Its different, its better, it will sell

tyrelian

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2010
239
1
0
Visit site
Htc is great at watching the trends, so they catered to enterprise and education with the scribe. The thing is well built, light and you can hold it in one hand, the breaking point with this will be the price, they need to make just wifi verisons of this and it will be a hit, sure the other guys get honeycomb right out the box but HTC isnt just another ''me too'' type of company. They make quality products and want expand upon their great reputation. Moreover buy this tablet, its great, its fast and it will will be updated.
 

original00

Well-known member
May 13, 2010
148
9
0
Visit site
I agree it will do well if priced right ($399-449). I think there are enough options for stock HC 10" tablets choice is never a bad thing. It will be going up against the galaxy tab for the "more portable" 7" market
 

LukeApoApo

Member
Feb 16, 2011
6
0
0
Visit site
Drawers

I don't know much about HTC Flyer but for drawers like me, it may be the best tablet. I hope there will be drawing apps like sketchbook and corel. Thinking about that, our imagination goes: Adobe could develop a adobe flash to create animations or even a pocket Photoshop. Gimp can join the party too. And many others.
My nglish may not be the best, that's because i'm brazilian. Sorry if i did some mistake. This was my first reply in this site!!!:D
 

Limjelo

Well-known member
Apr 19, 2010
141
3
0
Visit site
You're English is great and obviously much better than my Portuguese. :) No need to apologize.

And I agree with you...

I don't know much about HTC Flyer but for drawers like me, it may be the best tablet. I hope there will be drawing apps like sketchbook and corel. Thinking about that, our imagination goes: Adobe could develop a adobe flash to create animations or even a pocket Photoshop. Gimp can join the party too. And many others.
My nglish may not be the best, that's because i'm brazilian. Sorry if i did some mistake. This was my first reply in this site!!!:D
 

splmonster

Well-known member
Jun 12, 2010
1,117
138
0
Visit site
Actually, $500 is overpriced for this IMO.

No IPS. No Dual-Core. No Honeycomb (yet).

If it came in at $399 I'd consider it.

IPS? lol! Dual-Core is still not needed, because nothing fully supports this, nor do apps utilize it. This is just like it was during the first Dual-cores on PC, heck most apps still don't utilize the 64bit two processor machines. HTC promised Honeycomb shortly after release. $499 for this is highly reasonable, this device looks great and brings ease of use to Android.
 

menji

Well-known member
Jan 21, 2011
160
12
0
Visit site
The interesting thing is that I know little about this tablet, and for some reason, I'm drawn to it. if the price is definitely right, it might be my first tablet. At first, not having honeycomb was a dealbreaker. However, it's android, and if the nook can run honeycomb, then this little 7 incher will most definitely be able to.
 

htowngator

Well-known member
Jan 4, 2011
1,422
46
0
Visit site
IPS? lol! Dual-Core is still not needed, because nothing fully supports this, nor do apps utilize it. This is just like it was during the first Dual-cores on PC, heck most apps still don't utilize the 64bit two processor machines. HTC promised Honeycomb shortly after release. $499 for this is highly reasonable, this device looks great and brings ease of use to Android.

TFT LCD is not anywhere near as nice as IPS (my wife's NC has that and it's beautiful)
 

cparker5

Well-known member
Feb 6, 2011
380
21
0
Visit site
IPS? lol! Dual-Core is still not needed, because nothing fully supports this, nor do apps utilize it. This is just like it was during the first Dual-cores on PC, heck most apps still don't utilize the 64bit two processor machines. HTC promised Honeycomb shortly after release. $499 for this is highly reasonable, this device looks great and brings ease of use to Android.
With the Xoom WiFi going at $600 I think $449 is the max this should sell for. I think $399 and they have a solid foothold.
 

th0r615

god of thunder.
Apr 19, 2010
155
30
0
Visit site
IPS? lol! Dual-Core is still not needed, because nothing fully supports this, nor do apps utilize it. This is just like it was during the first Dual-cores on PC, heck most apps still don't utilize the 64bit two processor machines. HTC promised Honeycomb shortly after release. $499 for this is highly reasonable, this device looks great and brings ease of use to Android.
I thought apps developed with the NDK were able to be programed to use dual core chips (even quad, check out that video of Kal-El smoking Tegra 2)
 

splmonster

Well-known member
Jun 12, 2010
1,117
138
0
Visit site
I thought apps developed with the NDK were able to be programed to use dual core chips (even quad, check out that video of Kal-El smoking Tegra 2)

