slitchfield wrote:Oh, for the UMPTEENTH time, we'd LOVE to give the i8910 HD HUGE coverage. If Samsung could ahem..... make some. Or at least some that aren't locked to an Italian network or crippled by Orange.Two i8910 HD's are due to arrive this week, but we're not exactly holding our breath.
As you've mentioned Orange and Italian in the same sentence, you're probably already aware that one can be used to fix the other....😉.
[QUOTE=Super Chimp;429211]This test might have meant more if it had included handsets such as the 3GS, Pre, Hero, TG01 & i8910HD. I mean why use the past generation iphone, it makes no sense?
I'm sorry, but it makes PERFECT sense 2 me. The point here is that the s60 browser has improved TREMENDOUSLY compared to the likes of the N95, N95 8gb, N82, E71, etc..N I'm personally very surprised not to have read anythg on this until now. It doesnt matter if the 3GS, or the Pre, or the i8910 is faster than the N86, they're much more powerful hardware, they SHOULD do better. But the test was meant to show how much improved the browser is now compared to previous version. N the fact that the browser now matches, or even bettered the speed of the Iphone 3G, is a really worthy news, at least 4 me it is.
Unregistered wrote:not a fair test. no 3GS which you know would win WITHOUT testing!!! so you left it out in order to glorify symbian which was the purpose of this test..it's allaboutsymbian of course
READ and UNDERSTAND the whole point of the article Apple Fanboy!
Nice comparison guys.. 😊
Interesting that you are using the latest version of Iphone OS (3.0) to do the comparison and the N97 still beats them (given they have similar CPU speeds). In comparison to a 3GS is probably not too fair unless Nokia had put in a 600Mhz ARM11 in there as well.
Also, those fanboys there that claim the 3GS is suppose to be 3 times faster - remember that there is a fair amount of latency involved with downloading the page itself - plus the fact that the CPU is only 50% more than the previous generation, the results of these tests will be closer to 40% better than the 3G iphone. the 300% faster speed only incorporates the fact there is a faster GPU in there as well and is not used during browsing. So realistically a 3GS will ONLY be as fast as a N97 or 5800 ANYWAY.
BTW.. I've quite literally stopped using my NETBOOK since I got my N97.. Given the Browser is now fast enough to be usable and that it does have sufficient memory to browse (and multitask my MSN) - plus its instantly there (and on) with much more battery life, it really is very cool..
Here's a comparison between the the iPhone & N97 browser speed..
http://www.mobiiliblogi.com/2009/07/11/nokia-n97-vs-iphone-3g-kumpi-avaa-nettisivut-nopeammin/
Unregistered wrote:READ and UNDERSTAND the whole point of the article Apple Fanboy!
poor boy has his feelings hurt over his slow browser!
Looking again at those figures, those really are impressive numbers there. I'm amazed how so many negative comments are being posted here. Probably with comparable hardware with the 3GS, the Nokias would have given it a royal kick in the ass!
Unregistered wrote:poor boy has his feelings hurt over his slow browser!
Nope, your're just an idiot who doesn't get it
Unregistered wrote:Here's a comparison between the the iPhone & N97 browser speed..http://www.mobiiliblogi.com/2009/07/11/nokia-n97-vs-iphone-3g-kumpi-avaa-nettisivut-nopeammin/
The N97 is still faster in most of the tests..
Given the following circumstances:
1) N97 has a higher resolution than the Iphone meaning it has to push harder to display more and cache more of the screen info
2) N97 also displays AND loads the flash content - which Apple does not.
Rafe,
You should have compared the speed and appearance of Nokia's S60 web rendering www.apple.com with Apple's iPhone Safari rendering www.nokia.com.
"Full web", my arse.
I've just installed a user agent switcher on firefox, and it also appears that a number of sites I test serve up reduced iPhone pages if you have the iPhone UA string.
Slashdot for instance only shows 5 stories with no sidebars - since slashdot loads the content after the main page has loaded, the number of stories has a direct link to the amount of time it takes to load. Also, the floating CSS sidebar isn't there for iPhone.
Interestingly, apple.com takes more time to complete on my computer that it does on those phones in the linked youtube video.
Unregistered wrote:Here's a comparison between the the iPhone & N97 browser speed..http://www.mobiiliblogi.com/2009/07/11/nokia-n97-vs-iphone-3g-kumpi-avaa-nettisivut-nopeammin/
i dont know what your intent was, but that comparison shows that the n97 is actually slightly faster on some pages, and the video certainly shows that the n97 is very close to the iphone 3g. its not like a blow out or anything, they are both finishing very close together.
also the slashdot page on the iphone i dont think was the full version.
Never mind being able to skip the unregistered comments, why not make them have to register in the first place?
If you do get the other phones, hopefully soon - is it possible to update this test?
Or better yet, please do this as a standard test for future phones, e.g. a grid style loading performance comparison? this test is really interesting for comparison purposes.
Cheers
RogerPodacter wrote:The intent is testing the newest version of the browser 7.1. All those phones are using the newer browser with improved rendering so take your pick whichever one you want. And the 5800 seems to be the older and has a slower cpu and it actually seemed slightly quicker so it really doesn't seen to matter anyway.
Well I am going to go out on a limb here & I have no scientific tests to back this up so it's my own personal experience of the two devices but I would say, allowing for connection issues, that my 3GS renders pages considerably faster than my 5800XM used to do.
I don't want to be seen as just flying the flag for the 3GS here as I am sure other devices such as the Pre, i8910HD & even possible the Hero enjoy a better performance than most of the devices listed here. But you wouldn't know as they weren't tested.
As for AAS not testing the i8910HD, well their not going to have an excuse for not reviewing after the 01/08/2009 as that's when it gets re-released in it's fully finalised form. Source
Super Chimp wrote:Well I am going to go out on a limb here & I have no scientific tests to back this up so it's my own personal experience of the two devices but I would say, allowing for connection issues, that my 3GS renders pages considerably faster than my 5800XM used to do.I don't want to be seen as just flying the flag for the 3GS here as I am sure other devices such as the Pre, i8910HD & even possible the Hero enjoy a better performance than most of the devices listed here. But you wouldn't know as they weren't tested.
i have no doubt that the new iphone 3gs will perform faster. of course it will, nobody is saying otherwise.
Hello,
you should have tried the o3 browser (3rd party free browser using a quite new webkit, but still in alpha or something state).
On my E71 it is way faster than the standard browser. But ok it is not replace yet, but anyway nice to see that my E71 can be much faster. I really hope Nokia will push the updates to their standard browser down to the "older" phones (E71 is not really old after all).
I was a poster above saying that my iPhone 3GS rendered the Times site at exactly the same speed as Rafe's N86. I am impressed, but there is a big difference.
Here is a screenshot from Rafe's video:
http://gallery.me.com/chrismahon/100052/Picture%203
Although technically it renders correctly, apart from the Logo, everything is in the same blocky terminal-like font, just like my old Nokia N71:icon13:. And here's my 3GS:
http://gallery.me.com/chrismahon#100052/Fonts :icon14:
Maybe it's just me, but its a far more natural experience on the iPhone, and more like how the designer intended.
And I am amazed by the N97. Such a big screen, but it displays only the corner of the page. Even though Web has the ability to display the whole page (in it's history function). That was the big innovation of Web, and yet it is only properly implemented on the iPhone. The point is, why should I have to scroll as soon as the page is loaded, when I can just look and double-tap on what I want to read?
So, for the love of fonts, Nokia, add a few more.
Group51 wrote:I was a poster above saying that my iPhone 3GS rendered the Times site at exactly the same speed as Rafe's N86. I am impressed, but there is a big difference.Here is a screenshot from Rafe's video:
http://gallery.me.com/chrismahon/100052/Picture%203
Although technically it renders correctly, apart from the Logo, everything is in the same blocky terminal-like font, just like my old Nokia N71:icon13:. And here's my 3GS:
http://gallery.me.com/chrismahon#100052/Fonts :icon14:
Maybe it's just me, but its a far more natural experience on the iPhone, and more like how the designer intended.
