4 ms·

Multicore isn't free in a battery constrained device, and yet devices are multicore. The fact that you don't have an 8 core phone doesn't mean multicore concurr

Multicore isn't free in a battery constrained device, and yet devices are multicore. The fact that you don't have an 8 core phone doesn't mean multicore concurrency isn't used. There are all sorts of things that benefit from multicore concurrency; a simple example is keeping data handling (including SQLite query execution, which has a non-zero cost) off of the UI thread that's responsible for keeping table scrolling glossy smooth. You may have been writing native code, but you clearly haven't been shipping high gloss end-user applications on mobile devices.

pcwalton 11y ago
Concurrency is not parallelism, and you're conflating the two. Multicore is for parallelism: literally doing multiple tasks at the same time. Apps are not making good use of parallelism. Apps certainly do make good use of concurrency--your example of moving background work off the UI thread is an example of that--and the Web needs to support that better. But that's not a parallelism problem, and it's not related to multicore: note that what you describe is a good idea even with only one CPU. > but you clearly haven't been shipping high gloss end-user applications on mobile devices. Yes, I have. Can I suggest you stop inserting these random jabs into your posts?