Apple has put such an emphasis on increasing the performance of their mobile chips and honestly I just don’t know why at this point. I don’t need nor want to play Resident Evil 4 Remake on my phone. I much rather have more battery life.
With that said I suspect this is probably a software issue and can probably be resolved with an update.
On the hand, I agree. But on the other hand, I love the innovation here, because it could lead us to a day where your phone is your computer. Plug it into a keyboard and monitor and get to work.
I don't Like how the phone merges the utility of a camera,and watch. Or the ebook reader replaces the book. (Or IPod to iPhone)
I don't agree with the concept of merging of their functions, as it impacts their utility.
You lose the essence of its purpose.
And on the other hand, I think it would be a win if Apple could merge the functionality of the iPhone with the Apple Watch, but given it eat into the bottom line of competing products, would they?
Would they allow the iPhone to impact MacBook sales for example.
When Apple is able to replace the iPhone with an Apple Watch, I think that is a win for utility.
This is of course just my opinion but we’re moving towards a high speed interconnected world- 5G, (6G?), peer to peer internet, starlink (eh?), etc.
One idea I’ve been playing around with quite a bit lately has been offloading computational data and even OS- obviously I’m not the first one on this, but I think at one point just turning our phones in to input/ receivers for some sort of cloud based OS- where basically all our phones have are an input module, battery, a strong receiver, and a storage for caching.
Then you could start making super light hardware- computers, tablets, phones all accessing on singular OS that just reformats depending on the device.
And we wouldn’t need to upgrade our personal hardware anymore we could just upgrade the racks.
Once everything is interconnected we wouldn’t even need cell plans either, we could just communicate through the existing cloud devices.
I'm still waiting for the day when my phone just "slots" into a dock on my desktop, and all the apps will "automagically" transform into desktop apps with keyboard/mouse shortcuts.
Not just talking scaling to whatever, or running a phone app on my laptop, but a complete "reskin" of the application for environment that is currently executing it. If we're talking Word, i want the mobile word experience on my phone, but the full blown desktop experience when docked into a monitor with keyboard/mouse.
You could even take it one step further and make the dock indicate the intended purpose, i.e. you'd have a dock in a meeting room that suggests "presentation mode" or "meeting mode" and instead of blasting your desktop to the screen/projector, it instead shows as a second presentation desktop.
People keep foisting DEX forward as a reason why convergence isn't demanded by the market.
But, demand is created by early adopters (the people here), and those people don't use DEX because they don't use Samsung, due to Samsung being considered janky-to-insecure, depending on who you ask.
> due to Samsung being considered janky-to-insecure, depending on who you ask
If you ask a member of the Church of Apple, yes, you'll get that answer. Ask any heretic and they'll give different answers ranging from 'I want to keep things separate so I don't flush my PC down the loo next time I forget to take it out of my back pocket' to 'I want to keep my PC personal and don't trust ${vendor} to abide by that promise'.
As to 'Samsung' (or, rather, Android) being 'insecure' it is remarkable to see this premise being pushed. From what I gather there is not much difference between Android and iOS in 'security' - if anything it seems to be iOS which is more often in need of patching against yet another 0-day/0-click related to problems with iMessage or other text-parsing related bugs where Android 'security' problems seem to be more related to the lack of updates for older devices.
Yes -- and for many, this is all the proof necessary that iOS is a superior ecosystem. I was a longtime Android user. I had several Galaxy and Pixel devices. I'm now an iOS convert, because all that "it just works" nonsense turns out not to be nonsense.
Increased performance in case of this architecture style actually contributes to better battery life. The faster any one operation can finish, the faster the whole core can go back to sleep - remember, just idling has a very significant energy drain.
That’s great as long as the software doesn’t change to fill the new performance headroom. Unfortunately, software seems to follow the same law as bureaucracy: expand until all available resources are consumed.
It seems that in this case the performance per watt is essentially the same. There is no point in rushing to sleep if perf per watt is constant, you will only end up giving the chip a higher amperage and loosing even more to heat in the power delivery (internal battery resistance, traces and power supply). The slower cooler phone will perform as well and also deliver better sustained performance over time as the peak burst current of the battery decreases.
I suspect they are trying to compete in the console market without having a console per se. AFAIK the iPhone 15 Pro has 1/3rd of the TFLOPs of the Playstation 5. They also have a smooth TV-connectivity system.
Most people who have consoles in the US already have an iPhone in their pocket. Now you just need a controller, some kind of dock for the phone, and pay off a lot of devs to make games for the platform to get the ball rolling.
Because they _really_ want the next gen to be able to run big LLMs locally. Or an alternative argument, they need it as a powerful companion to their Vr "stuff". Although I'm in favour of the first option. Why? I think running LLMs locally may be seen as a big differentiator of their devices. What else can apple do that makes their phones do more than competition?
It's like with their laptops. I briefly considered buying their laptop with M2 ultra just for the amount of ram it makes available for ML/AI (until, I saw the price in Europe that is).
Software easily would take all gains in hardware performance. I did not measure in seconds but I have a strong impression that an app (a ticket booking service, nothing which should require a powerful CPU) become considerably slower in the last couple years. So phones have to become faster and faster just to keep the same user experience in the face of increasing software bloat.
I'm an embedded engineer and I'm always surprised at how slow software is. I bought a new laptop that had Windows 11 pre-installed, SSD, all the bells and whistles. Just loading up it takes 5GB of RAM, eats my CPU trying to index files and still can't find the files I want faster than a brute force search.
What does Windows really do now more than my Windows 95 PC? It connects to the network, browses files and can load a web browser. Why does it need to be so bloated just to sit there ready to load a web browser
* A developer who produces faster code is more expensive to hire.
* Any developer - good or bad - will deliver the same feature faster if they implement it naively, rather than digging deep and optimizing it.
* A slow implementation might cost less to maintain later.
* The vendor doesn't pay the cost of their code being slow. It's the customer that has to pay for the hardware upgrade.
Each company just edges the line between most profit (by cheaply producing slow software) and complete death (by producing software so slow your customers leave instantly a competitor shows up, e.g. Discord killing Skype)
I can't wait for CPUs to stop developing. Companies will have to return to efficiency in order to actually support more features.
Oh, believe me, it is very visible. You can test this easily on a desktop PC. Start it & browse websites when 10+ GB of RAM are inserted and when 2 or 4 are intserted.
With that said I suspect this is probably a software issue and can probably be resolved with an update.