Storage Efficiency stuff.

[rosettaZ]

Well you know how the 'report' goes
http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/palm/competitive.pdf

I really want to know for sure all this "Storage Efficiency" stuff for once and all.

Right now the comparison list is very bare bone. Ideally It'll contain most popular 10-15 apps from both sides along with the equivalent of functionalities from the other. To make things easy at first, just popular apps are listed along with closest equivalent plus the memory uptake. ARM version only for PPC. Specific platform quirks and external storage consideration will be dealt after the basic list is built.

The goal:
- know more precisely about this "Storage efficiency" idea
- have some idea how much memory each platfrom needs if asked for approximately same apps feature.
- provide basic conversion picture to people who wants to know.
- see if the myth of 1:10 memory uptake between PPC and POS is true or not.

If somebody know more apps or pair of apps along with their memory up take please post them.

---------------------------------------------
Memory uptake comparison preliminary titles.

-POS
PalmReader (734kb)
Dataviewer (423kb)
iSilo program (349kb)

Aeroplayer (646kb)
WorldMate (502kb)

Pinball (896kb)
ChessGenius (83kb)


-PPC
PalmReader (284kb)
DataViewer (479kb)
iSilo (449kb)

GSPlayer (326kb)
WorldMate (660kb)

Porta-Pinball 1.04 (480kb)
pChess (120kb)

---------------------------------
More PPC candidates:
Wisbar 95K
pexplorer 80K
tdLaunch 50K
tAgenda 10k
PHMregistry 94k
ftxbrowser 60k
Turbotray 18k
DES encryption 16K

uBook 412K (opens .PDB, .PRC, .TXT, .RTF and .HTML)
pNester 338K
PStreet 260K
Transcriber 877K
PDAmillViewer 158K
pMVP 1,072K (opens .mp3, .avi. mpeg, .ogg)
Go 33K

[Jason Dunn]

This forum isn't for platform advocacy one way or another - it's for "Help & Tips" for people moving from Palm to Pocket PC, period. :wink: I've moved your post into the Just Chatting forum.

[rosettaZ]

You "mod" move it there, check with them first . This thread is originally over here, since this is the only forum with traffic that can give the head post input.

[Crystal Eitle]

You "mod" move it there, check with them first . This thread is originally over here, since this is the only forum with traffic that can give the head post input.

I think a lot of users here use the "new posts" button to view all new posts in all forums at once. Therefore, I saw your post even though I don't own a Palm (and never have! and perhaps never will!) Don't worry about whether people see your post - they will.

[rosettaZ]

.. well mmm...

anybody have actual input? I'll just remove the post to different site if this is so inconvinient.

[Jason Dunn]

anybody have actual input? I'll just remove the post to different site if this is so inconvinient.

Don't pout :wink: , it's only been 8 hours since your original post, and you posted it in the middle of the night for our North American readers, so give it some time.

I don't have a Palm, so I can't offer any specific input to your question. To be honest though, I'm not sure how much sense this makes - you can't compare different binaries from different companies and come up with any meaningful data. Even if you were to get programs from the same company (like ListPro), unless they have 100% feature parity, the comparison isn't accurate.

Why does it matter anyway? :wink:

[rosettaZ]

-One of Palm inc. main contention is their models only need 16mb memory. Because it is enough to provide equivalent feature compared to 32-64mb PPC RAM, hence their hype about 'storage efficiency'. (So apparently it's important enough for somebody to even create a term and make a report)

-now it's very hard to go directly to feature/memory efficiency, so I'll take the easy first start with application/memory uptake. Probably from there apps features/memory efficiency can be checked. For eg. does 2mb PPC application really only worth a single 200kb Palm apps capability or Palm need 2-3 apps to match the features like I suspect.

-For binary size, even if we are comparing title per title memory uptake. It is said to be in the range of 1:10...or some other insanely big ratio. I want to see if it is true or not, if not what is the closer ratio.

-even only comparing memory uptake data for top selling application, at least on can compare how memory is being popularly used on both platform.

-all raw data is meaningless. It's the interpretation afterward which might be usefull.

-I don't use a lot of top selling PPC apps like PI or AF, and to be honest I really don't fell like donwloading them and figure out all number myself. heh..
that's one reason why I post...

-some people scrutinize web traffic data and forum post pattern, I collect useless handheld comparison data. Call it a hobby, if you need some sort of justification.

[thomas1973]

I guess the point was to fight the belief that PPC programs are so much larger and memory inefficient. I think rosettaZ proved her(?) point. I know some programs and databases/docs use more memory on PPC than Palm, but I'm happy to see this isn't always the case.

I would also like to say the PPC platform is designed with the extra memory use in mind, as PPC's usually come with 32/64 MB ROM, whereas the 'standard' on Palm OS has been 8/16 MB (... and, yes, I do know there are PPCs/Palms with more/less RAM... and, yes, I do know these numbers are 'dated', but I wanted to show the standard the last year or so...)

Another reason for PPC databases/docs taking up more space, is that they keep their format, going from PC desktop to PPC. They are interchangable, and usually don't need any conversion, as is the case with Palm.

RosettaZ: Hope you're happy someone commented! Chill! :hippy:


Thomas.

[Jason Dunn]

Another thing to think about is the size of the data. Will an MP3 be any smaller on a Palm than a Pocket PC? What about a JPEG image (320 x 240 vs. 320 x 320 in some case)? No, probably not. :mrgreen:

[rosettaZ]

data file is not a problem for PPC since a lot of apps have on the fly .zip capability, for eg. e-book, emulators. And for office apps, there is zip/unzip utility. Compression utility in Palm is fairly primitive and cumbersome affair.

The rest of advance compression algorithm. is pretty much 1:1. (pictures, audio etc)

but gotta home in on apps first to find the number. Popular PPC/Palm models has built in RAM ratio about 1:4 or so.

[dh]

All this fighting between POS and PPC gets rather boring in the end. At the end of the day, some people like the Palms and some like Pocket PC. Nothing that supporters of either side is going to say will make a bit of difference.

I don't care if a file is a bit smaller on a POS than my PPC. On my Dell with 256MB SD card and 1GB CF card, I'm not hard up for storage space. I have all the applications that I need (or want) right now with plenty of room in the main or storage memory for many more.

For years I used a Palm Vx and it did everything I needed. Now I have my Axim that does everything I need today. Tomorrow, who knows? None of the new Palms tempts me to go back, same with PPC none of the current offerings make me want to replace the Dell.

I guess, like many others, I would like to see a bit of hardware innovation from the PPC camp. That's the way to get me to buy a new device.

[Kati Compton]

but gotta home in on apps first to find the number. Popular PPC/Palm models has built in RAM ratio about 1:4 or so.

On my PPC, most of my room is taken not by applications, but by data (primarily .mp3's, some theme (.tsk) files).

Really, it's important to measure how much total space you think you need. If you don't think you need data files or ebooks or whatever, then application size does matter. If, like many other users, it's the data files that use the largest part of your RAM/ROM, then the app size isn't as important.

I'm getting flashbacks of Amdahl's law here....

[dh]

Agree 100%. If I had to choose between more RAM or bigger CF card, the card wins everytime!

Since a music or movie file is the same size regardless of the type of PDA being used, the best device for me is the one that gives me the best storeage options.

This is the main reason I have an Axim rather than a Sony NX.

[rosettaZ]

On my PPC, most of my room is taken not by applications, but by data (primarily .mp3's, some theme (.tsk) files).

Really, it's important to measure how much total space you think you need. If you don't think you need data files or ebooks or whatever, then application size does matter. If, like many other users, it's the data files that use the largest part of your RAM/ROM, then the app size isn't as important.

It's going to take a lot more data to get what you want...

ultimately, but not until there are enough data, everybody can use the data say "what if I use the other platfrom and want to keep all functionalites plus add my data, how much memory would each platfrom use?" then he'll pluck and add up all memory uptake data and compare side by side.

But I don't think I'll even go that far, I'll just create 2 PPC profiles, one low budget user, where he stuff his PPC with the greatest freebie apps, and second a generic Joe, where he just pretty much buy what everybody buy and use PDA like the other million joe use it. Then create make the comparable POS profiles.

as of now, the way I see it I can easily categorize memory use as:

-system overhead
-utility
-Apps
-user data

In term of percentage memory uptake, the ratio of each app to overall available space, Palm burns a high percentage of space in utility and system overhead (eg. 600kb patch, browser temp, hacks, enhancement, file utility) A 600kb patch in 1:4 PPC situation would mean ~2MB patch!

for user data, Palm is quickly losing the traditional PIM/database advantage too, since user move to richer and richer content. (pictures, ebook, audio, even movie) Plus this area is pretty trivial to calculate, I don't feel it is terribly interesting to investigate.

So in the end it goes back to compiling app/utilities list and memory uptake again, then build the synthetic profile before comparing both platforms.

[Kati Compton]

Really, it's important to measure how much total space you think you need. If you don't think you need data files or ebooks or whatever, then application size does matter. If, like many other users, it's the data files that use the largest part of your RAM/ROM, then the app size isn't as important.

It's going to take a lot more data to get what you want...


No. Music files are what take up the most room in my unit. Music file size would be independent of device. So for whatever I get, Palm or PPC, I need about the same amount of total storage. This can include expansion cards, of course, and not just the built-in RAM.

So to be even more accurate, I don't care so much how much RAM/ROM the unit has (for my purposes), but that it has CF and/or SD, because I refuse to buy a memory stick. I prefer CF over SD due to capacity/$ issues.

When I was referencing Amdahl's law, this is something used in engineering to say "don't sweat the small stuff". So lets say that I have 512MB of memory in my PPC, 95% (486.4MB) of which is mp3's, and 5% (25.6MB) of which is programs and PPC-format data like Excel files / Word files. And then say that Palm-format data and Palm programs are 50% smaller than PPC, which should be an exaggeration. This would lead to 12.8MB of programs/data on a Palm, PLUS the 486.4MB of songs = 499.2MB. This is only a decrease of 12.8MB. So by reducing program size by half, I'm only saving 2.5% of my total memory usage, and I still need about 512MB. This is why I don't sweat the size difference of PPC programs / program-specific data files.

Granted, this doesn't apply to everyone (ie, those not using a PPC for music), but it's why you have to consider how you use the memory to see if the difference is actually significant.

That being said, the Microsoft GUI code does add a lot of overhead to programs. :( But it's not something that bothers me enough to start a crusade. Efficient programming just becomes less critical as more resources are available to the program, and fewer resources (like time) are available to the programmer.

I think it really is going to start coming down to which you actually *like* more, not which is most perfectly optimal in every way.


EDIT - corrected spelling, oh-so-helpfully pointed out by Janak...:razzing:

[rosettaZ]

overal user data pattern is not known, and file type you propose just might be a small case instead of general pattern for both platforms. I personally don't think Palm models are that mp3 friendly. (no freebie players, file management is somewhat clumsy, and the sound quality doesn't seem to satisfy hardcor headbannger. But this is utter speculation on my part)

so...
from the scant survey that I did, It seems majority of Palm storage space are still largely occupied by apps. People are still talking about putting somewhere between 4-6mb of apps, plus under 6mb of data. The SD seems to have same pattern. (about 40-50% of storage space in Palm still represent apps)

The scene in PPC on the other hand is very different. my puny storage size(RAM+SD) seems to have 30% apps, 50% data, and little space left. (need new SD.. gah!) I wish I could stuff more mp3. But i don't have big SD, so I haven't approach your situation where a very large percentage of space is taken by multimedia data.

my point about all this?
I don't think we have approach a situation where only 5% of storage space is devoted to this hotly debated "apps" type of data. Most people still use a relatively large storage space for apps. I would say somewhere in the range of 20-40mb, guesstimating from last PPCT "how many apps do you own" . And even with 128mb SD, which was just only recently reach affordable price, it would still account for 10-20% of space. (Okay the number is approaching your 5% point, but I am betting everybody is poor sods like me and doesn't already own 512MB SD/CF.)


-Well, it's time to make a poll I guess, to determine if we have approach this 5% apps space point.
(it could be that surveywill indicate PPC user file types have indeed approach the proportion you suggest. If that is the case, yeah the entire exercise is sort of a moot point.)

[Kati Compton]

-Well, it's time to make a poll I guess, to determine if we have approach this 5% apps space point.
(it could be that surveywill indicate PPC user file types have indeed approach the proportion you suggest. If that is the case, yeah the entire exercise is sort of a moot point.)

It was just one example. The general rule is that you have:

<total_storage>*<percent_fixed_size> + <total_storage>*<percent_variable_size> = <memory needed>

So if you say 128MB total, 15% is variable, even if using Palm made the apps take up 1.92MB instead of 19.2MB, which would be really unlikely, you still need 110.72MB, requiring a 128MB unit anyway, as I don't think you can get a 111MB unit. ;) FYI - my own "fixed" data size is probably ~90%-95%. Game ROMs and Infocom files also fall under the fixed category, and they can be quite large.

Note that the programs and sizes you listed actually made it look like PPCs on the whole need LESS memory than POS machines. But anyway -

If on the other hand, you have 128MB total, only 15% is fixed, and the rest is a 1:10 ratio, then 128MB on the PPC would be equivalent to 128*.15 + 128*.85*.1 = 19.2 + 10.88 = 30.8MB on a Palm. Without debating the likelihood of the 1:10 ratio (which I'd never heard of), this illustrates how the difference in fixed vs. variable is important to determining "equivalent" memory sizes between the two.

I'm still not convinced it's worthwhile to calculate it out, but since you think it is, I would have to say that if you don't know usage patterns, there isn't a valid comparison that you can actually make in terms of storage requirements.

So again, I would suggest that you instead determine, for whomever it is you're trying to make a purchasing decition, if there's a killer app available on one but not the other, which OS is more comfortable to use, etc. And just go with that rather than worrying about storage efficiency. Even if you're trying to get a black and white logical comparison by the numbers, the numbers don't cooperate because there's too many variables that depend on human factors.

I think this is the point in the conversation where I start doing a Dr. McCoy impersonation, and talk about green-blooded Vulcans and their logic.... ;)

[maximus]

my point about all this?
I don't think we have approach a situation where only 5% of storage space is devoted to this hotly debated "apps" type of data. Most people still use a relatively large storage space for apps. I would say somewhere in the range of 20-40mb, guesstimating from last PPCT "how many apps do you own" . And even with 128mb SD, which was just only recently reach affordable price, it would still account for 10-20% of space. (Okay the number is approaching your 5% point, but I am betting everybody is poor sods like me and doesn't already own 512MB SD/CF.)


OK, I volunteered to be a research subject for your thesis. These are my data :

Internal Storage: 64MB+48MB
External Storage that are commonly inserted into PPC: 256MB SD + 1G CF
Total Storage = 1392MB

Installed applications: Running Voice, PocketMVP, and other smaller apps and games. Nothing else. Total size of application is .. around 7MB.
The 256SD is fully occupied with oggs + data from office.
The 1GCF is fully occupied with oggs.

So, the storage on my PPC has a ratio of (apps vs. data) 7/(7+256+1024)*100% = 0.5%

For most of us, regular users who are not really into programming, hacking, wardialling, warwalking, etc., I say 5% ratio of apps vs data is too much.

[dh]

Sorry Rosetta, I think you are writing a load of old bollocks.

I'm probably a typical user (kati obviously is as well).

The built in ROM of the PPC (and Palm if you want) is more than enough for the number of applications anyone needs. Remember you can run apps from a card as well if need be.

What takes up space is data, MP3 files, OGG files, movies, maps, books and pictures. My 1GB CF card is just about full and I have to swap movies around to take with me. (most of my movies are just under 200MB in size so I keep three on my CF card at a time)

All of these can be happily stored on a card (SD or CF doesn't matter). I don't doubt that all your calculations make sense, but the truth is no-one cares. Like I said earlier, if you like POS you will buy a Palm or Sony, if you like PPC that's what you will buy.

All the fine detail is meaningless. Palm OS makes for a great simple organiser (quite sophisticated if an NX or NZ) and PPC makes a mobile computer. The difference between the two will continue to get blured as both OSs move more into each other's space.

I'm not trying to be rude, maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see what you are trying to prove.

[Kati Compton]

Well, I'm not sure we are actually the TYPICAL users, even if we are the average of the people reading the thread... ;)

I guess the other way to look at it, is that to get even a 25% difference in memory requirements of Palm vs. PPC, using 1:10 ratio, you'd need to have:

Mem*x + Mem*(1-x)*.1 = .75 Mem
Mem*x - Mem*x*.1 + Mem*.1 = .75*Mem
Mem*x*.9 = .65*Mem
x*.9 = .65
x = .72

At least 28% programs/program data. Note that this is regardless of the the size of the memory, as I'm using percentages, and "Mem" drops out of the equation. My math may be wrong of course, from thinking too hard all day.

If the 1:10 ratio turns out to be overdramatic, you'd need even more programs vs. fixed files to make a significant difference.

Your needs may fall into this category, which is fine, but there are many people for whom this would not apply.

[rosettaZ]

<total_storage>*<percent_fixed_size> + <total_storage>*<percent_variable_size> = <memory needed>

So if you say 128MB total, 15% is variable, even if using Palm made the apps take up 1.92MB instead of 19.2MB, which would be really unlikely, you still need 110.72MB, requiring a 128MB unit anyway, as I don't think you can get a 111MB unit. ;)

No it can't go that way, the fixed and variable_size variable can only be determined after app feature comparison/inspection. ( as pointed out before. Admitedly I don't quiet understand how I should figure out those variables beside from actual applications memory uptake)

also, to be perfectly honest, the 1:4 ratio was based on T|T/Z71 vs 64mb's PPC models. It's not a really strong number, so I rather not go with percentage first to determine memory needed. The number will change as storage available increases. It is that much more straight forward to create generic user profile and count the memory uptake from that profile list, instead of working it backward from variables that hasn't been proved, let alone used to calculate memory needed.

