1. pilotnh's Avatar
    Am I the only one who believes that the basic problem with the Storm is that the processor can't keep up with the rest of the hardware. Why else would it be that in the last couple of leaked OSs that RIM is trying "desperate" measures to decrease processor usage? First they get rid of the transitions between apps to gain speed and now in .99 they decrease screen resolution and colors.

    I am starting to believe that they will not be able to realize the full potential of this device without adding processor power and additional memory.
    02-01-09 10:52 PM
  2. SRMartin15's Avatar
    you bring up a good point...
    02-01-09 11:05 PM
  3. NuclearPigeon's Avatar
    I don't know if that is true but with 528mhz there should be plenty considering the iphone runs at 412mhz.
    02-01-09 11:05 PM
  4. bigman2's Avatar
    We simply don't know enough about what's going on with the development to say one way or the other.

    It seems entirely possible that they simply backed out a big chunk of code from previous builds that was causing most of the problems because it proved to be too unruly, and so the return of the fade effect is really just a byproduct of this. Then again, they could have simply commented out a few lines of code that disabled the feature, and now brought it back. Two very different scenarios, both equally plausible because we don't have any sort of a changelog that tells us what is different about each build. Of course the first option would also explain why some people feel .99 is slower than .90 quite nicely, but it's still purely speculation.
    02-01-09 11:05 PM
  5. bigman2's Avatar
    I don't know if that is true but with 528mhz there should be plenty considering the iphone runs at 412mhz.
    Clock speed means little compared to the architecture.
    02-01-09 11:06 PM
  6. rab05's Avatar
    Clock speed means little compared to the architecture.
    Exactly. I hate to knock RIM, but the fact that it's really just a little machine doing all it can to run a full blown OS through Java is kinda the hindrance.

    From a developers perspective that means two things. First, it's extremely easy to port the BB OS to any different device and just lay it on top of a Java VM. Java is standard, easy to port over, and suits most applications fine.

    However the second point is that it's a large overhead for a little device and means you're not running native code. A lot of the apps are probably interpreted code (or just not as optimized as they could be if it was not a Java VM). The whole reason the BB OS takes forever to load up is that it's loading module after module of code into the Java VM. Also, Java isn't real great for things like 3D acceleration, which puts it behind the performance that the native code (and custom written OS) that runs the iPhone.
    02-01-09 11:14 PM
  7. SRMartin15's Avatar
    i believe the storm needs its own OS for it to run at its full potential... Till then its just going to have the issues Rab05 is talking about sadly. So much potential packed into such a small device just so that it can work harder then it really has too.
    02-01-09 11:22 PM
  8. fifthand's Avatar
    I've been/am an avid, hardcore BB user for some time now. If the Storm/Bold are having processor speed problems then I will probably switch to iPhone. I already have lag issues with my Curve but I've been overlooking them out of "fanboy" type respect for my weapon of choice these years. I was really hoping this new generation would be better than I am reading/experiencing. I literally hate my iPod but I am used to the format at this point. I have really been resisting the iPhone but if BB can't get their S together then I might just have to go. Sad
    02-01-09 11:23 PM
  9. bigman2's Avatar
    The Storm's CPU does have native Java bytecode execution, so it's not quite as bad as it may seem, but I do kind of think Java is not the best of choices for embedded platform programming. Granted most of the other choices out there suck for different reasons. If people think there are memory leaks now, they don't even want to know what it'd be like if every app was written in C\C++ without the benefit of a garbage collector. Objective-C might be compiled, but it's still a very dynamic language and that makes it tough to do any real optimization. Scripting languages are obviously out for performance and scalability reasons.

    In a lot of ways, I'd actually like to see a clear division between the OS and the graphics layer. The core OS could be written in C\C++, and essentially be off-limits to third party developers, then the GUI could be done in something like Flash assuming they could get the performance to an acceptable level. Can't stand flash for virtually everything it's used for on the web, but it would fit quite nicely in building a GUI for an embedded device... At least assuming Adobe could streamline the code enough.
    02-01-09 11:30 PM
  10. apetit's Avatar
    Out of curiosity (I think I already know the answer...):

    There seems to be a lot of comments about RIM doing things wrong. Does anyone actually know what RIM has actually done? What OS (executive) provides the interface between the hardware and the code running on the platform, for instance.

    Or threads like this simply to be read for amusement and a certain (high) acceptance that the signal to noise ratio is very low...
    02-02-09 12:33 AM
  11. Optimusv2's Avatar
    There is nothing wrong with the processor.

    When it comes to programming, sometimes when your code isn't good enough -- or as good you know it will be with time -- you have no choice but to make sacrifices in places until you get your code in a position where it's able to better take advantage of the available hardware.

    What you are seeing isn't an issue with the processor, but code that needs to be optimized to better take advantage of the hardware. Just relax and wait for it. Take videogames as an example. You ever wonder how a very ugly, not so impressive looking videogame, can have serious performance issues and yet a far more impressive looking one run flawless and is, all around, just more complex in nature?

    Just give RIM time to optimize their code. There is nothing wrong with the Storm's hardware. This is just like when people thought the Storm would never become any faster and the .90 and higher series is showing that it's definitely capable of being faster.

    When people saw how fast .90 was, they figured that performance came because RIM got rid of the transition effects. Only to learn in .99 that the Storm can absolutely run that fast with the fade transitions intact. This color resolution thing, whatever the heck it is, I've still yet to see it as this massive problem. Give RIM more time and they'll prove, yet again, that people need to just relax.

    There was a problem with RIM's code where if you were to have entered an app inside the applications folder, when you came out there would be a delay before you could actually get the Storm to respond to your inputs. They've managed to completely erase that with .99. Give them time to workout their code.
    02-02-09 02:46 AM
  12. Funnystuff's Avatar
    Optimus --

    I've read elsewhere that the Storm's processor is "more advanced" than the Iphone's. Granted this is probably an excruciatingly vague comment and I have no context to back it up...

    You seem like you are in the know about such issues. Care to shed any light here?

    -- FS
    02-02-09 03:02 AM
  13. pilotnh's Avatar
    There is nothing wrong with the processor.

    Just give RIM time to optimize their code. There is nothing wrong with the Storm's hardware. This is just like when people thought the Storm would never become any faster and the .90 and higher series is showing that it's definitely capable of being faster.

    And everytime they "optimize their code" and fix something, it breaks two other things. .90 is faster but can't play AAC files and the portrait QWERTY broke the dialpad when it is used in the middle of a call.

    I think this phone has limitations that preclude doing everything they say it can well. Even you diehards here are going to start realizing that maybe they haven't gotten it right yet because they can't.
    02-02-09 05:47 AM
  14. mittaytwo's Avatar
    Mine was running pretty slow after doing multiple installs etc.. so I decided to wipe the whole thing and load from scratch. It's like a different phone now, the accellerometer is almost instant, locking too and all loading times are much, much faster. Don't know how long this will last tho.. and I'm only running Vodafones 4.7.0.78. I'd go so far as to say that it's better than when I got it

    Edit: I wiped using JL_Cmder as per a lot of posts here and reinstalled then reloaded my backup. Everything was smooth and I'm really surprised at the difference it made.
    Last edited by mittaytwo; 02-02-09 at 06:05 AM.
    02-02-09 06:01 AM
  15. bigman2's Avatar
    And everytime they "optimize their code" and fix something, it breaks two other things. .90 is faster but can't play AAC files and the portrait QWERTY broke the dialpad when it is used in the middle of a call.

    I think this phone has limitations that preclude doing everything they say it can well. Even you diehards here are going to start realizing that maybe they haven't gotten it right yet because they can't.
    And exactly how much programming have you done before? Of any kind really, since the basic concepts carry over no matter what kind of project you're working on. Do you actually have any concept of what goes into making something like the BB OS, or are you just armchair quarterbacking?

    When you're not the one writing the code, it's easy to criticize. Doubly so when you have no real idea what programming is like.

    For all the complaining people do, you rarely see anyone stop to take note of how the .8x and .9x releases significantly increased the performance of the device compared to .65 and .75. The device is much faster overall, the accelerometer is better, battery life is better, and probably a bunch of other little bugs we never even noticed were fixed. These are not minor things, they are HUGE.

    I need to go get ready now, so I reserve the right to come back to this later if I think of it.
    02-02-09 07:11 AM
  16. pilotnh's Avatar
    And exactly how much programming have you done before? Of any kind really, since the basic concepts carry over no matter what kind of project you're working on. Do you actually have any concept of what goes into making something like the BB OS, or are you just armchair quarterbacking?

