I’m sure there are apps on the market that allow you to setup a ad-hoc connection :)

I dislike IR so much as you have to aim the transmitter at the receiver for the darn thing to work, I wish TV manufacturers would switch to different technology like bluetooth.

I’m sure there are apps on the market that allow you to setup a ad-hoc connection :)

I dislike IR so much as you have to aim the transmitter at the receiver for the darn thing to work, I wish TV manufacturers would switch to different technology like bluetooth.

A) I don’t tolerate people trying to pass off misleading information as facts.

B) Everything I’ve posted is just in response to what you have posted.

So yes, your tirade!

And no, I did compare the OMAP 4 GPU!  You’re the one who was ignoring it.  Only the 4470 comes even close to challenging the Tegra 3 graphically.  Both the 4430/4460 use the less powerful  SGX540 GPU!  While the SGX544 provides about 2.5x the SGX540 performance.

But that’s typical of our discussions that you skip over details and further misinterpret what was actually stated.

While optimization is not limited to just throttling CPU speed.  Both the Tegra and OMAP use secondary processors to handle low performance demands to leave the main processors low to off unless needed.  While the Tegra 3 can scale from just the sub processor to 1, 2, 3, and all 4 of the main processors for more efficient scalable performance.

As for trade show, most people know the trade shows are given just either prototypes or concept props, but the Samsung Galaxy S2 is already coming out to market with 1.5GHz, they actually came out with what they promised.  Along with other Smart Phones from HTC and others also starting to come out with 1.5GHz.

There’s a difference between what the big companies can get to market and what the smaller companies can manage.

It’s mainly the business model Archos has to follow that prevents them from always offering everything they want to offer right away.  While the bigger companies that deal with premium products can more readily offer the top of the line components.  Alternatively, sometimes the faster processor is released first, especially if it’ll provide a strategic market advantage at a time sensitive moment.  So market release don’t always follow the same pattern. Something you should know by now and not be so fast to jump to conclusions.

Besides, for Archos main customer base the high end performance isn’t as important as the price point.  Even with Tegra 3 providing more performance, the higher price point can still make the Archos more appealing even if the price for performance ratio is slightly less.

TI OMAP is still one of the best ARM chips available and it’s a good choice for Archos to go with them.  They’ll likely do better with it than RIM did with the Playbook.  So just keep to the real facts and try to refrain from making exaggerations or depending on just your experiences without doing any actual research!

Really, hurt the consumer trust and you do more harm than promoting of these products!

A) I don’t tolerate people trying to pass off misleading information as facts.

B) Everything I’ve posted is just in response to what you have posted.

So yes, your tirade!

And no, I did compare the OMAP 4 GPU!  You’re the one who was ignoring it.  Only the 4470 comes even close to challenging the Tegra 3 graphically.  Both the 4430/4460 use the less powerful  SGX540 GPU!  While the SGX544 provides about 2.5x the SGX540 performance.

But that’s typical of our discussions that you skip over details and further misinterpret what was actually stated.

While optimization is not limited to just throttling CPU speed.  Both the Tegra and OMAP use secondary processors to handle low performance demands to leave the main processors low to off unless needed.  While the Tegra 3 can scale from just the sub processor to 1, 2, 3, and all 4 of the main processors for more efficient scalable performance.

As for trade show, most people know the trade shows are given just either prototypes or concept props, but the Samsung Galaxy S2 is already coming out to market with 1.5GHz, they actually came out with what they promised.  Along with other Smart Phones from HTC and others also starting to come out with 1.5GHz.

There’s a difference between what the big companies can get to market and what the smaller companies can manage.

It’s mainly the business model Archos has to follow that prevents them from always offering everything they want to offer right away.  While the bigger companies that deal with premium products can more readily offer the top of the line components.  Alternatively, sometimes the faster processor is released first, especially if it’ll provide a strategic market advantage at a time sensitive moment.  So market release don’t always follow the same pattern. Something you should know by now and not be so fast to jump to conclusions.

