Time: Phone specs don't matter

[theeedude]

They don't matter if you use it as a phone. If you use it as a computing device they do matter.

 

[zerocool84]

I couldn't disagree more.

Just look at the whole desktop CPU push. So much was focused on increasing GHZ and in the end of the day CPU efficiency won.

Cell phones are consumer electronics. Consumers don't care how they work as long as they "just work". Consumers do not view nor do they shop for these devices as computers.

If a phone has the latest and greatest CPU and a ton of ram but the GUI transitions suck balls, or the OS doesn't have a nice fit and finish, it isn't going anywhere.

Specs do mean NOTHING in the world of cellphones because consumers don't see them as computers. Hell, in the computer market, specs are essentially meaningless and nothing more than marketing terms to get people to pay more money for something they don't need.

Well that's your opinion. People buying iPhone AND Android phones at an insane pace says otherwise.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Specs never mattered til Android started drooling over 1ghz CPUs. The fact is we care about every incremental bump because the damn phone isn't smooth enough.

Lots of iPhone enthusiasts could care less about the iPhone clock speed. Sure it's not the fastest thing out there, but it'll work for all the apps that's out there. The fragmentation issue of Android and unoptimized code means that even the simplest of games like Angry Birds can't run as smoothly as the same one on an iPod Touch 2G or something.

Same with XBox and PS3. Specs are nice to care about, but at the end of the day everything released on it will work just fine. So even though I care enough to spend a month on XTremeSystems and HardOCP and Anandtech reading about which brand X58 motherboard to get based on overclockers' experience, I really don't care about how technologically superior that PS3 is. It's just features in the end.

From the beginning, phones have always been about bells and whistles. It's always about the camera, the radio, the MP3 capabilities, etc etc and not about how fast the CPU and how much memory. Because at the end of the day, the software should run FINE on it. Since that's not the case with Android, we obsess. We hope that the next iteration brings dual core, triple core, 5ghz, whatever you name it.

Back in the day you just shopped for features you wanted. Oh 2MP camera? FM Radio? LED flash? Wifi? Nice stuff. You picked what manufacturer you liked due to their OS or UI and then maybe build quality. Done.

 

[s44]

edit: nevermind, it's a stupid flame war to get dragged into

 

[Fingolfin269]

Ah nerd fight, my ghz are more than your ghz!! (your mom)

 

[Bateluer]

Specs never mattered til Android started drooling over 1ghz CPUs. The fact is we care about every incremental bump because the damn phone isn't smooth enough.

Prior to Android, other OSs were locked down tightly by both the manufacturer and the carrier. Something they're trying to shove down the consumer's throat again, but thats a separate topic for another day.

Earlier versions of Blackberry OS didn't need powerful hardware because the OS couldn't do anything what would require powerful hardware. The existing CPU/RAM worked great for RIM's robust corporate email applications. Same with the earlier versions of iOS. It wasn't until Apple opened their App Store for people write their own applications that the potential was realized, and people began craving more and more powerful hardware, so they can fulfill their desires on what they want their device to do. And when those devices are released with the more powerful hardware, allowing people do to more, there will always be something they want to do thats just out of their reach with that hardware. So they want better.

Ultimately, even the next revision of the iPhone will boast superior spec's to the iP4(hopefully a fixed antenna too), if its not a dual core device, I'll be shocked.

 

[sivart]

time is a useless rag anyways

exactly...choosing the no-privacy Facebook dude as man of the year? :\

 

[DivideBYZero]

Prior to Android, other OSs were locked down tightly by both the manufacturer and the carrier. Something they're trying to shove down the consumer's throat again, but thats a separate topic for another day.

Earlier versions of Blackberry OS didn't need powerful hardware because the OS couldn't do anything what would require powerful hardware. The existing CPU/RAM worked great for RIM's robust corporate email applications. Same with the earlier versions of iOS. It wasn't until Apple opened their App Store for people write their own applications that the potential was realized, and people began craving more and more powerful hardware, so they can fulfill their desires on what they want their device to do. And when those devices are released with the more powerful hardware, allowing people do to more, there will always be something they want to do thats just out of their reach with that hardware. So they want better.

