| Author |
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X1 discussion |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
@whybe, the s60 and WM OS's can almost certainly address more than 16GB.
Now OEM's would not design an OS that supports a certain architecture for expandable memory unless the OS could address all that space. Or at the worst they would patch the OS well before it reaches that limit. Think of it this way: to incorporate the SDHC standard into a phone, it would be necessary to ensure the OS could address all that space. Otherwise it's like buying a shoe that's already too small.
I think it's extremely unlikely that s60 or WM will not support 32GB plus on any given bus.
As to memory combined, well the memory card runs on it's own BUS so it's a separate issue.
For example on a computer, the motherboard may only be able to address for example 2TB of space (I'm guessing, but I think it's quite a bit more than that) on the IDE bus. So master and slave combined would mean only 1TB per drive. However the second IDE controller can also address 2TB (in this example) and this is independent of the installed storage on the primary IDE bus. So that's 4TB all up.
|
|
|
WhyBe
Joined: Apr 02, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: Ohio, USA
PM |
On 2008-09-29 02:53:52, max_wedge wrote:
@whybe, the s60 and WM OS's can almost certainly address more than 16GB.
I said 32GB as a limitation. But I wasn't attributing the limitation specifically to the OS.
Now OEM's would not design an OS that supports a certain architecture for expandable memory unless the OS could address all that space. Or at the worst they would patch the OS well before it reaches that limit. Think of it this way: to incorporate the SDHC standard into a phone, it would be necessary to ensure the OS could address all that space. Otherwise it's like buying a shoe that's already too small.
Of course. I agree.
I think it's extremely unlikely that s60 or WM will not support 32GB plus on any given bus.
As to memory combined, well the memory card runs on it's own BUS so it's a separate issue.
OK, now we have to ask whether the internal flash is on a separate bus from the external. This was the point I was getting at.
For example on a computer, the motherboard may only be able to address for example 2TB of space (I'm guessing, but I think it's quite a bit more than that) on the IDE bus. So master and slave combined would mean only 1TB per drive. However the second IDE controller can also address 2TB (in this example) and this is independent of the installed storage on the primary IDE bus. So that's 4TB all up.
Now on a mobile device, this would be the case providing there are means for addressing multiple busses. How likely is that on current mobile devices?
[ This Message was edited by: WhyBe on 2008-09-29 02:03 ] |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
@whybe I believe the SDHC has it's own bus, separate from system memory.
System memory is faster than the SDHC card so it's almost certain that internal memory has it's own bus.
There are two broad possibilities of limitation to 32GB:
One: the OS cannot address that much memory, or Two: the BUS architecture cannot support that much memory. We know SDHC bus can suport 32GB. We know the system memory can address as much memory as the OEM has provided (wouldn't make sense otherwise).
And we can be reasonably sure the OS supports 32GB.
|
Residentevil
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Raccoon City, USA
PM, WWW
|
On 2008-09-27 05:53:59, WhyBe wrote:
On 2008-09-27 05:08:04, NimmyxHuynh wrote:
but T-Mobile 3G also utilizes the 2100MHz band, so, wouldn't that be okay for X1i owners?
What's the difference between the two anyways? does it mean that some places only use 1700 and other places use 2100?
If I were you I would verify that T-Mobile is using the 2100 MHz for 3G in your area. Also check whether everything is compatible (I don't know). The X1a may very well be fully compatible with both T-Mobile and AT&T.
@max_wedge
I'm thinking the extra RAM is prep for WM7...or an apology for no accelerometer 
[ This Message was edited by: WhyBe on 2008-09-27 05:05 ]
I check with a rep in a tmob store here in the us and asked what freq they use for the 3G. 1700 & 1900mhz.
Tough times don't last, tough people do!
Free Tibet |
WhyBe
Joined: Apr 02, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: Ohio, USA
PM |
On 2008-09-29 03:57:26, max_wedge wrote:
@whybe I believe the SDHC has it's own bus, separate from system memory.
System memory is faster than the SDHC card so it's almost certain that internal memory has it's own bus.
OK, I'm saying that the 4/8/16 GB "internal" memory on said devices is NOT part of system memory (SDRAM), but may very well be on the same buss as the SDHC card (Flash).
iPhone has 128MB system memory and 8/16GB of storage. Same for the the Innov8. I believe the n96 is similar. |
djin
Joined: Jun 13, 2007
Posts: > 500
PM |
A lil Ot, i got touch pro, and i have to say opera browser is great, once you zoom in you can read everything. Its great, however, wasnt really impressed by the phone's design, especially its volume keys and thickness, and its speaker and camera really arent good.
Hope x1i would not dissapoint me in these areas  . |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
On 2008-09-29 05:29:04, WhyBe wrote:
On 2008-09-29 03:57:26, max_wedge wrote:
@whybe I believe the SDHC has it's own bus, separate from system memory.
System memory is faster than the SDHC card so it's almost certain that internal memory has it's own bus.
OK, I'm saying that the 4/8/16 GB "internal" memory on said devices is NOT part of system memory (SDRAM), but may very well be on the same buss as the SDHC card (Flash).
iPhone has 128MB system memory and 8/16GB of storage. Same for the the Innov8. I believe the n96 is similar.
I don't think so because internal memory is usually faster than external memory. Internal memory and system ram are usually the same thing, though maybe not in the case of multi-gb internal memory.
|
WhyBe
Joined: Apr 02, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: Ohio, USA
PM |
@max wedge
SDRAM is volatile while Flash is not. Certainly files stored on the 4/8/16 GB of "internal" memory don't get erased when the power is off . So, logically, that would make the internal memory (not the system memory) of said devices flash, not SDRAM.
@djin
So another lost soul is coming back home to the X1. Glad you're coming back! I knew people couldn't resist the charms of the X1.  |
l337h1um
Joined: Aug 20, 2008
Posts: 69
PM |
On 2008-09-29 05:59:21, max_wedge wrote:
Internal memory and system ram are usually the same thing, though maybe not in the case of multi-gb internal memory.
As WhyBe just pointed out, that is untrue. Indeed, DRAM is most certainly volatile, as each bit is stored in its own capacitor (hence why data is able to be retrieved for short periods after power is cut). NAND (or NOR types) flash is a lot slower and stores data using completely different technologies. |
alex1313
Joined: Jan 21, 2005
Posts: 12
From: Athens, Greece
PM |
i think i saw the X1 in the new episode of Knight Rider 2008 s01e01. can anyone else confirm this?
Come back for good |
WhyBe
Joined: Apr 02, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: Ohio, USA
PM |
Several pages ago...yes.
[ This Message was edited by: WhyBe on 2008-09-29 08:55 ] |
Osmano
Joined: Jul 22, 2006
Posts: 252
From: Trondheim, Norway
PM |
Hi all!
Isn't this phone going to be released toworrow? Where are the reviews?
Have I missed something? I have seen all the videos but I want an in-depth review with a finished phone....
Anyone...? os:-) |
Singapore_Air
Joined: Mar 02, 2004
Posts: 67
PM, WWW
|
Hey,
I can't wait to get my hands on the XPERIA X1, however, my experience in the past with touchscreens (and screens on devices in general) is that it's best to get a screen protector.
Since there are none available for the X1 right now, there's probably one with the same or similar screen dimensions to the X1.
So, does anyone know the dimensions of the X1's screen (all I can find is the resolution) or recommend a compatible screen protector ?
Cheers |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
On 2008-09-29 06:18:17, WhyBe wrote:
@max wedge
SDRAM is volatile while Flash is not. Certainly files stored on the 4/8/16 GB of "internal" memory don't get erased when the power is off . So, logically, that would make the internal memory (not the system memory) of said devices flash, not SDRAM.
Yeah, I didn't think that through. In the old days of WM (pocket pc actually), RAM and Storage were the same thing. Thankfully that sorry state of affairs is long gone.
I still have the impression internal memory is faster than expansion. Even on the old N70, internal memory is faster than external (for example recording onto memory card results in jerky video whereas recording onto internal memory is smooth.) Perhaps this is no longer the case, however it indicates that internal memory and external memory use a different bus.
|
WhyBe
Joined: Apr 02, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: Ohio, USA
PM |
On 2008-09-29 10:39:02, max_wedge wrote:
I still have the impression internal memory is faster than expansion. Even on the old N70, internal memory is faster than external (for example recording onto memory card results in jerky video whereas recording onto internal memory is smooth.) Perhaps this is no longer the case, however it indicates that internal memory and external memory use a different bus.
Well, internal memory is closer to the CPU. That alone would make it somewhat faster than external. Also it would depend upon the transfer rating of the card.
I guess it all boils down to what the OS is designed to handle, as far as memory addresses go. |
|
|
Posted: 2008-09-29 02:53
