[bluetroll]

not sure if any of you have looked recently, but HTML5TEST.com now shows BlackBerry 10 on PlayBook.

tablet.jpg

[Thunderbuck]

495 total? That's AWESOME.

And for those who don't see the value in this, html5 is a platform that is growing in importance by the day. At least two mobile OSes (Tizen and the upcoming Firefox mobile OS) are actually BUILT on it. The BB10 browser is actually an html5 app itself.

This doesn't measure speed, but it DOES measure both fidelity and the likelihood that BB10 will be able to process any html5 code thrown at it. It will definitely be an advantage.

[notfanboy]

495 total? That's AWESOME.

And for those who don't see the value in this, html5 is a platform that is growing in importance by the day. At least two mobile OSes (Tizen and the upcoming Firefox mobile OS) are actually BUILT on it. The BB10 browser is actually an html5 app itself.

This doesn't measure speed, but it DOES measure both fidelity and the likelihood that BB10 will be able to process any html5 code thrown at it. It will definitely be an advantage.

Because careful against jumping to conclusions based on that score. "HTML5Test.com isn't the last word though. It doesn't actually determine whether the HTML5 functions are correctly implemented, it merely tests for their presence."

The PB browser had a similar high score, but could not actually do some of those self-reported functions, some of which even crashed the browser.

[Andrew4life]

This is old news. They've shown this result at a number of BB Jam sessions already.

[BB_Bmore]

Yup that's been there for many months. That's how we know that there is a internal build for BB10 on Playbook and that it won't be as long to launch after the phones as some suggest.

[Thunderbuck]

Because careful against jumping to conclusions based on that score. "HTML5Test.com isn't the last word though. It doesn't actually determine whether the HTML5 functions are correctly implemented, it merely tests for their presence."

The PB browser had a similar high score, but could not actually do some of those self-reported functions, some of which even crashed the browser.

There are certainly developers who are "building to the score" with little apparent concern for actual implementation (Maxthon, I'm looking at you). In RIM's case, though, I don't think it's exaggerating to say that much of their survival depends on how good BB10 is, and Web performance is a big chunk of that.

The BB10 browser is a case in point, since it's actually a full-blown html5 app. I was skeptical when I heard the browser wasn't going to be a native app, but it turns out to be smooth and speedy. I think it speaks volumes about RIM's commitment to make sure that the OS doesn't just put up good test scores.

[BB_Bmore]

Last I heard There isn't another mobile browser out that comes close to the BlackBerry10 browser in terms of HTML5 compatibility and SPEED. Wish I had the link but the article tested a boatload of browsers and RIM's quote : "Smoked the Competition " "It wasn't even close " maybe someone will read this who can produce the link? RIM's back is to the wall and BlackBerry10 is do or die...this is why BlackBerry10 will be so good, because it has to be. Can't wait!!

[F2]

There are certainly developers who are "building to the score" with little apparent concern for actual implementation (Maxthon, I'm looking at you). In RIM's case, though, I don't think it's exaggerating to say that much of their survival depends on how good BB10 is, and Web performance is a big chunk of that.

The BB10 browser is a case in point, since it's actually a full-blown html5 app. I was skeptical when I heard the browser wasn't going to be a native app, but it turns out to be smooth and speedy. I think it speaks volumes about RIM's commitment to make sure that the OS doesn't just put up good test scores.

I do hope that their beta will include a wider groups of average users who seem to visit sites that regularly crash the current browser. Or, they, at least, read the various threads where folks mention sites that crash the current browser and test them and find out if they work with this new, improved (no artificial chemicals) browser. I think there's too much 'inbreeding' at rim and that testing does not go beyond a few select internal testers and some of their corporate clients who don't test as widely as should be done. There's a real world and insular testing does not cut it - too many features are still missing after 2.0 and 2.1.

[THBW]

Because careful against jumping to conclusions based on that score. "HTML5Test.com isn't the last word though. It doesn't actually determine whether the HTML5 functions are correctly implemented, it merely tests for their presence."

The PB browser had a similar high score, but could not actually do some of those self-reported functions, some of which even crashed the browser.

Read the post. PB browser was good but not at the level of Bb10. Both are years ahead of anything Apple can produce. The bridge your require is down the road and to the left. Tim Cook is waiting for you with your pay check. Troll.