Besides, for Archos main customer base the high end performance isn’t as important as the price point.  Even with Tegra 3 providing more performance, the higher price point can still make the Archos more appealing even if the price for performance ratio is slightly less.

TI OMAP is still one of the best ARM chips available and it’s a good choice for Archos to go with them.  They’ll likely do better with it than RIM did with the Playbook.  So just keep to the real facts and try to refrain from making exaggerations or depending on just your experiences without doing any actual research!

Really, hurt the consumer trust and you do more harm than promoting of these products!

You have been misleading from the beginning!  Remember you started by stating that going quad core would only net 50% improvement but claimed that at 1.8GHz the TI OMAP4 dual core would blow away a quad core at 1.2GHz, but simple math shows that actually makes them equivalent in performance to each other. 

While the ZTE T98 Tegra 3 tablet is likely to be one of the first out and the sample model was only under clocked to 1.3GHz, which even assuming 50% bonus still pushes the Tegra 3 over a TI OMAP 4470 at 1.8GHz.

Never mind you still blatantly ignored everything else pointed out.  Excluding power efficiency, graphical performance, software optimization, and scaling flexibility.  So sorry but that’s not logical debating, that’s trying to impose your opinion by ignoring anything that doesn’t support your contention.

Actual reported comparison of the Tegra 3 to other processors shows it can run at 579mw vs 1501mw for TI OMAP4 at near equivalent performance, with the Tegra 3 cores clocked less than half the TI OMAP4. While at equivalent 1GHz speed the Tegra 3 totally blows away the TI OMAP 4 (11667 core mark vs 5673, while also still using less power at 1261mw vs 1501mw).  So actual reported benchmarks do not support you as you claim!

Never mind the 9th gen Archos tablets were originally suppose to get the TI OMAP 4460, which maxes out at 1.5GHz.  It’s the newer TI OMAP 4470 that offers up to 1.8GHz and it’s still up in the air whether Archos will choose the pricier chip!  Since it’ll force them to raise the max price and the improvements would appear to mainly allow the future use of Windows 8.

While TI OMAP uses Imagination PowerVR Series 5 based GPU’s, SGX540 for 4430/4460 and a 2.5x better SGX544 for 4470.  A nice improvement and as already stated adds support to run desktop OS like the upcoming Windows 8.  However, the Tegra 3 still has better performance and you’ll find more apps optimized to take advantage of Tegra graphics over PowerVR for an even clearer difference.

Along with the small advantage Tegra 3 has for being 40nm versus the TI OMAP 4 still being a 45nm.

Really, there’s a lot of facts you either ignored or misrepresented to justify your biased conclusion.  Like even your 50% remark, despite the average come close to that it’s misleads because there are processes that take both better and less advantage of multiple cores to boost performance, which is something the Tegra 3 actually addresses by augmenting the process handling in hardware and not just relying on the OS and apps to be properly optimized.

While multi-core optimization has increased from when systems first made the switch from single core to dual core and that means the optimization to quad core will happen even faster. So actual max performance can be significantly more under ideal conditions, which you would not even entertain as a possibility.

Even on x86 hardware, it’s well known that dual core performance can range depending on how optimized the software is for the hardware.  Single core processes will of course benefit most from single core performance but properly optimized software can see a substantial boost from multiple cores.  It’s only because that software is still a mix of single and multiple core optimization that multiple core systems don’t net more obvious performance advantages.

So continue your tirade if you wish, as already stated you’re not really fooling anyone.

You have been misleading from the beginning!  Remember you started by stating that going quad core would only net 50% improvement but claimed that at 1.8GHz the TI OMAP4 dual core would blow away a quad core at 1.2GHz, but simple math shows that actually makes them equivalent in performance to each other. 

While the ZTE T98 Tegra 3 tablet is likely to be one of the first out and the sample model was only under clocked to 1.3GHz, which even assuming 50% bonus still pushes the Tegra 3 over a TI OMAP 4470 at 1.8GHz.

Never mind you still blatantly ignored everything else pointed out.  Excluding power efficiency, graphical performance, software optimization, and scaling flexibility.  So sorry but that’s not logical debating, that’s trying to impose your opinion by ignoring anything that doesn’t support your contention.

Actual reported comparison of the Tegra 3 to other processors shows it can run at 579mw vs 1501mw for TI OMAP4 at near equivalent performance, with the Tegra 3 cores clocked less than half the TI OMAP4. While at equivalent 1GHz speed the Tegra 3 totally blows away the TI OMAP 4 (11667 core mark vs 5673, while also still using less power at 1261mw vs 1501mw).  So actual reported benchmarks do not support you as you claim!

Never mind the 9th gen Archos tablets were originally suppose to get the TI OMAP 4460, which maxes out at 1.5GHz.  It’s the newer TI OMAP 4470 that offers up to 1.8GHz and it’s still up in the air whether Archos will choose the pricier chip!  Since it’ll force them to raise the max price and the improvements would appear to mainly allow the future use of Windows 8.

While TI OMAP uses Imagination PowerVR Series 5 based GPU’s, SGX540 for 4430/4460 and a 2.5x better SGX544 for 4470.  A nice improvement and as already stated adds support to run desktop OS like the upcoming Windows 8.  However, the Tegra 3 still has better performance and you’ll find more apps optimized to take advantage of Tegra graphics over PowerVR for an even clearer difference.

Along with the small advantage Tegra 3 has for being 40nm versus the TI OMAP 4 still being a 45nm.

Really, there’s a lot of facts you either ignored or misrepresented to justify your biased conclusion.  Like even your 50% remark, despite the average come close to that it’s misleads because there are processes that take both better and less advantage of multiple cores to boost performance, which is something the Tegra 3 actually addresses by augmenting the process handling in hardware and not just relying on the OS and apps to be properly optimized.

While multi-core optimization has increased from when systems first made the switch from single core to dual core and that means the optimization to quad core will happen even faster. So actual max performance can be significantly more under ideal conditions, which you would not even entertain as a possibility.

Even on x86 hardware, it’s well known that dual core performance can range depending on how optimized the software is for the hardware.  Single core processes will of course benefit most from single core performance but properly optimized software can see a substantial boost from multiple cores.  It’s only because that software is still a mix of single and multiple core optimization that multiple core systems don’t net more obvious performance advantages.

So continue your tirade if you wish, as already stated you’re not really fooling anyone.

You have been misleading from the beginning!  Remember you started by stating that going quad core would only net 50% improvement but claimed that at 1.8GHz the TI OMAP4 dual core would blow away a quad core at 1.2GHz, but simple math shows that actually makes them equivalent in performance to each other. 

While the ZTE T98 Tegra 3 tablet is likely to be one of the first out and the sample model was only under clocked to 1.3GHz, which even assuming 50% bonus still pushes the Tegra 3 over a TI OMAP 4470 at 1.8GHz.

Never mind you still blatantly ignored everything else pointed out.  Excluding power efficiency, graphical performance, software optimization, and scaling flexibility.  So sorry but that’s not logical debating, that’s trying to impose your opinion by ignoring anything that doesn’t support your contention.

Actual reported comparison of the Tegra 3 to other processors shows it can run at 579mw vs 1501mw for TI OMAP4 at near equivalent performance, with the Tegra 3 cores clocked less than half the TI OMAP4. While at equivalent 1GHz speed the Tegra 3 totally blows away the TI OMAP 4 (11667 core mark vs 5673, while also still using less power at 1261mw vs 1501mw).  So actual reported benchmarks do not support you as you claim!

Never mind the 9th gen Archos tablets were originally suppose to get the TI OMAP 4460, which maxes out at 1.5GHz.  It’s the newer TI OMAP 4470 that offers up to 1.8GHz and it’s still up in the air whether Archos will choose the pricier chip!  Since it’ll force them to raise the max price and the improvements would appear to mainly allow the future use of Windows 8.

While TI OMAP uses Imagination PowerVR Series 5 based GPU’s, SGX540 for 4430/4460 and a 2.5x better SGX544 for 4470.  A nice improvement and as already stated adds support to run desktop OS like the upcoming Windows 8.  However, the Tegra 3 still has better performance and you’ll find more apps optimized to take advantage of Tegra graphics over PowerVR for an even clearer difference.

Along with the small advantage Tegra 3 has for being 40nm versus the TI OMAP 4 still being a 45nm.

Really, there’s a lot of facts you either ignored or misrepresented to justify your biased conclusion.  Like even your 50% remark, despite the average come close to that it’s misleads because there are processes that take both better and less advantage of multiple cores to boost performance, which is something the Tegra 3 actually addresses by augmenting the process handling in hardware and not just relying on the OS and apps to be properly optimized.

While multi-core optimization has increased from when systems first made the switch from single core to dual core and that means the optimization to quad core will happen even faster. So actual max performance can be significantly more under ideal conditions, which you would not even entertain as a possibility.

Even on x86 hardware, it’s well known that dual core performance can range depending on how optimized the software is for the hardware.  Single core processes will of course benefit most from single core performance but properly optimized software can see a substantial boost from multiple cores.  It’s only because that software is still a mix of single and multiple core optimization that multiple core systems don’t net more obvious performance advantages.

So continue your tirade if you wish, as already stated you’re not really fooling anyone.

And sorry but I have read on parallel architecture and unlike you I actually have some idea that they did more than just pile on additional processors!  Never mind all the additional factors you totally ignored that totally invalidate your opinion.  You couldn’t even get your facts straight with first assuming 1.2GHz would be the Tegra 3 max, when it’s actually 1.5GHz, and you just ignored everything else stated.

While your association with archosfans, and promoting Archos itself, along with biased nationality comments clearly show your opinion is heavily biased and again you’re not fooling anyone who is actually paying attention!

You’re the one to not actually know how the technology works, you’re the one saying 300Mhz Quad core = 1.2Ghz Single core. Go read up on parallel programming and especially parallel computing in ARM Powered devices and come back once you have read that and tell me I am always right.

I run the http://forum.archosfans.com because I know Archos is the best company in the world, they started selling ARM Powered embedded Linux tablets 4 years before the ipad was released. They have always used the best and newest ARM technologies for more than the past decade. And their prices are always reasonable, not crookish like Apple and others. $299 for a Dual-core Honeycombe 3.2 Tablet is a fantastic price, consider this one performs FASTER than all the Tegra2 tablets, just look at the benchmark. Archos is always the one to use ground breaking technology, here for example, the first tablet not using a Tegra2 processor.

You obviously haven’t a clue how these processors actually work and are pretending your opinions are facts when they’re nothing but fabrications of your imagination!

Never mind when the OMAP 5 comes out, it won’t be that far from when the Tegra 4 will be coming out.  You forget their road map is for a new chip to be released every single year!  Never mind the Tegra 4 with offer up to Octa Cores for even greater performance gain!

Really, you said it yourself you’re basing this opinion on the idea that the Quad Core difference would be the same as the difference from single core to dual core when its nothing of the kind. 

Opinions are not facts and lets face it, you’re really doing this because you’re a promoter of Archos.  You even founded the Archosfan forum and go around showing off Archos products.  But you’re not fooling anyone who’s paying attention and actually knows the technology involved.

Those are my estimates for approx manufacturing cost, but I am pretty sure I am not far off. The iphone4 might cost now closer to $125 for Apple to manufacture so the iPhone4 is BY FAR the biggest profit margin in the history of consumer electronics and BY FAR the source of most of Apple’s profits at the moment.