Does anyone know if there is something similar to My Mobiler for Windows Phone where you can control your phone through your computer?
I to would like to known if any one knows of this. I really miss copy and past form pc to and from phone if there are any devs out there willing to make it. it would be worth 79p or equivalent for the ability
much thanks
This is impossible due to API limitations. You cannot take screenshots and it is impossible for an app to do any action when it's not in the foreground. Thus, such an app would be useless, or it would only be able to control the app itself (supposed you can find a way to get the screenshots).
I don't see them changing the multitasking system in the near future as it's a strong point for WP.
_Madmatt said:
I don't see them changing the multitasking system in the near future as it's a strong point for WP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How is it a strong point?
CervezaPorFavor said:
How is it a strong point?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The multitasking system on WP7 puts apps in sort of "sleep" mode while they are not in the foreground. This is a strong point because the apps cannot continue to use CPU cycles, and thus they cannot slow down the device. The system is developed in such way, that the actual running app will never have a RAM shortage or not enough CPU space available.
You can't deny this is a strong point, you have no lagging at all (like on EVERY Android device)...
_Madmatt said:
The multitasking system on WP7 puts apps in sort of "sleep" mode while they are not in the foreground. This is a strong point because the apps cannot continue to use CPU cycles, and thus they cannot slow down the device. The system is developed in such way, that the actual running app will never have a RAM shortage or not enough CPU space available.
You can't deny this is a strong point, you have no lagging at all (like on EVERY Android device)...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very true. This Lumia 800's MSM8255 at 1.4 GHz feels so much smoother than my Xperia Play's identical MSM8255 at 1.5 GHz, even with ICS.
jenesuispasbavard said:
Very true. This Lumia 800's MSM8255 at 1.4 GHz feels so much smoother than my Xperia Play's identical MSM8255 at 1.5 GHz, even with ICS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Multitasking is one point, the architecture of the system is another. Just because the way Android is built, it will never be as fast as Windows Phone. I don't remember exactly how the theory was, but it has something to do with Android being virtualizing everything and this takes time.
Related
For Archos 101/70 etc
here is the link now lets get to work
http://www.archos.com/support/download/software/sources/gen8-gpl-froyo.tgz
Custom ROMs like HTC Sense builds and Motoblur and Cyanogenmod should be more straightforward now.
Sent from my Ideos S7 using XDA App
Root access and custom recovery are steps 1 and 2. Then that can happen. Hopefully Root isn't far away.
Fingers crossed because the froyo release archos delivered was a BIG disappointment for many..
Waiting for root and recovery.
Then, we can flash custom rom and kernel to the Archos tablet.
Really disappointed on the speed. At the beginning, I think 1G cpu should be really fast .... but now @ froyo, the speed is really slower than my Nexus one (very very much slower...)
Especially when doing multiple web-page browsing and heavy network loading, my Archos 70 lag lag lag all the time....
Hope Archos will release a fix that optimize the power of the machine very soon.
ardatdat said:
Waiting for root and recovery.
Then, we can flash custom rom and kernel to the Archos tablet.
Really disappointed on the speed. At the beginning, I think 1G cpu should be really fast .... but now @ froyo, the speed is really slower than my Nexus one (very very much slower...)
Especially when doing multiple web-page browsing and heavy network loading, my Archos 70 lag lag lag all the time....
Hope Archos will release a fix that optimize the power of the machine very soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Archos downclocked it to 800Mhz with 2.2 release.
ravula said:
Archos downclocked it to 800Mhz with 2.2 release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While you are correct, I think the reason is not only limited to 800Mhz.
I set my Nexus One to 806Mhz and still find out the response and speed are much higher than my Archos 70 running at full speed (setcpu to 1000Mhz)
There must be something wrong in the firmware and the wifi driver that is not optimized such that the machine looks generally much much slower than any other android systems running at the same frequency.
Yes, 2.2.1 on Archos 70 s***s
+1
My Milestone downclocked to 250 mhz is faster than my Archos 70 at 800 or 1000 mhz....
Root access will complete the froyo update
ardatdat said:
While you are correct, I think the reason is not only limited to 800Mhz.