Yes that is correct, but we haven't even got a official release of Android yet that supports dual-core. By the time 2.4 and 3.0 are officially out, then yes dual-core has the support. In reality are we going to be able to tell it being much faster? No! But it will get better battery life, we know that. In realtime testing you will never know it's faster then the single core. This 1.5ghz Snap chip in the Flyer is powerful and will be more then enough to run everything at a smooth pace. Heck my 1ghz Snap that is 1st gen in my EVO runs perfectly and smooth as butter. I'm not as into specs as most, as long as the device runs well and handles everything efficiently. I'm perfectly happy with that. Just look at Apple and they succeed without all this high end specs. The devices run well and smooth.
 

E_man

Well-known member
Jul 16, 2010
480
45
0
Visit site
IPS? lol!

I don't understand your post. "IPS? lol!" You may "lol" but many of us find that to be a desired feature. Tablets aren't going to always be 90 degrees to your face. IPS is more important on them than any other screen in my opinion. Your opinion may differ, but to laugh at others is rather immature.

Dual-Core is still not needed, because nothing fully supports this, nor do apps utilize it. This is just like it was during the first Dual-cores on PC, heck most apps still don't utilize the 64bit two processor machines.

Sorry to say this, you haven't the slightest clue what you're talking about. First of all, the non-multithreaded apps are the unusual ones these days, especially power hungry apps. Sure, nobody is worried about dual core for their clock widget, but games, movies, web browsing, multitasking, advanced UI's, etc all use multiple cores on PC, and there is no reason to think the opposite won't happen in mobile, albeit much faster.

TFT LCD is not anywhere near as nice as IPS (my wife's NC has that and it's beautiful)

TFT is Thin Film Transister. *-IPS panels are a form of TFT panels. So are *VA's (often used in Televisions) and TN panels (the cheap panels found in most consumer computer screens, low end phones, low end TV's, and almost all laptops. Usually associated with bad color and viewing angles).

Heck, I can't remember for sure, but I believe even OLED's use TFT technology.

Yes that is correct, but we haven't even got a official release of Android yet that supports dual-core. By the time 2.4 and 3.0 are officially out, then yes dual-core has the support. In reality are we going to be able to tell it being much faster? No! But it will get better battery life, we know that. In realtime testing you will never know it's faster then the single core. This 1.5ghz Snap chip in the Flyer is powerful and will be more then enough to run everything at a smooth pace. Heck my 1ghz Snap that is 1st gen in my EVO runs perfectly and smooth as butter. I'm not as into specs as most, as long as the device runs well and handles everything efficiently. I'm perfectly happy with that. Just look at Apple and they succeed without all this high end specs. The devices run well and smooth.

Have you tested honeycomb on a flyer? What about a straight up app comparison? Even something simple as web browsing will quickly take advantage of dual cores. You will most definitely be able to tell unless you are the lightest of users.

As for apple, they have always been in the top few percentiles hardware wise. Unless you're reffering to the outdated iPad specs. In which case, that's a strange example. Is the laptop you could have bought a year ago as good as what you'd get now?
 

splmonster

Well-known member
Jun 12, 2010
1,117
138
0
Visit site
I don't understand your post. "IPS? lol!" You may "lol" but many of us find that to be a desired feature. Tablets aren't going to always be 90 degrees to your face. IPS is more important on them than any other screen in my opinion. Your opinion may differ, but to laugh at others is rather immature.



Sorry to say this, you haven't the slightest clue what you're talking about. First of all, the non-multithreaded apps are the unusual ones these days, especially power hungry apps. Sure, nobody is worried about dual core for their clock widget, but games, movies, web browsing, multitasking, advanced UI's, etc all use multiple cores on PC, and there is no reason to think the opposite won't happen in mobile, albeit much faster.



TFT is Thin Film Transister. *-IPS panels are a form of TFT panels. So are *VA's (often used in Televisions) and TN panels (the cheap panels found in most consumer computer screens, low end phones, low end TV's, and almost all laptops. Usually associated with bad color and viewing angles).

Heck, I can't remember for sure, but I believe even OLED's use TFT technology.