Ultimately, even the next revision of the iPhone will boast superior spec's to the iP4(hopefully a fixed antenna too), if its not a dual core device, I'll be shocked.

Why is it that people think that Phone apps only turned up AFTER Apple opened the App Store?? I'd been using all sorts of apps on my BlackBerry for years prior to apps even coming to iPhone, yet it was all their idea...

 

[Nebor]

Phone speed specs seem pretty abstract to me. As long as the phone runs quickly, who cares what's in it. The parts are all so small it may as well be magic and elves in there anyway.

 

[akugami]

Prior to Android, other OSs were locked down tightly by both the manufacturer and the carrier. Something they're trying to shove down the consumer's throat again, but thats a separate topic for another day.

Earlier versions of Blackberry OS didn't need powerful hardware because the OS couldn't do anything what would require powerful hardware. The existing CPU/RAM worked great for RIM's robust corporate email applications. Same with the earlier versions of iOS. It wasn't until Apple opened their App Store for people write their own applications that the potential was realized, and people began craving more and more powerful hardware, so they can fulfill their desires on what they want their device to do. And when those devices are released with the more powerful hardware, allowing people do to more, there will always be something they want to do thats just out of their reach with that hardware. So they want better.

Symbian OS was very open as far as what you could do with it. There was also no unified distribution system (app store) and the user base was quite limited but Symbian was more open of an OS than Android or iOS. It's been open source since 2008 so it doesn't get more "open" than that. Even today, Symbian arguably has better multi-tasking support than Android or iOS. Symbian is a pretty powerful OS. It just has a completely crappy interface.

Obviously today, phone OS's have come a long way but don't make it out like previous phone OS's were completely crap.

Ultimately, even the next revision of the iPhone will boast superior spec's to the iP4(hopefully a fixed antenna too), if its not a dual core device, I'll be shocked.

I wouldn't count on that. Apple has never been about having the most cutting edge hardware. The only exceptions are when it aids them in some of their design goals, like lower power draw or smaller physical footprint.


Are we still on the iPhone 4's antenna issues? Seriously? That's not even the topic of this thread and you're the OP. But if we're now on phone reception issues I'll take the time out and hope Google's Nexus One might one day fix it's antenna issue. Maybe HTC fixes their reception as well because reports around the web have a lot of people whose Droid 2 has reception problems and dropping calls just sitting on a desk and having no one touch it. That's not even mentioning the HTC HD7 death grip issue. And one day Samsung will finally be able to have a working GPS in their phone as well. But those phones don't matter. What everyone is concerned about is the iPhone 4 because that's the only phone everyone cares about.

 

[MrX8503]

Why is it that people think that Phone apps only turned up AFTER Apple opened the App Store?? I'd been using all sorts of apps on my BlackBerry for years prior to apps even coming to iPhone, yet it was all their idea...

Because Apple was the first to create an App Ecosystem that is highly profitable and has the most robust high quality app library available on any mobile device.

The Apple App store was the main driving force behind mobile app development. An app developer (Epic Games) making 1.5M in 4 days would be unheard of back before the Apple App store was released.

I wouldn't count on that. Apple has never been about having the most cutting edge hardware. The only exceptions are when it aids them in some of their design goals, like lower power draw or smaller physical footprint.

When the iPhone 4 was released, its specs were similar to current Android phones. Apple doesn't release phones as frequently which may have skewed your perception of their phones not being cutting edge. When Apple does release a new iPhone, its specs are on par or better than what is currently available.

 

[Patranus]

Phone speed specs seem pretty abstract to me. As long as the phone runs quickly, who cares what's in it. The parts are all so small it may as well be magic and elves in there anyway.

Exactly.

The average consumer wants to pick up their phone and play Angry Birds or play music. The average consumer wants to go to whatever app store they use and download an app without being told they cannot run it or they need to do XYZ.

They don't care if that can be done on a single or duel core CPU.
They don't care if it does it with 256mb RAM or 1GB Ram.

