[citation][nom]reprotected[/nom]iPhone 5 is not lagging behind the competition by any stretch of the imagination. In the end, it's the end user's experience, and many peers of mines do in fact like the iOS. I like Android, but it's high maintenance when you have to keep up for updates. I for one like the size of the iPhone/iPod touch because of the keyboard size; over a year of using the Galaxy S2, I am still not used to it's keyboard, and will probably never adapt to it. The original iPhone had terrible specifications, but Androids that came out shortly after had horrendous performance with better hardware; the iOS looked like it was really well developed for the hardware. Now things have changed, Android is not as laggy, but iPhone doesn't suffer from lag either, nor does it need a quad-core, and neither should Android. Specs are important, but that is if it becomes convenient, and if we have the technology. If an iPhone can run 8 hours of casual gaming, but a Galaxy S3 can only do half, but have double the specs, I honestly would prefer an iPhone. It's not like a Galaxy S3 is that much cheaper than an iPhone (at least not in Canada). Same concept with Wii U.But most of you guys would probably think that Wii U needs more power or it will suck! Not really. Unless the processing power is going to improve and innovate gameplay, rather than focus on graphics that is just going to kill my computer, then you won't need it. Something like iPhone 5 and Wii U will function as it should, and nothing except for super detailed graphics will be deprived due to it's "lower specs". Optimization is the key word.There is no reason for Apple to implement a quad-core processor. It's just going to kill the battery rather than actually make a huge performance difference. Optimization is where it is at.[/citation]
On the same thought process, if the S3 is twice as powerful for double the power consumption with the same battery capacity (meaning ~half the battery life at load), then simply implementing an underclocking feature for it to let it perform more like the iPhone if you want it too (maybe something like the Windows power profiles could be implemented for an easy to use yet still advanced one-stop control panel of this) and thus get similar battery life at load would give it much more flexibility. If you valued battery life over performance like that, then you could even simply underclock the CPU/GPU yourself in a few minutes and have your solution.
Oh sure, you could simply get the iPhone option, but then you wouldn't have the option of buying a larger high-capacity battery to get the best of both worlds later on
Of course having say a quad core CPU seems useless without optimization at first, but you're thinking only of single-threaded performance with a single app. Having four cores brings on a whole new level of multi-tasking perfomrance with Android that can be quite an advantage. However, the current quad core CPUs all seem quite lacking and outdated at this time, so that's kinda irrelevent ATM IMO given that a dual-core A15 or Krait CPU will probably be able to beat Tegra 3 and other quad-core A9s even in fully threaded performance.
As for the Wii U, anyone who complains about it not being high-end is someone who fails to understand what Nintendo does. They aren't competing in the high-end and high-cost market and they should not be considered failing for not trying to do so. They have nearly an entire market of lower end hardware to themselves and like with AMD's low end graphics advantage over Nvidia, that clearly matters for Nintendo. Besides, that Nintendo can have enjoyable games due to having more novel and seemingly innovative features to counter-balance the inferior graphics quality is a quite compelling argument in favor of Nintendo IMO. Having a high-quality game is better than a crap game with great graphics.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram