1. jinxednuance's Avatar
    I was at Costco yesterday picking up a 9900 for a friend.

    As usual the salesman tries to push a non BlackBerry phone, it's like they've been mandated from God not to sell BlackBerry!

    Anyway, so there's this Android Galaxy I think? I am not sure it has that dual core processor. The salesman started bragging about how that phone is tapped as the fastest (beating iPhone and BlackBerry).

    I am not trying to start a "fire thread" here and have endless rants and raves. I am posting from a more technical level:

    For a phone (or any computer for a matter of fact) to be the "fastest" shouldn't the software be in complete computability with the hardware? Sort of like, even if you have quad core processor, and you have a lousy software, wouldn't that mean you don't necessarily have the fastest phone?

    That's what I know. I am not a tech freak, but I do know that there needs to be a good synergy between the two. I tried explaining that to the salesman but he kept refuting my argument.

    Can someone please clarify if I am right or wrong?

    Thanks.
    08-26-11 10:16 AM
  2. howarmat's Avatar
    you are correct, the software has to be programmed to take advantage of the multiple cores.
    08-26-11 10:28 AM
  3. gonzo1x's Avatar
    and why do you think the software isn't programmed to do that??

    I owned a SGII and it was fast as ****, but i returned it cause battery life was like 8 hours as best
    08-26-11 10:41 AM
  4. jinxednuance's Avatar
    and why do you think the software isn't programmed to do that??

    I owned a SGII and it was fast as ****, but i returned it cause battery life was like 8 hours as best
    What's the point of having a fast phone if the battery gives you 8 hours? That's a flaw. I would consider.
    08-26-11 10:44 AM
  5. Tiassa's Avatar
    Benchmarks -- the tests that prove that your computer can do things that no one wants their computer to do faster than the other guy's computer.
    08-26-11 10:44 AM
  6. howarmat's Avatar
    some people have BBs that only last 8 hours. Performance benchmarks dont mean anything really. everyone uses their phone differently. But you do need a minimun amount of performance. This can be seen with the spinning clock on an older BB. the new faster processor should take care of most of that
    08-26-11 10:50 AM
  7. bounce007's Avatar
    I am not a tech freak, but I do know that there needs to be a good synergy between the two.
    Yeah the software and hardware need to be in good synergy as you said. I think I read somewhere that this aspect contributed to the termination of WebOS and the failure of the TouchPad as the Hardware was not on par with the software...

    --Bounce
    08-26-11 11:30 AM
  8. Rickroller's Avatar
    What's the point of having a fast phone if the battery gives you 8 hours? That's a flaw. I would consider.
    Not everyone is as concerned with battery life as people on these forums. Most people go to work for 8 hours (where they can charge if need be), and then drive home (again..with a charger handy..or dock) where they can charge as needed.

    If you're buying a phone just to talk, text, and email..then a phone like the SGSII isn't for you. If you want a portable computer in your pocket..then this is something that would appeal to you.

    I never hear people complaining when their laptop battery dies after 2 hours of being unplugged..
    08-26-11 11:39 AM
  9. jonathon.94's Avatar
    If I wanted a mini computer, I'd carry a netbook. If I want a phone that let's me get the information I need that also gives me decent battery life, then I'll carry a blackberry.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    08-26-11 02:45 PM
  10. Rickroller's Avatar
    You can carry a netbook in your pants?
    bmacc likes this.
    08-26-11 02:47 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD