Has microsoft made an oath to stay behind the competition?

[a5cent]

If there is a problem with wanting a quad core device, maybe if its just said as, they want a better cpu and gpu would that help?

IMHO, absolutely! There is currently a real danger of OEM's releasing quad core WP8 devices that perform inferiorly compared to all of the dual core WP8 devices currently on the market. That isn't just bad for those that get duped into buying those devices. It's bad for the entire ecosystem, because most developers will target their apps to run well on the poorest performing hardware that WP8 supports. In the end, we all lose, because the masses bought into the "more cores is always better" hype.

Also, the number of CPU cores has almost no relationship to GPU performance. Unfortunately, GPU performance really is a sore spot for WP8. If we as a community really understood our hardware, that is what we would be complaining about, not the number of cores, but it's barely ever mentioned.

Quality and efficiency of cores matter, but if cores was so irrelevant why didn't wp stick with single cores?

Any real answer that goes beyond marketing speak is complicated. You'll just have to believe me when I say that for the types of software we run on smartphones, the usefulness of every core is greatly reduced with every extra core added to the CPU. This is particularly true of WP. For Android this is less true, because the OS itself runs a whole host of threads in the background, which WP does not.

I thought one of the benefits of wp8 compared to wp7 was the fact it could use multiple cores, and no that never meant just 2.

You are making a typical mistake. What you mention is not at all a benefit. That is only of value when that extra performance becomes apparent and noticeable to the person using the device. That is not always guaranteed to be the case. In fact, I know a few hardware engineers that are specifically asked to engage in spec-sheet optimization... the act of designing hardware as to improve the spec sheet, while actual performance gains are irrelevant. This is standard practice.

I think there's a lot to be said for controlling the specs the way MS does, but i think its more important for the minimum spec than top end.

In general I agree. However, it's worth mentioning how often we point at Android and ridicule their fragmented ecosystem. Every new hardware chassis spec for WP fragments our own ecosystem too. We can't have it both ways.

 

[a5cent]

or maybe they have that freedom due to the quality of the chips they produce, that includes the gpu.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. What I was trying to say is that Apple is in the enviable position of not having to market spec-sheets to geeks, and can instead focus on designing hardware that actually performers better as opposed to just looking better on paper. They don't even mention core count at their product launches. Instead, they just tell you: "this device is 135% faster then our last generation smartphone", and that difference is generally noticeable (has been so far at least).

On the other hand, Samsung tells people: "this is our new octa-core califragilator chip" (a freak of engineering), implying it's twice as fast as a comparable quad-core device, which is complete BS. But it sells.

But as even you have highlighted better specs can make a difference, even if its not as simple as saying core count. Its just easier for some people to put it that way

True. I would just rather see the entire consumer base up in arms and calling for better performance in "this" or "that" scenario, instead of everyone playing "arm-chair" engineer and asking for more cores. In peoples minds it may be the same thing, but it really really isn't.

I would love to see people ignore the technicalities of how hardware is built entirely, and instead focus on benchmarks.

 

[NaNoo123]

Yea a5cent, pretty much agree with you.

I do actually understand at a lower level, but trying to articulate at a higher level what the OP was asking for. Although if you ask me about what specs iPhones, different android devices are i wouldn't know.

Wanting better spec, isn't wrong or worthless.
WP8 the OS runs fine without lag, but not some games. And the magical optimise that people think solves everything is not always the case.

Cores have come to mean performance in the mainstream though, so i could understand his point.
We've gone from the ghz to cores war lol

WP8 runs well, but the architecture is relatively old in comparison to what is available.

One of the reasons i don't mind MS control, is the controlling of fragmentation, i also think their iron grip is a bit too tight though.

 

[NaNoo123]

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. What I was trying to say is that Apple is in the enviable position of not having to market spec-sheets to geeks, and can instead focus on designing hardware that actually performers better as opposed to just looking better on paper. They don't even mention core count .

actually that was my point lol
Due to their position they are able to produce a good/balanced chip, which includes the gpu.
But they don't have to deal with oems etc

 

[a5cent]

Wanting better spec, isn't wrong or worthless.

I get what you're saying. The difference is that you are willing to ignore what is actually being said and translate it into what you think is meant. You've one upped me in that area. I can't do that, and don't intend to either. Sorry. ;-)

Cores have come to mean performance in the mainstream though, so i could understand his point.
We've gone from the ghz to cores war lol

Yeah, no kidding. I think the core wars are even worse though, because MHz and performance were at least somewhat proportionally related, whereas that isn't at all true for core count.

...i also think their iron grip is a bit too tight though.

Really? Many people say that but I don't see it. The only things Microsoft rigorously standardizes on are the SoC, display resolutions and RAM. I think if you're going to lessen your grip anymore you might as well not do it at all, no?

My complaint here would relate only to timing. If Microsoft intends to design a chassis spec around a Qualcomm 600 SoC, then IMHO they should be ready with that when that SoC launches. They need to get that hardware out when it's new, or not do it at all. IMHO adding fragmentation to the ecosystem isn't worth it for hardware that is already six months old.

 

[SnailUK]

One of the reasons i don't mind MS control, is the controlling of fragmentation, i also think their iron grip is a bit too tight though.

Its difficult though. WP8 has a tiny market share, so its hard enough to get developers to write an app for WP8. We are already seeing developers being lazy, and not testing on 512mb devices.

Start adding more cores, and more ram, and developers will just keep focusing on the top end, and WP8 will become like Android, where the experience is fantastic on the brand new top end devices, but 6 months down the line, your phone is completely outdated, and all the latest apps require more power.

 

[SnailUK]

My complaint here would relate only to timing. If Microsoft intends to design a chassis spec around a Qualcomm 600 SoC, then IMHO they should be ready with that when that SoC launches.

But they'll be stuck in that same old situation. There are multiple manufacturers all fighting for the latest chipset, most will end up selling magnitudes more handsets than (for instance) Nokia, therefore Microsoft/Nokia will get little or no early support, they'll get worse prices, etc etc.

 

[NaNoo123]

Not ignore what is being said, but try to understand what someone is saying.
People seem quick to dismiss what others say, even though i suspect they know what is meant.

Not all cores are made equal and therefore nether the frequency. But yes it would have been correct to say wanting a better soc.

Isn't that the point though? By the time it comes to market its not that current and not going to be updated for a while.
If your going to maintain that kind of control then bring it to market in a timely manner.
Otherwise say these are the minimum requirements you must meet and give them more control of what they can produce.
I don't think it would fragment the ecosystem that much, probably less than the memory disparity we currently have.

It just means that what the OP was talking about would be possible.

 

[a5cent]

But they'll be stuck in that same old situation. There are multiple manufacturers all fighting for the latest chipset, most will end up selling magnitudes more handsets than (for instance) Nokia, therefore Microsoft/Nokia will get little or no early support, they'll get worse prices, etc etc.

Are you saying that the delay is intentional, because WP OEM's couldn't get those high-end parts that early on? I can't really speak to that, because I know nothing about it. I would assume that if HTC can do it (with their HTC One), then why couldn't Nokia?

IMHO if WP was out with the cutting edge hardware when it launched, it would be easier for WP to stick with that platform for at least a year (in the interest of low fragmentation), without people feeling WP is getting left behind. That is what I think would be different about the situation.

 

[NaNoo123]

Its difficult though. WP8 has a tiny market share, so its hard enough to get developers to write an app for WP8. We are already seeing developers being lazy, and not testing on 512mb devices.

Start adding more cores, and more ram, and developers will just keep focusing on the top end, and WP8 will become like Android, where the experience is fantastic on the brand new top end devices, but 6 months down the line, your phone is completely outdated, and all the latest apps require more power.

edited my reply as better phrased above me by a5cent.

 

[NaNoo123]

Have to admit, was just wondering if i was being slightly unfair to the "8" core gs4. (although i do think it was valid for the point)
I've not looked at what frequency both models are running at, battery life etc.
The 4 main cores may actually be just as good or a better marchitecture, but maybe Samsung throttled it to make both models even, as they are supposed to be gs4's, not gs4 and gs4s.

Do they even market it as 8 core?
What their trying to do isn't a bad idea in of itself, main cores and companion type cores.

Not meaning to derail thread, but i stopped following actual implementation after days of cortex a9 and if neon instruction set way being developed for etc.
Now a days i just have passing interest in what phones are actually using, until im interested in upgrading, until then i just follow the marchitecture, theory etc.

