Misconceptions on the Storm's hardware capabilities

I see a lot of threads saying that the Storm doesn't have a graphics processor and that's why it looks bad (as of .99 OS) and why it lags.

The Storm does have a graphics processor. What you guys seem to fail to realize is that the firmware on the Storm wasn't built for the Storm. It was jacked from the Bold and an API was added for the touchscreen. Then they tried to modify the firmware to the point where it would give off an impression that it works for touchscreen. It was stupid and sloppy on RIM's part. They rushed it and this is what we get for that. They should of taken the time to make the OS from scratch. They should of done this while the prototype was being mocked up. The Storm's graphics processor isn't being used as it's supposed to--if at all.

All of the Storm's current processing is done by CPU. It's also fair to mention that it is a dual-core CPU, too; but to what extent it is being used, I cannot say. Certain updates to the OS can fix things. For example, look at the main menu scrolling. They were able to make it smooth (as of .90).

I don't think anyone has said that it doesn't have a graphics processor. I have heard numerous people comment on the lack of a video accelerator though.

Originally Posted by Terrahawk

I don't think anyone has said that it doesn't have a graphics processor. I have heard numerous people comment on the lack of a video accelerator though.

I've read like 7+ posts on why the Storm lags because it doesn't have a processor, eh. :)

People also thought the Storm would never become too much faster and here we are with OS versions like .99 and the Storm is a much quicker device all around.

well ... wht's the actual proccessor for storm?
diff website have diff spec
500+ or 600+ proccessor?
and wht type graphic processor?
any idea anyone?

Just processor specs:
http://www.qctconnect.com/download_l...00_chipset.pdf

Do you think RIM will eventually create a touch screen based OS for the storm/future touchscreen phones, or do you think they will continue to use the "jacked" bold version??

I thought I'd read somewhere else on these forums that the confusion stems from the idea that the storm has a video/graphics processer that is integrated into the processer chipset where as the iPhone has a separate graphics processing chip.

I'm not UBER Cell Phone tech savy so i can't say if it is fact or not.

I do recall the 386/486 days when adding a graphics acellerator card made a world of difference but I'm not sure that comparison applies here.

As it is right now, the Storm doesn't really do anything that needs a GPU. It doesn't have a lot of pointless eye candy like the Jesus Phone. Just that simple fade effect.

Even on the Jesus Phone, MP3 and video playback would be done by the CPU not the GPU. Some of that might change if Apple implements OpenCL on the Jesus Phone's OS. The GPU doesn't really do quite as much as people think it does. The main CPU is still what is doing probably 90% of the heavy lifting, even on the Jesus Phone which is supposed to be this shining example of why phones need a GPU.

Originally Posted by BlackberryStorm98

Do you think RIM will eventually create a touch screen based OS for the storm/future touchscreen phones, or do you think they will continue to use the "jacked" bold version??

Future touchscreen phones maybe, maybe even the Storm 2, but I'm not holding my breath for a brand new OS for our Storms. Not that I'm complaining all that much, sure it can be better and that would be cool, but I'm content as long as they get it working well with the current 4.7 OS, and with the betas that been been out it seems to be moving in the right direction. :)

Originally Posted by BlackberryStorm98

Do you think RIM will eventually create a touch screen based OS for the storm/future touchscreen phones, or do you think they will continue to use the "jacked" bold version??

It's unlikely they would ever do such a thing for any Blackberry branded device. What I wouldn't rule out is RIM creating a whole new brand that is for a more consumer oriented line of phones where they can make a clean break with the BB OS and not worry so much about upsetting the BB devout. My suggestion might be Blueberry. Keeps with the whole "berry" theme, but it's likely different enough that MOST people could manage to keep from buying a Blueberry phone when they wanted Blackberry.

Originally Posted by bigman2

It's unlikely they would ever do such a thing for any Blackberry branded device. What I wouldn't rule out is RIM creating a whole new brand that is for a more consumer oriented line of phones where they can make a clean break with the BB OS and not worry so much about upsetting the BB devout. My suggestion might be Blueberry. Keeps with the whole "berry" theme, but it's likely different enough that MOST people could manage to keep from buying a Blueberry phone when they wanted Blackberry.

god i hope not blueberry is already a failure

engadget.DOT/2009/01/12/keepin-it-real-fake-part-clxvii-the-blueberry-is-exactly-what/]Keepin' it real fake, part CLXVII: the BlueBerry is exactly what you think

Originally Posted by cpuking2009

god i hope not blueberry is already a failure

engadget.DOT/2009/01/12/keepin-it-real-fake-part-clxvii-the-blueberry-is-exactly-what/]Keepin' it real fake, part CLXVII: the BlueBerry is exactly what you think

Well, the brand name isn't really important... It could be Strawberry or Raspberry for all I care... Just something with the "berry" at the end.

Originally Posted by bigman2

As it is right now, the Storm doesn't really do anything that needs a GPU. It doesn't have a lot of pointless eye candy like the Jesus Phone. Just that simple fade effect.

Even on the Jesus Phone, MP3 and video playback would be done by the CPU not the GPU. Some of that might change if Apple implements OpenCL on the Jesus Phone's OS. The GPU doesn't really do quite as much as people think it does. The main CPU is still what is doing probably 90% of the heavy lifting, even on the Jesus Phone which is supposed to be this shining example of why phones need a GPU.

Well, you are kinda correct. If you were to offset all the graphical processes to the GPU, the CPU would have a lot more processing time for other things. The GPU can do a lot to help the situation. If it were a general purpose one, it would become incredible.

Originally Posted by bigman2

As it is right now, the Storm doesn't really do anything that needs a GPU. It doesn't have a lot of pointless eye candy like the Jesus Phone. Just that simple fade effect.

Even on the Jesus Phone, MP3 and video playback would be done by the CPU not the GPU. Some of that might change if Apple implements OpenCL on the Jesus Phone's OS. The GPU doesn't really do quite as much as people think it does. The main CPU is still what is doing probably 90% of the heavy lifting, even on the Jesus Phone which is supposed to be this shining example of why phones need a GPU.

Well, you are kinda correct. If you were to offset all the graphical processes to the GPU, the CPU would have a lot more processing time for other things. The GPU can do a lot to help the situation. If it were a general purpose one, it would become incredible.

Originally Posted by Shadow.xXx

Well, you are kinda correct. If you were to offset all the graphical processes to the GPU, the CPU would have a lot more processing time for other things. The GPU can do a lot to help the situation. If it were a general purpose one, it would become incredible.

While that's true, I think people need to stop and think about whether they REALLY need this on a cell phone. On a desktop, where power is essentially infinite, it's one thing... On a cell phone, or even a laptop, where you have to assume a finite supply of power... If it adds something to the experience beyond an initial "Wow!" factor, then fine... Otherwise, until we get some kind of breakthrough in battery technology, I just don't see this as a good thing.

Originally Posted by Devlyn16

I thought I'd read somewhere else on these forums that the confusion stems from the idea that the storm has a video/graphics processer that is integrated into the processer chipset where as the iPhone has a separate graphics processing chip.

I'm not UBER Cell Phone tech savy so i can't say if it is fact or not.

I do recall the 386/486 days when adding a graphics acellerator card made a world of difference but I'm not sure that comparison applies here.

You are right. It is integrated into the chipset. The OS does everything at software level, though.