Comments on: Developers Say the PACE Is Fast Enough

The biggest change in Palm OS 5 is the switch from Dragonball processors to ARM-based ones. This change would have required all developers to rewrite all their applications but PalmSource knew this would be a disaster for the platform so it created the Palm Application Compatibility Environment (PACE), which interprets the instructions of existing applications designed for the Dragonball processor, and makes them run on the ARM processor. There has been some concern in the Palm community that this would make OS 5 run slower than OS 4. According to developers, this isn't the case.
Return to Story - Permalink

Article Comments

 (61 comments)

The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Comments Closed Comments Closed
This article is no longer accepting new comments.

Down

This sounds good enough for me (just a Palm-user)

I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 9:25:56 AM #
This sounds good enough for me (just a Palm-user).
For the developers it is a good way of getting used to the new processors and the succes of PalmOS PDA's is based on the software base. Powerusers (whatever that may be on the Palm-platform) will have to wait until OS 6.

Greetings, Roel.

I'm confused. why bother with ARM if no native compiling

I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 9:35:32 AM #
If no native ARM can be programed (i dont know anything about programing palm so dont get mad) so the only reason to get it would be hi res, multimedia, some optimised stuff, but no native ARM would make it a bit pointless? the clie has all but the optimised stuff.
and there probably will be no budget model as someone said somewhere. i will be keeping my palm III (gparents go free from charity shop) for some time longer it seems, nothing is complety worth it yet...
RE: I'm confused. why bother with ARM if no native compiling
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 9:39:01 AM #
Notice how everyone quoted in the article says OS 5 will speed up your apps. If that isn't enough for you, how about MP3 and video playback? If that isn't enough, what more do you want?
RE: I'm confused. why bother with ARM if no native compiling
Foo Fighter @ 7/23/2002 9:46:08 AM #
The main purpose of OS5 is to maintain compatibility with the installed base of software. That's step one. OS6 will be Step 2; ARM native apps. However, we should still see some very nice multimedia capable PalmOS hardware this fall.

RE: I'm confused. why bother with ARM if no native compiling
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 9:48:14 AM #
Developers will be able to develop for the the new ARM palms in ARM code, this is just ensuring that the older PalmOS programs we have grown to love SHOULD run on the new ARM devices with no need for a complete code rewrite.
RE: I'm confused. why bother with ARM if no native compiling
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 9:48:44 AM #
Read the artice again. It doesn't say "no native compiling". It says you can't be 100% native. For speed critical parts of the app, you can use armlets which are ARM native.

Michael

RE: I'm confused. HOW IT WORKS
ardiri @ 7/23/2002 9:51:58 AM #
    If no native ARM can be programed (i dont know anything about programing palm so dont get mad) so the only reason to get it would be hi res, multimedia, some optimised stuff, but no native ARM would make it a bit pointless? the clie has all but the optimised stuff.

if (detectARM processor)
  execute native arm code
else
  execute m68k code (as normal)

thats how you will maintain compatibility, and, take advantage of the additional processing power where ARM code can be used natively. palmos 5.0 apps should technically run on both old and new hardware provided that both code portions are made available.

// az
aaron@ardiri.com
http://www.ardiri.com/
http://www.mobilewizardry.com/

RE: I'm confused. why bother with ARM if no native compiling
huggy @ 7/23/2002 9:52:19 AM #
hey you posted yesterday at infosync didn't you? I just remember that story of the Palm III and the charity shop :-D

-------------- huggy ---------------
RE: I'm confused. why bother with ARM if no native compiling
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 10:48:58 AM #
Thanks, i dont really understand anthing about ARM programming.

Yes, its me.

Why can't you have the best of both worlds?
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 11:49:31 AM #
1. OS4 Apps Emulation

***AND***

2. Completely NEW OS5 ARM Native Apps

?????

Just like a PC running Win2000 can mimic old DOS to run old DOS programs.

I'm confused as to why this isn't possible. Sorry if I am missing something.

RE: I'm confused. why bother with ARM if no native compiling
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 12:27:40 PM #
ARM native compiling is not available to Palm app but is available to Palm licensee. It opens up possibilities to Sony, Palm, Handera, etc.

