That's just because every time there's an improvement in something the web establishgentia load up even more crappy and heavier ADs and tracking. You are a prisoner of marketing to do with as they will, they can fill up
What am I going to regret the most if I order the 2GB model?
- Thread starter ynohtna
- Start date
Another reason why IE/Edge really needs to get on board the plug-in wagon.
Even this forum is a PITA to use on the S3. Typically load the page and the forum would start loading and I click on new posts link the moment it appears. On the S3 when I load this forum I cannot click new posts until the entire page has completed loading. sites like engadget and cnet are the worst though, even on the SP3 once I start reading comment on an article the machine will often just lock up and the web page recovered.
I think one of the bigger problems at present is it seems every software company (and also hardware companies such as mobile phones) seem to create their business plans on the assumption that any and everyone who uses their product always has access to a silly fast internet connection.
I played with the 2GB version extensively and when you have too many windows/tabs open, it's very noticeable for me (may not be noticeable for a lot of people) when it has to transfer data from virtual memory. Instead of instant loading when going to a different window, there is a 1-4 second lag time to get that program into RAM.
Belshazer4
New Member
RAM is not storage, it is operating space. You can not increase it in tablets, what you buy is what you live with.
By 'operating space' I mean that it is what determines how many applications you can have running at the same time and how smoothly they run.
More RAM = Smoother and faster operation. More is better in ALL computers.
Also, $100.00 is a good investment for RAM and will reduce future headaches and regrets.
InspectHerGadget
Active Member
I got the 4G one for that reason. I guess if someone is worried enough about 2G RAM to post on the forum then the answer is to get the 4G model.
Likewise if you're worried enough about performance to post then get the SP3 which is much faster.
I used my Asus F202E for two weeks as my sole work computer while the SP3 was getting exchanged. I found it slow but it did the job and I found with 2G of RAM it would permanently be cruising around 1.8G RAM usage with everything running. So 2G is enough but obviously 4G is most likely better.
Perspective. The RT and Surface 2 only have 2GB RAM. The RT was a bit slow for my tastes but that was due to the Tegra 3 SoC. The S2 was/is much faster than RT and worked well even with 2GB RAM and I used it almost daily until getting an S3. The S3 measures faster than the S2 in every respect so, if you were satisfied with an RT the S3 will be blazing whether 2GB or 4GB.
In the last three to four months I have noticed some occasional lags with the S2 and I see the same with the S3 these are NOT hardware or resource related, rather the experience of POORLY designed web sites and heavy ADware/tracking, whether you have 2GB or 4GB is irrelevant in this respect. A faster SSD would help and while disk performance is better on an S3 vs S2 or RT a standard SSD vs the eMMC would have been more than welcome. I hope the S4 forgoes eMMC and uses at least a regular SSD.
MS please resist the temptation to follow the low cost industry norms and cheap out with low cost/quality components. Perhaps a 128Gb SSD is $60 (less at wholesale) and a 128gb eMMC is $20 that's $40 per unit times however many they sell per quarter ... say a million (by some measures a success and others a failure) the cost difference is 40 million or 40 million per million. Whatever that difference is; in volume it makes managers make decisions that negatively affect the end result for users.
In the last three to four months I have noticed some occasional lags with the S2 and I see the same with the S3 these are NOT hardware or resource related, rather the experience of POORLY designed web sites and heavy ADware/tracking, whether you have 2GB or 4GB is irrelevant in this respect. A faster SSD would help and while disk performance is better on an S3 vs S2 or RT a standard SSD vs the eMMC would have been more than welcome. I hope the S4 forgoes eMMC and uses at least a regular SSD.
MS please resist the temptation to follow the low cost industry norms and cheap out with low cost/quality components. Perhaps a 128Gb SSD is $60 (less at wholesale) and a 128gb eMMC is $20 that's $40 per unit times however many they sell per quarter ... say a million (by some measures a success and others a failure) the cost difference is 40 million or 40 million per million. Whatever that difference is; in volume it makes managers make decisions that negatively affect the end result for users.
InspectHerGadget
Active Member
I think Windows does suck up a lot of CPU in relation to tablet OSs and maybe even in comparison to Windows RT.
I do agree with poorly designed websites but also people can have dodgy internet too.
My wife who is the one who is the real owner and user of the Surface 3 said last night "my email is slow, a circle is going round and round". It wasn't there when I looked but it does show that the Surface 3 will bog down, for whatever reasons, much more often, than say the SP3 will. On the other hand, as you say, it is faster overall than the Surface 2.
I think the Surface 3 is cruising on the lower edge of acceptable performance, as you would expect with eMMC and an Atom processor but it is impossibly small for what it does and is lovely. If anyone has ideas on the relative power draws of eMMC versus an SSD, I would be interested as the decision to use eMMC could be driven as much by power considerations, as cost.
I do agree with poorly designed websites but also people can have dodgy internet too.
My wife who is the one who is the real owner and user of the Surface 3 said last night "my email is slow, a circle is going round and round". It wasn't there when I looked but it does show that the Surface 3 will bog down, for whatever reasons, much more often, than say the SP3 will. On the other hand, as you say, it is faster overall than the Surface 2.
I think the Surface 3 is cruising on the lower edge of acceptable performance, as you would expect with eMMC and an Atom processor but it is impossibly small for what it does and is lovely. If anyone has ideas on the relative power draws of eMMC versus an SSD, I would be interested as the decision to use eMMC could be driven as much by power considerations, as cost.
Agreed, as was the Surface 2 and the RT was cruising below that level.
Don't get me wrong I really like the S2 and S3 although come time for S4 or S3+ there are areas of opportunity where there's a gap between this and the Pro line for a device to comfortably fit and there could even be overlap at the high and low end of the two. IMO that's where the perfect device lives.
True but in directly comparing the two "dodgy Internet" falls into the all things being equal category, where it's the same for both.
I wish there was a way to quantify that however from most appearances it's just a Windows recompile for a different chip. I imagine there's something more to it but for Office, and vbscript, powershell, system utilities like device manager, disk manager, & control panel to work plus you get a lot of the same patches the differences are well hidden or minimal between RT and X86 notwithstanding the arbitrary marketing imposed limitations.
