[Tre Lawrence]

hmn
to be honest, i really don't care - i just want the BB10 to run smooth and from the looks of it, it does (like 99% of the time, and that's without final software on the dev alpha device)
super excited, can't wait!

oh and... games? i really don't care, i think smartphone games are dumb, playing on a 4'' screen with no physical buttons? no thanks!
if i feel like playing i'll get a real game for the computer, my Nintendo Wii U or Nintendo 3DS XL (love Nintendo <3)

sure.. those games are way more expensive, like 60euro etc., but i don't have a problem with that. im willing to spend that much for a great game, all those free or 99cent games are just horrible

Not to defend phone gaming, but gaming with peripherals that add physical buttons has been available for a while.

Since mobile gaming is supposedly the fastest growing sector, those of us that don't do it are in the minority.

[Seijuro]

yea ofc, and i really hope there'll be "great" games available for BB10, because appearantly people love playing on their smartphones and i want BB10 to succeed
im just saying, im not one of them... i enjoy GOOD games and in my opinion those are not available on any smartphone

[darkehawke]

i want games to play as a time filler.
but the trade off in having the latest and greatest games is that it drains the battery quick.
i know i wont be playing those games, not unless i am near my charger. which happens to be next to my ps3.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9810 using Tapatalk

[aha]

Better specs doesn't always mean better performance, but most of the time, it does. You can't diss the value of specs just because you saw on one occasion that a V4 car beat a V6 car, because, most of the time, higher horse power and torque on specs means better performance.

Specs and bench marks are designed to measure functions of a product. They are developed and gradually perfected by professionals to give Average consumers an idea how great a product is in general. yes the specs and benchmarks in mobile space might have not yet being perfected, but still they can give you a general idea.

When i see a phone powered with 1.5ghz processor, i know it 's most likely faster than my 9860. When i saw my PlayBook scores badly in sunspider benchmark tests, i know why my PlayBook is so slow on accessing crackberry forums.

Z10 has better specs in CPU, GPU, and RAM, that why I am not surprised it beats i5 and SGSIII on browser tests, app launch tests, and some benchmark tests posted in video. Whether that's because of the efficiency of the OS, it remains to be bench marked. When the i6 or sgsiv comes out with better specs, you can't just simply say that Z10 is going to outperform them because of the efficiency of BB10, because, you simply heard of it from someone on the forum, or from articles published by QNX.

Another rumor circling around was, iphone doesn't have good specs but performs better than android phones. that's simply not true. every generation of iphone has better specs than previous one, and it usually has the best specs on resolution, GPU, battery life, camera, etc. over all other smart phones, and the CPU specs are also among the best of the market can offer at time.

If you only rely on how a phone feel at hand to evaluate a phone's performance, you would have to have used the competition extensively before you make the judgment, otherwise you are just speculating.

So specs matters.

[hurds]

Doesn't the OS matter? I'm putting my money down to buy more QNX

If you talk to 99% of people and they aren't going to care about at all. I doubt anyone who actually even cares about specs has any quantifiable way to differentiate these variances in specs during their daily use of their devices, but of course they think they do.

[hennesseystealth]

Doesn't the OS matter? I'm putting my money down to buy more QNX

If you talk to 99% of people and they aren't going to care about at all. I doubt anyone who actually even cares about specs has any quantifiable way to differentiate these variances in specs during their daily use of their devices, but of course they think they do.

Example to support the above. Our competitors ship their software (simulation tool) with a big a$$ workstation and then tell you how powerful their "system" is. So, looking at their hardware spec, you are impressed. On the other hand, we ship our simulation tool with no hardware and a hardware spec that says anything that can run a Windows OS is fine with us (suggest you max out the DRAM but that is cheap). They run <1M lot moves per minute of simulation time and we run >4M. Looking at the specs on the hardware says we get handed our lunch. Look at system performance and we complete tasks in minutes that takes hours for the other guy.

So, I want to see how fast the system executes what I need done. If QNX with an old dual core processor and only 2Gb of RAM does what I need to do faster (or fast enough) than the other guy, do I really care about hardware specs. Some uninformed consumers will, some will follow the sheeple, and others will evaluate the performance against their needs matrix.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Example to support the above. Our competitors ship their software (simulation tool) with a big a$$ workstation and then tell you how powerful their "system" is. So, looking at their hardware spec, you are impressed. On the other hand, we ship our simulation tool with no hardware and a hardware spec that says anything that can run a Windows OS is fine with us (suggest you max out the DRAM but that is cheap). They run <1M lot moves per minute of simulation time and we run >4M. Looking at the specs on the hardware says we get handed our lunch. Look at system performance and we complete tasks in minutes that takes hours for the other guy.

So, I want to see how fast the system executes what I need done. If QNX with an old dual core processor and only 2Gb of RAM does what I need to do faster (or fast enough) than the other guy, do I really care about hardware specs. Some uninformed consumers will, some will follow the sheeple, and others will evaluate the performance against their needs matrix.

They why ever buy a new device?

All I know is that PAST RIM devices could have really benefited from just a little bit better hardware! Even the PlayBook really needed a better GPU. I know that with mobile devices Power Requirements of the hardware have to be balanced with how much power you can get out of the batteries. But SPEC to matter to the average consumer, that is what they use to give them a "benchmark" between devices that they are not familiar with.

