Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
What's the actual tested performance improvement in iOS 12?
8 views
Skip to first unread message
Arlen Holder
Jul 17, 2018, 2:01:23 PM7/17/18
to
*What's the performance improvement (real, not imaginary) in iOS 12?*
They start with someone saying they "want to be the first".
And a "new treatment for cancer".
And a "breakthrough for Alzeimers".
And then ... they talk almost exclusively about emojis.
Jesus Christ.
Isn't anyone sane on this planet?
To Apple's credit, that highly edited video had a *single* line saying:
"We're doubling down on performance".
Given the secret throttling, performance would be a nice thing!
I get it that there are silly pictures, but where's the beef?
*What's the performance improvement in iOS 12?*
They start with someone saying they "want to be the first".
And a "new treatment for cancer".
And a "breakthrough for Alzeimers".
And then ... they talk almost exclusively about emojis.
Jesus Christ.
Isn't anyone sane on this planet?
To Apple's credit, that highly edited video had a *single* line saying:
"We're doubling down on performance".
Given the secret throttling, performance would be a nice thing!
I get it that there are silly pictures, but where's the beef?
*What's the performance improvement in iOS 12?*
joe
Jul 17, 2018, 9:05:34 PM7/17/18
to
On 7/17/2018 1:01 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> *What's the performance improvement (real, not imaginary) in iOS 12?*
>
>
Since iOS 12 has yet to be released how would you expect anyone to have
> *What's the performance improvement (real, not imaginary) in iOS 12?*
>
>
'real' performance measurements?
nospam
Jul 17, 2018, 9:25:56 PM7/17/18
to
Arlen Holder
Jul 18, 2018, 12:29:50 AM7/18/18
to
On 17 Jul 2018 17:25:56 GMT, nospam wrote:
> public beta.
*Which has shown essentially _zero real speed improvements_ in iOS 12.*
It isn't exactly zero, as the results depend *greatly* on the device and
even more greatly on the specific app being tested, where the improvement
is greater in the (highly flawed to start with) iPhone X, and less so in
iPhone 6, & on down to the oldest iOS11-capable tablet, the iPad Mini 2.
Overall though...
Most things, on most devices, are ... you guessed it, about the same.
The performance improvement is yet another example of Apple MARKETING BS.
Up to 40% faster app launches,
Up to 50% faster keyboard opening,
Up to 70% improvement in opening the camera
where the only reason they're not lying is the caveat "up to", and the lack
of mentioning that some apps show no improvements whatsoever (where the
variance was huge even within native apps).
The only reason Apple MARKETING "can" say it, is that "some things" are
faster, even when "most things are about the same".
It's MARKETING's job to make you *think* that is a leap in performance.
Take a look, for example, at this chart:
<https://venturebeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/screen-shot-2018-06-04-at-1-15-08-pm.jpg>
Does anyone know why Snit-like fact-challenged morons like Jolly Roger and
nospam, Lewis, BK@OnRamp, etc., will fall in *love* with that graph?
HINT: Look at the Y-axis.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0/Lk1Iin89BwAJ>
It's shocking Apple makes a big deal about silly fifth-grade animations
when real performance & functionality should be what they strive for.
> public beta.
*Which has shown essentially _zero real speed improvements_ in iOS 12.*
It isn't exactly zero, as the results depend *greatly* on the device and
even more greatly on the specific app being tested, where the improvement
is greater in the (highly flawed to start with) iPhone X, and less so in
iPhone 6, & on down to the oldest iOS11-capable tablet, the iPad Mini 2.
Overall though...
Most things, on most devices, are ... you guessed it, about the same.
The performance improvement is yet another example of Apple MARKETING BS.
Up to 40% faster app launches,
Up to 50% faster keyboard opening,
Up to 70% improvement in opening the camera
where the only reason they're not lying is the caveat "up to", and the lack
of mentioning that some apps show no improvements whatsoever (where the
variance was huge even within native apps).
The only reason Apple MARKETING "can" say it, is that "some things" are
faster, even when "most things are about the same".
It's MARKETING's job to make you *think* that is a leap in performance.
Take a look, for example, at this chart:
<https://venturebeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/screen-shot-2018-06-04-at-1-15-08-pm.jpg>
Does anyone know why Snit-like fact-challenged morons like Jolly Roger and
nospam, Lewis, BK@OnRamp, etc., will fall in *love* with that graph?
HINT: Look at the Y-axis.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0/Lk1Iin89BwAJ>
It's shocking Apple makes a big deal about silly fifth-grade animations
when real performance & functionality should be what they strive for.
nospam
Jul 18, 2018, 12:38:29 AM7/18/18
to
In article <pimfnt$mli$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder
> The performance improvement is yet another example of Apple MARKETING BS.
> Up to 40% faster app launches,
> Up to 50% faster keyboard opening,
> Up to 70% improvement in opening the camera
that is not 'essentially zero'.
contradicting yourself in the very same post? usually it's a subsequent
post.
<arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:
>
> > public beta.
>
> *Which has shown essentially _zero real speed improvements_ in iOS 12.*
very, very wrong.
>
> > public beta.
>
> *Which has shown essentially _zero real speed improvements_ in iOS 12.*
> The performance improvement is yet another example of Apple MARKETING BS.
> Up to 40% faster app launches,
> Up to 50% faster keyboard opening,
> Up to 70% improvement in opening the camera
contradicting yourself in the very same post? usually it's a subsequent
post.
Arlen Holder
Jul 18, 2018, 1:34:32 AM7/18/18
to
On 17 Jul 2018 20:38:28 GMT, nospam wrote:
> very, very wrong.
*You always guess wrong nospam, where the monkey does better than you do.*
The iPad Mini 2 (which uses the same A7 processor as the iPhone 5s) scored
on the Geekbench 4 CPU test at 1295 single core & 2179 multi-core in iOS
11.4 where the results were almost the same at 1293 single core & 2203
multi-core in the iOS 12 beta.
That is, essentially the same, just as I had said.
*Those are facts.*
>> The performance improvement is yet another example of Apple MARKETING BS.
>> Up to 40% faster app launches,
>> Up to 50% faster keyboard opening,
>> Up to 70% improvement in opening the camera
>
> that is not 'essentially zero'.
You put too much stock in the words "up to".
You can win *"up to"* 40 million dollars when you play the lottery also.
I do always expect you, of all people, to easily fall prey to Apple
MARKETING scams (since your entire belief system is whatever Apple feeds
you), and, true to form, you have proven you fell prey, yet again to mere
illusions of functionality improvements.
Facts don't concern people like you whose entire belief system is underlain
only by what Apple MARKETING cleverly feeds you.
In that same phone above, the Geekbench 4 GPU compute benchmark scored at
588 in iOS 11.4, with only a slightly higher score of 591 in iOS 12.