[notfanboy]

[/b] ;7724213]Read the post. PB browser was good but not at the level of Bb10. Both are years ahead of anything Apple can produce. The bridge your require is down the road and to the left. Tim Cook is waiting for you with your pay check. Troll.

Why don't you see for yourself. Here are some tests you can try out right now that shows iOS and Android browsers handily beating the PB browser on an HTML5 test. Take note that the PBOS 2.1 browser in question has the exact same score 484 + 11 bonus as the BB10 PB Browser shown in the original post.

[AT_Nepal]

Hi Thunderbuck,

just curious since im not a "techy". What do you mean by fidelity? and why is being able to process an html5 code an advantage? Thanks!

[RubberChicken76]

The HTML5 test is great and all, but I'd like to see general rendering speed improvements and (particularly) stability improvements.The PlayBook browser is fine when it works, but it checkerboards too much still and is the least stable app for me on the device.

I don't care if it gets 900 points at HTML5test if the thing is crashing every other time I use it.

[Thunderbuck]

Hi Thunderbuck,

just curious since im not a "techy". What do you mean by fidelity? and why is being able to process an html5 code an advantage? Thanks!

By "fidelity" I mean that the browser renders content as closely to what the developer intended as possible. It means not having to degrade elements (which happens if a browser doesn't support specific features a developer might build into a page or app). It also means that the browser interprets code PROPERLY.

[Thunderbuck]

The HTML5 test is great and all, but I'd like to see general rendering speed improvements and (particularly) stability improvements.The PlayBook browser is fine when it works, but it checkerboards too much still and is the least stable app for me on the device.

I don't care if it gets 900 points at HTML5test if the thing is crashing every other time I use it.

Personally, I find the current PB 2.1 browser to be reasonably stable. Checkerboarding is definitely still an issue, though. Part of that is sheer horsepower, and some of it comes from the overhead of Adobe Air.

The BB10 browser is all-new, and actually a WebWorks app in its own right. Seems more stable AND zipper.

[billbsb]

I hate to be pessimist and negative but I'll focus on just one small thing: I'm not sure if the Playbook hardware, even the 4G, can handle all the implemented spec! Sometimes it's just not possible to support well some features for instance CSS 3D effects. The Playbook's browser supports it but looks worse and slower than the iPad 2 and sometimes even iPad 1 has better results!

BB10 phones on the other hand, which might have even a Quad Core processor and 2G of RAM, it's a total different story. With this kind of hardware, I have no concerns that it can handle the specs!

[RECOOL]

I hate to be pessimist and negative but I'll focus on just one small thing: I'm not sure if the Playbook hardware, even the 4G, can handle all the implemented spec! Sometimes it's just not possible to support well some features for instance CSS 3D effects. The Playbook's browser supports it but looks worse and slower than the iPad 2 and sometimes even iPad 1 has better results!

BB10 phones on the other hand, which might have even a Quad Core processor and 2G of RAM, it's a total different story. With this kind of hardware, I have no concerns that it can handle the specs!

lol even with these so called old specs the PB can play 1080P 3d games at 60fps.Specs dont mean jack good programming is key.

Stop talking about orange tablets that dont even have 1080p and struggle to get above 30fps.

The PB dna is like an alligator its viewed as a dinosaurs by spec whores but its still around because its a beast that does'nt get owned.
Its evolving to BB10 soonish and as we can see by the scores will be sitting high up on food chain the dinosaur will live on.

RIMS forsight for the win.

[texazzpete]

lol even with these so called old specs the PB can play 1080P 3d games at 60fps.Specs dont mean jack good programming is key.

Stop talking about orange tablets that dont even have 1080p and struggle to get above 30fps.
.

What 1080p game? LOL. Can you recall what the screen resolution of the PlayBook is?
*hint* it's nowhere near 1080p

Sorry, specs matter. It's the 3D GPU that's going to be pushing those polygons around, you know.

Who knew that just by good programming I could get PS3 level graphics on my PS2

[BB_Bmore]

Those test are from Microsoft and I suspect have something to do with silverlight. The PlayBook's don't support silverlight. Now I'll get back to trying to figure out what makes someone who is not a BlackBerry fan, frequent a BlackBerry fan sites.

Why don't you see for yourself. Here are some tests you can try out right now that shows iOS and Android browsers handily beating the PB browser on an HTML5 test. Take note that the PBOS 2.1 browser in question has the exact same score 484 + 11 bonus as the BB10 PB Browser shown in the original post.

[RECOOL]

What 1080p game? LOL. Can you recall what the screen resolution of the PlayBook is?
*hint* it's nowhere near 1080p

Sorry, specs matter. It's the 3D GPU that's going to be pushing those polygons around, you know.

Who knew that just by good programming I could get PS3 level graphics on my PS2

Who's talking about Sony goods here?? We talking about PB specs to its counterparts on the market.
SO specs are irelevant the PB specs are more than enough its a beast.

Specs only matter to spec whores.Products will always be released with good enough specs jn this day and age.
Good programming is the key to getting best out of your hardware simple.

People still dont know how awesome the PB is.



Nothing but good times ahead RIM for the win.

[Bobert_123]

Who's talking about Sony goods here?? We talking about PB specs to its counterparts on the market.
SO specs are irelevant the PB specs are more than enough its a beast.

Specs only matter to spec whores.Products will always be released with good enough specs jn this day and age.
Good programming is the key to getting best out of your hardware simple.

People still dont know how awesome the PB is.



Nothing but good times ahead RIM for the win.

As much as I love my pb the specs are really outdated... 1024x640 pixels, 1 ghz duel core, 1 gb ram... The os is powerful enough to get past some hardware problems, but I am really looking foward to an updated pb...

[eddy_berry]

As much as I love my pb the specs are really outdated... 1024x640 pixels, 1 ghz duel core, 1 gb ram... The os is powerful enough to get past some hardware problems, but I am really looking foward to an updated pb...

iPad mini: 1GHz dual core, 512Mb ram, 1024x768 pixels. Specs don't matter. I know enough people that will buy anything with an apple on its back no matter the specs. PB specs are fine. It does the job. Updated specs would be nice, but no point in bending to minority of people that actually care about specs.

[texazzpete]

iPad mini: 1GHz dual core, 512Mb ram, 1024x768 pixels. Specs don't matter. I know enough people that will buy anything with an apple on its back no matter the specs. PB specs are fine. It does the job. Updated specs would be nice, but no point in bending to minority of people that actually care about specs.

The iPad mini also has a GPU that is even better than the Tegra 3 in the Nexus 7 (same GPU as in the iPad 2)

Given that the most demanding apps on tablets these days are games, the iPad mini IS all round significantly more powerful than the Playbook...especially when it comes to gaming performance.

[bluetroll]

LOL.. Talk about getting off topic!

The only reason why I started this thread was because I wanted to show that BB10 on PlayBook is being developed and tested.

[pantlesspenguin]

Last I heard There isn't another mobile browser out that comes close to the BlackBerry10 browser in terms of HTML5 compatibility and SPEED. Wish I had the link but the article tested a boatload of browsers and RIM's quote : "Smoked the Competition " "It wasn't even close " maybe someone will read this who can produce the link? RIM's back is to the wall and BlackBerry10 is do or die...this is why BlackBerry10 will be so good, because it has to be. Can't wait!!

A slight correction - Dolphin Browser HD with the Jet Pack add on scores 492 with 3 bonus points. However, on the html5test.com site it doesn't even list it in the mobile browser section, not even the development or beta section.

[notfanboy]

A slight correction - Dolphin Browser HD with the Jet Pack add on scores 492 with 3 bonus points. However, on the html5test.com site it doesn't even list it in the mobile browser section, not even the development or beta section.

Thanks, I'll try out that add on.

Those test are from Microsoft and I suspect have something to do with silverlight. The PlayBook's don't support silverlight. Now I'll get back to trying to figure out what makes someone who is not a BlackBerry fan, frequent a BlackBerry fan sites.

Those tests have nothing to do with Silverlight. Neither iPad nor SG3 support Silverlight, and they ran the html tests fine.

Actually it's ideal that the tests were designed by Microsoft. When comparing browser performance between Apple, Google, and RIM, I would not want to use tests from Apple, Google, or RIM.