Have you tested honeycomb on a flyer? What about a straight up app comparison? Even something simple as web browsing will quickly take advantage of dual cores. You will most definitely be able to tell unless you are the lightest of users.

As for apple, they have always been in the top few percentiles hardware wise. Unless you're reffering to the outdated iPad specs. In which case, that's a strange example. Is the laptop you could have bought a year ago as good as what you'd get now?

However when it comes to Dual-Core in a phone, the point still remains is it needed? I mean currently we have 1 core devices that run everything perfectly well. Some more then well... I still run two big PC rigs for higher end games, and notice how my second core barely moves in load. So yeah we could go back and fourth all day. At the end of the day we are still talking about phone devices. It will most definitely improve battery life. Performance? Yes if the system allows for the full support of Multi-threading, same goes for the apps. Which I believe is another year away from being fully supported on these devices. No I have not tested a Flyer with "Honeycomb" nor has anyone else except HTC. I have however played with a Nook Color that had the SDK port and it seemed to work quite well considering the lower specs of the Nook compared to these other high end tablets. So being a SDK and being buggy, something not official. I have good reason to think the Flyer will run Honeycomb very well.

No Apple is not known for being the top dog when it comes to hardware specs. Reason we can get a more powerful PC for less money with specs that are much better. Same goes for phone devices... They go for what works good, and what aims to their consumer. Apple is not known for being power hungry with specs.

So lets not make this a dumb argument. No need for calling users dumb. Keep it to yourself. Thanks
 
Last edited:

E_man

Well-known member
Jul 16, 2010
480
45
0
Visit site
However when it comes to Dual-Core in a phone, the point still remains is it needed? I mean currently we have 1 core devices that run everything perfectly well. Some more then well... I still run two big PC rigs for higher end games, and notice how my second core barely moves in load. So yeah we could go back and fourth all day. At the end of the day we are still talking about phone devices. It will most definitely improve battery life. Performance? Yes if the system allows for the full support of Multi-threading, same goes for the apps. Which I believe is another year away from being fully supported on these devices. No I have not tested a Flyer with "Honeycomb" nor has anyone else except HTC. I have however played with a Nook Color that had the SDK port and it seemed to work quite well considering the lower specs of the Nook compared to these other high end tablets. So being a SDK and being buggy, something not official. I have good reason to think the Flyer will run Honeycomb very well.

No Apple is not known for being the top dog when it comes to hardware specs. Reason we can get a more powerful PC for less money with specs that are much better. Same goes for phone devices... They go for what works good, and what aims to their consumer. Apple is not known for being power hungry with specs.

So lets not make this a dumb argument. No need for calling users dumb. Keep it to yourself. Thanks

I maintain, games and everything use multiple cores just fine. It's not hard to see that at all. If you use ctrl+shift+esc in windows, you'll see it for yourself. Phones/tablets will also use multiple cores. Look at some of the nVidia dual/single core comparisons of real software. Yes, single core will work fine, for a certain amount of things, you're twisting my arguments. I never said otherwise. I did say that it will suffer a performance hit in things as basic as browsing. Again, go watch the videos.

In fact, I'll do my own little demo. I have here task manager after opening the following tabs in quick succession. Ny Times, Engadget, Gizmodo, Android Central, and Pocket Now. Basically, some relatively complex sites. See the attached thumbnail. It's not as easy to read as some (stupid windows), but it's not hard to tell that this is multithreaded, and not necessarily easy for a 3.6Ghz Quad to do. They all opened in ~12 seconds combined on a 3mbit connection in google chrome. Now, this is obviously not a real world scenario for a tablet, my point was about the multithreading. Now, on your device of choice (phone/tablet) open just one of those websites. Takes quite a bit longer, as much as 30 seconds some times. Using the extra power afforded by multiple cores can significantly reduce that. I think I saw an nVidia demo where they were loading in ~5-10 seconds each. That is just the web browser (which is confirmed multithreaded). What about even more intense stuff? Flash? Games? These will all do multicore, and far sooner than one would want to replace a tablet. Second test is a game called Team Fortress 2. Not even close to a high end game, but that was the reason I tested it, to show even low end games are multithreaded. You can see I jumped into game (mid use as game loaded), played for about 20 seconds (higher use), and quit (return to idle use). I welcome you to do your own test, and post the results if you want. Just give the name of the program and what you did please. If you can, keep it with free/common software so I might try it as well.