I set my Nexus One to 806Mhz and still find out the response and speed are much higher than my Archos 70 running at full speed (setcpu to 1000Mhz)
There must be something wrong in the firmware and the wifi driver that is not optimized such that the machine looks generally much much slower than any other android systems running at the same frequency.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah but your nexus one also has double the memory, and it seems that the JIT doesnt work the same on the Archos 2.2 build , quadrant and linpack scores are pretty much the same from 2.1 to 2.2, where as on every phone 2.2 double or sometimes triple the linpack scores.
ardatdat said:
While you are correct, I think the reason is not only limited to 800Mhz.
I set my Nexus One to 806Mhz and still find out the response and speed are much higher than my Archos 70 running at full speed (setcpu to 1000Mhz)
There must be something wrong in the firmware and the wifi driver that is not optimized such that the machine looks generally much much slower than any other android systems running at the same frequency.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem with Archos 70 is the screen size and less RAM
The nexus one has a much smaller resolution for the CPU to draw while it has double the amount of RAM
End of story.
**Notice there's no GPU acceleration in Android UI even at 2.3. Wait till Honeycomb for that.
The nexus one has a much smaller resolution for the CPU to draw while it has double the amount of RAM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
suprise, resolution is the same
should not be so slow und unstable with 256RAM
czesiu said:
suprise, resolution is the same
should not be so slow und unstable with 256RAM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
oh my, i didn't know the N1 packed that many pixels...
sorry about the bad inform.
Then it's the CPU: Cortex A8 vs Snapdragon
and : 256MB vs 512MB of ram
but since both CPU clocked at 1GHz, most likely it's the ram that's not sufficient.
What would help is the ability to disable Multitask in apps except selective ones by user.
I guess Apple was RIGHT when they choose to not implement MULTITASK in the earlier iPhones. These also have limited RAM, only 128MB... leaving only 40MB after iOS boot up.
I'd be happy with my Archos with minimum Multitasking. Just music apps get multitask.
(I use Auto Memory Manager to auto kill apps when my memory hits certain level)
Guys, is it possible to speed up the tablet? The new rom works good, but sometimes it hangs a lot.. So is it possible too disable memory-eating processes??
Dreetje said:
Guys, is it possible to speed up the tablet? The new rom works good, but sometimes it hangs a lot.. So is it possible too disable memory-eating processes??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well You can use a task killer app to keep memory clear if you want. There are also several threads on Archosfans.com's forums about using z4root (only temp root at the moment) and the SetCPU to speed up the CPU to 1Ghz, and raise the min. clock value too.
I have mine on min. 800 and max. 1000 Mhz ... except when screen is off. Feels quite smooth, though when memory is full, it still gets a bit laggy.
I read somewhere that they have JIT disabled too.... dont quote me, but I read it from a thread that referenced another thread that said this other guy knew it was disabled...
I did read it somewhere, but I don't know if its true.
If the build.prop is any indication then it is not enabled. There is no command there to enable JIT like is on my other devices that have 2.2.
blazingwolf said:
If the build.prop is any indication then it is not enabled. There is no command there to enable JIT like is on my other devices that have 2.2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting. If JIT is disable, then we're loosing a lot of performance just because of that. That and the under clocked 800 is a double kill.
Archos is rushing to put our a patch soon from what I've heard. The patch is suppose to include Flash and the JIT enabled. If this is the case, then the patch will do wonders for performance.
kenyu73 said:
Archos is rushing to put our a patch soon from what I've heard. The patch is suppose to include Flash and the JIT enabled. If this is the case, then the patch will do wonders for performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This will be nice if true. I just hope they don't rush like they did with the first 2.2. I would rather wait a little bit to have more things working correctly.
If JIT was disabled on this build it would explain a lot. I had my A70 with 1.0.84 for day or two and it worked "faster" than with this froyo update. I'm no expert but... Archos was under lot of pressure to deliver 2.2 on Gen8 so they probably rushed it. I was gonna wait for better firmware of 2.2 but I didn't want to install all apps and then reinstall from scratch on 2.2. They are making these firmwares every 2-4 weeks so soon we will probably see another update. cajl, charbax any news on this?
