3 ms·
Ugh, same problem as all the other "open phone" designs, absolute garbage tier hardware. At least they're pricing it somewhat reasonably, but come on, give us
by wolrah 8y ago
Ugh, same problem as all the other "open phone" designs, absolute garbage tier hardware.
At least they're pricing it somewhat reasonably, but come on, give us some actual performance.
2.4GHz-only WiFi shouldn't even be a thing anymore. The 2.4G spectrum is a wasteland for anyone living in a densely populated area and if it weren't for a few old IoT devices I'd have it entirely turned off on my home network.
- gazarullz 8y agoHi, do you mind elaborating why the 2.4ghz is crap and how the 5ghz is better ? (newbie here)
- detaro 8y agoThe available range of frequencies is smaller in 2.4 GHz, so fewer networks can run in parallel without interfering with each other. Even in early standards with 20 MHz channels, you can only fit 3 networks in 2.4, vs in 5 it's more than 10 (exact number depends on region and other special cases). 2.4 Ghz is also somewhat better at getting through walls, which one the hand is useful, but on the other means in a dense city networks from further away can interfere.
- squarefoot 8y agoYou're right about 2.4GHz limitations, although the network card can be easily swapped with a cheap 802.11+BT5.0 module that cost 20 euros. On performance, I don't know about that CPU, but consider how much is gained by running binary code natively rather than Java apps in a virtual machine; even the oldest smartphones out there would fly, had their manufacturers published enough information to have a Linux distro running on them with enough hardware support.