FINALLY figured out why RIM doesn't repartition the App memory......
The reason is simple (I came to this realization reading the Storm2 spec sheet over on CB)
S2 is listed as having 256MB of Flash memory, and 2GB of something called eMMC
By the logic, one could assume the following:
S1 has 128MB of Flash memory, and 1GB of eMMC
eMMC is a low-cost memory technology which uses a MultiMediaCard controller (once a popular flash memory standard in some digital cameras). It is an older technology, and a relatively slow technology. (eMMC stands for Embedded MultiMediaCard). It's main advantage is its small size (the memory and controller fit into a ball-grid-array chip) - higher speed versions are not all that slow, it can run up to 52MB/sec; however i'm sure the version RIM is using is much slower.
The "Flash" memory, on the other hand; is likely the expensive Single Level Cell design (used in high-end flash drives and SSDs) - that is why there is so little of it. What it boils down to is this: the eMMC memory is more suited to media storage than running apps. Apps would likely launch unacceptably slow from the eMMC memory, especially as they become more complex.
I'm sure RIM COULD allocate the eMMC to app storage; after all PPC devices can use SD cards to store apps. However, if you are using a slower, less expensive SD card, app loading performance can be downright painful. Perhaps RIM just wants to maintain relatively quick loading times, and thus only allow apps to run from the smaller Flash memory.
great post i never really looked at it like that
Makes sense... after loading the OS (which uses about 80ishmb of the flash) whats left is all we got for our apps... and if they went to the eMMC for more mem, we'd all bitch n complain bout how slow it was!
I started thinking about it, and it started making sense. It's sort of like looking at a netbook computer with an SD card slot and a SSD hard disc. The SD card would be painfully slow to boot an OS from, whereas the SSD would be a whole lot faster. I sort of figured that the Storage memory would use something slower as there is alot more of it. The App memory is sort of like the hard disc. The Storage memory is sort of like the slow external USB drive you back your music and pics up to.
Now, the only mystery remaining is this:
How much SYSTEM RAM does the S1 have vs. S2? That would explain the fact that people have reported the S2 to "feel" faster than the S1 though they share the same processor.
Actually, i'm afraid what would happen is we'd have the 188.8.131.52 fiasco all over again:
Originally Posted by Drukan
We'd be looking at the busy indicator more often than we'd be using the device...... :laugh2:
Last edited by Dave12308; 10-14-2009 at 11:52 PM.
Very interesting post, I appreciated your rationale and the thought you put into this. I wish someone would perform a tear down so we could find out if you are correct.
rim could give us more flash memory for apps. half the flash memory goes to the os...we cant download our hearts out like the iphone which i believe uses 16gb and 32gb of flash memory.
yea but we can run more apps at the same time and iphone doesn't so all depends on what you want on your phone.
thanks for the post that makes sense.
Tags for this Thread