128mb Of Ram...

[BaDToaD]

A few years ago 128mb was considered plenty of ram and ran everything we run today just in a slightly less flamboyant way. There were still word processors, graphics packages, spreadsheets, emulators, mail packages etc etc.

128mb is plenty enough to do most tasks. An OS that requires 128mb is bloody disgusting IMHO. Have a look at what Palm can do in 32mb or less. Have a look at what an Amiga can do with 10mb of hard drive space dedicated to the OS etc.

 

[J201605]

The N64 emulator on the PSP can't be considered a gaming possibility, because it's speed is merely that of a proof of concept. (Note this does not mean I am saying that the developer was just trying to make a POC, merely that it is only as fast as one, essentially) It is something that you put on your PSP so you can say to your friends: "Check it out, I got Super Smash Bros. Handheld!" You don't just go playing it, because it's not fast enough for it to be enjoyable. (or in most cases playable)

I have seen several people post that the psp emulator is just a proof of concept but many games look great and its still being developed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhvaKDRV_Sc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOjYWxUsY_8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxqKmkIVXWk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ4xYSs9cL0

 

[C B Felterbush]

I can sympathize with you jdh2550, I have been a member of these forums now for a long time and there is one thing I've learned. No matter what you say, no matter how you say it there are people here who are going to twist your words. There are people who won't even read your post, they will just respond to it. This has always been a very volatile forum, people flame and discount what you have to say without regard.

Exophase- I must call you a liar, I believe you did mean this sentence to be a way for you to put down jdh2550---It's the developers (are you a developer?) who will determine what it can be used for even more than the ones doing the hardware will.---- this is a bit condescending. You have done this in the past, the suggestion that if he is not a developer then his opinion is not important. It is only because he is that this topic has gone on so long, that and the question he asked got tossed aside.

jdh2550 is not questioning craig or michael, but rather asking them a question, and not a bad one at that. If they answered " we decided not to" that would suffice.

UMPC, wtf? It is clearly a UMPC among many other things. Is a Powerbook G4 a computer? I owned one, it was my own personal computer. Isn't that what PC means? regardless of who coined or owns the right to say in an advertisement. I agree with jdh2550 the term UMPC should be used more loosely, it is not just a portable device made to run some variation of x86 based software.

Exophase you are obviously a smart dev. that aside other than having educated guesses into the development of the Pandora, do you think your word into the "what" and "why" is more important than craigs because you are going to develop for the hardware?

This is a device suited for many things, of those things many will be brand new. This is not a device suited for similar things, it is a device suited for new things. It is unimportant how much ram the PSP has or the DS- this is neither of those. The objective is to be the sheppard not another sheep.

 

[atomicthumbs]

On another board I saw Exophase mention that you can't create a virtual machine for an ARM. Can someone point me at a good resource to understand that?

For normal computers, you can create an emulator but not a virtual machine. That's because normal computers don't have ARM chips in them.

 

[Squidge]

I'm still going to ask the question. Craig, MWeston and ED - if you have time to answer this (and you probably don't) why did you chose 128MB RAM?

Because 64MB is too small, 256MB is over the top and you can't have 192MB

 

[Pickle]

I'm still going to ask the question. Craig, MWeston and ED - if you have time to answer this (and you probably don't) why did you chose 128MB RAM?

Because 64MB is too small, 256MB is over the top and you can't have 192MB


unless your compaq

 

[Squidge]

I'm still going to ask the question. Craig, MWeston and ED - if you have time to answer this (and you probably don't) why did you chose 128MB RAM?

Because 64MB is too small, 256MB is over the top and you can't have 192MB


unless your compaq


I meant in the Pandora. Compaq are not designing the Pandora

 

[Pickle]

I'm still going to ask the question. Craig, MWeston and ED - if you have time to answer this (and you probably don't) why did you chose 128MB RAM?

Because 64MB is too small, 256MB is over the top and you can't have 192MB


unless your compaq


I meant in the Pandora. Compaq are not designing the Pandora


Thank God they arnt! When you put up 192 mb, it reminded me of a piece of junk compaq I had that would only support an odd memory config like that.

 

[Exophase]

I can sympathize with you jdh2550, I have been a member of these forums now for a long time and there is one thing I've learned. No matter what you say, no matter how you say it there are people here who are going to twist your words. There are people who won't even read your post, they will just respond to it. This has always been a very volatile forum, people flame and discount what you have to say without regard.

This forum really isn't so bad, there are protective people but most are level headed. Much better than most other forums I've been to.

Exophase- I must call you a liar, I believe you did mean this sentence to be a way for you to put down jdh2550---It's the developers (are you a developer?) who will determine what it can be used for even more than the ones doing the hardware will.---- this is a bit condescending. You have done this in the past, the suggestion that if he is not a developer then his opinion is not important. It is only because he is that this topic has gone on so long, that and the question he asked got tossed aside.

Calling me a liar is really harsh. I'm sorry to you as well that that's how you interpreted it but that isn't actually what I meant, I can't believe you or anyone else would think that I would so arbitrarily assume that someone isn't a developer while knowing nothing about them. You can believe what you want but I'm telling you that I was ASKING HIM if he was a developer. Maybe I could have phrased it better but whatever, I can see you already have your own preconceived notions about what I have to say anyway.

And I think him being a developer or not has remained completely irrelevant to the responses, which is unfortunate because I really wanted an explanation from a developer's perspective of view why the RAM is important (and not because a minimum requirement demands it).

Yes, you're right, in the past I have called people out on not being emu devs when they start telling me what is harder and easier to emulate when they don't know the first thing about the console hardware they're referring to, and I don't apologize for that It's not at all a matter of "only a dev's opinion matters"

jdh2550 is not questioning craig or michael, but rather asking them a question, and not a bad one at that. If they answered " we decided not to" that would suffice.

Guess that's not the way everyone else took it.

UMPC, wtf? It is clearly a UMPC among many other things. Is a Powerbook G4 a computer? I owned one, it was my own personal computer. Isn't that what PC means? regardless of who coined or owns the right to say in an advertisement. I agree with jdh2550 the term UMPC should be used more loosely, it is not just a portable device made to run some variation of x86 based software.

Okay, just stop right there and go read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMPC

I can't claim that Wikipedia is definition by consensus but for a pretty well known term like this it's pretty close.

It's not a PC, meaning it's not an x86 desktop or laptop computer, that's ALL I was saying! Is this really so difficult to accept? Why are people being so offended by this?

The world has already decided what "PC" means and by extension what UMPC means, you can argue that it's a bad definition but you can't argue that the definition doesn't exist.

Exophase you are obviously a smart dev. that aside other than having educated guesses into the development of the Pandora, do you think your word into the "what" and "why" is more important than craigs because you are going to develop for the hardware?

No, I never thought that my word was more important than craig's, and I never said it was either. Nor have I said anything that has contradicted anything he has said. However, it's a logical fact that what the devs end up putting on the device will determine what it's used for even more than what the makers of the hardware intended (Sony never intended PSP to be used as a homebrew machine, but that's what a number of people use it for). craigix et al are not just the hardware pushers, but they are devs themselves so they will also contribute to this.

This is a device suited for many things, of those things many will be brand new. This is not a device suited for similar things, it is a device suited for new things. It is unimportant how much ram the PSP has or the DS- this is neither of those. The objective is to be the sheppard not another sheep.

So basically what I'm getting here is that I'm this giant condescending asshole for saying what I think the device will end up being used for, whereas you're allowed to define its purpose...

Sorry, but all of your retorts are really slanted because you're unhappy with how people's vision of Pandora doesn't meld with yours.

On another board I saw Exophase mention that you can't create a virtual machine for an ARM. Can someone point me at a good resource to understand that?

It's not really that clear cut, it's more that in traditional ARMs you can't create a VM that fulfills all of the Popek & Goldberg requirements, whether or not this is a problem depends on what you're trying to virtualize. A big problem might be cache, if what you're virtualizing doesn't have it and you do there can be coherency issues (this is something that comes up if you're trying to virtualize say, GBA on GP32 or GP2X).

ARM has actually added "TrustZone" to their chips which does allow for true virtualization as of ARMv6 (for the ones that support it, and I believe Cortex-A8 does). This doesn't solve the coherency problem, but it's no longer really relevant at that point.

There is one more issue - when you virtualize you have to handle exceptions externally and not in software, which usually means using hardware to help emulate them. This gives you a lot less speed control, so you can't nearly as reliably unthrottle execution to let it run as fast as possible, and if the environment virtualizing isn't fast enough then it can break everything as opposed to just making it slower (this can happen even for a sudden spike in background activity, so it has pretty strict realtime requirements).

 

[jdh2550]

jdh2550 is not questioning craig or michael, but rather asking them a question, and not a bad one at that. If they answered " we decided not to" that would suffice.

Guess that's not the way everyone else took it.



This is my first post:
QUOTE

I'm sold on p&|a and hope to be lucky enough to pick up one of the first 100.

The one spec that disappoints me the most is the 128MB of RAM. I know that's a lot for the console class of machine however, it's a shame that it's not more - because, as can be seen, the p&|a can do a lot more than only games.

For example, It would be fun for me to be able to experiment with the likes of http://www.ubuntu.com/products/mobile (256MB minimum and 512MB recommended). Note that I'm not suggesting that such a heavyweight GUI is suited for the mainstream use of this device - just that it would be fun for tinkerers like me to be able to have that as an option (yes, I know there's no ARM version yet - this is just an example of what we'll likely miss out with 128MB RAM).

So, I wonder if MWeston, Craig or ED could comment on the decision behind 128MB RAM?

I can't believe it's based on cost (RAM is so cheap) or size (RAM is so small) or processor limitation (surely the addressable space of the OMAP is measured in GB).

So, you guys had a reason - what was it? Will there be a chance for a user installed upgrade (I doubt it), or a "next gen" version with more memory?

The p&|a is so darn versatile I just wonder why you kept the RAM figure so low?


Most people didn't read it. Or they chose to pick up on Ubuntu Mobile ignoring the fact that I said it was just an example. Or they chose to see it as unwarranted or unfair criticism. I'm still having a hard time figuring out why so much animosity towards a simple question.

Even if we take the wikipedia definition of UMPC to be x86 based (which is a reasonable pov) - that still doesn't really explain why Exophase would introduce it in his first post responding to a question about why a certain amount of memory. Nor would it explain why we should "ignore the marketing" which would seem to imply ignore what's written on the openpandaro.org website.

So, the question still stands to Craig et al.

 

[C B Felterbush]

I don't have a vision of what the pandora will be used for. I know it will take on many tasks from our old console but I am expecting much more in the end. If it in fact just makes the same things we have been doing a little easier and nothing more, it will still be a great thing. However I think that the people behind this have higher aspirations than to just take their place in
line, then be forgotten when they're passed.

And no, this isnt the worst forum to visit, but it can be harsh. In the relm of technology people who think that something cant be done may be right on day one. But on day two there may be a way.

 

[Yrx]

lol, This is getting ridiculous.

@jdh(lots of numbers here): If your first post had involved only asking about the RAM, and not inserting your opinions about it being too low for such and such, then it would have been a fair and easy question. But it took a critical tone, and then when people started discussing it, instead of clarifying that you were only asking a question, you argued about why more RAM would be good. You continued arguing about it, and I got frustrated. If you're just asking a question, then just ask a question. lol

@Zarneth: What exactly are we even arguing about? lol, Because we basically said the exact same thing. It is primarily a game system. We both said that. I never said it couldn't do more. lol

 

[C B Felterbush]

I do so love this forum.

How is it possible to "ask" a question like,,,,Why didn't you guys put more ram in? without coming under fire?

@Yrx, are you clear on the definition of opinion?

How's this, a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter.

I ask you, point out in his first post where there is an opinion stating 128MB is too low for "such and such."

jdh---The one spec that disappoints me the most is the 128MB of RAM. I know that's a lot for the console class of machine however, it's a shame that it's not more - because, as can be seen, the p&|a can do a lot more than only games.

The Pandora can do a lot more than just games, is it your Opinion that through out the entire lifespan of the Pandora that not one application would run better if you were to upgrade or have a unit with 256MB?

-CB

 

[jdh2550]

@jdh(lots of numbers here): If your first post had involved only asking about the RAM, and not inserting your opinions about it being too low for such and such, then it would have been a fair and easy question. But it took a critical tone, and then when people started discussing it, instead of clarifying that you were only asking a question, you argued about why more RAM would be good. You continued arguing about it, and I got frustrated. If you're just asking a question, then just ask a question. lol

Exactly where's the critical tone? The closest I can find is the word "disappointed". Just because I'm disappointed doesn't mean squat - but I thought a little context was helpful.

You're the a-hole who piped up "If you don't want to tweak, and you don't want to make the money-invested initiative to make your own handheld (or for that matter, even buy one more powerful than Pandora), then I don't want to hear it." That sounds a darn site more critical than asking politely why they chose 128MB.

Great, first I get a hard time about not giving a good enough reason why more than 128MB is needed (Exophase led that charge asking me to be able to prove why more than 128MB would ever be necessary - and also implying the folks who developed Ubuntu Mobile are idiots (and then all the harping began about how any OS requiring more than X was obviously grossly inefficient).

Now you want to give me a hard time about giving any reason at all. I give up.

But you're right this whole thread is ridiculous. I no longer care how much memory the freakin' thing has and I'm glad that Craig et al are too busy (and hopefully blissfully unaware of all this pointless bickering).

BTW, those "lots of numbers" are simply my house number. It's a way of increasing my odds of being able to use the same login account everywhere.

 

[Yrx]

QUOTE
... instead of clarifying that you were only asking a question, you argued about why more RAM would be good...


And now you're arguing with me about other things, lol. Seriously, it's really not that big a deal. I'm explaining the impression I got.

By the way, did Craigix or MWeston ever give a straight answer to the original question? I didn't notice it if they did.

 

[Exophase]

QUOTE
... instead of clarifying that you were only asking a question, you argued about why more RAM would be good...

And now you're arguing with me about other things, lol. Seriously, it's really not that big a deal. I'm explaining the impression I got.

By the way, did Craigix or MWeston ever give a straight answer to the original question? I didn't notice it if they did.


Yes MWeston gave an answer (although not directly), jdh2550 acknowledged this, I don't know why he's still asking.

And seriously, lay off me a little jdh2550, you're exaggerating/contorting everything I'm saying, which is not very good for someone who's so insistent that you're being misrepresented. How many times are you going to say "I was just asking a simple question but then Exophase comes in charging with all this stuff" then followed by putting a bunch of words in my mouth...

Chances are that most software can be optimized for size and for speed, and probably in a lot of cases this can be a done a LOT - people often don't, and me saying this does not mean I think they're idiots, nor that their software is "obviously grossly inefficient", get a grip man, it's a design trade-off. These things are done by dozens of people, they're not going to put forth the effort to make it slim if they think everyone is going to have the memory in the first place. Although I do think they could be in cohorts with Intel and they specifically don't want this running on devices like N800 or say, iPhone (and, ahem, Pandora).

But yes, I do think asking why something requires more than 128MB of RAM is a better question than asking why something doesn't have more than 128MB of RAM, and yes, a good discussion about why RAM requirements like this are necessary would be very nice instead of "fuck you, I was asking craigix, my reasons don't fucking matter" (you know, you could have just sent him a PM)

 

[Tobriand]

(you know, you could have just sent him a PM)

To be fair, he probably couldn't. PMs never work for Craigix. Possibly for MWeston, though...

 

[jdh2550]

"fuck you, I was asking craigix, my reasons don't fucking matter"

Lovely - now, do you want to re-consider talking about putting words in people's mouths? Not sure how you got from point A to point Z but glad you're happy with your interpretation.

This all started because in my original post I said "I know 128MB is generous for a console class machine but the p&|a is aimed at more than that. So I wonder why not more than 128MB". And you appeared to come back and say "no it isn't" which is what I expected to happen so I was frustrated that you didn't let the question stand - you just attempted to slap me down with words that were counter to what the openpandora.org website states.

Have a nice day.

 

[Exophase]

Lovely - now, do you want to re-consider talking about putting words in people's mouths?

Yeah, doesn't feel very good does it? I'm glad you got my point.

 

[bnolsen]

Totally agree with both Ginrai and Yrx. We'll work with what we have. We're getting 128mb RAM, so we'll design software that conforms to that limitation. We'll code ports that conform to that limitation. Honestly, it doesn't limit us in the least. Any of these 256mb pieces of software that people want to use can be trimmed down to a 128mb requirement, I'm sure. Anything requiring more than 256mb RAM is not something that should be run on Pandora.

P.S.: Quote edited for accuracy.

EDIT: GameMaster: The sys reqs for Quake 3 are a 300ish MHz Pentium 2/3 processor, an OpenGL compatible graphics card, and 64mb RAM. With a bit of tweaking and porting, Quake3 should run fine. (Remember, iD released the source for the engine.)

Sadly quake3 only really shines when it has custom mods loaded on top of it. I hope the pandora could be made to effectively run Urban Terror or other mods like it.