Again, essentially the same.
*Those are facts.*
> contradicting yourself in the very same post? usually it's a subsequent
> post.
The contradictions are within the results, where, for example, on that same
phone above "Angry Birds 2" took 31 seconds to load in iOS 11.4 and 19
seconds to launch in iOS 12 but "Pokemon Go" took the same 39 seconds to
launch with either OS where the same occurred with "Asphalt 8" at 32
seconds with both versions of iOS.
You may not like nuance in the real world - but it exists.
Each phone that was tested scored completely differently, as did each app.
So, just like it's not a lie that you can win "up to" 40 million dollars
playing the lottery, in most cases, it will actually cost you "about a
buck".
I only speak facts.
> very, very wrong.
*You always guess wrong nospam, where the monkey does better than you do.*
The iPad Mini 2 (which uses the same A7 processor as the iPhone 5s) scored
on the Geekbench 4 CPU test at 1295 single core & 2179 multi-core in iOS
11.4 where the results were almost the same at 1293 single core & 2203
multi-core in the iOS 12 beta.
That is, essentially the same, just as I had said.
*Those are facts.*
>> The performance improvement is yet another example of Apple MARKETING BS.
>> Up to 40% faster app launches,
>> Up to 50% faster keyboard opening,
>> Up to 70% improvement in opening the camera
>
> that is not 'essentially zero'.
You can win *"up to"* 40 million dollars when you play the lottery also.
I do always expect you, of all people, to easily fall prey to Apple
MARKETING scams (since your entire belief system is whatever Apple feeds
you), and, true to form, you have proven you fell prey, yet again to mere
illusions of functionality improvements.
Facts don't concern people like you whose entire belief system is underlain
only by what Apple MARKETING cleverly feeds you.
In that same phone above, the Geekbench 4 GPU compute benchmark scored at
588 in iOS 11.4, with only a slightly higher score of 591 in iOS 12.
Again, essentially the same.
*Those are facts.*
> contradicting yourself in the very same post? usually it's a subsequent
> post.
phone above "Angry Birds 2" took 31 seconds to load in iOS 11.4 and 19
seconds to launch in iOS 12 but "Pokemon Go" took the same 39 seconds to
launch with either OS where the same occurred with "Asphalt 8" at 32
seconds with both versions of iOS.
You may not like nuance in the real world - but it exists.
Each phone that was tested scored completely differently, as did each app.
So, just like it's not a lie that you can win "up to" 40 million dollars
playing the lottery, in most cases, it will actually cost you "about a
buck".
I only speak facts.
Arlen Holder
Jul 18, 2018, 2:02:17 AM7/18/18
to
On 18 Jul 2018 05:34:32 GMT, Arlen Holder wrote:
> You may not like nuance in the real world - but it exists.
I only speak facts.
> You may not like nuance in the real world - but it exists.
Did I mention that the native iOS News app actually loaded *slower* on iOS
12 than on iOS 11.4 on that same tested phone?
Yup.
- iOS 11.4 = 8 seconds
- iOS 12 beta = 12 seconds
Um, that's *50% slower* on iOS 12 based on iOS 11.4 performance.
The variance is great, which is why Apple cleverly inserts *up to*.
a. You can win *up to* 40 million dollars in the lottery.
b. Or, you can lose about a buck most of the time.
Pick the most likely one.
nospam
Jul 18, 2018, 9:28:09 AM7/18/18
to
In article <pimjh6$tna$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder
*much* faster on the same hardware, particularly on older devices.
benchmarks taken out of context mean nothing.
<arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:
> The iPad Mini 2 (which uses the same A7 processor as the iPhone 5s) scored
> on the Geekbench 4 CPU test at 1295 single core & 2179 multi-core in iOS
> 11.4 where the results were almost the same at 1293 single core & 2203
> multi-core in the iOS 12 beta.
those who have actually used ios 12 (i.e., not you) know that it's
> The iPad Mini 2 (which uses the same A7 processor as the iPhone 5s) scored
> on the Geekbench 4 CPU test at 1295 single core & 2179 multi-core in iOS
> 11.4 where the results were almost the same at 1293 single core & 2203
> multi-core in the iOS 12 beta.
*much* faster on the same hardware, particularly on older devices.
benchmarks taken out of context mean nothing.
Arlen Holder
Jul 18, 2018, 9:54:19 AM7/18/18
to
On 18 Jul 2018 06:28:08 GMT, nospam wrote:
> those who have actually used ios 12 (i.e., not you) know that it's
> *much* faster on the same hardware, particularly on older devices.
Hehhehheh....
> those who have actually used ios 12 (i.e., not you) know that it's
> *much* faster on the same hardware, particularly on older devices.
I quote actual well-known tested facts by a third party.
You just guess.
Your guesses over time have proven less accurate than the monkey's guesses.
My statements are simply facts.
> benchmarks taken out of context mean nothing.
Says the man who touted benchmarks of iPhones when I ran a hardware
comparison to Android phones.... (especially since benchmark results on the
current crop of iPhones must be *halved* in about a year to remain
realistic).
*I love though, nospam, how you respond to facts.*
Do you want more facts on the publicly reported 3rd-party benchmark
results, or do you concede that sure, you can get "up to" 40 million
dollars in the lottery, but most of the time you'll end up spending 'about
a buck'.
For example, on the iPhone 6, iOS 12 was only "slightly" "more responsive"
than the iPhone 6 on iOS 10.4 and the Apple iOS camera was only "slightly"
quicker to open.
The iPhone 6 Geekbench 4 CPU test scored "about the same" with a 1560
Single core & 2686 multi-core in iOS 11.4 and "about the same" at 1545
single core & 2722 multi-core in iOS 12.
The iPhone 6 GPU results were "about the same" at 4213 in iOS 11.4 & 4248
in iOS 12.
BTW, I'm sure there is one app on an iPhone that, under Apple's biased
testing, *did* get "up to" 40%$ performance gain, but, overall, the
benchmark scores, especially on the older iEquipment, will be "about the
same".
Either you already know such facts, or you're ignorant of the known facts.
Pick one.
Calum
Jul 18, 2018, 10:13:34 AM7/18/18
to
they can collect extra diagnostics etc.
nospam
Jul 18, 2018, 10:19:08 AM7/18/18
to
In article <pinhub$cbs$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Calum
stable too. the final version should be even better.
<com....@nospam.scottishwildcat> wrote:
> >>> *What's the performance improvement (real, not imaginary) in iOS 12?*
> >>>
> >> Since iOS 12 has yet to be released how would you expect anyone to have
> >> 'real' performance measurements?
> >
> > public beta.
