yorg | # 151 | 2010-09-21, 16:31 | Report

Yes I did have a chance to play with the desire. My wife has one. Without the lag fix I applied to the Galaxy S, the HTC was miles ahead. After I applied the lag fix, they are on par. Her phone is still on 2.1 though.

Once she gets 2.2 her phone will be 6 times faster. As an indication, the best 2.2 linpack score for the Galaxy S is about 14MFlops. In contrast there are some HTCs that perform at around 50MFlops.

See here for more info on this:

http://www.greenecomputing.com/2010/...n-on-my-phone/

Rushmore | # 152 | 2010-09-21, 16:50 | Report

VZW version has Flash Lite 4.1, which plays most Flash 10 content, but at about 50% the efficiency of Flash 10.1. I was surprised how much better 10.1 was. I expected relative results I got from the N900 and Archos 5 (non Android model).

Flash Lite 3 on Archos 5 with same chipset as N900, plays much better than Flash 9 on the N900. A lot better.

Opposite with Flash 10.1. Plays FAR better than Flash Lite 4.1 did. No comparison. Sad thing is Flash Lite 4.1 plays far better than Flash 9 on the N900, so everything is relative.

added:

BTW, I can not help but notice even less Flash sites work now for the N900. A lot now come up with "need Flash player". Lame.

As far as Linpack, I have an Incredible and average 30.1 mflops, so seems odd the Galaxy is less than half. Android 2.2 makes that much difference? Hummingbirds chipset should kick snaps butt.

---

Last edited by Rushmore; 2010-09-21 at 16:59.

Capt'n Corrupt | # 153 | 2010-09-21, 17:51 | Report

As I understand it, Android2.2 includes optimizations for the Dalvik interpreter which improves performance DRASTICALLY for apps (like linpack) that are compiled for the DalvikVM (probably the majority). I remember Google touting 4-5x performance boost which is HUGE. Consider the leap other systems got when moving from 2.1 to 2.2.

Take the Nexus One linpack score that jumped from ~7MFLOPS to ~37MFLOPS (over 5x higher!)
http://www.overclock.net/software-ne...provement.html

Expect to see a HUGE performance increase in apps that use Dalvik, as the Galaxy S moves up to Froyo.

slender | # 154 | 2010-09-24, 21:29 | Report

Hmm. Yesterday tested Galaxy S and well screen is really good but on the other hand N900 screen is not bad either still of course it looks bit dull after this beast.

It was nice to see how well it/android interacts with touch and how fluid it was but after a while it really hit me. I´m using phone, not computer. And after a while I thought that this reminds me somehow of symbian. Really do not laugh Also I had to use HW buttons to use it properly. Weird IMO. I have to test more so maybe i should install nitdroid, but still it just feels phone on steroids. Not pocketable computer. I don't not why but that was first "feeling"

---

Last edited by slender; 2010-09-24 at 22:10.

rickysio | # 155 | 2010-09-25, 02:58 | Report

Err, early tests of (alpha builds of) Froyo on the SGS doesn't have the JIT compiler enabled, so...

Capt'n Corrupt | # 156 | 2010-09-25, 10:38 | Report

I think it's worth noting that phones like the N900 have apps that are already running at native speed, as they have compiled binaries running right on top of the OS with no interpreter in between. The speed gains in Froyo's Dalvik VM bring Android apps closer to native speeds using the JIT. The benefit of using Dalvik vs. native code is mainly portability, and may include some security features as well.

Just to note, Dalvik's portability is why Android can be quickly released across many different hardware devices (ARM, x86, plus variants)

daperl | # 157 | 2010-09-25, 13:06 | Report

Sorry, but you're getting carried away here, bordering on FUD.

Phones like the n900? You mean, all one of them.

Sure, I'm a GNU/Linux fanboi, but please don't trivialize the awesomeness and uniqueness of the n900. Especially in it's native OS form. Write once, run everywhere has panned out much better for C based code than it has for Java or any bastard child there of. And don't forget what code base the forked Android kernel is running on.

Tread lightly when touting Android byte code portability as a feature. One missing library or wrong version of something, and everything can still go to sh*t. Unfortunately, HTML, CSS, and Javascript are the closest things we have to a silver bullet.

Fanboi out. Carry on.

---

Last edited by daperl; 2010-09-25 at 13:24.

Capt'n Corrupt | # 158 | 2010-09-25, 13:30 | Report

What?! FUD?! Are you serious? Why are you picking a fight when I'm saying that phones like N900 are already running at maximum speed (native speed)? If anything this is a disadvantage of a Dalvik binary (or a tradeoff depending on how you look at it).

Are you saying that a general binary is as portable than a Dalvik binary?

daperl | # 159 | 2010-09-25, 15:20 | Report

Again, what phones like the n900? There's only one.

I wasn't responding about speed, the topic was portability.

Without the proper supporting cast (compiler, drivers, shared libraries, ..., etc.), has it ever really mattered? Python's a better answer than Dalvik. Source code compiler and byte code compiler properly stay close to each other, and source code distribution is optional. A Python JIT is rarely considered based on how easy it is to either create Python bindings, or actually directly access native shared libraries.

In practical terms, Dalvik's best features are its memory and blob management, and maybe its security, but not its portability.

Kangal | # 160 | 2010-09-25, 15:35 | Report

I got a SGS ... nana nana na na!