You are right though. OS6 or whatever it's called is the real one.

RE: I'm confused. why bother with ARM if no native compiling
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 12:31:06 PM #
It's not that it can't be done. Maybe they decided it shouldn't be done for OS5. Don't just looking at the technical reasons, there may be marketting reasons why they don't want that to happen.

By doing this, they are ensuring that most of the new OS5 software will run on older Palm devices. Also, the developers will need some time to get used to the new ARM coding. If you limit what they can do now you can control the stability of the system.

And maybe they haven't decided how full blow ARM apps should behave. They may be keeping everything tighten down until they finish the BeOS enhanced version of the PalmOS with multitasking etc... This keeps forward compatiblity.

- JV

best of both worlds
ardiri @ 7/23/2002 1:08:38 PM #
    I'm confused as to why this isn't possible. Sorry if I am missing something.

sure, you could always build two different versons of your applications (arm + 68k) - developers do this these days when it comes to color and grayscale versions of their applications. but, you must ask yourself why?

ok, first obvious answer is - you save memory (no redundant code). this is important, however, it is much more important for any joe blo user to come along and install your application, without having to say "hey, this doesn't work" simply because they installed the wrong version of your application. application developers can make their applications smart, even to the point of saying "hey, i am on an ARM unit - i can delete the 68k stuff now" (which, will prevent it from being beamable)... heaps of ideas.

to give a perfect example of the bad - consider PPC. users are not the smartest people in the world (if only some of you knew) - and, developers are not always the best at explaining things :) PPC had a huge problem with CPU types.. install the MIPS version, the ARM version, the SH3 version.. this sucks. to make it worse, palm is not going to label their units as an ARM unit, it will be a palmos unit. so, unless users know what is inside their devices - they wont know if it is a ARM or m68k CPU inside.

// az
aaron@ardiri.com
http://www.ardiri.com/
http://www.mobilewizardry.com/

RE: I'm confused. why bother with ARM if no native compiling
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 1:50:24 PM #
OS 5 is a stepping stone. PalmSource isn't supporting fully native ARM applications YET due to time constraints. It's hard enough porting the OS from 68k to ARM, adding the high-density, sound, and security stuff without having to worry about new executable file formats and shipping ARM development tools.

It's more important that they get OS 5 out the door ASAP.

Performance consistency

Foo Fighter @ 7/23/2002 9:39:21 AM #
This has been my number one concern. If PACE drags performance down, it will ruin the user experience for existing applications. If, however, we see good overall performance...and maybe even a speed-up, developer/user migration to OS5/ARM should go off without a hitch.

This looks VERY promising. Hopefully we will see some revolutionary changes in OS6, such as a dedicated gaming API. One thing is clear...the best days are ahead for PalmOS! :-)

PACE vs Native API

ardiri @ 7/23/2002 9:38:43 AM #
    Howard Tomlinson, the CEO of Astraware, said "From the OS 5 demos done by David Fedor at both this PalmSource Developers Conference and the one before using a demo board he had there, you can be sure that PACE will run quite adequately for all normal apps. The Zap!2000 that he showed running on it had quite a bit of custom 68k in there instead of OS calls for graphics, and that was running faster than on a normal device, so I think you can safely see that 'good' apps that call into the OS will run at least as well as on current devices, and those that are 'bad' and bypass the OS to do custom code should still be fine."

    Aaron Ardiri from MobileWizardry. said, "We ran tests with Lemmings at PalmSource, and PACE was emulating faster than the API's were being implemented natively."

there is a bit of confusion between "good" and "bad" here. just because the use of API's doesnt happen - it doesn't mean "bad". in many cases, the API's that PalmSource provide are full of error checking, special case scenarios, "what if..." type code. this slows things down. when i make a statement that PACE was emulating faster than the native ARM API's - it is due to the fact that we have taken the API, and, optimized it specifically to what we want; taking into account known issues/scenarios such that the additional error checking is not required. these routines are also going to be faster if converted to native ARMlets (which, in our case, we didn't need to do).

applications that use API's will notice no speed problems at all, and, in many cases are much faster than previously witnessed on the m68k units.

i should note that the only true BAD thing to do is to access the screen buffer directly. in our tests and research into ARM units - doing so will not crash your application however it will not show what you want. endiness and alignment are two serious issues. when copying to the screen, we use an API to ensure compatibility on hardware we are not aware of. this is what allows our applications to remain forward compatible.