>
> Betas usually aren't optimised to the same extent as GMs, if only so
> they can collect extra diagnostics etc.
yep, and yet the public beta is *much* faster than ios11, and fairly
> >>> *What's the performance improvement (real, not imaginary) in iOS 12?*
> >>>
> >> Since iOS 12 has yet to be released how would you expect anyone to have
> >> 'real' performance measurements?
> >
> > public beta.
>
> Betas usually aren't optimised to the same extent as GMs, if only so
> they can collect extra diagnostics etc.
stable too. the final version should be even better.
sms
Jul 18, 2018, 10:25:01 AM7/18/18
to
On 7/17/2018 10:34 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On 17 Jul 2018 20:38:28 GMT, nospam wrote:
>
>> very, very wrong.
>
> *You always guess wrong nospam, where the monkey does better than you do.*
>
> The iPad Mini 2 (which uses the same A7 processor as the iPhone 5s) scored
> on the Geekbench 4 CPU test at 1295 single core & 2179 multi-core in iOS
> 11.4 where the results were almost the same at 1293 single core & 2203
> multi-core in the iOS 12 beta.
The Geekbench CPU test is not representative of the performance that a
> On 17 Jul 2018 20:38:28 GMT, nospam wrote:
>
>> very, very wrong.
>
> *You always guess wrong nospam, where the monkey does better than you do.*
>
> The iPad Mini 2 (which uses the same A7 processor as the iPhone 5s) scored
> on the Geekbench 4 CPU test at 1295 single core & 2179 multi-core in iOS
> 11.4 where the results were almost the same at 1293 single core & 2203
> multi-core in the iOS 12 beta.
user will actually see.
On iOS devices, the CPU is rarely the cause of any performance issue
seen by a user since unlike Android manufacturers they aren't trying to
build a lower-cost phone by using a lower performance processor.
On one older Android device I have, I turned on full encryption. What a
mistake that was. The performance noticeably decreased, as did battery life.
nospam
Jul 18, 2018, 10:27:15 AM7/18/18
to
In article <pinijs$u05$1...@dont-email.me>, sms
for a true comparison of performance with ios, you would *also* need to
have it enabled on android.
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On one older Android device I have, I turned on full encryption. What a
> mistake that was. The performance noticeably decreased, as did battery life.
except that all ios devices have that enabled.
> On one older Android device I have, I turned on full encryption. What a
> mistake that was. The performance noticeably decreased, as did battery life.
for a true comparison of performance with ios, you would *also* need to
have it enabled on android.
sms
Jul 18, 2018, 3:29:42 PM7/18/18
to
On 7/17/2018 11:01 AM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> I get it that there are silly pictures, but where's the beef?
> *What's the performance improvement in iOS 12?*
<https://www.cnet.com/news/ios-12-beta-on-an-old-iphone-5s-what-happened-speed-test/>
> I get it that there are silly pictures, but where's the beef?
> *What's the performance improvement in iOS 12?*
Arlen Holder
Jul 18, 2018, 3:38:06 PM7/18/18
to
On 18 Jul 2018 07:24:57 GMT, sms wrote:
> The Geekbench CPU test is not representative of the performance that a
> user will actually see.
Hi sms,
> The Geekbench CPU test is not representative of the performance that a
> user will actually see.
I can talk to you differently than the rest because you have an education.
You can handle nuances of fact that the others can't possibly comprehend.
The "performance" results, as it turns out, are all over the map.
- Some are faster (most of those were single-digit percentages)
- Most are about the same (with only very slight improvements)
- Some are even 50% slower (with most being about the same)
In the end, what will matter to each person is what metric they care about,
and what device they care about - since the numbers are all over the place
but almost none that I've seen reported are anywhere near two-digit
percentages.
If you care about real-world numbers, look at these facts.
*The iPhone 6 launched 6 seconds _slower_ on iOS 12 than on iOS 11.4!*
*The App Store launched 2 seconds _slower_ on iOS 12 than on iOS 11.4!*
Overall, the independent testers rated iOS 12 as only "slightly smoother"
and "slightly more responsive" than iOS 11.4 on that iPhone 6.
The iPhone 6 camera was only "slightly quicker".
One of the best improvements was "Angry Birds", which took 41 seconds to
launch on iOS 10.4 and 40 seconds on iOS 12, which is an improvement of
only 2.5%, and that was one of the *better* improvements!
Another improvement was the TV app, which launched 5 seconds faster on iOS
12 than on iOS 11.4.
Launching News, Books, Appleinsider, Amazon Prime Video, Google Drive, and
the YouTube app were all only "slightly" faster on iOS 12 than on iOS 11.4.
"Pokemon Go" was 1 second *slower* on iOS12 and "Asphalt 8" was 4 seconds
slower on iOS 12 than on iOS 11.4.
After reading that, and knowing full well that I don't make anything up,
are you still going to suggest that this lack of performance is not
representative of what the user cares about?
Arlen Holder
Jul 18, 2018, 3:38:07 PM7/18/18
to
On 18 Jul 2018 07:19:07 GMT, nospam wrote:
> yep, and yet the public beta is *much* faster than ios11, and fairly
> stable too. the final version should be even better.
Hehhehheh ... you always guess nospam.
> yep, and yet the public beta is *much* faster than ios11, and fairly
> stable too. the final version should be even better.
I have the numbers in front of me.
They are all over the map.
Some things are faster. Some slower. Most about the same.
Remember how horrid iOS11 was?
Given that the iOS beta 12 is "about the same" overall, then, well,
whooopie doo on the claimed gains of "up to 40%".
Remember, I'm sure Apple found something that is "up to 40% just like the
lottery always advertises that someone will win up to 40 million dollars,
but the reports show that the beta 1 is "about the same" overall, but it
depends greatly on which test you run and on which device since the numbers
are all over the map.
*Some are even _50% slower_ on iOS 12 beta 1 than on iOS 11.4!*
Arlen Holder
Jul 18, 2018, 3:38:08 PM7/18/18
to
On 18 Jul 2018 07:13:33 GMT, Calum wrote:
> Betas usually aren't optimised to the same extent as GMs, if only so
> they can collect extra diagnostics etc.
This may or may not be true where the data I quoted was from beta 1 reports
> Betas usually aren't optimised to the same extent as GMs, if only so
> they can collect extra diagnostics etc.
that are publicly available.
What makes you think Apple MARKETING will ever tell the truth to you
when they have been caught in so many egregious blatant public lies?
In addition, bear in mind the long-standing complaint (for whatever reason)
that each release *slows down* people's iOS devices (where we know for a
fact that last years' releases literally secretly *throttled* CPUs).
While the die-hard fact-free Apple Apologists always claim that slowdown is
due to the updates themselves, the point is that I ask you for where you
get your history that Apple actually *speeds up* devices after each
release?
If anything, devices slow down after releases based on the facts as
reported last year.
