It seems way more likely that in the decision to go with a 64-bit CPU vs. 2 GB RAM, the pros outweighed the cons. I mean, who knows, but these kinds of decisions aren't made based on the simplistic criteria you're claiming they are. There are pros and cons (and benefits and compromises) to any engineering decision (and product design decision, and business decision, and marketing decision, etc. etc. etc.).
I could easily see a situation where a bunch of people were sitting around saying, "y'know, we don't absolutely positively NEED a 64-bit processor, but it doesn't cost much more and there might be some performance gains and if nothing else it might be a good bullet point for marketing. On the other hand, doubling the RAM will double what we pay for RAM, it won't help performance, and it will eat into the power budget, and it wouldn't make a good bullet point for marketing. The only downside is that denim_chicken will think we're being nefarious and will tell the world about it on HN."
I have no idea if that's what happened, but Occam's Razor suggests that it's more likely than the combination of pure evil and pure incompetence that you've been postulating here.
Well, for one, Apple has never marketed the amount of RAM in iOS devices. It's not even listed on the tech spec (neither is CPU frequency).
Apple's marketing tends to stick to what users will understand. Saying "Your apps will run twice as fast" people get, "Your phone will have twice as much memory", people don't.
Now, granted, saying 64-bit is somewhat idiosyncratic for Apple, but if you look closely they're saying that it's the first phone with a 64-bit processor. While people probably don't know why they want a 64-bit processor, they do know why they want a phone with cutting edge technology. As for why it's good, they keep referring to speed, which people can relate to. Still slightly unusual though.
Well, if nothing else, Apple has never, ever mentioned the RAM in marketing material (in fact, last year, most people assumed the iPhone 5 had 512MB until it was available to look at).
denim_chicken|12 years ago
mwfunk|12 years ago
I could easily see a situation where a bunch of people were sitting around saying, "y'know, we don't absolutely positively NEED a 64-bit processor, but it doesn't cost much more and there might be some performance gains and if nothing else it might be a good bullet point for marketing. On the other hand, doubling the RAM will double what we pay for RAM, it won't help performance, and it will eat into the power budget, and it wouldn't make a good bullet point for marketing. The only downside is that denim_chicken will think we're being nefarious and will tell the world about it on HN."
I have no idea if that's what happened, but Occam's Razor suggests that it's more likely than the combination of pure evil and pure incompetence that you've been postulating here.
drrotmos|12 years ago
Apple's marketing tends to stick to what users will understand. Saying "Your apps will run twice as fast" people get, "Your phone will have twice as much memory", people don't.
Now, granted, saying 64-bit is somewhat idiosyncratic for Apple, but if you look closely they're saying that it's the first phone with a 64-bit processor. While people probably don't know why they want a 64-bit processor, they do know why they want a phone with cutting edge technology. As for why it's good, they keep referring to speed, which people can relate to. Still slightly unusual though.
nsxwolf|12 years ago
rsynnott|12 years ago