    Despite this encouraging news, there is still room for improvement. OS 5 doesn't allow developers to write completely ARM- native applications, though they can include small of ARM code called ARMlets. The next version of the Palm OS, generally referred to as OS 6 though PalmSource hasn't officially given it a name, allows true ARM native apps. According to PalmSource, code that has been recompiled for ARM-based chips is 61 times faster on a 200 MHz ARM processor compared to a 33 MHz Dragonball one.

we were fortunate to get our deity3D engine running on an ARM testing board at PalmSource and, since it uses a LOT of m68k code and close to no API's; it ran like a dog. :) deity3D [test version] ran at around 3-4 frames per second without as-is (as compared to 15-16 frames per second on a 33Mhz 68k). this is a classic example of where the use of ARMlet code will sufficiently speed up the execution time - but, not many developers will be required to do this.

PalmSource provides a lot of information to developers - and, this is great. now, off we go to convert those 25000+ lines of assembly to C so we can be ready for the new hardware when it is released. i would recommend the PACE link about for users who want to know how it will work under the "hood" - its an interesting read.

// az
aaron@ardiri.com
http://www.ardiri.com/
http://www.mobilewizardry.com/

RE: PACE vs Native API
Foo Fighter @ 7/23/2002 10:09:21 AM #
Aaron, thanks for your input.

Question: What is your overall impression of OS5?

RE: PACE vs Native API
ardiri @ 7/23/2002 1:04:37 PM #
    Question: What is your overall impression of OS5?

its palmos 4.1 + extra features *g*

there is not to get excited about in regards to the OS. its the same :) now, when your talking about the ability to run applications that were not possible before? the level of excitement is roughly that when palm upgraded their m68k CPU's from 16 Mhz -> 20 Mhz -> 33Mhz :) more processing power just means you can do more now - the os itself hasn't changed much. its still, as we know, zen of palm :)

// az
aaron@ardiri.com
http://www.ardiri.com/
http://www.mobilewizardry.com/

RE: PACE vs Native API
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 2:08:52 PM #
ardiri, you are not getting me too excited
RE: PACE vs Native API
ardiri @ 7/23/2002 2:42:52 PM #
    ardiri, you are not getting me too excited

should i be? what do you expect me to say - that it'll have a fully blown multitasking operating system with a BeOS interface? lets not forget that this is a PDA - it will continue to function as a PDA. the improvements are definately great - but, i wouldn't go spend a million dollars in stock for it. it is definately a step in the right direction, without overstepping. palm is doing the right thing here.

// az
aaron@ardiri.com
http://www.ardiri.com/
http://www.mobilewizardry.com/
RE: PACE vs Native API
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 4:53:55 PM #
Right, and PDA are not suppose to do presentation, fetching email, a node to share multimedia material wirelessly, or even do spreadsheet. For that of course you have laptop with projector, desktop, iPod or Wi-fi laptop, and mini computer.

Is there a reason, PDA does not follow the general computing tradition since the beginning of mainframe? Is there a reason why PDA doens't need to be as secure, stable and able to handle computing intensive application in the era of video transaction over wireless?

People are already using PDA as a launching pad to attack network or turning PDA into a full access internet tool.

So your commment are only fitting in the era of beep beep computer game and connected organizer.