Given iOS devices were secretly throttled last year by the iOS release,
it's not surprising that Apple MARKETING would claim "up to" 40% faster
speeds (just as the Lottery claims that someone could win "up to" 40
million dollars in the lottery.
While the beta 1 results are all over the map, there's no indication
whatsoever that most iOS devices will achieve anything even close to *any*
speedup, let alone 40%.
I have the number so I know what they say.
What makes you think Apple MARKETING will ever tell the truth to you
when they have been caught in so many egregious blatant public lies?
Arlen Holder
Jul 18, 2018, 4:03:47 PM7/18/18
to
On 18 Jul 2018 12:29:39 GMT, sms wrote:
>> I get it that there are silly pictures, but where's the beef?
>> *What's the performance improvement in iOS 12?*
>
> <https://www.cnet.com/news/ios-12-beta-on-an-old-iphone-5s-what-happened-speed-test/>
Hi sms,
>> I get it that there are silly pictures, but where's the beef?
>> *What's the performance improvement in iOS 12?*
>
> <https://www.cnet.com/news/ios-12-beta-on-an-old-iphone-5s-what-happened-speed-test/>
You know I only speak fact.
And you know I don't usually ask a question that I don't already know the
answer to, since I know even you can't find any performance gains that are
anywhere near what Apple MARKETING claimed.
I appreciate that you're one of the rare posters on this iOS newsgroup who
can actually comprehend facts, and, who supplies facts in return.
My position is that I haven't seen a *single* report of two-digit
performance gains, let alone 40% (the gains I've seen are in the single
digits, and the overall score is "about the same" with a "slight
improvement" being common).
Let's look at your CNET report which tested *different phones* than mine:
<https://www.cnet.com/news/ios-12-beta-on-an-old-iphone-5s-what-happened-speed-test/>
*The iPhone 5S startup time was 9 seconds _slower_ on iOS 12 than iOS11.4!*
- The following were identical in speed between iOS 11.4 & iOS 12
Maps
- The following were 1/2 second faster on iOS 12 than on iOS 11.4
Mail, photo slide, Siri request
- The following were 1 second faster on iOS 12 than on iOS 11.4
Keyboard, Share sheet* (see caveat below where it's about the same)
- The following were 3.5 seconds faster on iOS 12 than on iOS 11.4
Safari
While we don't know the actual times, so we can't compute the percentages,
I haven't seen a single reliable reference showing even two-digit
percentage increases, let alone 40%. (Again, I'm sure Apple found one app
that *is* 40% faster - but nobody else seems to have found it, and
certainly not on all devices.)
Notice they said "the difference in others, like Weather and Maps" was
*"hardly visible"*, which is what I've been saying all along.
Even the share sheet claims were debunked "after running it several times
in a row" where the results after a while, were yet again, about the same.
In summary, and given you're likely as well educated as I am, what I'm
seeking is any indication of double-digit performance increases since the
only performance increases I can calculate (given what the news reports)
are single-digit performance figures.
There doesn't appear to be *anything* in your article that refutes what
I've already said, where I have been discussing the iPhone 6 and iPhone
Mini 2, and where your article added the iPhone 5s.
Note that I have the numbers for the iPhone X, which, as I said, are
different still, which backs up my statements that the numbers are all over
the place - but where - overall - the performance on most phones is about
the same.
*Apple MARKETING seems to be hiding well those 2-digit performance gains.*
Speaking only facts ... I must ask ...
Where's the beef?
--
I'm sure Apple found an app, on at least one phone, to justify their
outrageous performance claims; but nobody else seems to have found that
super-secret (imaginary perhaps?) app yet, based on the existing published
reports I've seen.
sms
Jul 18, 2018, 4:20:58 PM7/18/18
to
On 7/17/2018 9:29 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On 17 Jul 2018 17:25:56 GMT, nospam wrote:
>
>> public beta.
>
> *Which has shown essentially _zero real speed improvements_ in iOS 12.*
>
> It isn't exactly zero, as the results depend *greatly* on the device and
> even more greatly on the specific app being tested, where the improvement
> is greater in the (highly flawed to start with) iPhone X, and less so in
> iPhone 6, & on down to the oldest iOS11-capable tablet, the iPad Mini 2.
>
> Overall though...
> Most things, on most devices, are ... you guessed it, about the same.
>
> The performance improvement is yet another example of Apple MARKETING BS.
> Up to 40% faster app launches,
> Up to 50% faster keyboard opening,
> Up to 70% improvement in opening the camera
It's not BS at all.
> On 17 Jul 2018 17:25:56 GMT, nospam wrote:
>
>> public beta.
>
> *Which has shown essentially _zero real speed improvements_ in iOS 12.*
>
> It isn't exactly zero, as the results depend *greatly* on the device and
> even more greatly on the specific app being tested, where the improvement
> is greater in the (highly flawed to start with) iPhone X, and less so in
> iPhone 6, & on down to the oldest iOS11-capable tablet, the iPad Mini 2.
>
> Overall though...
> Most things, on most devices, are ... you guessed it, about the same.
>
> The performance improvement is yet another example of Apple MARKETING BS.
> Up to 40% faster app launches,
> Up to 50% faster keyboard opening,
> Up to 70% improvement in opening the camera
If you look at the boot-up time of iOS 12 versus iOS 11 on a iPhone 5s,
the boot-up time is slower with iOS 12, but then the app launches are
much faster. It's obvious what's going on to accomplish this, but I
think for most people a longer start-up time is an acceptable trade-off
for much faster app launch time, especially since most people don't turn
off their phones very often.
<https://www.cnet.com/news/ios-12-beta-on-an-old-iphone-5s-what-happened-speed-test/>.
This is for the 5s, launched in 2013! Can you imagine an Android phone,
launched in 2013, getting an operating system update? You're lucky to
get even two years of OS updates, and that's usually only on flagship
phones. Updates after three years are very rare. The 2016 Galaxy S7
finally got Android 8 while The 2017 Stylo 3 Plus is not scheduled to
ever get it.
nospam
Jul 18, 2018, 5:01:37 PM7/18/18
to
In article <pio7fa$bj1$1...@dont-email.me>, sms
non-developers (and even some developers) do not understand all of the
tweaks that are going on under the hood for the speed optimizations.
> but I
> think for most people a longer start-up time is an acceptable trade-off
> for much faster app launch time, especially since most people don't turn
> off their phones very often.
startup time is completely meaningless.
most people never turn off their phones at all in normal use, nor
should they.
> This is for the 5s, launched in 2013! Can you imagine an Android phone,
> launched in 2013, getting an operating system update? You're lucky to
> get even two years of OS updates, and that's usually only on flagship
> phones. Updates after three years are very rare. The 2016 Galaxy S7
> finally got Android 8 while The 2017 Stylo 3 Plus is not scheduled to
> ever get it.
yep.
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> If you look at the boot-up time of iOS 12 versus iOS 11 on a iPhone 5s,
> the boot-up time is slower with iOS 12, but then the app launches are
> much faster. It's obvious what's going on to accomplish this,
no it isn't obvious.
> If you look at the boot-up time of iOS 12 versus iOS 11 on a iPhone 5s,
> the boot-up time is slower with iOS 12, but then the app launches are
> much faster. It's obvious what's going on to accomplish this,
non-developers (and even some developers) do not understand all of the
tweaks that are going on under the hood for the speed optimizations.
> but I
> think for most people a longer start-up time is an acceptable trade-off
> for much faster app launch time, especially since most people don't turn
> off their phones very often.
most people never turn off their phones at all in normal use, nor
should they.
> This is for the 5s, launched in 2013! Can you imagine an Android phone,
> launched in 2013, getting an operating system update? You're lucky to
> get even two years of OS updates, and that's usually only on flagship
> phones. Updates after three years are very rare. The 2016 Galaxy S7
> finally got Android 8 while The 2017 Stylo 3 Plus is not scheduled to
> ever get it.
nospam
Jul 18, 2018, 5:01:37 PM7/18/18
to
In article <pio4uu$ikp$2...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder
the difference is significant.
you don't understand whatever you supposedly have in front of you.
<arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:
>
> > yep, and yet the public beta is *much* faster than ios11, and fairly
> > stable too. the final version should be even better.
>
> Hehhehheh ... you always guess nospam.
> I have the numbers in front of me.
i have *actual* *devices* running ios 12 in front of me.
>
> > yep, and yet the public beta is *much* faster than ios11, and fairly
> > stable too. the final version should be even better.
>
> Hehhehheh ... you always guess nospam.
> I have the numbers in front of me.
the difference is significant.
you don't understand whatever you supposedly have in front of you.
Chris
Jul 18, 2018, 5:22:41 PM7/18/18
to
Arlen Holder <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 17 Jul 2018 20:38:28 GMT, nospam wrote:
>
>> very, very wrong.
>
> *You always guess wrong nospam, where the monkey does better than you do.*
>
> The iPad Mini 2 (which uses the same A7 processor as the iPhone 5s) scored
> on the Geekbench 4 CPU test at 1295 single core & 2179 multi-core in iOS
> 11.4 where the results were almost the same at 1293 single core & 2203
> multi-core in the iOS 12 beta.
>
> That is, essentially the same, just as I had said.
> *Those are facts.*
You do realise that a hardware profiler will always give the same (or at
> On 17 Jul 2018 20:38:28 GMT, nospam wrote:
>
>> very, very wrong.
>
> *You always guess wrong nospam, where the monkey does better than you do.*
>
> The iPad Mini 2 (which uses the same A7 processor as the iPhone 5s) scored
> on the Geekbench 4 CPU test at 1295 single core & 2179 multi-core in iOS
> 11.4 where the results were almost the same at 1293 single core & 2203
> multi-core in the iOS 12 beta.
>
> That is, essentially the same, just as I had said.
> *Those are facts.*
least very similar) result for the same hardware regardless of the software
that's on it? Right? To expect anything different is odd.
Software, on the other hand, can be optimised in different ways even with
the same hardware. A simple example is two different versions of the same
software where one has multicore enabled and one doesn't. To the user it's
exactly the same program, but its performance is very different.
nospam
Jul 18, 2018, 5:34:55 PM7/18/18
to
In article <piob30$1ga$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
> Software, on the other hand, can be optimised in different ways even with
> the same hardware. A simple example is two different versions of the same
> software where one has multicore enabled and one doesn't. To the user it's
> exactly the same program, but its performance is very different.
and in fact, pulling stuff off the main thread where possible is one
area in which they're optimizing it. there are others.
wrote:
> >> very, very wrong.
> >
> > *You always guess wrong nospam, where the monkey does better than you do.*
> >
> > The iPad Mini 2 (which uses the same A7 processor as the iPhone 5s) scored
> > on the Geekbench 4 CPU test at 1295 single core & 2179 multi-core in iOS
> > 11.4 where the results were almost the same at 1293 single core & 2203
> > multi-core in the iOS 12 beta.
> >
> > That is, essentially the same, just as I had said.
> > *Those are facts.*
>
> You do realise that a hardware profiler will always give the same (or at
> least very similar) result for the same hardware regardless of the software
> that's on it? Right? To expect anything different is odd.
he doesn't understand what he's supposedly looking at.
> >> very, very wrong.
> >
> > *You always guess wrong nospam, where the monkey does better than you do.*
> >
> > The iPad Mini 2 (which uses the same A7 processor as the iPhone 5s) scored
> > on the Geekbench 4 CPU test at 1295 single core & 2179 multi-core in iOS
> > 11.4 where the results were almost the same at 1293 single core & 2203
> > multi-core in the iOS 12 beta.
> >
> > That is, essentially the same, just as I had said.
> > *Those are facts.*
>
> You do realise that a hardware profiler will always give the same (or at
> least very similar) result for the same hardware regardless of the software
> that's on it? Right? To expect anything different is odd.
> Software, on the other hand, can be optimised in different ways even with
> the same hardware. A simple example is two different versions of the same
> software where one has multicore enabled and one doesn't. To the user it's
> exactly the same program, but its performance is very different.
area in which they're optimizing it. there are others.
sms
Jul 18, 2018, 5:55:19 PM7/18/18
to
On 7/18/2018 2:22 PM, Chris wrote:
<snip>
> Software, on the other hand, can be optimised in different ways even with
> the same hardware. A simple example is two different versions of the same
> software where one has multicore enabled and one doesn't. To the user it's
> exactly the same program, but its performance is very different.
One key thing with a RISC processor that can operate at many different
frequencies and voltages is how you make the trade-off between
frequency, voltage, and power consumption, how fast you can detect
increased demand on the CPU from an application, and how fast you can
ramp up the voltage and frequency to meet that demand, and how fast you
can ramp down to reduce power consumption.
There's a learning curve for the OS to recognize the demands of
different apps, so the initial app load can take longer than subsequent
app loads.
One article nailed it stating "When your iPhone or iPad needs to do a
demanding task, the CPU will ramp up to maximum performance mode more
quickly to get that work done before lowering its performance to use
less battery power to extend your battery life."
<snip>
> Software, on the other hand, can be optimised in different ways even with
> the same hardware. A simple example is two different versions of the same
> software where one has multicore enabled and one doesn't. To the user it's
> exactly the same program, but its performance is very different.
frequencies and voltages is how you make the trade-off between
frequency, voltage, and power consumption, how fast you can detect
increased demand on the CPU from an application, and how fast you can
ramp up the voltage and frequency to meet that demand, and how fast you
can ramp down to reduce power consumption.