 

[a5cent]

I don't think it would fragment the ecosystem that much, probably less than the memory disparity we currently have.

The way I see it, fragmentation is only an issue if it requires developers to consider differences in hardware and/or software configurations, in order to get their apps to behave as intended. The WP RAM disparity doesn't do that. In other words, those two RAM configurations don't make it any more difficult for developers to create their apps, nor will it cause stability or performance issues on any device. I'm not saying you can't call this fragmentation, but if you do, then it's the type of fragmentation that lacks negative consequences.

Yes, some consumers will not be able to run all apps, but in exchange for that they got their devices at a cheaper price. Those are good options to have. Anyway, those RAM disparities exist only as a form of market segmentation, and I think MS could have chosen worse ways of achieving that.

However, adding new SoCs to the mix, particularly if they have very different performance characteristics compared to the devices already in circulation, well, that can significantly complicate app development. For your average single-threaded calendar app it's completely irrelevant of course (as are all other hardware characteristics), but for apps that benefit from taking hardware to its limits, such variations add a lot of cost to app development and testing (= less software of that type, apps that perform poorly, incompatibilitites). That is what I consider an example of fragmentation with negative consequences, and I do think that is far worse than the two RAM configurations we must deal with.

Its difficult though. WP8 has a tiny market share, so its hard enough to get developers to write an app for WP8. We are already seeing developers being lazy, and not testing on 512mb devices.

Start adding more cores, and more ram, and developers will just keep focusing on the top end, and WP8 will become like Android, where the experience is fantastic on the brand new top end devices, but 6 months down the line, your phone is completely outdated, and all the latest apps require more power.

Yeah. I think so too.

However, in general, developers ask how they must build their app to be a viable choice for as many people as possible. More often then not, that means targeting the current mid- to low-end, not specifically the high-end.

Regarding WP's "high-end" games, all we're getting is second hand "stuff". Such ports are always far less efficient than if they were developed specifically for WP. The 512MB issue isn't because developers are lazy, but because they are on extreme deadlines to get their ports finished. Basically, if the port doesn't crash, then the port is considered finished. If the app does really well in sales, then they may get some time to clean up and get it running more optimally on WP, but that isn't always the case... those are the apps that never make it to 512 MB devices. :-(

 

[a5cent]

Not ignore what is being said, but try to understand what someone is saying.
People seem quick to dismiss what others say, even though i suspect they know what is meant.

Hey, no need to pull your punches. :wink:

Microelectronics and IC engineering are exact sciences. So, if we're going to use related terms, I think it's fair to expect a certain amount of "exactness" to go with it. I think we do the community a disservice if we just ignore false usages and misunderstandings. After all, aren't we here to exchange what we know, and to learn more about our common interest?

I think the OP raised a good question and I think his question has been answered. He's probably not a fan, but I think the quality of the answer he got is now better, thanks to fleshing out some of the gritty details.

 

[dreamwizwp]

Sorry, but why in the world would 1080p be necessary to fit content on a 5" screen? It has to be said: 400+ PPI adds absolutely zero functional benefit. It's a nicety, nothing more. What fits on a screen, in this context, is purely a function of software and screen size. Considering the talks of Windows Phone phablets and 3-column home screen, I would say that it is an area that Microsoft seems to be intent on addressing.

Where'd you pull this out of? WP8 definitely does not have to match Android in hardware specs, it needs to provide and market a meaningfully better experience than a previous Android device that consumers have owned. You should also toss out this concept of a mass market "Android world", just as people should have never thought there was some bulletproof "Windows world". (Referring to the consumer space specifically here.)

Remember that there are huge numbers of Android garbage being sold, somewhat similar to how the average Windows PC is junk.

This of course depends on the user and what the user values. And, necessary or not or sensible or not, this is important for Nokia. Why? Because a lot of consumers, especially in the high-end market, want to buy the latest and greatest because they consider it to be future proof. If you want sales, you need to cater to demand. I know lots of people from the tech world who refuse to even consider Windows Phone at the moment because of the older hardware that costs the same as Android with the latest hardware. I think Apple can afford it thanks to their strong brand to not fight the "spec war" but at the moment, WP OEM's really can't afford it.

Personally, I'm using iPhone 4S, hardly a spec monster anymore and I've been on the market for a new phone. After looking at both, Lumia 920 and HTC One, I could see some benefits from having the 1080P screen and it somewhat killed my interest in 920. I'm likely to hold on a few months and see if Nokia can get the specs up to date because I really like Nokia's design language and built quality over the HTC. Given that I can get over the limitations in multi-tasking that originally steered me off the 920 in the winter...

 

[NaNoo123]

Hey, no need to pull your punches. :wink:

Microelectronics and IC engineering are exact sciences. So, if we're going to use related terms, I think it's fair to expect a certain amount of "exactness" to go with it. I think we do the community a disservice if we just ignore false usages and misunderstandings. After all, aren't we here to exchange what we know, and to learn more about our common interest?

I think the OP raised a good question and I think his question has been answered. He's probably not a fan, but I think the quality of the answer he got is now better, thanks to fleshing out some of the gritty details.

lol, it was a general statement and not meant at you
I do agree though that getting into a reasonable discussion and educating people are a good thing, regardless if people agree or not.
At least your responses wasn't just, not needed Wp8 doesn't lag. That's the sort of thing i find dismissive, and a bit condescending. If people think its all about amount of cores, or don't know gpus play a part then explain to them.
Or at least try to understand what they actually mean, good or bad.
Considering the topic, its been fun.

 

[AngryNil]

i would say you need to provide a better experience than the current device they could get, not just previous to what they owned.

I think you're leaning a little too much to the side of assuming people vigorously cross-check specs and capabilities before a purchase. You'll probably find that this is no longer the case with the smartphone industry, which has gone mass market with buyers easily manipulated by marketing and sales representatives. While you are right to a certain extent – Windows Phone obviously can't just slightly edge out a 2011 Android device – I can see any platform that wholly overcomes less-than-stellar Android experiences gaining some traction. I'm not sure that people love Android much more than people love Windows (not much).

I was just using your reply to prove that there is nothing wrong with wanting 1080 displays.

Sure, there's nothing wrong about wanting the best. But my current opinion is that is the only legitimate reason to specifically request 1080p on non-phablets (unless you find text to be not sharp enough to read at 300 PPI, which is very doubtful). What people ultimately want when they ask for more visible content is either a bigger screen or a software overhaul (more efficient design, or making everything smaller).

 

[Bicpug]

I'm not sure 1080p is worth it on a phone, it's just a lot more pixels to move in games for a minor increase in text sharpness. It's pointless to just add res for the sake of it so you can boast that text 1mm high is readable with a magnifying glass.

 

[NaNoo123]

I did say phablets in regards to 1080 displays, and your correct in that its more to push in games, which is why it would be best with a better gpu.

Below phablet size, I'm meh about, although it is the direction its going, and i don't see it stopping.

Do people check specs?
My response to that is, they generally read reviews, or get advice from someone. I doubt must people just go in a shop and just pick a random phone nowadays.
So it's the reviewers and people giving advice that would comment on specs, which does influence the buying public.
Regardless of its perceived good or bad points.

 

[a5cent]

I'm not sure 1080p is worth it on a phone, it's just a lot more pixels to move in games for a minor increase in text sharpness

A few months back I spent some time at a shop comparing high quality 5" 1080p and 720p displays. If I squint and really focus I can tell a difference. However, the difference is very subtle and even that subtle difference is only noticeable at very close viewing distances. There is no way I'd notice any benefit during normal/everyday use.

... and your correct in that its more to push in games, which is why it would be best with a better gpu.

IMHO that argument is a strange one, because after all, any device profits from a better GPU, right? There is no law that states that the exact same GPU you'd want to see in your 1080p smartphone, can't also be built into a 720p smartphone. Given that situation, the 720p device will always enjoy a performance advantage over the 1080p device (in GPU intensive tasks).

Of course, I'm only talking about devices with displays <= 5". Generally, the above statement is only valid when comparing devices of similar size.

If mass market gadget sites like the verge started pushing standardized framerate tests, included them in every review, and proclaimed them to be a measure of "smoothness", I suspect we'd see the demand for 1080p displays drop off quickly.

 

[NaNoo123]

Yes most devices may see a profit, but i was responding to the point made that the higher res means it would be slower. Yes it may be with the current set up.