    When you're not the one writing the code, it's easy to criticize. Doubly so when you have no real idea what programming is like.

    For all the complaining people do, you rarely see anyone stop to take note of how the .8x and .9x releases significantly increased the performance of the device compared to .65 and .75. The device is much faster overall, the accelerometer is better, battery life is better, and probably a bunch of other little bugs we never even noticed were fixed. These are not minor things, they are HUGE.

    I need to go get ready now, so I reserve the right to come back to this later if I think of it.
    Did you bother to read my original post? I am definitely not criticizing the programmers. I think they are suffering from the inherent limitations of the phone and more specifically the processing power.

    I hate to bring up the dirty word iPhone here but.... people on this forum get freaky over every app on their Storm that may be stealing memory. Yet the average iPhone user probably has 30 or 40 apps installed on their device.
    02-02-09 07:17 AM
  17. bigman2's Avatar
    Did you bother to read my original post? I am definitely not criticizing the programmers. I think they are suffering from the inherent limitations of the phone and more specifically the processing power.
    Yes, but it's also only about 6:30AM where I am, and I'm not a big morning person.

    But there are also a lot of practical issues to deal with when designing the phone. As much as the engineers designing the phone might love to stuff it with 3-4GB of RAM, a 2-3GHz CPU, a 40GB SSD, etc... They have to keep to a budget. If a phone costs much more than about $500, no one is really going to buy it, even if it's the single greatest technical marvel of the decade. You also have to keep the size of the thing within certain limits, weight is a concern, battery life... There are a myriad of things that they need to concern themselves with which really kind of put a damper on what they can do.

    I hate to bring up the dirty word iPhone here but.... people on this forum get freaky over every app on their Storm that may be stealing memory. Yet the average iPhone user probably has 30 or 40 apps installed on their device.
    People here don't really understand memory management, and it's understandable. It's a concept that is very difficult to get your head around, and can still trip up even the most experienced programmers.

    So while you do have a point, it's really kind of three things in one.

    #1: AFAIK, the Jesus Phone doesn't offer any way of viewing free RAM, but I've barely played with one, so I won't be surprised if I'm wrong, but knowing Apple it won't be quite as easy to find as on a BB

    #2: The Jesus Phone only has limited multi-tasking. A few core services are always running, just like on a BB, but all other apps are single-tasking. They are given the full resources of the phone, less those used by a few core services. With a BB, I can flip from editing a Word document to checking my email, then add some appointment to my calendar, before getting back to my Word document. You can't do that on a Jesus Phone, and that helps considerably when it comes to memory management.

    #3: The Jesus Phone doesn't have a special segmented area of memory where apps must be installed.

    Now, #1 helps a lot more than you'd think, because if people didn't know how to check free app mem, they wouldn't know to obsess over it. #2 is just a fundamental technical difference, that the average user probably isn't going to care about too much, but it is none the less very significant. #3 is probably the big one. I'm sure there's a very good reason why apps have to be installed in this special memory segment, but at the same time 128MB doesn't cut it anymore. When the first couple BBs came out, it probably seemed like an enormous amount of space that you could never hope to fill, but that's no longer the case. Sad as it is, people want programs that make farting noises or will "belch" whatever you type in (which is actually a reasonably impressive bit of basic AI programming), and they don't want to have to deal with the technical details, so RIM really should try and come up with a solution to this.

    If it's as I suspect, and they left this 128MB segment for backwards compatibility reasons, then maybe they could add an API hook in a future update that lets Storm apps install onto the 1GB of onboard storage, and run from there. Older apps still have to install into that 128MB region, but apps written specifically for the Storm can be installed elsewhere. Then they can gradually phase out the use of this 128MB region in a few generations. It's probably the least disruptive method I can think of. A clean break would upset corporate customers in a big way, an all or nothing switch that lets you disable back compatibility would probably cause a lot of apps like Google Sync to stop working, so grandfathering in that idea and phasing it out over time gives people time to update their apps before it stops working around the time of the Storm 3 or whatever it will be called.

    Anyway, I need to leave here soon, so talk amongst yourselves.
    02-02-09 08:54 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD