with Bluetooth sync technology for hands free speaking, and you see another one that is the exact same model and color but without the technology. Would you say "that's dumb....why would Ford release a car with the Bluetooth when I would never use that?", or would simply not buy it and go for the cheaper model without it?Its called reaching a wide array of audiences. Just because you don't use it that doesn't mean it just doesn't belong in the marketplace. And everyone is also reading over the fact that I would STILL BUY an Apollo device even if it shipped with hardware being beaten by the competition. I'm saying IT WOULD BE NICE, not "quadruple core processors or I'm abandoning ship".

I understand now. I think you're going to be really please with what you see, I think we all are. Every indication I've seen seems to point at dual-core and more in the pipeline. WP 8 phones will be competitive on hardware specs, not to worry.

 

[jrdatrackstar1223]

I appreciate all the replies from everyone, whether they agreed or not. Again, this wasn't meant to be a "we NEED more hardware" thread, but rather meant to look forward to new potential future of Windows Phone since it IS new and requires new hardware to run; can't hurt to dream and hope for the best the 2nd "time around".....right....?