--- In maccellphone%40yahoogroups.com">maccellphone
yahoogroups.com, Alan Danziger <aland...> wrote:
>
> Wow. Just wow.
>;
> This is a great message, and makes some valid points, which makes it
all
> the more interesting how flat-out wrong it is.
>
> 1) Normal cell phones, historically, have a memory footprint (OS &
Apps)
> of a 1MB or less. The iPhone has - based on analysis of the update
> packages - upwards of 40mb (I can't find the reference right now).
The
> iPhone has a 4 or 8 GIGABYTE flash drive, which is used for both OS
and
> 'user content'.
>
> 2) Do you have any references for the comments about "bloated language
> features"? Because the iPhone native apps are written in a 'dialect'
of
> Cocoa, Apple's Objective-C framework, which does NOT need to rewrite
> things like exceptions. I don't know what if any restrictions there
> might be on dynamic memory, but you should be thinking of this in
terms
> of a computer not a cell phone.
>
> 3) The iPhone is running a 620mhz ARM
>
(http://www.engadget.com/2007/07/01/iphone-processor-found-620mhz-arm/).
> As we saw with the PowerPC vs. X86 architectures, there's a lot more
to
> system performance than clock cycles. But you're right, there's no
> question that a laptop or desktop running off AC will have a lot more
>; cycles available (and generate more heat in the process). Doesn't
mean
> that the iPhone is "slow" per se. Does anyone need a 3ghz computer to
> view web pages or read email? 
>
> 4) The Apple web page you quote is talking about the presentation of a
> web page, and has nothing to do with the "Space vs. speed";
optimizations
> you imply. You're right (generally speaking) that for compiled code,
> space vs. speed is a typical tradeoff. Actually depends where the
> bottleneck is on any particular system. But when you're talking about
> web pages, that's a different issue. There are plenty of ways to
> optimize HTML and presentation without needing to trade off space or
> speed. Simple things like removing extraneous characters in your
>; javascript or HTML will make it download faster, and it runs the same
>; way because the browser parses it regardless of those extraneous
characters.
>
> 5) "modern Terabyte raid systems that can use the virtually unlimited
> disk space to enhance program execution." How many desktop clients do
> you know that are configured with terabyte systems? (I have one, but
I
> only know 1-2 others who do.) Those systems are more often on the
> server end, which works perfectly well with Apple's recommended use of
> the Web 2.0 paradigm.
>
> 6) I agree with you that it would be nice to have more information
about
> what's in the iPhone, but there are companies that have disassembled
it
> and posted the information.
> http://blogs.business2.com/apple/2007/06/iphone-disassem.html points
to
> two of them.
>
> 7) OSX is the same (a recompile is about the only change). Safari is
> the same as Safari 3.x currently in beta for Windows and OSX. Flash,
> Java, etc. are not (yet?) available. I also (mostly) wish they were.
> But they're not NEEDED. JavaSCRIPT is there in the browser; support
for
> the Java programming language is not.
>;
>
> The biggest problems I have with considering the iPhone a "full"
> computer are the screen size and slow EDGE performance. But I don't
> really need to consider the iPhone a "full" computer - I'm happy
> considering it a really good phone and a very nice PDA that syncs
> reasonably nicely with my computer. The big win for me is that I can
> quickly and easily access Google / IMDB / Netflix / Mail / Maps, etc.
>;
> The long and short of it is, you wrote an interesting and technical
> email that just has enough 'wrong' information in it that I had to
> rebut. I do agree with many of the points you made, some just don't
> make sense the way you described them. The thing that really tweaked
me
> was your correlating Apple's (web page) design recommendations with
the
> size/speed tradeoffs of compiled code.
>
> Regards,
> -=Alan
>
> mjalkut wrote:
> >
>; > I don't have one. I haven't even gone to the store to look at one.
>; >
>; > But I do know that adapting software to any cell phone is a
challenge that requires
> > sacrifice and compromise. So I can't believe the Safari or the OSX
are the same full bloated
> > versions as on normal machines. They are undoubtedly tailored,
optimized for space (-Os
>; > instead of -O), and sections that depend on bloated language
features like C++
> > exceptions are rewritten in smaller, simpler, less robust fashion.
And anything that chews
> > up dynamic memory is also restricted.
> >
>; > And all of the space compression has to be compromised with speed.
The processor(s) are
> > probably ARM Xscale architectures which are designed more for power
optimization
> > than for speed, running well under 1Ghz, nothing like a 2.8Ghz Core
2 Duo or even a g4
> > or g5.
> >
>; > And one glaring omission is the inability to install any 3rd party
apps except web apps. So
> > things like Flash support can't be added even if you wanted to.
According to this link about
> > web app development,
> >
>; > http://developer.apple.com/iphone/designingcontent.html
>; >
>; > everything must be tailored to use optimal space. Space savings
always (most always)
> > come only with the sacrifice of speed. And speed is already
sacrificed because it isn't
> > native software.
> >
>; > Getting actual specs out of Apple is like pulling teeth. It would be
nice to know for certain
> > what are the memory limits, what are the processors, how fast, etc.
All they tell us is how
> > much flash is available (4-8G). That's like running with only a 4G
or 8G hard disk, a far cry
> > from modern Terabyte raid systems that can use the virtually
unlimited disk space to
> > enhance program execution.
> >
>; > It is at best misleading to claim that iPhone runs the same OSX and
> > Safari as on Mac, as the iPhone commercials continue to claim. I
always was puzzled that
>; > the commercials show the NY times page and a lot of nifty navigation
around the page,
> > but never show actual browsing to another page. And with the
omission of Java script and
> > Flash, it is a stretch to claim that all websites can be viewed just
as on your Mac.
>; >
>; > All things considered, the iPhone still faces all the same
limitations as any handheld
> > device. And the state of the art is still archaic, and a continuous
up hill battle to please
> > consumers with ever more complex technology on ever smaller form
factors.
>; >
>; >
>; > There's my 12 cents.
> > Mike Jalkut
> >
>; >
>; > --- In maccellphone%40yahoogroups.com">maccellphoneyahoogroups.com, "H.B. Elkins" hbelkins wrote:
> >
>; >>> I admit that for complex websites it's clearly not fast, but
> >>> considering that I can get a connection seemingly anywhere, as
> >>> opposed to only in a major metropolis, I think it was smart
> >>> compromise. I know that in today's society everyone has to have
>; >>> everything yesterday, but when I need speed, I'll find myself a
wi-
> >>> fi- spot.
> >>>
> >> Will the iPhone browse regular Web sites (as opposed to the
> >> "mobile-only" sites that normal cellphones can access) and is it
> >> capable of playing streaming Windows Media Player audio, either
> >> embedded in an http page or via a standalone player?
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
.
