9to5Mac reports that evidence of support for quad-core processors has shown up in beta versions of iOS 5.1, lending support to claims that Apple's forthcoming A6 chips will see a doubling in the number of processing cores.
The references to quad-core iPhone and iPad chips come by way of a hidden panel that describes cores that are supported by iOS device hardware. The updated core management software includes an option of “/cores/core.3,” and this represents a fourth available processing core…
The report notes that single-core processors such as the A4 found in the iPhone 4 and original iPad fall under a "cores/core.0" designation, while dual-core processors such as the A5 in the iPhone 4S and iPad 2 are covered by a "/cores/core.1" designation. The "/cores/core.3" reference thus suggests compatibility with a quad-core chip.
/article-new/2012/01/ios_5_1_cores3.jpg?lossy)
Apple's A6 system-on-a-chip has been rumored several times to carry a quad-core processor, and has been presumed to be set for inclusion in the company's next-generation iPad and iPhone models. There have, however, been some questions about whether the production timeline for the A6 would support its inclusion in the iPad 3, which is rumored for a release around March of this year.
Top Rated Comments
Apple does not publicize many specs for its iOS devices. And they are right: Joe Consumer really doesn't care how MFLOPs the CPU can handle or how many polygons the graphics unit can paint in a second.
Remember that Apple is a software-driven company whose software and services run best on their proprietary, high-margin hardware.
The key with handheld devices is optimizing the software to run efficiently on the hardware. This is where Apple's tight control is advantageous. Android handset manufacturers do not have that control and often their devices which exceed Apple's on a spec sheet, don't perform as well in real world usage. In fact, they may need to beef up the hardware to get similar results.
The biggest concerns in throwing in more hardware performance is battery life and bulk. There are some very important design considerations that need to be made, particularly in the design of handheld devices.
Joe Consumer cares about how quickly the camera starts up and whether or not his favorite game stutters. Stuff like that. Joe Consumer does not care that smartphone X has a Tegra running at 1.2GHz whereas the iPhone 4S is probably underclocked to 800 or 900MHz.
A good friend of mine has a Galaxy S2. My 4S
- Gets better battery life time (even with the 4S' crappy battery life time)
- Makes better pictures and movies
- Syncs with my iMac-MBA-iPad calender/mail/address book faster through iCloud than his S2 does with his Google stuff
- Has a far far better browsing experience. Pages just load faster and scrolls like butter. He can have his flash.
- can download software that I know is verified by Apple, rather than the unverified spam junk that is on Android store.
But you go ahead and customize your phone OS until you weigh about an ounce. Meantime, I'll enjoy verified great software while watching beautiful photos and movies on my Macs that are neatlessly and flawlessly synced across my iCloud devices, as are my notes-calenders-email accounts-documents and so on.
Please, take your PRADA, and ram it.
I used touch screens prior to the iPhone, nothing and I mean NOTHING had an interface that good or a screen that responsive. I had a top of the line Sony Ericsson and I owned an LG, and both were horrendous. The Sony used a stylus that clipped onto the side and the LG was utterly unresponsive.
Pre-iPhone, smartphones were awful. Pre-iPhone, Android looked like a RIM knock off. That's your facts.
You do realize Apple can't always be first? So what if someone else has a quad core processor? Notebooks and desktops already had quad core before tablets... so you could say Android manufacturers are following the notebook-industry.
And oh, you should be ashamed of yourself. You name eight subjects Apple has 'copied', but only two of these eight are correct. The rest are pure expectations.
I really don't care if you want to talk negatively about Apple (because you clearly want to). I do care about it when you are stating things as 'facts', even when these 'facts' are just pure speculation.