RE: PACE vs Native API
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 8:52:10 PM #
Well, Im sure Aaron will apologise to the .01% of Palm users that do all that (with considerable cost and difficulty), for hurting your feelings with his harsh comments :)
RE: PACE vs Native API
ardiri @ 7/23/2002 9:11:35 PM #
    Well, Im sure Aaron will apologise to the .01% of Palm users that do all that (with considerable cost and difficulty), for hurting your feelings with his harsh comments :)

heh, but realistically - you sure it is .01%? i would guestimate more likely 0.0001% based on sales figures *g*. palm did a great thing with 5.0, the real true move to arm will most likely occur in 6.0. palm has put priority on its users, compatibility is one of the major success stories of Palm - its good they still keep this motion going.

while we would all like a dual athlon system with 1 gig of ram and 200 gigs of harddrive space in the space of a PDA - we all know this is not going to happen in such a rush; want to plug it into a power socket? palm is balancing power and battery consumption - expanding its horizons looking forward and competing with PPC.

palmos 5.0 runs very fast natively, and, the technology palm uses to ensure compatibility with older m68k applications is also quick - most people will be happy with the migration. yes, you'll see enhanced audio, higher resolutions, networking support, internet/wireless capabilities; but, it'll still be the good old palmos we all learned to get attached to because of its simplicity.

you will see mp3, mpeg, divX players - i am sure of it. the technology isn't that limiting; it just makes the possibilities more broader.

// az
aaron@ardiri.com
http://www.ardiri.com/
http://www.mobilewizardry.com/

Developers Say the PACE Is Fast Enough
Stingray @ 7/24/2002 8:38:39 AM #
Hi aaron, great comments.
I'm Just wondering if palmsource has any plans to include an advanced version of grafitti. After all, with 200mhz of cpu speed, im sure you could write something that would kick JOT's @ss:) Do we still have to look for third party apps? I tend to dislike using third party inputs becos they tend to interfere with the functionality of some programs occasionally.
Would appreciate it if you or someone else with some info would respond.
Kumaresan Balakrishnan
aka stingray


"May the potato be with you!"

Additional Comments from Ed

Ed @ 7/23/2002 9:59:17 AM #
I think I, and other reporters, are at least partially responsible for the nervousness about the speed of OS 5. In early articles about the new operating system, I generally said the OS 5 had an emulator that would allow it to run OS 4 apps. That word "emulator" made many people nervous because anyone who has worked with other emulators will tell you they can be very slow. That's one of the reasons why I wanted to write this article so I could help clear up a misconception I helped create.

In addition, I wanted to point out that I spoke to more developers than were quoted in this article and not a single one of them had any concerns about how quickly PACE and OS 5 would work. I was looking for at least one opposite opinion to make the article more balanced but I couldn't find one.

---
News Editor

RE: Additional Comments from Ed
Foo Fighter @ 7/23/2002 10:21:22 AM #
Thanks for writing this article, Ed.

Off-topic question: Have you dug up any new info on the "Oslo"?

RE: Additional Comments from Ed
Ed @ 7/23/2002 10:36:07 AM #
This article actually grew out of the Oslo one. I was doing research on how quickly the Oslo would run so I started to talk to developers about PACE and that section of the article grew and grew and eventually I decided it needed to be its own article.

One thing holding up the Oslo article is I can't get anyone to talk about RAM. I may run it tomorrow without this info.

---
News Editor

RE: Additional Comments from Ed
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 4:00:23 PM #
If it "interprets 68k instructions", it's an "emulator". If that doesn't make your applications run slowly it's because your applications aren't very CPU intensive. Most Palm applications aren't, so it probably isn't a problem.

On the other hand, it also makes PalmOS5 an awkward beast: while the OS may run faster, CPU intensive application code will likely run slower. Is that worth upgrading? I don't think so.

RE: Additional Comments from Ed
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/24/2002 12:53:58 AM #
>>>On the other hand, it also makes PalmOS5 an awkward beast: while the OS may run faster, CPU intensive application code will likely run slower. Is that worth upgrading? I don't think so.


Of course its worth upgrading. 3 reasons:

1 - New software and new versions of existing software will take advantage of ARM using 'Armlets' for precisely the sort of "CPU intensive application code" that you mentioned.

2 - Palm OS 5 ARM devices with FlashROM can be upgraded to OS 6 - which is where the real push in term of native ARM will happen.

3 - Native hi-res and audio support in OS 5 means new software that will support these features as standard.

...maybe its just me but these are all excellent reasons to upgrade. i love games and multimedia type apps, so OS 5 devices are exactly what im waiting for.