That said I don't think people do as much comparison shopping anymore for phones - they usually get what a family member or a friend recommends.

[RubberChicken76]

The chip/core that RIM uses is irrelevant as long as the OS works.

Not irrelevant, but not the entire story either. For example. look at the original Torch 9800. Brand spanking new webkit browser, but sluggish product due to the old processor, lack of GPU and java OS. Ditto for my iPod Touch that sputters through running iOS 5 and 6.

Apple has proved this time and time again with the iPhone, not using bleeding edge tech (actually older tech) and still having one of the most fluid experiences on a smartphone.

Sometimes. Until you run an older OS. :-) Remember this parody? This is life on my iPod Touch

[hennesseystealth]

I think we all agree on one point, we want to see how the overall system performs. If an older CPU with modest RAM has outstanding performance due to an optimized OS, then we aren't going to care. If the system crashes, reboots, hangs, etc., then it will fail regardless of specs.

[ddlax22]

considering tegra 3 is old and the tegra 4 is our blackberry, once again, is going to be behind the curve. UGH, i hate that. why does no one understand the game (in terms of specs) like apple? apple has a dual core but quad graphics on iPad and tri-core graphics on iphone. games need GPU not CPU. its killing me to see that blackberry always lags behind and currently im using the 9900 but its a love hate relationship. i cant switch to any other phone because i love the keyboard PLEASE BLACKBERRY DONT MAKE ME SWITCH

apple has been behind the curve for so long it is ridiculous. they dont relase their internal specs specifics because it isnt up to par. they tote the quad core ipad gpu and people confuse it for a quad core cpu and it goes viral.

[RubberChicken76]

they dont relase their internal specs specifics because it isnt up to par..

I don't think that's it. I imagine a lot of their audience a) doesn't know what the specs mean; b) would find that talk to be too technical for a company founded on ease-of-use and benefits vs. spec-talk; and c) is likely to get misconstrued

[backfire101]

Quad core gpu? That is just laughing specs, desktop gpu are already available with 400 up to 3000 cores. That's the power of graphic cards.

[Arreat]

apple has been behind the curve for so long it is ridiculous. they dont relase their internal specs specifics because it isnt up to par. they tote the quad core ipad gpu and people confuse it for a quad core cpu and it goes viral.

I hate to be rude but the A4, A5, A5X, and A6 are the fastest CPU/GPU combos in their classes. The A6 alone scores 1601 in Geekbench, and the S3 normally falls around 1300. Then you consider the GPU scores AT LEAST double the scores of anything from the S4 to T3, **** even the 4S GPU is still faster than every other SoC short of the S4 Pro. Don't even get started on how power efficient it is. If there's anything Apple is doing far and away better than the competition it's their SoC design and production.

[Plazmic Flame]

Sometimes. Until you run an older OS. :-) Remember this parody? This is life on my iPod Touch

Hahaha, yes, that is very ture

[aha]

I hate to be rude but the A4, A5, A5X, and A6 are the fastest CPU/GPU combos in their classes. The A6 alone scores 1601 in Geekbench, and the S3 normally falls around 1300. Then you consider the GPU scores AT LEAST double the scores of anything from the S4 to T3, **** even the 4S GPU is still faster than every other SoC short of the S4 Pro. Don't even get started on how power efficient it is. If there's anything Apple is doing far and away better than the competition it's their SoC design and production.

Nah, people will stick to whatever they are willing to believe... ignoring whatever they don't like to learn

[djdragon]

I saw a 3870 lbs car with a supposedly inferior v6 TT engine with 545 hp beat a 3900 lbs car with a v8 supercharged engine with 700 hp over a quarter mile......true story

Tru' story bro.

[JR A]

How does this have anything to do with this discussion? Was this meant like there are so many other variables involved? Was the SC V8 on slicks or was he on street tires? What about the other car? What was the suspension on the cars? How much do each of the drivers weigh. Was this only a single race and one spun out off the line. Was this a street race or a fully prepped drag strip? Useless post.


Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

His post was not useless.

He's drawing a parallel with CPU/GPU in mobile phones to the engines in cars. It's a very valid analogy.

And you're right, there are other variables involved such as transmission, tires, suspension, etc. But that's exactly what collinc93 is saying. Things such as the BB10 OS itself are like the sum of the previously mentioned factors. That's why a straight comparison of a CPU/GPU doesn't tell the whole story, just like looking at an engine's displacement/horsepower doesn't tell the whole story.

[collinc93]

How does this have anything to do with this discussion? Was this meant like there are so many other variables involved? Was the SC V8 on slicks or was he on street tires? What about the other car? What was the suspension on the cars? How much do each of the drivers weigh. Was this only a single race and one spun out off the line. Was this a street race or a fully prepped drag strip? Useless post.


Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

But you commented didnt you? Just goes to show....you just made it relevant> a useless response to a useless post....silly rabbit, Trixx are for kids. :P
Edit: Someone above said it even better than I was going to respond.Carry on

[howarmat]

Tru' story bro.

my mustang with 330 or so HP could do better quarter mile time than those but i will leave that to another forum lol

[JR A]

my mustang with 330 or so HP could do better quarter mile time than those but i will leave that to another forum lol

Pfffttt... I was a on a 737 that did a quarter mile in less than half that time. Best part of all, I only had to pay $120... However, that was for a one time "rental". ****, I didn't even have to drive/fly...