It also masks memory management issues specially in POS where user cannot just put apps anywhere in combined storage available.


Note that the programs and sizes you listed actually made it look like PPCs on the whole need LESS memory than POS machines. But anyway -

Well, the list doesn't even resemble a real user profile yet. Look at the app mix, which is why I post and hoping there will be more memory uptake data being posted. (guess I was wrong... lol)


I'm still not convinced it's worthwhile to calculate it out, but since you think it is, I would have to say that if you don't know usage patterns, there isn't a valid comparison that you can actually make in terms of storage requirements.

It's long weekend, I was bored. lol

for usage pattern I guess I just have to pull it out of the air, home made poll, top selling chart, etc. and create a syntetic user profile and compare them between the two platforms and hope It come out believable.

It's not like there is a comprehensive data available to the public which tell how PDA is being used generally anyway. So if I create a generic profile, and everybody like it, it'll fly. (very scientific eh? :P )

-----------
to those who insist carrying 1GB CF + 128mb SD.
ehrr.. even at current street price they still cost upward of $300. I don't know, I am not terribly convinced they are common yet.

Plus it will accentuate further the size of storage available to PPC vs POS, not that it is relevant to 'memory efficiency stuff'

[Kati Compton]

<total_storage>*<percent_fixed_size> + <total_storage>*<percent_variable_size> = <memory needed>

So if you say 128MB total, 15% is variable, even if using Palm made the apps take up 1.92MB instead of 19.2MB, which would be really unlikely, you still need 110.72MB, requiring a 128MB unit anyway, as I don't think you can get a 111MB unit. ;)

No it can't go that way, the fixed and variable_size variable can only be determined after app feature comparison/inspection. ( as pointed out before. Admitedly I don't quiet understand how I should figure out those variables beside from actual applications memory uptake)

I am giving the hypothetical for a PPC user potentially moving to a POS platform to save on memory requirements. So the PPC user can look at what programs/data/etc they have installed and use those numbers instead of mine. You were saying that you had a 128MB card, and that you thought you were closer to 10% than 5% of data that wouldn't change with a move to POS. For this example I upped it to 15% to illustrate how it doesn't really matter which one you choose if that's your percentage.


also, to be perfectly honest, the 1:4 ratio I based it on T|T/Z71 vs 64mb's PPC models. It's not a really strong number

And I was using 1:10 to be more dramatic. So even with the dramatic cases I was looking at, it didn't matter too much. With real ratios, it matters even less.

It is that much more straight forward to create generic user profile and count the memory uptake from that profile list, instead of working it backward from variables that hasn't been proved, let alone used to calculate memory needed.

No, you'd use the generic user profile to DETERMINE the percentages (% fixed, vs. percent programs/docs) to see if you could possibly gain anything by moving to a platform that potentially has smaller program/doc sizes.


It also masks memory management issues specially in POS where user cannot just put apps anywhere in combined storage available.


It is true that I wasn't differentiating between storage cards and internal RAM.

Well, the list doesn't even resemble a real user profile yet. Look at the app mix, which is why I post and hoping there will be more memory uptake data being posted. (guess I was wrong... lol)

I think the problem is that a lot of us just haven't run out of RAM, so haven't closely examined how much is in use.

So if I create a generic profile, and everybody like it, it'll fly. (very scientific eh? :P )

You could make a generic user profile for yourself (ie, a starting point of what you personally would want in there), but there's no way you'll be able to capture what "everybody" wants. You might be able to try a couple different profiles, like "stock" (someone that doesn't install any programs beyond what's included, but might add pictures and songs), "power user" (take the top whatever downloads from Handango and install them), etc.

[rosettaZ]

I am giving the hypothetical for a PPC user potentially moving to a POS platform to save on memory requirements. So the PPC user can look at what programs/data/etc they have installed and use those numbers instead of mine. You were saying that you had a 128MB card, and that you thought you were closer to 10% than 5% of data that wouldn't change with a move to POS. For this example I upped it to 15% to illustrate how it doesn't really matter which one you choose if that's your percentage.


nevermind, I misunderstood. I thought you were saying how to do it differently instead of from the list.

------
gah, It seems I really do have to collect the memory footprint of apps the hard way. nobody wants to post app size. oh well...

[rosettaZ]

ps, about using my own app list to create comparison data. Forget it, half of my apps don't even exist in Palm...