RE: Additional Comments from Ed
Stingray @ 7/24/2002 8:43:31 AM #
Just out of curiosity Foo Fighter, do you happen to know what a "foo fighter is" ;)
its nothing bad...in fact its kinda cool...but im just wondering if you knew.


"May the potato be with you!"
RE: Additional Comments from Ed
Foo Fighter @ 7/24/2002 11:09:00 AM #
>"Just out of curiosity Foo Fighter, do you happen to know what a "foo fighter is" ;)
its nothing bad...in fact its kinda cool...but im just wondering if you knew."

If I'm not mistaken, "Foo Fighter" was the name given to UFOs by World War II aviators.



RE: Additional Comments from Ed
Stingray @ 7/25/2002 7:30:22 AM #
yes, it was given by french aviators. these aviators called THEMSELVES foo fighters and the objects "foo's"


"May the potato be with you!"
RE: Additional Comments from Ed
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/25/2002 7:58:04 AM #
but doesn't "foo" basically mean B.S.?

meaning that they never believed that UFO's were ALF's?

Multimedia apps etc.

I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 10:32:16 AM #
My question is whether developers are as we speak writing apps to play mp3, movies etc. to take advantage of the "ARMlets". In other words, are such apps likely to be ready when the new hardware launches?

Does the NDA prevent developers from speaking about forthcoming OS5 apps? I ask this because I have seen several developers advertise their current apps as OS5 ready. The sneak peak page for Launcher X even shows a partial snip of this app running in high-res in OS5. If I was a programmer I would want to get people stirred up over my OS5 ready mp3/wav/wma/ogg/etc player due out in the fall as an example.

RE: Multimedia apps etc.
bcombee @ 7/23/2002 11:27:05 AM #
Currently active NDAs would cover OS versions after OS 5, plus prerelease hardware. PalmSource has released large amounts of information on OS 5 in public forums, and the Palm OS 5 Simulator is available for anyone to download from palmos.com, so its not under NDA. I've already seen several apps that have been noted as working on OS 5.

--
CodeWarrior for Palm OS technical lead
Programming help at www.palmoswerks.com
RE: Multimedia apps etc.
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 11:41:36 AM #
So if I am reading your statements correctly, the NDA would cover prerelease hardware but not OS5 applications, so developers COULD go ahead show us screenshots etc of apps running on OS5 that would take advantage of ARM-based hardware?

Its hard to get excited about ARM processors unless software for things like mp3 and better video will be a reality at the time devices like the Oslo ship.

Sounds like Classic & OSX

I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 12:22:35 PM #
Apple did the same thing to assist the transition for their current OS9 users to OSX. It all worked fine in the end. I believe that this will work out for Palm too.

It's a good idea for users to be able to use older apps still on their new OS5 devices. But it looks like OS6 will be the ultimate upgrade for Palm users. Of course if Palm is still alive and nothing happens bad before then.

It's nice to have some more info on OS5, Ed. Now we need some secret pics of these devices. We'll see if it's all worth it in the next couple of months.

RE: Sounds like Classic & OSX
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 2:16:56 PM #
of course, you have Nagel running the show and he is a formal Apple-ite.

Maybe Palm will start running those "Switch" commercials too?

RE: Sounds like Classic & OSX
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 2:47:53 PM #
Nah. I think the shoe is on the other foot in this case. Most of us--even Palm OS fans--were feeling pretty gloomy about the platform's future during the last couple years but I think OS5's imminent release, despite its relative ho-hum-ness, and Sony's enthusiastic hardware development have restored a lot of hope in Palm OS and sales continue to be dominant for Palm OS devices.
RE: Sounds like Classic & OSX
hotpaw4 @ 7/23/2002 2:50:05 PM #
But Apple did a lot better in their transistion from M68k to PowerPC CPU's. Metrowerks had an Mac IDE which could recompile an entire application to native PPC code available at MacWorld in January, before the first PowerMacs shipped to the public in April '94 (I still have a CD). It took about a day to convert and recompile a medium sized application (which included sprite graphics and a byte-code interpreter).

There are no publicly available toolchains to create ARM native application for PalmOS yet (just gcc for armlets, you get to roll your own linker...).