The only spec that they might care about is built in storage.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Why is it that people think that Phone apps only turned up AFTER Apple opened the App Store?? I'd been using all sorts of apps on my BlackBerry for years prior to apps even coming to iPhone, yet it was all their idea...

Phone apps became sensationalized after Apple. I remember getting apps for my Pocket PC and Symbian device. You would scour websites and ask forums for recommendations. It was pathetic. You would pay individual sites. Almost like you buy software for your PC. Separate vendors. Unfortunately there was no Best Buy in this case.

Prior to Android, other OSs were locked down tightly by both the manufacturer and the carrier. Something they're trying to shove down the consumer's throat again, but thats a separate topic for another day.

Earlier versions of Blackberry OS didn't need powerful hardware because the OS couldn't do anything what would require powerful hardware. The existing CPU/RAM worked great for RIM's robust corporate email applications. Same with the earlier versions of iOS. It wasn't until Apple opened their App Store for people write their own applications that the potential was realized, and people began craving more and more powerful hardware, so they can fulfill their desires on what they want their device to do. And when those devices are released with the more powerful hardware, allowing people do to more, there will always be something they want to do thats just out of their reach with that hardware. So they want better.

Ultimately, even the next revision of the iPhone will boast superior spec's to the iP4(hopefully a fixed antenna too), if its not a dual core device, I'll be shocked.

Like I said, what matters in the end is that it can do its task. Dual core or not doesn't matter. You're focusing so much on this because something from the PC world stuck that in your brain. At the end of the day if your new Android phone can multitask efficiently with no lag, does it mtater if it's dual core or not? It might be nice. There's some requirement you placed in your mind that the NEXT phone has to be dual core or else its bust. And so what if its dual core? What if Angry Birds still runs shittier than on an iPod Touch 2G? Then what did you accomplish other than to put a bunch of paper specs on your phone that look impressive? Results matter. The underlying elements of the phone might dictate what your phone might be able to do, but in the past X # of years, underlying specs have never been a huge issue til now.

For example, my iPod Touch and Android phone. My D1 is clocked faster, and with the same memory, I'd expect it to perform comfortably close to my iPod Touch. Unfortunately the limited 256mb causes a lot of apps to NOT stay open. So much for multitasking right? Meanwhile my iPod Touch keeps like 4-5 games AND Safari open (I'm talking open, not reload from saved state). Angry Birds runs far better on my iPod Touch. If I compared specs, what would I achieve? 256mb on Android is not the same as 256mb on iOS. It's probably closer to 128mb on iOS or even less. You have to compare features of the phone. Camera? Which one's better? Which OS is better? Customizability?

 

[Patranus]

Like I said, what matters in the end is that it can do its task. Dual core or not doesn't matter. You're focusing so much on this because something from the PC world stuck that in your brain. At the end of the day if your new Android phone can multitask efficiently with no lag, does it mtater if it's dual core or not? It might be nice. There's some requirement you placed in your mind that the NEXT phone has to be dual core or else its bust. And so what if its dual core? What if Angry Birds still runs shittier than on an iPod Touch 2G? Then what did you accomplish other than to put a bunch of paper specs on your phone that look impressive? Results matter. The underlying elements of the phone might dictate what your phone might be able to do, but in the past X # of years, underlying specs have never been a huge issue til now.

Well said.

Techies forget that technology is a tool designed to do a task.

 

[Bateluer]

When the iPhone 4 was released, its specs were similar to current Android phones. Apple doesn't release phones as frequently which may have skewed your perception of their phones not being cutting edge. When Apple does release a new iPhone, its specs are on par or better than what is currently available.

It was the fastest, for about a week. Then the Droid X shipped. Since then, we've seen the launch of several technically superior devices, including the Galaxy S line which has the same GPU as the iP4 with a better GPU.

Exactly.

The average consumer wants to pick up their phone and play Angry Birds or play music. The average consumer wants to go to whatever app store they use and download an app without being told they cannot run it or they need to do XYZ.

They don't care if that can be done on a single or duel core CPU.
They don't care if it does it with 256mb RAM or 1GB Ram.

The only spec that they might care about is built in storage.

Which is what we've been saying, the consumer may not care about the technical specs, but they do care about the features those specs allow, games, video playback, storage, etc. You're going to see more and more people care about whats in their phone as they continue to grow in capability.

 

[MrX8503]

It was the fastest, for about a week. Then the Droid X shipped. Since then, we've seen the launch of several technically superior devices, including the Galaxy S line which has the same GPU as the iP4 with a better GPU.

Technology advances, whats new. Besides the DroidX isn't that much faster than the iPhone.

 

[Bateluer]

For example, my iPod Touch and Android phone. My D1 is clocked faster, and with the same memory, I'd expect it to perform comfortably close to my iPod Touch. Unfortunately the limited 256mb causes a lot of apps to NOT stay open. So much for multitasking right? Meanwhile my iPod Touch keeps like 4-5 games AND Safari open (I'm talking open, not reload from saved state). Angry Birds runs far better on my iPod Touch. If I compared specs, what would I achieve? 256mb on Android is not the same as 256mb on iOS. It's probably closer to 128mb on iOS or even less. You have to compare features of the phone. Camera? Which one's better? Which OS is better? Customizability?

I've only tried Angry Birds once, seemed to run find on my D1 at a stock 550Mhz, but I only played for a minutes before I uninstalled. Didn't really get into it. 256MB is a shortcoming, but its been addressed, the current crop of high end Android devices all have 512MB or more. In a few months, they'll all have 768-1GB, or more.

Also, what Touch are you referring to? You claim the Touch 2G runs Angry Birds better than more Android devices in many of your posts, but then you claim your Touch runs 4-5 games open at the same time, implying multi tasking, something the older 2G Touch cannot do. Even the newest iP4-esque Touch has extremely limited multi tasking. Your figures sound fishy to me.

Lastly, Camera is a spec. Same with most of the features you've listed. You want video calling ability? You'll need a front facing camera to do it well, that's a spec you're care about.

If you only want the phone to do what the manufacturer says it can do, maybe you should just buy a feature phone? Those have far fewer problems than any smart phone, Android, RIM, iOS, Symbian, etc, because their hardware is tailored to a specific function, nothing more. Today's full smart phone are full blown mini computers, if you don't agree, then you're stuck in in a 2002 world. Time to join us all in 2011.

Technology advances, whats new. Besides the DroidX isn't that much faster than the iPhone.

Yep, technology advances. Just used it as an example, iP4 had the most powerful hardware for a week before it got eclipsed. Now every Galaxy S phone is faster, the 45nm Qualcomms with the Adreno 205 are faster, TI's 36x0 are faster, etc. The next gen iPhone will be a dual core device, there's no doubt.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Technology advances, whats new. Besides the DroidX isn't that much faster than the iPhone.

When I watch the poor Droid X users on their stock launcher flip through their screens like a slideshow I laugh. I guarantee you THAT is what consumers care about. How responsive, how slick the UI is. If you could make all that run on a fail ARM 434mhz like an N97, then props to you.

 

[MrX8503]

When I watch the poor Droid X users on their stock launcher flip through their screens like a slideshow I laugh. I guarantee you THAT is what consumers care about. How responsive, how slick the UI is. If you could make all that run on a fail ARM 434mhz like an N97, then props to you.

akugami stated that Apple is always behind the curve of technology when it comes to their iPhones.

I was stating that it wasn't true. You do bring up an interesting point though, despite the iPhone4 not being the fastest, I'm rocking HD Graphic games such as Infinity Blade and RAGE. On top of that the iPhone4 runs circles around the best of Android phones when it comes to UI fluidity and speed.

 

[zoiks]

When the iPhone 4 was released, its specs were similar to current Android phones. Apple doesn't release phones as frequently which may have skewed your perception of their phones not being cutting edge. When Apple does release a new iPhone, its specs are on par or better than what is currently available.

Hmm. So why doesn't the iPhone4 have 4g?

 

[zoiks]

I'm rocking HD Graphic games such as Infinity Blade and RAGE. On top of that the iPhone4 runs circles around the best of Android phones when it comes to UI fluidity and speed.