My point is things are already going to take advantage of dual core out of the gate. Multithreading is near ubiquitious in todays (and even yesterdays) software, and will not take anywhere near the time it took to get multiple PC cores running right. In fact, here is an article from 6 months ago on google developer blog on how to best multithread your app. Android has supported multithreading for quite some time it seems, just not necessarily on two cores to this point. If that's not high on your priority list, more power to you. I respect that position. This entire conversation was based entirely around your statement that dual core is not going to do much if anything. That is entirely incorrect.

As for apple, you're correct in saying we are talking about phone/tablets here, not PC's. When the iPad launched, the specs on it were excellent, in the top few percentiles as I said before for mobile tech. Same with the iPhone 4. I wasn't talking about PC's in that case.

As for calling you dumb, I did no such thing. If that was your impression, I apologize. None of this is meant as any kind of personal attack, just a correction of something I see as incorrect.
 

Cory Streater

Well-known member
Sep 21, 2009
9,495
3,428
0
Visit site
Guys I hope this conversation continues. You have both made some really good points. Like splmonster, it was my understanding that both the apps and the OS needed to be developed in a way that allowed them to utilize both cores. For example, I was under the impression that a Windows 32 bit OS will not take advantage of the second core; prohibiting apps from doing so either. If I wanted to take advantage of both cores, I thought the requirement was to run a 64 bit OS; so, that is what I installed. For example I know some of my apps (office?) are either not compatible (especially in the early/less popular days of 64 bit) or they will run not in 64 bit mode. I also I think I understand where splmonster is coming from when he says dual core doesn't really matter. If you listen to the podcast, I've gotten pretty animated about how meaningless benchmarks are to me. People get really caught up in the higher the number the better. I get to play with a lot of Android phones and I can tell you the user experience on phones that are almost double mine (900) had a much slower feel in terms of the user experience. My phone is blazing fast and I honestly can't imagine it going any faster. A second core would be nothing to me because that's my perception. So I guess all of these things combined put me on the same page as splmonster.

That said, what you did E_man, was present data (which as an Engineer by trade I'm always a big fan of) to back up what I think is a contention that the apps are already written to support dual cores and will take full advantage of them regardless of the OS? You did so by showing the Windows task manager. So I guess that helps me a little bit, but is Android really working the same way?

I will admit I don't have the degree to say one person is correct and the other isn't. I actually get a little confused because I hear so many explanations for this. Now, based on my phone example, and my experience of not thinking my phone could actually perform any faster than it does; I am still suspicious of whether a dual core is a necessity.


On a tablet however, I think dual cores will open up the possibility of CPU hungry applications that a single core could not. Even the UI on some of the single core tablets I played with at CES felt laggy to me. That could be due to the fact Froyo isn't intended for tabs, and it could also be a core thing.

Either way I don't think either one of you were trying to insult the other. I think you both just have different ideas on what this all means to the end user. I read it as more of a debate with compelling points from each side. So carry on, and try not to take your differences of opinion personally, because I'd love to learn more.

P.S. if I misquoted either of you, please let me know. Just because I have that badge next to my username shouldn't affect anyone's post in responding back. In fact, I kind of appreciate it when someone says "now look here you idiot, that's not how it works" ;)
 

BSG75

Custom User Title
May 11, 2010
785
98
0
Visit site
Apps don't need to be reprogrammed for multiple cores. As long as they are multi-threaded apps (which they are), they are already ready to go for multiple cores.

I remember hearing or reading that the hold up is that the dalvik vm doesn't support multiple cores yet. Each app runs it's own instance of the dvm, so the apps can be multi-threaded, but still not be able to run more than one thing through their dvm at once. That seems to be the bottleneck. However, two different apps can be making use of each core at the same time, it seems. You just can't have one app accessing more than one processing core at a time. If that is the case, then I think it's safe to say multiple cores are not a waste.

I'm not an android guru, though. I could be mistaken.
Reference:
What is Android? | Android Developers

I also want my tablet a little future-proofed. If Ice Cream introduces full multiple processor support, I don't want my tablet to be let out in the cold.

I can totally see the good reason not to make the processor count a determining factor. It's still a big deal to me, if I'm throwing down $600 for a device that I hope lasts 3 years.