RE: Sounds like Classic & OSX
bcombee @ 7/23/2002 6:16:02 PM #
True, but the original PPC versions of Mac OS had lots of system code still implemented in 68K assembly, therefore slowing down the system side of things. One key advantage of Palm OS 5 is that all of the OS-side code has been build for ARM. Only user side code runs in emulation mode, so there's a lot more opportunity for speed up.

As for Metrowerks tools... I can't really say what are plans are beyond OS 5, but we will be supporting ARMlet development in the next version of our toolset.

--
CodeWarrior for Palm OS technical lead
Programming help at www.palmoswerks.com

RE: Sounds like Classic & OSX
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 9:45:34 PM #
The analogy isn't bad, but Apple's solution goes much further, at least in one respect. We could compare the "traps" to Classic (which also is not an emulator in the normal sense) and the optimised OS 5 applications to the Carbon API's, which are not fully native. But Apple's solution also offers the Cocoa API's which *are* fully native (and the BSD UNIX subsystem, as well). Palm's approach doesn't allow an ARM-native application to be written for OS 5 because they didn't think people would buy into the idea of getting new applications. I think this aspect of their approach was partly motivated out of fear and that people would have stepped up to the plate if the rewards had been there. That certainly seems to be working for Apple.
RE: Sounds like Classic & OSX
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/24/2002 2:06:18 AM #
Carbon is native to Mac OS X, just as native as BSD or Cocoa. All are subsystems sitting on top of the core foundation services in the OS. Carbon may not be as nice of a fit as Cocoa, but neither is less native than the other, IMHO.

The older analogy is better -- this really is more like System 7 and PowerPC. PalmSource wants developers to continue to support the existing devices, and originally wasn't going to support ARMlets... the developers demanded them, so it got into OS 5 at a fairly late stage. I feel confident that some developers are going to do some amazing things with the extra computing power.

Great news

I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 1:32:09 PM #
Palm Source has been making all the right moves for several months now. I hope they don't screw it up with one wrong move at a critical moment.
RE: Great news
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 3:01:51 PM #
For the ordinary user (moi), I want more speed in my database apps (ThinkDb/TomeRaider/search in WordSmith). From the sounds of it Palm OS5 is going to be good at getting equivalent speeds, it makes you wonder what the definition of equivalent is. This could range from anything from 88% to 105%. A switch to Palm OS6, when ever that happens, given the track record with OS 5 seems to be a VERY long way off in the distant and perhaps dim future.
I have persevered with Palm OS 4 but am really frustrated at the increbidly slow speed of searching for things, as a medic I always want to quickly check things out but have to wait while the Hour Glass appears in TomeRaider as it slowly scans my files. Using a language application like APOS (Arabic) makes me worried that it will not be at all cmpatible with OS 5, the developer is virtually useless at answering questions and I keep dreaming about a faster machine with (what some Palm enthusiasts may term nightmares) keep visualising changing platform.
One of the things that Palm has forgotten is that the average user, like the average voter eventually becomes tired of seeing the same PDA / Politician day in and day out, and sometimes just would like to sample a change both, especially if it is available. The new PocketPC devices ARE tempting, simply becasue they exist, the software exists for all the basics and they have ew processors. They detailed arguments about the vast superiority of the Palm OS become a pale restraint for the aid PDA user restless for change.

PALM MUST GIVE A RELEASE DATE FOR THEIR OS5 MACHINE! Rumours 60 days away are a joke, because from the past experience of their Browser release I am beginning to loose hope in Palm. The bitter memories of returning my M505 time and again and being fobbed off by slick telephone operators are beginning to resurface. The slick and smooth adverts for XScale machines beckon and I just wish Palm would give a release date, a target to aim, the pain barier in this painful marathon a geusture of appreciation to the loyal Palm fans.

