[jpash549]

I did visit the site and saw that much is possible including testing on many devices they have there including the playbook. I also did some testing using the Maxthon browser and the Origami browser. With the origami browser you can do some custom settings.My efforts there did not succeed probably due to my lack of competence coupled with the crash sensitivity of the browser. A more skilled person might be able to succeed. In any event some light photo shopping might work.

[Hirazi Blue]

So I guess this is irrefutable proof Blackberry is "also" working on Tablet OS 3 on the side...
(And no, it's not "shopped".. http://html5test.com/s/191d751fd07d752d.html )

[pacoman03]

So I guess this is irrefutable proof Blackberry is "also" working on Tablet OS 3 on the side...
(And no, it's not "shopped".. HTML5test - How well does your browser support HTML5? )

No one here has said that anything shown is "irrefutable proof" of anything, other than that some of the images posted have clearly not been photoshopped, including yours. There is, however, a significant difference between a score of 486, as shown in your pic, and the scores of 500 and 505 as shown in the pics that I posted previously. The difference is that there are a handful of browsers that can achieve a score of 486 on the HTML5test website (not all of which I have access to), but as far as I know there is only one publically available browser that can achieve a score of 499 or above. That browser is the Chrome desktop browser. Thus, when I see something like this on the HTML5test website, I know it was most likely done using Chrome desktop-



HTML5test - How well does your browser support HTML5?
Now, as I said, it was likely done using Chrome desktop, since the Playbook browser should score about a 422 running the test, and, like I said, AFAIK, only Chrome desktop can return a score as high as 499. Further and more specifically, the test was likely done using Chrome Canary, since Canary allows one to play around with user agents and device identifications, while I don't believe his is possible using Chrome 33. Lastly, I can say it was done using Chrome Canary running on a Windows 7 desktop, because, well, because I'm the one who ran the test on my Windows 7 desktop, using Canary, with the user agent set to Playbook running 2.1 (or something like that). That being said, while it was easy enough to "fake" a Playbook score on that site, try as I might, I could NOT get that site to report my device as a Playbook or Blackberry tablet running BB10 by playing around with Chrome's available user agents and device id's.. So, either I was missing something, or I don't know what I'm doing, or it's not as easy to fake the results posted earlier in this thread as some might have us believe. So, if anyone thinks those results are easily faked, then prove it by actually doing it. I'm certainly open to that possibility, maybe probability, but naked claims that it can be done are not likely to convince me.

[Hirazi Blue]

My previous post was merely made in jest, don't take it personally! I was surprised how even I could easily and within a mere 5 minutes get the faked result I posted above. Had I taken more time, I undoubtedly would have been able to fake it more convincingly. But that was not my point. My point was to show how easy this is to fake, hence the Tablet OS 3 as an extremely unlikely candidate...

[Deckard79]

My previous post was merely made in jest, don't take it personally! I was surprised how even I could easily and within a mere 5 minutes get the faked result I posted above. Had I taken more time, I undoubtedly would have been able to fake it more convincingly. But that was not my point. My point was to show how easy this is to fake, hence the Tablet OS 3 as an extremely unlikely candidate...

CYNIC! :-P

Posted via CB10