by James S » Aug 28, 2002 @ 9:52pm
Well, the answer to your multiple choice question is all of the above. All of those are intertwined to create one large problem. But if the PocketPC OS were optimized for XScale then the speed increase from 206MHz SARM to 400MHz XScale would wield nearly the increase one would expect from double the megahertz. Here's an example:
The iPaq H3955, Compaq's XScale PocketPC, runs PocketTV files at 22fps.
The Zayo PocketPC, Asus' XScale PocketPC, runs PocketTV files at 56fps.
The Zayo PocketPC has an optimized operating system. It's still PocketPC WindowsCE3.0, but Asus took the time to optimize it. Compaq was the first to release an XScale PocketPC, along with Toshiba, so they really didn't know how wide spread the issues could end up being. Asus has had 3 months to look at an analyze the XScale before releasing it. Same thing with the e550g Genio device. Both have optimized software which, as you can see, gives the processor around a 125% speed increase over unoptimized.
I'm confident that, seeing these optimized XScale PocketPC's using software optimizations within the OS, that Compaq will be able to release updates to increase the performance of the XScale iPaqs. As long as things have settled down from the HP/Compaq merger enough.
I would definitely not say it was Microsoft's "fault" for the unoptimized OS. WindowsCE.NET is optimized for XScale. I believe the manufacturers, Compaq, Toshiba, rushed the 400MHz XScale just to get some kind of marketing advantage over the 206MHz devices they'd be sitting next to, especially since the price difference in the old ARMs and new XScales is nearly nil.
<img src="http://home.comcast.net/~sonne/james/tag.gif">