By the same token, isn't it a little disingenous to say specs or benchmark tests mean nothing?
You are absolutely correct.
It is more disingenuous however to mislead the market.
The Droid X was originally hoopla'd and said to come out with 2.2. It was going to have killer performance - it's a killer processor and 2.2 is killer.
Suppose they'd done the release that way.
The market excitement would've shifted from the Droid X to the Droid X's wonderful Android implementation.
Potential buyers shopping for competing products, such as the EVO, would be hearing this: that's 2.2 - when the EVO has it, it'll all be the same.
The differentiation is still there, but it's weak.
Now - suppose you can release the Droid X with 2.1 but get 2.2 performance in some areas and keep that secret. They're not promising the same huge improvement when the Droid X upgrades to 2.2. Oh, no, they're completely innocent - none of them make future promises like that in marketing.
But it is not coincidental that they've implied it, and that expectation has been set.
And if I'm right, today's Droid X fans are going to ask what went wrong. And if any of them start blaming the silicon, then it affects me. I work in R&D in the semiconductor industry and would rather not have another round of needless questions creeping in to my personal life.
Believe me - if I'm right (and I don't _know_ if I am - but I'm not a fool) and if the big 2.2 performance improvement doesn't happen, what do you think the excuse will be?
The truth?
No. The excuse will be, well, that was the bug in the Droid X GPU and that's why they held back 2.2 - but don't worry, the new Droid Y will fix it with its OMAP 4 processor.
I have a choice. Ring the alarm and be laughed out of town as a benchmark-hating idiot later - or start right now protecting the reputation of OMAP 3 and Android 2.2.
I think I'm right, I have the courage of my convictions, so I'm willing to risk being laughed out of town as an idiot.
And no - I don't work for any of the industry processor makers so I don't have a dog in this fight where my own dollars are concerned.
I work at the level above that, in semiconductor reliability test, so my hands are clean.
I may be wrong but I suspect that if the Evo had come out on top in the benchmark test, the very same people who are saying benchmark tests mean nothing would be touting/defending it as much as they are the "test"/editorial posted by the OP.
In my case, that's proven not true by the fact that my "shenanigans" link point to an aside post that I wrote over in the thread criticizing and exploring the EVO's video limitations.
Again, my hands are clean.
It's not that the benchmark tests mean nothing.
I'm taking a LOT of meaning from them, now aren't I?
I'm just not taking the meaning that others want me to.
I'll be the first to admit I have no clue what those tests mean or measure but common sense tells me ...
I wrote my "shenanigans" post as best I could for the lay person. Feel free to criticize it, I count on that to improve my communication skills.
You may not have meant me specifically, but if I'm not the poster boy for the outcry against that benchmark video, I don't know who is.
Cheers!