Ram Poll.

[rygD]

I liked the other poll better: a single choice "how much do you want" contains more information than a multiple choice "what sizes should there be".
I want 4GB. I think it should only have 2GB and no choices, at least for the first months to a year while ED gets his finances back together. Other people will have other reasons for selecting what they do and there's no way to measure that.

I'm curious.  You're normally a relatively rational individual.  You know as well as anyone the difference in ram consumption between Linux on ARM and Windows on X86.  Why do YOU want 4GB?

I did the math and I should be able to have the full Debian OS, LibreOffice, FireFox or Chrome, a game or three and if it becomes possible, TWO Android VMs all running simultaneously inside of 2GB.

What is the need that you see for 4GB?  Am I missing something crucial in my 2GB assumptions?

You have done the math, but has anyone actually tried it?  I find it amusing that you seem to assume people wanting more RAM don't know any better because they are stuck in a windows way of thinking.  You can check the numbers all you want, but until someone actually tries these things we can't be sure the numbers include all variables.  I am not trying to say you are wrong, just that we shouldn't make assumptions either way.  I think WizardStan got it right.  None of us need a Pyra at all, we just want one, and some of us want different things for different reasons.

 

[bzar]

I'm curious.  You're normally a relatively rational individual.  You know as well as anyone the difference in ram consumption between Linux on ARM and Windows on X86.  Why do YOU want 4GB?

Okay, I have to ask because I'm starting to feel I've missed something. I understand the difference in RAM consumption between Linux and Windows. They're separate OSs and do things differently. What, on the other hand, is the difference in memory consumption between ARM and x86? Most of the data in memory in most applications does not depend on what architecture it's being run on. Sure, the binary sizes could be different, but those are typically a miniscule part of the memory consumption in total. You could also argue that the platform-dependent types like int are smaller, but many a software defines those in specific bit sizes and for those that do not still typically have most of their data in platform-agnostic formats. Also you could argue on ARM platforms programs are typically optimized better because they tend to be more restricted in terms of resources, but for any given generic trivally recompiled C application without any platform-specific optimizations, how is the memory consumption in any meaningful way different?

 

[Grench]

What is the need that you see for 4GB?  Am I missing something crucial in my 2GB assumptions?

No need, pure want.  I want 4GB for future growth, to be able to open 40+ browser tabs all at once, to be able to compile a large project, to load as much into RAM at startup as possible to keep things fast, give more RAM to the Android VM so it can keep more things active at once.
Nothing there is a need, everything beyond 2GB (and even that's probably more than what I'd actually need) is strictly wishlist, pie-in-the-sky because we can.

You would want 4GB instead of 2GB, despite that extra 2GB being 'just along for the ride' >99% of the time, even if the trade-offs were:
Adds ~$50 to the retail price of everyone's Pyra.
Decreases the continuous run time by ~15%.
Decreases the standby time from ~2 weeks to ~1 week.

That still does not strike me as a rational trade off.

I'm not opposed to 'adding costs'.  The question of adding $15 per unit so that every Pyra has 802.11b/g/n with 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz radios - THAT makes sense to me.  This doubling of expensive (both in costs and battery life) RAM to quadruple what has been shown to be 'enough' on the Dev Boards (see Trashy's posts), 'just because' strikes me as an illogical waste.

Now, here's a thought.  Instead of pushing for 4GB of RAM, push for 16GB or more of VERY fast eMMC NAND.

Yes, the RAM interface on the OMAP5 has a theoretical maximum transfer rate of 8.5GB/s.  However, since it is DDR3, it is very power hungry.

The eMMC port, on the other hand, has a maximum transfer rate of 208MB/s.  Since it is NAND, it is VERY power efficient.  Yes, it's about 2% of the theoretical speed of the RAM bus.  Still, it's capable SSD speeds, not old HDD speeds.

If you somehow manage to find a use case where you actually need more than 2GB of RAM, a portion of the eMMC NAND could be used as a very fast /SWAP partition.

So, maybe for those of you after 4GB of RAM...  maybe you should consider asking for 16GB of the fastest eMMC available instead?  It could give you the application space you're after without killing the power budget.
 

 

[Grench]

I liked the other poll better: a single choice "how much do you want" contains more information than a multiple choice "what sizes should there be".I want 4GB. I think it should only have 2GB and no choices, at least for the first months to a year while ED gets his finances back together. Other people will have other reasons for selecting what they do and there's no way to measure that.

I'm curious.  You're normally a relatively rational individual.  You know as well as anyone the difference in ram consumption between Linux on ARM and Windows on X86.  Why do YOU want 4GB?I did the math and I should be able to have the full Debian OS, LibreOffice, FireFox or Chrome, a game or three and if it becomes possible, TWO Android VMs all running simultaneously inside of 2GB.What is the need that you see for 4GB?  Am I missing something crucial in my 2GB assumptions?

You have done the math, but has anyone actually tried it?  I find it amusing that you seem to assume people wanting more RAM don't know any better because they are stuck in a windows way of thinking.  You can check the numbers all you want, but until someone actually tries these things we can't be sure the numbers include all variables.  I am not trying to say you are wrong, just that we shouldn't make assumptions either way.  I think WizardStan got it right.  None of us need a Pyra at all, we just want one, and some of us want different things for different reasons.

Umm - Trashy HAS tried it on a dev board and HAS reported back that even under full load with piles of things running he's barely pushing 1GB used.  Even doubling his testing case and getting 2GB is 'a lot'.  Why do you feel the need to quadruple it?

The power estimates are pretty straight forward.  RAM has to always be given power - and it's linear based on how much is plugged into the system regardless of if it's being 'used'.  So, estimates of 4GB halving (or so) the standby time vs 2GB is about as complicated as estimating that water at 25C is wet.

Testing with real hardware takes a lot of time and a lot of money.  They don't have to test a unit with an actual 4GB of RAM installed to be able to tell that it's a waste of money and power.
 

 

[rygD]

I don't think any of us are "after" more RAM.  We would like it, but I haven't seen anyone try to actually convince ED to give us more, at least not recently.  Plus, even those of us that would like more don't want to force it on everybody, which is why at least some of us have stated that.  For example, WizardStan said what he wanted (4GB), but also that there should only be 2GB immediately after that.

 

[WizardStan]

You would want 4GB instead of 2GB, despite that extra 2GB being 'just along for the ride' >99% of the time, even if the trade-offs were:
Adds ~$50 to the retail price of everyone's Pyra.
Decreases the continuous run time by ~15%.
Decreases the standby time from ~2 weeks to ~1 week.

That still does not strike me as a rational trade off.


 

I agree 100%, which is why I said "4GB is what I want, but 2GB is what I think it should have".  I chose my words very specifically which was part of my complaint about this poll, how the question is very open to interpretation and doesn't yield any useful information.
 

 

[rygD]

I liked the other poll better: a single choice "how much do you want" contains more information than a multiple choice "what sizes should there be".
I want 4GB. I think it should only have 2GB and no choices, at least for the first months to a year while ED gets his finances back together. Other people will have other reasons for selecting what they do and there's no way to measure that.

I'm curious.  You're normally a relatively rational individual.  You know as well as anyone the difference in ram consumption between Linux on ARM and Windows on X86.  Why do YOU want 4GB?

I did the math and I should be able to have the full Debian OS, LibreOffice, FireFox or Chrome, a game or three and if it becomes possible, TWO Android VMs all running simultaneously inside of 2GB.

What is the need that you see for 4GB?  Am I missing something crucial in my 2GB assumptions?

You have done the math, but has anyone actually tried it?  I find it amusing that you seem to assume people wanting more RAM don't know any better because they are stuck in a windows way of thinking.  You can check the numbers all you want, but until someone actually tries these things we can't be sure the numbers include all variables.  I am not trying to say you are wrong, just that we shouldn't make assumptions either way.  I think WizardStan got it right.  None of us need a Pyra at all, we just want one, and some of us want different things for different reasons.

Umm - Trashy HAS tried it on a dev board and HAS reported back that even under full load with piles of things running he's barely pushing 1GB used.  Even doubling his testing case and getting 2GB is 'a lot'.  Why do you feel the need to quadruple it?

The power estimates are pretty straight forward.  RAM has to always be given power - and it's linear based on how much is plugged into the system regardless of if it's being 'used'.  So, estimates of 4GB halving (or so) the standby time vs 2GB is about as complicated as estimating that water at 25C is wet.

Testing with real hardware takes a lot of time and a lot of money.  They don't have to test a unit with an actual 4GB of RAM installed to be able to tell that it's a waste of money and power.
 

He tested his stuff.  Was it the same things as what you listed, being actively used?   I am pretty sure with some things I frequently do 2GB would not be enough.  I don't feel the need to quadruple what you feel is an adequate amount of RAM (and if it is, why does no one seem to have an interest in cutting it back to 1GB?), however if I could I would like as much as I can get (maxed out, 8GB) in some scenarios "just in case".   I am pretty sure that would be completely useless, however I don't know until I start throwing things at it.

Why are you even talking about battery life again.  If I was going for a mythical Pyra with 4 or 8GB of RAM I wouldn't probably care too much about battery life, which I am not until we get real numbers, but no one in all of the discussion you quoted mentioned battery life, so just...what?

Why can't each indivdual decide for themselves what they want to waste their money on?  Why do you feel the need to save everyone from themselves by showing them that what they might want, if they could have it, is wrong?  Why can't others play "what if"?

 

[TrashyMG]

What are some tasks that uses more than 2GB, I'll try it out.

 

[rygD]

What are some tasks that uses more than 2GB, I'll try it out.

Can you do a couple of VMs with full desktops?  I thought I read that they weren't possible right now.  I can dig up a specific scenario (or send one of the books) if needed for them since it varies, but to keep it simple on the host, a large (500 pages) pdf document or 3,  LibreOffice Writer with 2 documents of around 20 pages of mixed text and images, a browser with maybe a few dozen tabs (another with a 3 or 4 on one of the VMs isn't uncommon, depending on the requirements).

 

[WizardStan]

What are some tasks that uses more than 2GB, I'll try it out.

Bookmark 40+ "average" websites (think webcomics or something) into a single folder, close everything, reopen firefox/chromium/whatever, and "right-click->open all in tabs" that folder.
This consumes nearly 8GB of RAM on my desktop in both Firefox and Chromium.

 

[TrashyMG]

What are some tasks that uses more than 2GB, I'll try it out.

Bookmark 40+ "average" websites (think webcomics or something) into a single folder, close everything, reopen firefox/chromium/whatever, and "right-click->open all in tabs" that folder.
This consumes nearly 8GB of RAM on my desktop in both Firefox and Chromium.

Why would you do that!? I suppose...

 

What are some tasks that uses more than 2GB, I'll try it out.

Can you do a couple of VMs with full desktops?  I thought I read that they weren't possible right now.  I can dig up a specific scenario (or send one of the books) if needed for them since it varies, but to keep it simple on the host, a large (500 pages) pdf document or 3,  LibreOffice Writer with 2 documents of around 20 pages of mixed text and images, a browser with maybe a few dozen tabs (another with a 3 or 4 on one of the VMs isn't uncommon, depending on the requirements).

I could, but these would have to be VMs of OSs that run on ARM... I may be able to launch virtualbox through exagear, but I imagine that would be horrendously slow using x86 emulation.   The rest seems reasonable.

 

[rygD]

I don't feel like messing with quotes right now.  

Any of the popular distros should be fine.  I can't remember which have an ARM version, but most things were done on Red Hat based (RHEL/Fedora/CentOS) or Debian based (usually Ubuntu, which probably isn't a surprise) distros.  I don't think specifics matter (we sometimes had to use different versions of the OS or software than what was originally listed in the books) as long as everything can be done.

Do you think exagear and a Pyra could handle VMware Workstation 12?  It wasn't something I had considered doing, but it might be nice.  Let me know if you want to try and need a copy.

 

[Grench]

I don't feel like messing with quotes right now.  

Any of the popular distros should be fine.  I can't remember which have an ARM version, but most things were done on Red Hat based (RHEL/Fedora/CentOS) or Debian based (usually Ubuntu, which probably isn't a surprise) distros.  I don't think specifics matter (we sometimes had to use different versions of the OS or software than what was originally listed in the books) as long as everything can be done.

Do you think exagear and a Pyra could handle VMware Workstation 12?  It wasn't something I had considered doing, but it might be nice.  Let me know if you want to try and need a copy.

No.  The host SoC isn't even 64bit and you're expecting to run a 64bit Windows application that directly addresses VM components in the Intel or AMD CPU hardware?  Please excuse me while I wipe away the tears of laughter...
http://www.vmware.com/products/player/faqs/install-requirements

It can't run X86 Crysis in full graphics mode either.

When thinking VMs on Pyra, think Android or another Linux install or something else along those lines.  Maybe a 32bit Windows, but that is likely to be barely able to run.

The Pyra is -not- a full spec Lenovo W or T series laptop workstation after all.  It's likely to be very good at what it does, but it isn't going to replace a lot of professional workstations.  Now, remotely controlling professional workstations - that should be quite possible.

 

[rygD]

I don't feel like messing with quotes right now.  

Any of the popular distros should be fine.  I can't remember which have an ARM version, but most things were done on Red Hat based (RHEL/Fedora/CentOS) or Debian based (usually Ubuntu, which probably isn't a surprise) distros.  I don't think specifics matter (we sometimes had to use different versions of the OS or software than what was originally listed in the books) as long as everything can be done.

Do you think exagear and a Pyra could handle VMware Workstation 12?  It wasn't something I had considered doing, but it might be nice.  Let me know if you want to try and need a copy.

No.  The host SoC isn't even 64bit and you're expecting to run a 64bit Windows application that directly addresses VM components in the Intel or AMD CPU hardware?  Please excuse me while I wipe away the tears of laughter...
http://www.vmware.com/products/player/faqs/install-requirements

It can't run X86 Crysis in full graphics mode either.

When thinking VMs on Pyra, think Android or another Linux install or something else along those lines.  Maybe a 32bit Windows, but that is likely to be barely able to run.

The Pyra is -not- a full spec Lenovo W or T series laptop workstation after all.  It's likely to be very good at what it does, but it isn't going to replace a lot of professional workstations.  Now, remotely controlling professional workstations - that should be quite possible.

I don't use Windows, but good to know that while you are busy criticising others you are still making mistakes yourself.  It also runs on Linux.
Yep, 64bit, although what you linked to was Player, not Workstation. Maybe I should have checked that before asking, as I thought there was a 32bit version.  
Would it have been hard to say "nope, 64bit CPU required"?  I sure hope nobody ever tries to come to you for information or advice (not that I did, as my question was obviously directed at TrashyMG) if these are the sort of answers you will give them.

Also, pay attention.  You seem to have a severe problem doing that, yet you jump on others for making a mistake or having an opinion that differs from yours.  If you hadn't noticed the cases in which I would be using VMs are Linux, as I described in the post you quoted.  Not once did I mention Windows.  Here you go making assumptions again.

Does it make you feel better to belittle and mock others?  Maybe you are having some personal problems and can't handle them.  Do you need a hug?  I don't give them out, but maybe someone will.  If you aren't having problems how about you grow up and have a bit of decency.
 

 

[FaeMinx]

Wow. Just.... wow.

I know we can be whoever we want to be online, but still...

Mrs Cake was taken roughly in a dirtly little alley behind the butcher shop... nobody heard her desperate cries for help, everyone was too busy minding their own concerns, and besides... it was over quickly.

 

[Tenka]

I like this fantasy.  Of course I imagine Mrs Cake to be a talking cake with arms and legs.

 

[bismuthdrummer]

Is there a major difference in power consumption (let's say, 1/2 hour or greater in loss of battery life during average use) between 2GB and 4GB? In whatever decent armchair theory someone can provide.

I'd be willing to pay some extra dollars for a high memory ceiling so long as the battery life isn't sapped by it. Aside from the already mentioned web browsing and possibility of doing video/audio/3D editing, I can imagine some (perhaps very few) game ports being less viable with just 2GB. And many if not most laptops run 4GB, so it seems the safer number to me, however unreasonable that is.

That said, I could easily be convinced 2GB is still more than enough. I just don't see the downsides as being so strong (maybe they are). We'll have plenty of battery, and it's already an expensive custom handheld. So let's make sure the memory ceiling doesn't punish the Pyra power users.

 

[ZXDunny]

I like this fantasy.  Of course I imagine Mrs Cake to be a talking cake with arms and legs.

Mrs Cake is a well-known psychic with rather excellent precognition abilities. If she's being taken roughly down a dark alley, it's because she bloody well wants to be there.

D.
 

 

[sebt3]

This consumes nearly 8GB of RAM on my desktop in both Firefox and Chromium.

Let me guess... you have 8G of RAM on this machine ?
If I do the same, it will use nearly 4G of RAM... but hey I have 4G

 

[ptitSeb]

If you want to make real testing, on a linux machine with 4G or 8G of Memory (RAM + Swap), open as many thing until one app gets "killed" because of lack of memory. That will be more precise then observation of free memory...