BenchmarkXPRT Blog banner

Category: Let us know your thoughts

Thinking about TouchXPRT scenarios

Last week I looked at the roles in TouchXPRT that would make sense on a touch-based device like a tablet. I suggested seven possible ones. The next step is to create usage models and scenarios based on those roles. In turn, we would need to develop simple apps to do these things. To get the ball rolling, here are some activity and scenario ideas we came up with for one of the roles—consuming and manipulating media.

After doing email and reading books, this is one of the main things I do on my iPad. Originally, in this role I mostly showed pictures or videos (especially of my grandsons) to people. (Yes, people do hide when they see me coming with my iPad in hand saying, “You gotta see this!”) As the iPad and its apps have grown, I’ve found myself doing some cleaning up of photos, video, and even sound directly on the iPad. I think a person in this role is not necessarily an expert in media, but like most of us enjoys playing with media. So, the person might do something like scale/trim a video or add a nice cross-dissolve between two video clips. Maybe the person would even create a video montage by combining stock travel footage with personal video clips. Beyond simply rotating and cropping photos, the person might add some stock preset effects like making them sepia toned, adding titles, or creating a postcard. The person might create a slideshow based on a set of travel photos and use some visual or audio effects. They might also add sound by manipulating audio clips. Based upon these kinds of usages, the apps would include some of the features found in apps like iMovie, Instagram, SnapSeed, PhotoGene, iPhoto, and GarageBand.

What do you think? How do those activities match your usage of touch-based devices? What would you add, subtract, or change? Do you have suggestions for the other roles? Thanks for your help in defining what TouchXPRT will be.

Bill

Comment on this post in the forums

Here a core, there a core…

Earlier this week, Apple announced its latest iPad. While the improvements seem to be largely incremental, I can’t wait to get my hands on one. (As an aside, I wonder how much work and how many arguments it took to come up with the name “new iPad.” I thought Apple had finally gotten over their longstanding fear of the number 3 with the iPhone 3, but I guess not.)

One of the incremental improvements that caught my eye, especially in light of trying to test the performance of touch devices, is the new iPad’s processor, the A5X. It’s hard to get a straight story as most reports refer to the chip as a quad-core processor and Apple referred to quad-core graphics. As best I can ferret out amidst the hype, the A5X is a quad-core for graphics, but for other operations it functions only as a dual-core.

Regardless of the specifics of the chip, it does have multiple cores for general execution and for graphics. Multiple processing units is an important trend over the last decade for processors in devices from PCs to tablets to phones. The interesting question to me is what is the proper way to benchmark devices in light of that trend. The problem is that for some things, the extra cores don’t help. For others, two cores may be twice as fast as one core. Similarly, additional dedicated processing units (such as for graphics) help only for particular operations.

The right answer to me is to do as we are trying to do with both HDXPRT and TouchXPRT—start with what people really do. That means that some usage scenarios and applications will benefit from additional processing units, while others will not. That should correspond with what people really experience. To make the results more useful, it would be helpful to try and understand which operations are most affected by additional general or special purpose processing units.

How do you think we should look at devices with multiple and varied processing units? I’d love to get your feedback and incorporate it into both HDXPRT and TouchXPRT over the coming months.

Bill

Comment on this post in the forums

Bye, bye 32 bits?

In developing HDXPRT 2012, we have encountered a dilemma. The problem is the amount of effort necessary to support 32-bit as well as 64-bit. While the world is moving to 64-bit Windows, some older platforms as well as possibly some lower-end devices still use 32-bit Windows. Our feeling is that the effort necessary to support 32-bit Windows would be better spent elsewhere, such as working on TouchXPRT. Further, supporting 32-bit Windows might have a noticeable impact on when we can complete HDXPRT 2012.

The downside in supporting only 64-bit Windows is that we had hoped to be able to increase the range of devices HDXPRT 2012 supports. The advent of TouchXPRT, however, means that it might be the more appropriate benchmark for those lower-end devices that consume content rather than create it. What do you think? This is one decision where we would really like your input. So, should we support 32-bit Windows or limit HDXPRT to 64-bit? Thanks!

Bill

Comment on this post in the forums

Art or sausage?

I discussed in my previous blog how weighing the tradeoffs between real science and real world in benchmark is a real art. One person felt it was more akin to sausage making than art! In truth, I have made that comparison myself.

That, of course, got me thinking. Is the process of creating a benchmark like that of creating sausage? With sausage, the feeling is that if you knew what went into sausage, you probably wouldn’t eat it. That may well be true, but I would still like to know that someone was inspecting the sausage factory. Sausage that contains strange animal parts is one thing, but sausage containing E. coli is another.

We are trying with the Development Community to use transparency to create better benchmarks. My feeling is that the more inspectors (members) there are, the better the benchmark will be. At least to me, unlike making sausage, creating benchmarks is actually cool. (There are probably sausage artisans who feel the same way about sausage.)

What do you think? Would you prefer to know what goes into making a benchmark? We hope so and hope that is why you are a part of this community. If you are not part of the Development Community, we encourage you to join at http://hdxprt.com/forum/register.php. Come join us in the sausage-making art house!

Bill

Comment on this post in the forums

Who is on board?

While talking with people at CES about HDXPRT and the upcoming touch benchmark, I encountered the same question a few times—Who are the current members of the Development Community? My answer was something along the lines of “About 10 PC hardware vendors, about the same number of press people, and a few other folks from companies around the world.” I was, however, itching to name the companies because the list is really pretty impressive. We haven’t asked for permission from the Development Community members, though, so I left my answer vague.

Given our goal of expanding the Development Community, I find myself weighing two possible outcomes if we were to make public the names of the companies represented. On the one hand, it could encourage others to join us (“All the other cool kids are doing it, I guess I will too!”). On the other hand, it could discourage others from joining us (“Not sure how my company would feel about this. Should I ask Legal? I’m too busy, never mind.”)

My best plan for now is to email each member individually and ask where he or she stands on company anonymity. And to give all new members the option of keeping their affiliation off the record. Rest assured that we will definitely not reveal this information without your permission.

We’d like to know what you think. Would you have joined the Development Community if doing so required identifying your company and allowing us to share it? Would you now be willing to let us say that someone from your company is a member?

Bill

Comment on this post in the forums

CES: Gadget overload

I never thought I would say this, but there are more electronic gadgets and toys than I want. While walking the many cavernous show floors of CES, I saw cool bicycle gadgets from iBike (www.ibikedash.com). One device is a case for your iPhone that transforms it into a cycling computer. Because it measures wind speed, it actually is more capable than any existing bike computer—it uses data you supply like your type of bike and your weight, GPS info and knowledge of the terrain, and readings on wind speed and your heart rate to calculate your power output. If it works reliably, it would provide data that normally requires a cycle power meter costing a couple thousand dollars. If you are not into cycling, you probably don’t care, but it does show how our phones are becoming the gathering point for a myriad of data sources around us. I definitely need to try one of these out when they become available in March.

I also saw solar panels from Sharp (SunSnap) that have the inverter built in so that they output AC power directly. This gets around the messy inverter and wiring problems of typical panels that output DC power. Now, if I can get my homeowners association to agree, I need some of these.

I also saw TVs that were enormous, like 84-inch LCD, and gorgeous, like the 55-inch OLED, both from LG. I saw Windows 8 tablets and cars and iPhone cases and e-cigarettes. Basically, I reached gadget overload. At least the future of technology does not appear to be boring!

Thanks so much to the folks that stopped by our suite to talk about HDXPRT, the upcoming touch benchmark, and what they see as the future of benchmarking. We will be doing our best over the coming months to incorporate your ideas and suggestions. If you were not able to visit with us, please feel free to drop me an email and let me know what you are thinking.

Bill

Comment on this post in the forums

Check out the other XPRTs:

Forgot your password?