Charbax is probably busy at LeWeb
Just as the question states. I know the second core will sleep when not needed but say you launch an app, does the second core help load the app? The reason I ask is because I'm curious about the raw speed difference between the atrix and inspire. Now compairing the inspire running at 1.8 and the atrix seemingly stuck at 1 per core (I'm not saying the atrix wont ever be OCed but I'm just talking about what's currently available). I'm just curious if the second core will help the first with tasks. If it doesn't would that make the inspire technically way faster (obviously battery life may be an issue but this isn't a battery compairo)?
Thanks for any insight
I think you should start by knowing that overclocking ARM prroccessors gives little yield.
XOOM at 1.5 ghz scores only 500 better than a non-overclocked xoom on quadrant.
I'm going to try and simplify the answer for you.
Will BOTH cores be used? Maybe. First off, is the app itself optimized for dual core, or does it even need dual core / multithreaded capability.
Secondly, and I think more importantly, what is the rest of the phone doing. So, let's say you fire up your favorite app, the phone is still doing stuff in the background. Maybe it's checking email. Maybe Google Latitude is checking your location and updating. The point is - the other core will still be around to offload this work.
Now, WILL it go to the other core. Maybe. Maybe not. I do work on some big Sun machines, and have seen them use one or two out of 64 cores, even with massive loads and each core being used 100%, it refused to balance the load amongst CPU's.
Hope this helps.
mister_al said:
I'm going to try and simplify the answer for you.
Will BOTH cores be used? Maybe. First off, is the app itself optimized for dual core, or does it even need dual core / multithreaded capability.
Secondly, and I think more importantly, what is the rest of the phone doing. So, let's say you fire up your favorite app, the phone is still doing stuff in the background. Maybe it's checking email. Maybe Google Latitude is checking your location and updating. The point is - the other core will still be around to offload this work.
Now, WILL it go to the other core. Maybe. Maybe not. I do work on some big Sun machines, and have seen them use one or two out of 64 cores, even with massive loads and each core being used 100%, it refused to balance the load amongst CPU's.
Hope this helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea that's exactly like I figured, I was kinda going off Windows/Intel multi core setup. Even after dual+cores have been out for quite some time 95% of programs made still don't use more than one core (Most of those remaining 5% being very CPU intense programs PS, Autocad ect.). But I get what you mean, the one core will be dedicated to what your doing and not sharing cycles with anything else because core 2 is working on whatever pops up. So basically the Atrix might be a little slower at doing things BUT it will always stay the same speed with less/no bog.
Techcruncher said:
I think you should start by knowing that overclocking ARM prroccessors gives little yield.
XOOM at 1.5 ghz scores only 500 better than a non-overclocked xoom on quadrant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you're saying Quadrant suck as it does with most phones or OCing the Xoom (and Atrix) wont really do much?
I already built an apk for testing CPU usage on both processors... When I get some free time, I'm going to turn it into a widget... Here's what I noticed:
Because of the current OS and less dual core support for apps, the phone kind of kicks certain tasks into using the 2nd processor. The APK i built reads the '/proc/stat' file and i've noticed that when the 2nd processor is being used it actually shows up in the file as 'cpu1'. However, when it's not being used the 'cpu1' line does not exist and you can default the 2nd processor usage to 0%. It seems like performing core OS tasks (like installing apps) kick the 2nd processor into use, which is what you can expect since froyo supports dual cores.
Like everyone says, I'd expect to see more dual core usage on 2.3/2.4 (whichever motorola gives) and when more apps are designed to kick certain threads onto the 2nd processor.
My G Tablet which I have had since December 2010 and which has been running Froyo 2.2.1 since then respoinds incredibly sluggishly to touch input (or virtual keyboard input) when certain applications are running and using the WiFi connection.. These applications are: K-9 Mail, NewsRob and particularly Astrid.
My G Tablet runs Android 2.2.1 and Quadrant Standard tells me the ARM v7 processor has 1 Core (it should have 2, or??). and gives me a score of 1812.