And I am amazed by the N97. Such a big screen, but it displays only the corner of the page. Even though Web has the ability to display the whole page (in it's history function). That was the big innovation of Web, and yet it is only properly implemented on the iPhone. The point is, why should I have to scroll as soon as the page is loaded, when I can just look and double-tap on what I want to read?
So, for the love of fonts, Nokia, add a few more.
That seems to be the fault of nokia. Their default zoom level is closer when a page first loads. Where it looks like the iphone loads at a higher overview zoom level. Of course after the page loads on the n97 you can zoom out and get the same view as the iphone. But this isn't what the browser defaults to.
I will say that i love my 5800 screen resolution when browsing the web compared to my roommates android browser and his iphone even. Cause in landscape view the 640 pixels pretty much gives you the whole page on most sites. And it looks so sharp and crisp.
you have to take into account the time wasted until the page is readable or usable.
on iphone etc, once the text loads you can jump in and start reading. on n97..... i think you would have to wait till the rest loads. and iphone seems to present a much more interesting page whilst loading. n97 doesn't seem to load pictures until the very end.
sometimes on 3g connections, n95 would wait until most of the html page was loaded before it could render it. now thats just poor design. there is no reason to wait for all the data to come through.
on 3g its slow, so thats why n95 is so poor. i would assume n97 even though faster doesn't fix those problems. also the threading on n97 is so poor that, most pages would pause at loading time. and you couldn't do anything until its fully loaded.
Okay, I've got the iPhone 3GS sat right here, and it'll be joined by the N97 shortly. I'll test some sites and post the results soon.
I think Rafe it makes sense if you do more tests once you get the i8910HD a 3GS or semilar that you also try and test the new S60 browser with flash content disabled as none of the above loads flash content. I think this is a more fair comparison.
This naturally also makes sense for people trying to do this themselves (Jaggz and others).
psiegumfeldt wrote:I think Rafe it makes sense if you do more tests once you get the i8910HD a 3GS or semilar that you also try and test the new S60 browser with flash content disabled as none of the above loads flash content. I think this is a more fair comparison.This naturally also makes sense for people trying to do this themselves (Jaggz and others).
Very much agree with this, the i8910HD would be particularly informative as it's using the same browser but running on a newer hardware platform.
Super Chimp wrote:Very much agree with this, the i8910HD would be particularly informative as it's using the same browser but running on a newer hardware platform.
well we could deduce that if the n86 can match the iphone 3gs (pending someone post their results), then it would only be natural to assume that the i8910HD be able to match the iphone 3gs, since it has the newer CPU hardware.
ps: just found out i can load multiple tabs on iphone 3gs all at the same time. its still liquid smooth.
symbian eat ur heart out.
RogerPodacter wrote:well we could deduce that if the n86 can match the iphone 3gs (pending someone post their results), then it would only be natural to assume that the i8910HD be able to match the iphone 3gs, since it has the newer CPU hardware.
Well who knows being as neither device was tested here, plus I believe phones like the 3GS & Pre render pages in a different way from those using the S60 browser which needs to be factored in.
Okay, I've tried loading up several popular pages including my own blog, and I'd say that the iPhone 3GS is about 35% faster than the N97 for basic web page loading and compositing.
Jaggz wrote:Okay, I've tried loading up several popular pages including my own blog, and I'd say that the iPhone 3GS is about 35% faster than the N97 for basic web page loading and compositing.
Not that I dont believe the 3GS is faster than N97 but what kind of test is that? Did you try with the pages from Rafe's test and what are the load times for the two?
Have you tried to disable the flash content loading in the N97? This does make a difference on pages with flash content.
We are curious about the test results so please give us some figures so we can compare with the ones in Rafe's test.
There are weird numbers in the Proxy Browsing Speed figure x-axis?
What's the point of including the iphone on this test? It just created bashing..
This was suppose to be a test to show how much faster is the new web browser compare to prior version.