There's a learning curve for the OS to recognize the demands of
different apps, so the initial app load can take longer than subsequent
app loads.
One article nailed it stating "When your iPhone or iPad needs to do a
demanding task, the CPU will ramp up to maximum performance mode more
quickly to get that work done before lowering its performance to use
less battery power to extend your battery life."
nospam
Jul 18, 2018, 6:03:32 PM7/18/18
to
In article <piod06$bsg$1...@dont-email.me>, sms
subsequent launches are always faster, even on mac/windows, because
some data does not need to be reloaded again. on ios, apps might be
suspended, not fully quit.
> One article nailed it stating "When your iPhone or iPad needs to do a
> demanding task, the CPU will ramp up to maximum performance mode more
> quickly to get that work done before lowering its performance to use
> less battery power to extend your battery life."
that's just one (small) part of it.
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> There's a learning curve for the OS to recognize the demands of
> different apps, so the initial app load can take longer than subsequent
> app loads.
it doesn't work that way.
> There's a learning curve for the OS to recognize the demands of
> different apps, so the initial app load can take longer than subsequent
> app loads.
subsequent launches are always faster, even on mac/windows, because
some data does not need to be reloaded again. on ios, apps might be
suspended, not fully quit.
> One article nailed it stating "When your iPhone or iPad needs to do a
> demanding task, the CPU will ramp up to maximum performance mode more
> quickly to get that work done before lowering its performance to use
> less battery power to extend your battery life."
Ant
Jul 18, 2018, 10:14:18 PM7/18/18
to
--
Quote of the Week: "Better (to be) an ant's head than a lion's tail." --Armenian and Maltese
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org / http://antfarm.ma.cx
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
| |o o| | ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and URL/link.
\ _ /
( )
nospam
Jul 18, 2018, 10:18:25 PM7/18/18
to
Ant
Jul 19, 2018, 12:36:43 AM7/19/18
to
Arlen Holder
Jul 19, 2018, 4:33:44 AM7/19/18
to
In response to the following from nospam:
> it's faster all around.
And yet, it's not.
Not a single report has been found to date that shows *anywhere near*
two-digit percentage gains, let alone the "up to" 40% "claimed" by Apple
MARKETING.
Many things are plenty slower, most are about the same, and some are indeed
faster, such that the results are all over the place.
And yet, nobody can find even close to this claimed "up to" 40% gain.
*Isn't there another sentient adult on this ng who comprehends fact?*
Or is the entire group composed of fact free man children who wouldn't know
a fact if it hit him in the face?
REMEMBER - this is the same newsgroup that, for weeks, commended an app
that supposedly provided graphical wifi signal strength over time where not
a single person on this iOS newsgroup knew the difference between a megabit
and a decibel! Not nospam. Not Lewis. Not Jolly Roger.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.ipad/-T7FEXIdU9Q/Dhy-LFH3AwAJ>
> it's faster all around.
Not a single report has been found to date that shows *anywhere near*
two-digit percentage gains, let alone the "up to" 40% "claimed" by Apple
MARKETING.
Many things are plenty slower, most are about the same, and some are indeed
faster, such that the results are all over the place.
And yet, nobody can find even close to this claimed "up to" 40% gain.
*Isn't there another sentient adult on this ng who comprehends fact?*
Or is the entire group composed of fact free man children who wouldn't know
a fact if it hit him in the face?
REMEMBER - this is the same newsgroup that, for weeks, commended an app
that supposedly provided graphical wifi signal strength over time where not
a single person on this iOS newsgroup knew the difference between a megabit
and a decibel! Not nospam. Not Lewis. Not Jolly Roger.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.ipad/-T7FEXIdU9Q/Dhy-LFH3AwAJ>
Arlen Holder
Jul 19, 2018, 4:33:46 AM7/19/18
to
In response to the following from nospam:
> i have *actual* *devices* running ios 12 in front of me.
>
> the difference is significant.
>
> you don't understand whatever you supposedly have in front of you.
The funny thing about you, nospam, is that you have zero credibility.
>
> the difference is significant.
>
> you don't understand whatever you supposedly have in front of you.
I am almost never wrong, where you can't find a single instance in my life
that I was wrong - but I'm sure it has happened inadvertently - but it's
extremely rare - simply because I speak facts.
Facts are funny that way.
You?
You just make everything up.
Your accuracy has been proven, time and again, to be worse than the monkey.
Worse, you've been caught in so many brazen claims of imaginary
functionality that nothing you say can ever be believed by any sensible
sentient human being.
Meanwhile, I only speak fact.
Specifically, I searched and read the reviews *before* I asked the
question, and you know that I do that since I can always catch you in a fib
simply by not letting on that I know the answer to the question.
I realize you're a well-proven man child, nospam, so this question which is
posed to you is actually a rhetorical statement, since I know you can never
back up anything you claim (you just make everything up).
Here's the question for you, nospam, that requires actual fact:
*Show us this "up to" 40% performance improvement that Apple claims.*
Arlen Holder
Jul 19, 2018, 4:33:47 AM7/19/18
to
In response to the following from sms:
> If you look at the boot-up time of iOS 12 versus iOS 11 on a iPhone 5s,
> the boot-up time is slower with iOS 12, but then the app launches are
> much faster.
Hi sms,
I expect you, as a fellow educated adult, to understand that you are
telling me what I already said, which is that the numbers are all over the
map, where lots of things are slower, and lots more are slightly faster,
but extremely few things are much faster.
I've provided plenty of real-world figures, from benchmarks (all of which
were about the same) to bootup time (which varied greatly) to app startup
times (which varied even more greatly) to subjective things like
"responsiveness" (which varied from almost no change to some improvement).
Do you think for a second that I said any of that without first knowing the
answer?
While I can't believe that Apple MARKETING is lying yet again the big
public lie, what I can tell you as a responsible intelligent logical adult
is that NOBDOY here has shown even a double-digit percentage increase in
performance - let alone 40% increase in performance - in the available
tests.
I presume you've all googled until your fingernails wore thin, and you
can't find them. Neither did I *before* I posted this thread.
Where is the beef?
Did Apple tell yet again a big public lie?
Are they touting imaginary iOS functionality, again?
*Where is this double-digit 40% improvement?*
> It's obvious what's going on to accomplish this, but I
> think for most people a longer start-up time is an acceptable trade-off
> for much faster app launch time, especially since most people don't turn
> off their phones very often.
> <https://www.cnet.com/news/ios-12-beta-on-an-old-iphone-5s-what-happened-speed-test/>.
I've looked at many numbers *before* I posted this thread.
The best I've seen is single-digit performance improvement (where numbers
were available on both operating systems). Most things are "about the
same". Some are 50% worse.
Where is this "up to" 40% improvement?
Is Apple telling yet again a big bold fib?
Doesn't anyone on this newsgroup utilize logical thought processes?
*Where is this 40% double-digit performance improvement?*
> This is for the 5s, launched in 2013! Can you imagine an Android phone,
> launched in 2013, getting an operating system update? You're lucky to
> get even two years of OS updates, and that's usually only on flagship
> phones. Updates after three years are very rare. The 2016 Galaxy S7
> finally got Android 8 while The 2017 Stylo 3 Plus is not scheduled to
> ever get it.
Let's keep Android out of this because you know full well that the app
functionality on a five year old Android phone is far better than the app
functionality on *any* iOS device ever made - so let's not go down that
track because only a fool would think that iOS app functionality is even
close to that of ancient Android phones, let alone modern ones.
I expect the brain-dead fools like nospam and Jolly Roger to always blame
Android for all of the problems in iOS, but this question has nothing to do
with Android.
The question is where is this performance that Apple touted?
As far as anyone can find, it doesn't exist.
I'm sure Apple has some legal standing for making such outrageous claims,
but I read the reviews *before* I posted this question, so I *knew* there
were none to be found by anyone (AFAICT).
I'm hoping someone here can prove my first assessment wrong.
(Where nospam loves statements like that because he can only play his silly
childish games with such statements - because he's a proven man child).
Where is the beef?
Isn't there a single logical person on this newsgroup?
*If Apple claims "up to" 40% improvement, why can't anyone find it?*
> If you look at the boot-up time of iOS 12 versus iOS 11 on a iPhone 5s,
> the boot-up time is slower with iOS 12, but then the app launches are
> much faster.
I expect you, as a fellow educated adult, to understand that you are
telling me what I already said, which is that the numbers are all over the
map, where lots of things are slower, and lots more are slightly faster,
but extremely few things are much faster.
I've provided plenty of real-world figures, from benchmarks (all of which
were about the same) to bootup time (which varied greatly) to app startup
times (which varied even more greatly) to subjective things like
"responsiveness" (which varied from almost no change to some improvement).
Do you think for a second that I said any of that without first knowing the
answer?
While I can't believe that Apple MARKETING is lying yet again the big
public lie, what I can tell you as a responsible intelligent logical adult
is that NOBDOY here has shown even a double-digit percentage increase in
performance - let alone 40% increase in performance - in the available
tests.
I presume you've all googled until your fingernails wore thin, and you
can't find them. Neither did I *before* I posted this thread.
Where is the beef?
Did Apple tell yet again a big public lie?
Are they touting imaginary iOS functionality, again?
*Where is this double-digit 40% improvement?*
> It's obvious what's going on to accomplish this, but I
> think for most people a longer start-up time is an acceptable trade-off
> for much faster app launch time, especially since most people don't turn
> off their phones very often.
> <https://www.cnet.com/news/ios-12-beta-on-an-old-iphone-5s-what-happened-speed-test/>.
The best I've seen is single-digit performance improvement (where numbers
were available on both operating systems). Most things are "about the
same". Some are 50% worse.
Where is this "up to" 40% improvement?
Is Apple telling yet again a big bold fib?
Doesn't anyone on this newsgroup utilize logical thought processes?
*Where is this 40% double-digit performance improvement?*
> This is for the 5s, launched in 2013! Can you imagine an Android phone,
> launched in 2013, getting an operating system update? You're lucky to
> get even two years of OS updates, and that's usually only on flagship
> phones. Updates after three years are very rare. The 2016 Galaxy S7
> finally got Android 8 while The 2017 Stylo 3 Plus is not scheduled to
> ever get it.
functionality on a five year old Android phone is far better than the app
functionality on *any* iOS device ever made - so let's not go down that
track because only a fool would think that iOS app functionality is even
close to that of ancient Android phones, let alone modern ones.
I expect the brain-dead fools like nospam and Jolly Roger to always blame
Android for all of the problems in iOS, but this question has nothing to do
with Android.
The question is where is this performance that Apple touted?
As far as anyone can find, it doesn't exist.
I'm sure Apple has some legal standing for making such outrageous claims,
but I read the reviews *before* I posted this question, so I *knew* there
were none to be found by anyone (AFAICT).
I'm hoping someone here can prove my first assessment wrong.
(Where nospam loves statements like that because he can only play his silly
childish games with such statements - because he's a proven man child).
Where is the beef?
Isn't there a single logical person on this newsgroup?
*If Apple claims "up to" 40% improvement, why can't anyone find it?*
Arlen Holder
Jul 19, 2018, 4:33:49 AM7/19/18
to
In response to the following from Chris:
> You do realise that a hardware profiler will always give the same (or at
> least very similar) result for the same hardware regardless of the software
> that's on it? Right? To expect anything different is odd.
>
> Software, on the other hand, can be optimised in different ways even with
> the same hardware. A simple example is two different versions of the same
> software where one has multicore enabled and one doesn't. To the user it's
> exactly the same program, but its performance is very different.
I already provided *plenty* of real world numbers, where, for example
And on the iPad Mini 2, for example
*The native iOS News app loaded 50% _slower_ on iOS 12 than on iOS 11.4!*
Meanwhile, sms posted iPhone 5s results showing, for example:
*The startup time was 9 seconds _slower_ on iOS 12 than iOS11.4!*
At the same time, on the iPhone X, for example:
*Amazon Prime Video was 2 seconds _slower_ on iOS 12 than on iOS 11.4!*
Despite the fact that you want to pooh pooh benchmark results, you can't
deny that the benchmark results on all these phones were "about the same".
Nor can any of you even *find* that illustrious (imaginary perhaps?)
double-digit performance improvement that Apple MARKETING touted.
Where's the beef?
Where on earth is there even a double-digit percentage improvement?
Show us the beef.
Even Apple doesn't say where they get their (imaginary perhaps?) numbers!
I only speak facts.
You can pooh pooh the benchmark scores all you want, but that doesn't
change the fact that they're "about the same".
You can pooh pooh the startup scores all you want, but that doesn't change
that they are facts.
What you can't do is *find* these (imaginary perhaps?) double-digit
percentage increases anywhere.
Where is the beef?
> You do realise that a hardware profiler will always give the same (or at
> least very similar) result for the same hardware regardless of the software
> that's on it? Right? To expect anything different is odd.
>
> Software, on the other hand, can be optimised in different ways even with
> the same hardware. A simple example is two different versions of the same
> software where one has multicore enabled and one doesn't. To the user it's
> exactly the same program, but its performance is very different.
*The iPhone 6 launched 6 seconds _slower_ on iOS 12 than on iOS 11.4!*
*The App Store launched 2 seconds _slower_ on iOS 12 than on iOS 11.4!*
And on the iPad Mini 2, for example
*The native iOS News app loaded 50% _slower_ on iOS 12 than on iOS 11.4!*
Meanwhile, sms posted iPhone 5s results showing, for example:
*The startup time was 9 seconds _slower_ on iOS 12 than iOS11.4!*
At the same time, on the iPhone X, for example:
*Amazon Prime Video was 2 seconds _slower_ on iOS 12 than on iOS 11.4!*
Despite the fact that you want to pooh pooh benchmark results, you can't
deny that the benchmark results on all these phones were "about the same".
Nor can any of you even *find* that illustrious (imaginary perhaps?)
double-digit performance improvement that Apple MARKETING touted.
Where's the beef?
Where on earth is there even a double-digit percentage improvement?
Show us the beef.
Even Apple doesn't say where they get their (imaginary perhaps?) numbers!
I only speak facts.
You can pooh pooh the benchmark scores all you want, but that doesn't
change the fact that they're "about the same".
You can pooh pooh the startup scores all you want, but that doesn't change
that they are facts.
What you can't do is *find* these (imaginary perhaps?) double-digit
percentage increases anywhere.
Where is the beef?
nospam
Jul 19, 2018, 9:12:40 AM7/19/18
to
Arlen Holder
Jul 19, 2018, 12:37:38 PM7/19/18
to
On 19 Jul 2018 06:12:39 GMT, nospam wrote:
>> And yet, it's not.
>
> it absolutely is.
>
> you have not used it.
Hehhehheh...
>> And yet, it's not.
>
> it absolutely is.
>
> you have not used it.
I quote actual published tests, proving what I say.
Facts are funny that way.
You just guess, with your accuracy rate far worse than that of the monkey.
Plus, you blatantly fabricate iOS functionality that doesn't even exist.
Nothing you say is credible, nospam. Nothing.
The only thing that matters are facts, and the fact is that, overall, the
release is "about the same" in performance on a variety of phones, with the
numbers being all over the map.
Some apps launch 50% slower, some a single-digit percentage faster (as far
as the reports sms and I've seen show), but most are "about the same".
That's pretty bad considering the catastrophe that was iOS 11 last year.
While I would hope Apple isn't telling a blatant public lie yet again,
nobody has found this magical (perhaps imaginary?) "up to" 40% improvement.
Hence, the only fact that matters here, nospam, & you don't have it, is:
*Show us reliable tests showing "up to" 40% performance improvement!*
nospam
Jul 19, 2018, 12:53:08 PM7/19/18
to
In article <piqeoh$d8p$2...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder
no you didn't. you have *no* understanding of what you quoted.
<https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/6479026/iphone-ios-12-update-ipad-speed-p
erformance-loading-faster/>
iPhone owners using iOS 12 on phones as old as 2013's iPhone 5S are
reporting huge performance improvements, potentially adding years of
life to their device.
...
Another cheery iPhone owner said: "iOS 12 is insanely fast! Running
it on my [iPhone] 7 Plus and this thing feels new as day one. It's
almost unreal how fast and fluid this [update] is."
...
"It really is something. I loaded it up on my old [iPhone] 5S and it
runs so much better than I would have imagined," a Reddit user
revealed.
...
Some users who own an iPad Mini 2 and have updated to iOS 12 have
noticed a major speed boost, even though the tablet launched way back
in October 2013.
...
User /u/michael60310 wrote: "Way faster and zero bugs I can find. If
you don't mention it's a beta I wouldn't even notice."
...
"Fast forward to today, running the latest beta and I am shocked.
This thing is practically new. The OS is snappy, apps load up a lot
faster, and it really feels like it has gotten a second life. Thanks,
Apple."
no you didn't. you have *no* understanding of what you quoted.
<https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/6479026/iphone-ios-12-update-ipad-speed-p
erformance-loading-faster/>
iPhone owners using iOS 12 on phones as old as 2013's iPhone 5S are
reporting huge performance improvements, potentially adding years of
life to their device.
...
Another cheery iPhone owner said: "iOS 12 is insanely fast! Running
it on my [iPhone] 7 Plus and this thing feels new as day one. It's
almost unreal how fast and fluid this [update] is."
...
"It really is something. I loaded it up on my old [iPhone] 5S and it
runs so much better than I would have imagined," a Reddit user
revealed.
...
Some users who own an iPad Mini 2 and have updated to iOS 12 have
noticed a major speed boost, even though the tablet launched way back
in October 2013.
...
User /u/michael60310 wrote: "Way faster and zero bugs I can find. If
you don't mention it's a beta I wouldn't even notice."
...
"Fast forward to today, running the latest beta and I am shocked.
This thing is practically new. The OS is snappy, apps load up a lot
faster, and it really feels like it has gotten a second life. Thanks,
Apple."
Arlen Holder
Jul 19, 2018, 2:52:21 PM7/19/18
to
On 19 Jul 2018 09:53:07 GMT, nospam wrote:
> no you didn't. you have *no* understanding of what you quoted.
hehhehheh ...
> no you didn't. you have *no* understanding of what you quoted.
*You never fail to lose on credibility, nospam.*
Never.
No wonder you saved your "reference source" for last.
*The Sun*
Jesus. That's it? The Sun? That's your technical reference?
*You quote The Sun as your "technical" source, for heaven's sake?*
The Sun quotes idiotic Apple users who wouldn't know how to perform a
scientific side-by-side test if their lives depended on it.
The user quote I loved best was "It's almost too good to be true."
Jesus. You really take the cake nospam on lack of any credibility.
Meanwhile, I quoted all Apple Insider actual test results with multiple
phones side by side (plus some quotes from sms' CNET reference, which I
consider inferior technically, to Apple Insider side-by-side tests).
Arlen Holder
Jul 21, 2018, 3:18:10 PM7/21/18
to
On 17 Jul 2018 18:01:22 GMT, Arlen Holder wrote:
> *What's the performance improvement in iOS 12?*
Suffice to conclude, unless new data arises, that the beta 12 has *zero*
> *What's the performance improvement in iOS 12?*
overall performance benefits over iOS 11.4, where, as I said from the
start, all reports show that some apps are %50 slower, some things are up
to single-digit percentages faster, and most are just about the same as
before.
Hence, Apple MARKETING's claim of "up to 40%" improvement hasn't been
vindicated even to the second digit on those percentages.
I'd *love* to be proven wrong, since all I care about are facts.
(Facts are funny that way ... they either exist ... or they don't.)
At the moment, the summary is that *nobody* can find this illusive (perhaps
imaginary? I hope not) "up to 40%" performance gain in a single device.
I suspect the iPhone X is where they'll "optimize" at least one app to have
that gain, but nobody has found it yet.
Those are the facts.
0 new messages