First, I am confused by Quadrant finding only 1 core since I thought the Tegra 2 processor had 2 cores.
Second, how can the three applications above hog the processor core(s) to the extent they do? Don't the developers use the applications themselves and find this unacceptable? When multithreaded applications were first properly designed on the PC the rule of thumb was that the UI thread should always return in less than 1/10 second. Granted, many applications developed for Windows and by developers who lacked development skills broke that rule and the solution pushed by Microsoft and the hardware manufacturers were to sell faster PC whereas this could have been avoided by proper application design in the first place.
Bringing this back to the Android platform on the G Tablet, is this a system failing or are the three applications above so poorly designed?
Inquiring minds want to know.
When I was on froyo I put a weather widget on and it bogged everything down just as you explained. I removed the widget and pow back to normal.
hga89 said:
First, I am confused by Quadrant finding only 1 core since I thought the Tegra 2 processor had 2 cores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has, but, depending on load and usage, only one of them may be active to save on power. See this thread.
Second, how can the three applications above hog the processor core(s) to the extent they do?
...
Bringing this back to the Android platform on the G Tablet, is this a system failing or are the three applications above so poorly designed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you know that the system is slow because those 3 apps are hogging the CPU? It is best to find out for sure. Again, see my posts in the thread linked above. The top command should tell you how much CPU is being used by which programs.
This is actually the second time I'm opting for a single core device (first being when I got my samsung captivate instead of the moto atrix which would have required a 1 month wait)
My logic has been that it took a long time for dual cores to really be worked into laptops/desktops well therefore I probably wouldn't miss too much with a single core tablet if I wasn't multitasking a lot.
So after reading http://www.anandtech.com/show/4463/the-htc-flyer-review/8
I've really began to wonder.. while I don't doubt the programming skills of the android creators or anything..
How much multi core optimizing is really going on? I have no doubt that the Tegra 2 processor can mop the floor with a single core in a lot of areas.. But, on the flipside.. the higher clockspeed seems to have quite a few advantages.. And outside of multitasking or apps that are seriously threaded well.. Seems like the benefits of dual core are a bit over rated..
You might not have threaded apps, but you would presumably multitask a bit on your phone, so one core can run a browser and the other core something else, etc.
Still, I don't think single cores are yet outdated, simply because none of the non-gaming apps really load one core that much anyway. If you wanted to crunch numbers, you'd use a PC. And if you're gaming on your phone, you wouldn't be multi-tasking.
Its just the way things work. Hardware always leads software that can actually take advantage of it by 6 to 18 months. That's why if you keep buying the next big things , you never actually get to use the new features. It's a marketing ploy a lot of times.
porcupineadvocate said:
You might not have threaded apps, but you would presumably multitask a bit on your phone, so one core can run a browser and the other core something else, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the thing, there isn't much "something else" going on most of the time. Background synching of email and a few other apps; downloading a big file. What else? Most apps just get suspended in memory, and don't need to be actively "running". Multi core may make switching a bit faster, but that's really it, until we see apps optimized for multi cores.
Back to the OP's question, in a similar discussion on multi cores, one person on these forums mentioned that hardware always precedes software. I have to agree with that point. Hardware manufacturers will always sell what is on the bleeding edge, because specs and marketing buzzwords (which dual or quad core have definitely become) will always sell hardware. But software developers just want there apps to be compatible with the majority of the hardware being used. If most people have single core Android devices (huge majority do, right now), there is little motivation to spend the resources making the apps optimized for multi cores.
Makes a lot of sense to me.
I think a lot of people forget that if all you want to do is browse the web/email.. Even a computer that is old will still work well enough for basic task.. Example I'm typing this from a single core emachines that is a 2 ghz athlon processor.. My parents haven't upgraded, because it still works and still moves relatively fast for basic task.
Plus, there is a misconception that two 1 ghz processors = 2 ghz total clockspeed.. but, doesn't quite work like that..
OK I've got mine on normal mode, and this kind of confirms my original thought that the 500mhz 5th core is clocked to low. I find the pad actually speeds up when I have multiple items in my recently run tab! If my understanding of the way it works these programs are still running in the background right? Then it starts kicking in the other 4 and not just running on the 5th at 500mhz! I really think we'd see a speed boost if we can get that 5th core over 500. Yes its supposed to save battery life but I really don't think 500 is fast enough to run on its own. You're thoughts and observations?
markimar said:
OK I've got mine on normal mode, and this kind of confirms my original thought that the 500mhz 5th core is clocked to low. I find the pad actually speeds up when I have multiple items in my recently run tab! If my understanding of the way it works these programs are still running in the background right? Then it starts kicking in the other 4 and not just running on the 5th at 500mhz! I really think we'd see a speed boost if we can get that 5th core over 500. Yes its supposed to save battery life but I really don't think 500 is fast enough to run on its own. You're thoughts and observations?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ill check on this when i get home. this issue im assuming is with honeycomb itself. we would assume that ICS would properly use those cores
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S II t989
i don't have it yet (mine gets delivered on wed), but what you observed makes perfect sense. Can they change it to run on say an 800 MHZ constant "down" to 500MHZ when doing the most simple tasks? obviously i to do not believe that 500MHZ will be sufficient at all times to do screen scrolling and such on it's own.
I'm really hoping that the few performance issues people are seeing is resolved in firmware updates and a tegra 3 optimized version of ICS. Maybe asus/nvidia needs to do more tweaking to HC before the ICS build is pushed if it will take a while for ICS to arrive to the prime (past january).
The cores are optimized just fine. They kick in when rendering a web page or a game, but go idle and use the 5th core when done. Games always render.
ryan562 said:
ill check on this when i get home. this issue im assuming is with honeycomb itself. we would assume that ICS would properly use those cores
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S II t989
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nothing's changed over HC in the way ICS uses h/w acceleration. And I'd assume apps using h/w acceleration do so via calls to the OS, not to the chip directly. So it appears what you've got is what you're going to get.
---------- Post added at 06:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:55 PM ----------
markimar said:
OK I've got mine on normal mode, and this kind of confirms my original thought that the 500mhz 5th core is clocked to low. I find the pad actually speeds up when I have multiple items in my recently run tab! If my understanding of the way it works these programs are still running in the background right? Then it starts kicking in the other 4 and not just running on the 5th at 500mhz! I really think we'd see a speed boost if we can get that 5th core over 500. Yes its supposed to save battery life but I really don't think 500 is fast enough to run on its own. You're thoughts and observations?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have Pulse installed? A bunch of people using it were reporting stuttering where their lower powered devices aren't. If you run it at full speed, does it stutter? One of the hypothesis is that it's the core's stepping up and down that's causing the stuttering.
BarryH_GEG said:
Nothing's changed over HC in the way ICS uses h/w acceleration. And I'd assume apps using h/w acceleration do so via calls to the OS, not to the chip directly. So it appears what you've got is what you're going to get.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that the OS knows about the fifth core? I believe the chip's own scheduler manages the transition between the quad-core and the companion core, not the Android scheduler.
Mithent said:
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that the OS knows about the fifth core? I believe the chip's own scheduler manages the transition between the quad-core and the companion core, not the Android scheduler.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the way I'd guess it would work. I don't think Android addresses different chips differently. I'd assume it's up to the SoC to manage the incoming instructions and react accordingly. If Android was modified for dual-core, I don't think it diffentiates between the different implementations of dual-core chips. Someone with more h/w experience correct me if I'm wrong. Also, does anyone know if the chip manufacturer can add additional API's that developers can write to directly either instead of or in parallel with the OS? I ask because how can a game be optimized for Tegra if to the OS all chips are treated the same?
I tried out the power savings mode for a while.it seemed to perform just fine. Immediate difference is that it lowers the contrast ratio on display. This happens as soon as you press the power savings tab. Screen will look like brightness dropped a bit but if you look closely, you'll see it lowered the contrast ratio. Screen still looks good but not as sharp as in other 2 modes. UI still seems to preform just fine. Plus I think the modes doesn't affect gaming or video playback performance. I read that somewhere, either anandtech or Engadget. When watching vids or playing games, it goes into normal mode. So those things won't be affected no matter what power mode you in, I think..lol
I was thinking of starting a performance mode thread. To see different peoples results and thoughts on different power modes. I read some people post that they just use it in power/battery savings mode. Some keep it in normal all the time. Others in balanced mode. Would be good to see how these different modes perform in real life usage. From user perspective. I've noticed, so far, that In balanced mode, battery drains about 10% an hour. This is with nonstop use including gaming, watching vids, web surfing, etc. now in battery savings mode, it drains even less per hour. I haven't ran normal mode long enough to see how it drains compared to others. One thing though, web surfing drains battery just as fast as gaming.
BarryH_GEG said:
I ask because how can a game be optimized for Tegra if to the OS all chips are treated the same?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hate quoting myself but I found the answer on Nvidia's website. Any otimizations are handled through OpenGL. So games written to handle additional calls that Teg2 can support are making those calls through OpenGL with the OS (I'm guessing) used as a pass-through. It would also explain why Tegra optimized games fail on non-Teg devices because they wouldn't be able process the additional requests. So it would appear that Teg optimization isn't being done through the OS. Again, correct me if I'm wrong.
BarryH_GEG said:
That's the way I'd guess it would work. I don't think Android addresses different chips differently. I'd assume it's up to the SoC to manage the incoming instructions and react accordingly. If Android was modified for dual-core, I don't think it diffentiates between the different implementations of dual-core chips.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did some research on it; here's what Nvidia say:
The Android 3.x (Honeycomb) operating system has built-in support for multi-processing and is
capable of leveraging the performance of multiple CPU cores. However, the operating system
assumes that all available CPU cores are of equal performance capability and schedules tasks
to available cores based on this assumption. Therefore, in order to make the management of
the Companion core and main cores totally transparent to the operating system, Kal-El
implements both hardware-based and low level software-based management of the Companion
core and the main quad CPU cores.
Patented hardware and software CPU management logic continuously monitors CPU workload
to automatically and dynamically enable and disable the Companion core and the main CPU
cores. The decision to turn on and off the Companion and main cores is purely based on current
CPU workload levels and the resulting CPU operating frequency recommendations made by the
CPU frequency control subsystem embedded in the operating system kernel. The technology
does not require any application or OS modifications.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/t...e-for-Low-Power-and-High-Performance-v1.1.pdf
So it uses the existing architecture for CPU power states, but intercepts that at a low level and uses it to control the companion core/quad-core switch?
Edit: I wonder if that means that tinkering with the scheduler/frequency control would allow the point at which the companion core/quad-core switch happens to be altered? If the OP is correct, this might allow the companion core to be utilised less if an increase in "smoothness" was desired, at the cost of some battery life?
Mithent said:
I wonder if that means that tinkering with the scheduler/frequency control would allow the point at which the companion core/quad-core switch happens to be altered? If the OP is correct, this might allow the companion core to be utilised less if an increase in "smoothness" was desired, at the cost of some battery life?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So what we guessed was right. The OS treats all multi-cores the same and it's up to the chip maker to optimize requests and return them. To your point, what happens between the three processors (1+1x2+1x2) is black-box and controlled by Nvidia. To any SetCPU type program it's just going to show up as a single chip. People have tried in vain to figure how to make the Qualcomm dual-core's act independently so I'd guess Teg3 will end up the same way. And Nvidia won't even publish their drivers so I highly doubt they'll provide any outside hooks to control something as sensitive as the performance of each individual core in what they're marketing as a single chip.
[/COLOR]
Do you have Pulse installed? A bunch of people using it were reporting stuttering where their lower powered devices aren't. If you run it at full speed, does it stutter? One of the hypothesis is that it's the core's stepping up and down that's causing the stuttering.[/QUOTE]
I have been running mine in balanced mode, have had pulse installed since day one, no lag or stuttering in anything. games, other apps work fine.
Well my phones when clocked at 500 so I wouldn't be surprised
Sent from my VS910 4G using xda premium