A simple Palm User
Taqi

RE: Great news
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 3:22:52 PM #
"Palm Source has been making all the right moves for several months now. I hope they don't screw it up with one wrong move at a critical moment."

basically all the moves they made was .... NO MOVE AT ALL ... serisously what did they do

RE: Great news
bcombee @ 7/23/2002 6:19:26 PM #
Programmers who have important applications are well aware of the possibilities of Palm OS 5. If your selling an application that has speed sensitive areas, its very likely that you'll be testing with OS 5 hardware and writing ARMlets to optimize the parts that need help. I'm personally pretty excited about the user experience.

--
CodeWarrior for Palm OS technical lead
Programming help at www.palmoswerks.com
Major Blunder by Palm
I.M. Anonymous @ 9/10/2002 10:03:35 PM #
Palm OS 5 and armlets are a major blunder on Palm's part. Development on OS 4 is fairly easy. Not true with OS 5/armlets. Any developer looking at a Palm 5/armlet project versus a Pocket PC project will go with Pocket PC and save themselves the headaches. Also, developers will wonder why they should use this technology when eventually there will be a way to write pure native ARM apps. You could go through the armlet development process and the next day learn that Palm really does have an easy way to write native apps.

marketing speak

I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 3:50:34 PM #
PACE does not emulate the 68k Dragonball chip or other hardware, nor does it run the old operating system. Instead, it interprets the 68k instructions itself, and handles 68k trap instructions

This is marketing mumbo-jumbo. Of course, PACE "emulates the 68k"--that's what "interpreting the 68k instructions" means.

Still, some people are worried that OS 5 will actually be slower than OS 4. However, developers that have been able to run their applications on test boards running the new operating system aren't worried.

Many Palm applications spend their time waiting for the user and do very little computation. So, of course, they are going to be fine.

However, the whole point of going to ARM is to allow developers to deal with more memory and write more compute-intensive applications. And for that, PalmOS5 is largely useless because using native ARM code is so cumbersome.

In different words, if you couldn't run an MPEG-4 player in software on a PalmOS4 device, you probably won't be able to run it on a PalmOS5 device unless some developer wastes a lot of time trying to deal with Palm's baroque ARM native subroutines. Few developers are likely going to bother.

According to PalmSource, code that has been recompiled for ARM-based chips is 61 times faster on a 200 MHz ARM processor compared to a 33 MHz Dragonball one.

That should probably read "6.1 times faster". An ARM processor is not going to give you a disproportionately high speedup relative to a 68k.

The fact remains: there is little reason for people to upgrade to PalmOS5 for the software. If you don't need new hardware that happens to come with PalmOS5, just wait for PalmOS6. The real question is why Palm is even bothering releasing PalmOS5.

You're uneducated...
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 6:04:04 PM #
"This is marketing mumbo-jumbo. Of course, PACE "emulates the 68k"--that's what "interpreting the 68k instructions" means."

You obviously do not know what you're talking about. Marketing "mumbo-jumbo"? Get educated on the topic before you speak: There is a clear difference between emulating and interpreting. They are not synonyms. You're crude statement is like saying "C emulates machine code" instead of the fact that a C compiler interprets and compiles the file into machine coded object files.

RE: marketing speak
hotpaw4 @ 7/23/2002 8:08:13 PM #
>That should probably read "6.1 times faster". An ARM processor is not going to give you a disproportionately high speedup relative to a 68k.

No. 61 times is closer to correct. A 68000 takes at least 12 clock cycles to fetch 1 instruction plus 1 32-bit operand from memory, more with memory wait-states. Even a non-superscaler ARM CPU with decent I+D caches can do this in one 1 clock cycle if there is a dual cache hit. The 70 MHz ARM development systems at PalmSource were said to run some native routines more than 20 times faster than on a 68K Dragonball.

More examples of CICS to RISC speed-ups: When I recompiled an app that took 120 seconds to run a a 16 MHz Mac SE/30, it ran in only 3.5 seconds on a 66 MHz PowerMac 7100, and in 0.35 seconds on a slightly-superscalar 266 MHz G3 with bigger caches. That's an over 300x speedup with only a 16.6x clock ratio difference.

RE: marketing speak
hotpaw4 @ 7/23/2002 9:03:06 PM #
>This is marketing mumbo-jumbo. Of course, PACE "emulates the 68k"--that's what "interpreting the 68k instructions" means.

Emulation is usually done for entire system implementations, e.g. not only the CPU instruction set, but the memory controller, memory map, reset and interrupt mechanisms, I/O registers, I/O device timings, displays, etc. in the Dragonball chip. PACE does not emulate an entire Dragonball implementation (the Dragonball I/O registers are not present in PACE as they are in POSE). PACE does interpret the MC68000 instruction set which is a subset of entire Dragonball virtual machine. Interpreting an instruction set usually runs a lot faster than emulating an entire system, depending on the complexity of the system and the I/O state.

RE: marketing speak
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/24/2002 10:25:37 PM #
I don't know how to measure the performance enchancement. However, our experience of Palm OS's api is very bad.

For instance, MemMove, the preformance of best case of our memmove is 4 time of the PalmOS's best case. Our worst case is equal to PalmOS's best case.

If Palm OS 5 just boost the performance to 6.6x, we don't need arm core for it and just need to ask Palm to rewrite their routine.

I love the pun! Good job Ed!

ahecht @ 7/23/2002 5:25:40 PM #
"Developers Say the PACE Is Fast Enough"
Haha. Very clever.

How does 66 times the current speed help me?

I.M. Anonymous @ 7/23/2002 11:36:45 PM #
I am quite confused about all that speed issue because for a handheld, being 66 times faster does not do much unless I plan to play multi-media games/home theatre on the bus.

If that's the intention then please also offer noise-reduction THX headphones with 2 gig Memorystick etc.....

All I want is my study room - read a book, listen to music, watch a sitcom and play some games while sending emails and writing proposals with Excel and Word.

RE: How does 66 times the current speed help me?
I.M. Anonymous @ 7/24/2002 1:18:32 PM #
Hmmm... Can the Palm OS5 device be 'flashed' to support OS6 too ??? Then I'll have no problem getting an OS5-based device :)


RE: How does 66 times the current speed help me?
I.M. Anonymous @ 9/21/2002 9:30:50 AM #
I think that OS5 is a waste of time. I live in Australia, where handhelds are already cost nearly double what they do in America, and I am only a student. All i want is basic handheld functions with a few games and maybe a calculator. I already have my own tv for watching movies and my walkman for listening to music. I don't need a multimedia PDA. I plan on buying a Palm M125 or something in that league. In a few years when i have more $ at hand, and OS6 is out, then i will get a new PDA, for now, OS4 is all i need. And all that most consumers will need.

PACE not an Emulator?

I.M. Anonymous @ 7/26/2002 2:17:57 PM #
And how is this diffrent from emulation?

"PACE does not emulate the 68k Dragonball chip or other hardware, nor does it run the old operating system. Instead, it interprets the 68k instructions itself, and handles 68k trap instructions (used by applications to call OS APIs) by making calls into the native Palm OS 5 system."

PACE - the real story

I.M. Anonymous @ 9/10/2002 5:15:40 PM #

Actually PACE is not that fast. Pure processor-bound applications run about 2.5 times SLOWER than on a Palm m505 running OS 4.1. Native ARM code does actually run 50 - 60 times faster than on the m505.
RE: PACE - the real story
I.M. Anonymous @ 9/10/2002 8:16:42 PM #
True, but 99% of applications are not processor-intensive, and hence will experience a nice speed increase simply by sitting in the OS most of the time.

I've just written my first piece of ARM native code (armlet) - not a lot of fun. Until the tools mature we won't seen too many apps using native code.

RE: PACE - the real story
I.M. Anonymous @ 9/10/2002 9:46:39 PM #
I agree about the difficulty of writing armlets. Developers won't be too happy about having to port their code in pieces. Also, from what I have seen, I don't think that the OS is much faster. So it seems that many apps will run (at best) about the same speed as under OS 4 and in many cases actually slower. I wonder what consumer reaction will be when they consider buying a PDA. Do they choose a new Palm that runs apps about the same speed as older Palms or a Pocket PC device? The puzzle is why Palm doesn't offer developers an easy way to port their apps to pure native ARM. I consider this to be a crucial mistake on Palm's part.
Top

Account

Register Register | Login Log in
user:
pass: