>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
General
> The X1 White Paper Has Been Revised!
Bookmark topic
I thought the RAM was added because the panel cannot run otherwise. The phone will still be slow as it seems that the panel is one piece of bloated software. No amount of RAM can help here. I think there is no such thing as pagefile in WM so it is not like speed will increase due to less swapping of RAM pages to disk.
If SE has done a good job, then the panel software should be optimised properly and thus do not need such huge amount of RAM. Requiring a RAM increase is not a good thing actually as this shows SE has not optimised the panel software.
To criticize is one thing, but to criticize over a speculation is absurd. It reads insecurity all over your words.
--
Posted: 2008-05-27 20:44:31
Edit :
Quote
The Panel thing ran no problem with 128 mb. The transitions might be on the slow side but they were working fine. What the big problem was is the opening of the panels. If you look on many videos, when they loaded the panel, it loaded fine, then had to reload itself.
Now we just need another revision whitepaper with acceletrometer and we are fine =)
--
Posted: 2008-05-28 01:57:54
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-05-27 13:09:00, Keiki wrote:
@mib1800
Omg! Trully youre over dramatizing over a HOMESCREEN as if its X1 os!
If you dont like it just deactivate it! ZIP and your problem was goner!
You know i will buys X1 not because its damn panel, but the WM os
Exactly. IF the extra ram was added only for panels, which I doubt, so what? Who gives a f&*k about panels, not I. The vast majority of people who want a fancy end user experience probably won't use the phone for much but browsing the net and watching videos. They probably won't be interested in cpu cruncing multi-tasking goodness like the techies amongst us. And the techies will happily turn off panels and have the extra 128MB to play with, which will surely make a very zippy WM device.
And if SE did increase the ram for the panels, there is a good chance that the extra 128MB would be MORE THAN ENOUGH to run the panels - meaning the forced upgrade to fix panels, pays off for general opertion AS WELL as making panels run better.
I suppose it's a "is the glass half empty or half full" kind of question, but I'm inclined to think that 256MB will fix the panel slowness AND give a nice RAM boost for general operation.
@mib, Regarding the standby time, it's true that WM devices have generally good standby time and that this doesn't make much difference to actual use. My HP ipaq lasts for almost 2 weeks on standby, but get's only a day or two on medium use (including a bit of wifi as well as talk). But I still think my argument has merit. If the phone uses hardly any juice in standby, then in the middle of the standby period the phone still has a substantial portion of it's talktime still available. On a device with a short standby time, if you are halfway through standby time, then talktime is substantially reduced.
However, I'm not arguing that long talktimes aren't better than long standby times. Overall, for a device I use everyday, I'd rather a device with a long talktime than a long standby time. For a device I only use occasionally, long standby times can be more useful. Depends on usage.
--
Posted: 2008-05-29 00:06:15
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-05-29 00:06:15, max_wedge wrote:
On 2008-05-27 13:09:00, Keiki wrote:
@mib1800
Omg! Trully youre over dramatizing over a HOMESCREEN as if its X1 os!
If you dont like it just deactivate it! ZIP and your problem was goner!
You know i will buys X1 not because its damn panel, but the WM os
Exactly. IF the extra ram was added only for panels, which I doubt, so what? Who gives a f&*k about panels, not I. The vast majority of people who want a fancy end user experience probably won't use the phone for much but browsing the net and watching videos. They probably won't be interested in cpu cruncing multi-tasking goodness like the techies amongst us. And the techies will happily turn off panels and have the extra 128MB to play with, which will surely make a very zippy WM device.
And if SE did increase the ram for the panels, there is a good chance that the extra 128MB would be MORE THAN ENOUGH to run the panels - meaning the forced upgrade to fix panels, pays off for general opertion AS WELL as making panels run better.
I suppose it's a "is the glass half empty or half full" kind of question, but I'm inclined to think that 256MB will fix the panel slowness AND give a nice RAM boost for general operation.
@mib, Regarding the standby time, it's true that WM devices have generally good standby time and that this doesn't make much difference to actual use. My HP ipaq lasts for almost 2 weeks on standby, but get's only a day or two on medium use (including a bit of wifi as well as talk). But I still think my argument has merit.
If the phone uses hardly any juice in standby, then in the middle of the standby period the phone still has a substantial portion of it's talktime still available. On a device with a short standby time, if you are halfway through standby time, then talktime is substantially reduced.
However, I'm not arguing that long talktimes aren't better than long standby times. Overall, for a device I use everyday, I'd rather a device with a long talktime than a long standby time. For a device I only use occasionally, long standby times can be more useful. Depends on usage.
Very strange reasoning! If you are at half the standby time, it is the same if it is short or long, you still are at half time. And half the remaining power.
What is different is the time it takes to get to half the power consumption.
--
Posted: 2008-05-29 02:09:31
Edit :
Quote
@michka, compared to a phone with a short standby time, the phone with a long standby time has more talktime available after an equivalent standby period. For example if a phone with long standby and a phone with short standby period both sit for 2 days in standby, then the phone with long standby has used less battery and therefore has more talktime availbal than the phone with a short standby time
Nothing wrong with my logic
--
Posted: 2008-06-04 00:42:33
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-06-04 00:42:33, max_wedge wrote:
@michka, compared to a phone with a short standby time, the phone with a long standby time has more talktime available after an equivalent standby period. For example if a phone with long standby and a phone with short standby period both sit for 2 days in standby, then the phone with long standby has used less battery and therefore has more talktime availbal than the phone with a short standby time
Nothing wrong with my logic
Except how you explained it. Please re-read your phrases I bolded.
I agree that after a given amount of time, the long standby will have more talking time left than a short standby time. That's logical.
The thing is you said a long standby will have more talking time left at half life than a short standby will have at half life. And that's not logical.
Sorry, I guess you just simply wrote too fast. But at the end, we do agree and that's what is important, is it not?
_________________
Pedestrian: don't run, my car is faster anyway.
[ This Message was edited by: michka on 2008-06-04 02:02 ]
[ This Message was edited by: michka on 2008-06-04 02:04 ]
--
Posted: 2008-06-04 02:45:18
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