Are you like one of those 12 years old trying to measure penises? These games and many more will be available on both platforms sooner or later. What difference does that make who gets it first.
By your analogy, Android should trump the iPhone on numerous google specific features that are not available on the iphone4. Wtf is the big deal there?

 

[Red Storm]

When I watch the poor Droid X users on their stock launcher flip through their screens like a slideshow I laugh. I guarantee you THAT is what consumers care about. How responsive, how slick the UI is. If you could make all that run on a fail ARM 434mhz like an N97, then props to you.

The great thing with Android is that I can drasticly change the UI to get the look and useability that I desire. Apple's OS is nice and smooth thanks to the closed platform, but the "mass of icons on screen after screen" is just ugly and not very efficient. With Android you can change it to what you want. With Apple you just learn to live with it.

On the matter of media... snycing is definitely better for music, but drag and drop is infinitely better for video files. And with my Droid X I don't even have to worry about converting media. I can play just about any type of video file just fine. That's HUGE.

 

[MrX8503]

Hmm. So why doesn't the iPhone4 have 4g?

If that's your argument for cutting edge, that's quite pitiful.

Are you like one of those 12 years old trying to measure penises? These games and many more will be available on both platforms sooner or later. What difference does that make who gets it first.
By your analogy, Android should trump the iPhone on numerous google specific features that are not available on the iphone4. Wtf is the big deal there?

We are talking about performance here, you're diverging. The iPhone4 runs circles around the best Android devices in UI fluidity and speed. On top of that it has the unreal engine to back it up. Those games will be on Android sooner or later? Try later, Rein and Carmack weren't too keen on the Android platform.

Stick with your Angry Birds.

The great thing with Android is that I can drasticly change the UI to get the look and useability that I desire. Apple's OS is nice and smooth thanks to the closed platform, but the "mass of icons on screen after screen" is just ugly and not very efficient. With Android you can change it to what you want. With Apple you just learn to live with it.

Android UI is ugly but functional. Apple UI is better looking, but less functional.

On the matter of media... snycing is definitely better for music, but drag and drop is infinitely better for video files. And with my Droid X I don't even have to worry about converting media. I can play just about any type of video file just fine. That's HUGE.

There's a VLC app for the iPhone now, so it can play a wide range of videos too. Drag n Drop is nice, but the iTunes sync on the iPhone is pretty versatile.

Calendars, notes, books, music, videos, photos (includes face tagging, geo tagging, events, albums), apps, address book.....ALL OF THIS....in one sync.

 

[akugami]

The great thing with Android is that I can drasticly change the UI to get the look and useability that I desire. Apple's OS is nice and smooth thanks to the closed platform, but the "mass of icons on screen after screen" is just ugly and not very efficient. With Android you can change it to what you want. With Apple you just learn to live with it.

That's personal opinion. Not a fact. Plenty of people like the way Apple's iOS works. Hell, Google liked it so much that Android's interface based most of its UI elements off of iOS. Granted Google tweaked a lot of how it works and improved on some aspects. If anyone saw early iterations of Android, it was butt ugly. If you really wanted to you can jailbreak the iPhone and customize the interface as well.

I find using the search function for the apps I use the most or using the app switcher is extremely quick and easy. Anyone who is familiar with Apple's iOS knows that flipping back and forth between pages is the least efficient way to open an app.

On the matter of media... snycing is definitely better for music, but drag and drop is infinitely better for video files. And with my Droid X I don't even have to worry about converting media. I can play just about any type of video file just fine. That's HUGE.

Eh...as MrX8503 said, VLC is available on the iPhone.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

akugami stated that Apple is always behind the curve of technology when it comes to their iPhones.

I was stating that it wasn't true. You do bring up an interesting point though, despite the iPhone4 not being the fastest, I'm rocking HD Graphic games such as Infinity Blade and RAGE. On top of that the iPhone4 runs circles around the best of Android phones when it comes to UI fluidity and speed.

Pitiful mobile graphics at 960x640 or less isn't gaming in HD.