S60 - tortoise or hare?

[Rafe]

In this editorial, Steve responds to criticisms of S60's speed, noting that expectations must be realistic and that in many ways smartphones are more efficient than PCs. We would be interested in hearing your thoughts though, so leave a note about your experience in the comment thread.

Read on in the full article.

[planetjag]

As someone trying to choose between an e61 and Treo680, one of the things I've read several times is that Symbian is sluggish next to the Palm OS. I've always thought that was more the point when people commented on it's speed.

Jonathan

[tburman]

After using the E61 for nearabout a year, I can safely say that the speed is not ideal. I run the latest firmware, have cleaned out my memory card a number of times and in general use it prudently (closing unused apps, etc.)

Symbian (or the Nokia S60 phones that run it) are simply not ideal in terms of response time. Opening folders can take several seconds, as do apps, sometimes. Whether it is a function of the OS or the hardware that runs it I do not know, but if there was a competitive device in terms of features, price and reasonable software support, but with speed, I would switch in a heartbeat. There are few things about Symbian/S60 that will keep me loyal.

Perhaps in the future, better packages of hardware/batteries will afford improved performance and longevity, in which case Symbian/S60 will be more than acceptable. Not perfect, but more than acceptable.

S60 is slow and to say it's because they choke the processor doesn't stand up, the chip in S60 smartphones is much faster than other phones who's GUI is almost instant, my girlfriend has a Sagem MXY-4 and it flies through the menus, she hates using my N70 cos it's like wait-wait-wait.

It's slow because the software is poorly written...end of argument

[Hardeep1singh]

Although I'm a 100% Symbian Fanboy, somebody who would make comments like, "I'm waiting for the day Symbian makes a PC OS, I'll ditch windows the very same day." But even I would agree that Symbian should do something to increase the response speed.
True, Symbian, being a proper OS, needs users with enough brains to understand how to use an Operating System, so sometimes, can be very difficult for Moto Users/Reviewers to understand, this causes them to start writing bad about it. But that doesn't mean the Problem isn't there. Symbian development team should treat 'Response Speed' as an area that needs improvement. From NgageQD to N80 whatever Symbian you may pickup, the issue has always been there. Its time they did something about it.

[Rafe]

Personally I think that the S60 2nd Edition phones did suffer from slowdown especially when heavily loaded (N70 in particular the operator variant I had). S60 3rd Edition is better, but some people have problems (but I think that true of any platform).

That said there is a noticeable improvement in devices like the N93 / N95 that use the newer and faster processors. This certainly points towards hardware though I imagine its not that simple. Its dangerous comparing devices too as they all have a different cost.

The equation between cost / speed and battery life is going to be different for each user. As one commenter mentioned there are other things that are more important in a user decision - e.g. overall real world use time and stability. For some devices I trade off a little speed for more battery life.

At the same time it may also be that I'm less impacted because I use my device multi tasking - i.e. messaging is nearly always open and therefore I always get an instant response.

Interestingly one of the main points about FP2 and Symbian 9.3. was about decreasing start up time and increasing responsiveness.

it's funny you picked an E70 to demonstrate speed especially with a the keyboard opened up - exactly because E70 is short on RAM to start with which is even less in landscape mode plus has serious memory leaks - so the last thing you would want to do is multitasking

my pet hate on my E70 is the time it takes to open a folder when I'm looking for icons for apps placed in strategic places. I can understand why it would take 76 seconds to open a folder with 60-70 icons in it, but it takes the same time to open (for the first time after start-up) folders with 3-4 icons inside. that's far more annoying than windows catching up with anything...

[Bassey]

Comments such as;

> journalists are often unsure of how multitasking works

make me wince a little. Largely because it's the sort of comment I've used myself many times before. I see the point, and make it myself, but to just play devils advocate for a bit, why should someone who buys a mobile phone need to understand the principles of multi-tasking in order for their phone to not run like a dog?

I don't need to understand the principle of the internal combustion engine in order to make my car go faster. I just press the pedal on the right.

The same goes for (and here I paraphrase) "the device is doing a lot and is portable therefore why shouldn't it be slow". I'm sorry Steve, but that's a daft argument. If I've just forked out top dollar for a premium device such as a smartphone, I expect it to perform better than a $50 sagem.

To take the car analogy again, if I bought a Bentley Continetal to replace my Renault Clio, I wouldn't just expect it to be more comfortable and have more features. I would also expect it to be a damn sight faster.

These arguments are designer arguments or, dare I say it, even marketing arguments. Sorry boys, we can't put in a fast enough processor because that would reduce the battery life. Oh no, we can't put in a better battery because that would cost money.

If the slowness of S60 devices is really a hardware limitation, why has the top of the range S60 device historically not been any faster than the others? Surely, as you move up the scale, the manufacturing costs become less of a constraint as the profit margins increase so Nokia could throw plenty of hardware at the problem. But we don't see this.

Apologies if this was already covered in comments before now, but I thought that I'd chime in after reading the article.

There were two aspects of device speed that you addressed in your article, and both are not only different, but highlight two respective aspects of application performance that we do not normally equate with the catch all term of "speed."

The first is that you spoke about the speed in going from one application to another. If the reviewer is knowledgable in the various means that you can switch from one applicaiton to another (as you noted) then switching applications is indeed faster. However, the person you quoted did not know this instincively, and therefore the increased amount of time "getting to the applciation before launching it" gives the perspective of slower speed, when its just that the UI is not well enough designed for someone to go quickly from one minimized app to another as you speak. This is completly on the part of the UI designers for Symbian S60, and is something that should be improved if there is to be improvement in perceived speed.

The second aspect of speed you talk about is in launching application. This is the aspect of speed that is most misunderstood by those not accustomed with mobiles doing what desktops do. Just as you say. "...the desktop with unlimited RAM, a smartphone has to manage its RAM quite carefully and this means a degree of creating and then destroying RAM-grabbing windows, and this takes a little time." This is not lost on the user, however their expectation is that of what they have on their desktop (whether right or not). Sure, system optimization can help, but your words again hold true here as the measure of speed that should be expected should not lie in the sme lane as that for a desktop.

That all being said, great article and a nice piece to think on. If I am the gurus programming for Symbian, I am looking at this article as one part affirmation and another part slap in the face to get my apps better. If I am the power user, I am smiling and wondering what extensions can help me eek a little more speed out of simple and complex processes. But the most important is that of the person who doesn't know much about SYmbian, but has expectations that are not yet clear as to what their new device can do. For that person, this article will not only set realistic expectations, but also make them much more the mobile student, than just the mobile use.

Thanks for the opportunity to contribute.

[slitchfield]

To answer a few of these points:

re: E70. Well, I multitask quite a lot with the E70, although I'll admit that striking up Web in landscape mode will cause everything else to shut down. This one's down to Nokia, I'm still waiting for the v3 firmware!

>>"devils advocate for a bit, why should someone who buys a mobile phone need to understand the principles of multi-tasking in order for their phone to not run like a dog? I don't need to understand the principle of the internal combustion engine in order to make my car go faster. I just press the pedal on the right."

You misunderstand. I'm not talking about knowing how multitasking works under the surface, I'm talking about knowing how to use the obvious multitasking tools (i.e. the app key), akin to learning to drive if you want to go motoring.

>>argument. If I've just forked out top dollar for a premium device such as a smartphone, I expect it to perform better than a $50 sagem.

Non sequitur. The smartphone can do 10 times as much, which was partly the point of my editorial. There's a lot more going on inside to allow you to do more on the outside.

>>These arguments are designer arguments or, dare I say it, even marketing arguments. Sorry boys, we can't put in a fast enough processor because that would reduce the battery life. Oh no, we can't put in a better battery because that would cost money.

Nope. They can't put in a bigger battery because they're already pushing the laws of physics. The size/processor/battery trade-off is the key issue.

>>If the slowness of S60 devices is really a hardware limitation, why has the top of the range S60 device historically not been any faster than the others?

Err... it is. The N93 is much faster than, say, a Nokia 6630.

Steve

[Bassey]

Just to explain, I largely agree with your point of view Steve. However, I am also trying very hard to see it from a users point of view. After all, us techies just sitting here saying "Well we're right because it works for us" doesn't help in the face of such overwhelming criticism from the general users.

Anyway;

> You misunderstand. I'm not talking about knowing how multitasking works
> under the surface, I'm talking about knowing how to use the obvious
> multitasking tools (i.e. the app key), akin to learning to drive

I don't see that. Most users already know how to use a mobile phone. Why should they have to re-learn for S60? Why should the OS not just multi-task by default if that's how it is meant to be used? I would also argue that the user DOES need to know why closing an app is different to switching away from it in order for it to make sense. If it doesn't make sense to them, they won't be inclined to do it.

> The smartphone can do 10 times as much, which was partly
> the point of my editorial. There's a lot more going on inside to allow you to
> do more on the outside.

I know what the point of your editorial was but MY point was that this doesn't make sense to a user. They have just paid many times more for an N95 than for a SE K750. They've already paid the extra money for the extra features. The phone then responding more slowly is like having to pay twice.

Think consumer. Slower is less. I've paid more so I want more. Surely you can understand that attitude from someone who has just foked out £400 only to discover their mates £50 phone is much quicker?

> Nope. They can't put in a bigger battery because they're already pushing
> the laws of physics. The size/processor/battery trade-off is the key issue.

Now that's just nonsense. The battery in my MiniS is a 1250mAh battery and is tiny. Many S60 devices come with batteries of roughly equivalant size but less than 1000mAh. And that's before we get into more efficient processors etc. There are plenty of ways Nokia could have used hardware to get more performance out of the S60 range over the last few years but it chose not to.

They are now begining to do so but you'll note I very carefully used the word "historically" because I'm well aware the very latest have started to throw more hardware at the problem This has certainly not been the case for several years where the top and bottom S60 devices in any particular "generation" were differentiated much more by form-factor and features than by hardware and, as such, were all fairly equal in terms of speed.

I agree with planetjag - Symbian is slow if you've seen the speed of Palm OS. Nokia keeps making excuses for a design tradeoff they decided on a long time ago. And yes, I understand that Palm OS doesn't have the same level of multitasking that Symbian has, but from a users perspective I rather have speed and limited multitasking than multitasking and a slow UI.

[sovind]

Sorry Steve one of those rare occasions where you're defending the undefendable


>>argument. If I've just forked out top dollar for a premium device such as a smartphone, I expect it to perform better than a $50 sagem.

>Non sequitur. The smartphone can do 10 times as much, which was partly the point of my editorial. There's a lot more going on inside to allow you to do more on the outside.

90% of the time we use 10% of the applications. Close everything else in the s60 and do a telephone number search, have a feeling the $50 sagem will still be faster. And this is worrying as 90% of the time we use the phone for talking or texting. If any other task is done significantly more IMHO you should be getting Windows Mobile or Windows Smartphone which is snappier in its response of the PDA or email functions.

Case in point. Testing with the old Nokia 9210. Sending a short sms using the numeric keypad is 3 - 5 times faster than going through messaging suite - and this includes multitapping! So I don't think it's all the multitasking complicated stuff happening in the "back" - it's plain poor programming.

I just think it is the case of Nokia resting on its laurels due to dominance - a bit like Msoft with Internet Explorer.

If the iPhone is snappier (albeit at poorer battery life), I think Nokia will buck up!

Here's hoping that the iPhone is great for a wakeup call.

[desertrat]

The slow speed I can put up with - just about. What I find an incredible PITA are the dumb design decisions which (i) makes operation slower (ii) increases memory usage - the most annoying being most apps go searching through all the memory and storage card looking for the files it knows how to handle, this allows it to present an unwieldyly (new word) long list which makes selecting one item from it extremely tedious. Sometimes building up this unwieldyly long list uses so much memory the app conks out (this has happened to me a number of times when trying to add a thumbnail to a contact and I happen to have hundreds of images on my SD card). This particular example of dumb design is not limited to S60, it's also evident in wince and qtopia.

[FRiC]

One thing I noticed about S60 (and I've commented on before) is that it's actually not slow, but there are stuff like those cute animations that seem to slow it down, e.g. the animated check mark, or the animated keypad unlocking when the slide is opened. I actually have to press a key to cancel the animation so I can go on with what I want to do.

Symbian phones have something like 95% market occupation where I live, and it's frustrating to see other users wait and wait on the UI, or scroll down endless programs since they don't know how to group programs into folders. (Not to mention all the virus infections...)