1. peter_betos's Avatar
    ... but it is still buggy. Not sure if it's because of the Playbook's browser. :S
    10-16-11 10:47 AM
  2. anindoc's Avatar
    ... but it is still buggy. Not sure if it's because of the Playbook's browser. :S
    the playbooks browser is zillion times better than on any tablet, let alone ipad....
    10-16-11 11:06 AM
  3. peter_betos's Avatar
    Yes, I know it's gazillion times better. But it seems Facebook didn't made the touch site compatible to the playbook's browser, or is it the other way around? or does the touch site need to be compliant with the new HTML standards just so it would have an effect with the playbook's browser as well?
    bonocol likes this.
    10-16-11 11:16 AM
  4. Abrante's Avatar
    Noticed that myself on FB on the PB. I have to click like 1/8 of an inch below whatever I want to click to activate it. Never really bothered me though, I adjusted to it.
    10-16-11 01:25 PM
  5. tayl0rd's Avatar
    That's because the touch site is designed for touch phones, not tablets. Most times when you use a touch phone for the web, your finger is actually touching below where you think you're touching (for most people.) And it is the source of much frustration for people that just can't grasp the concept of readjusting to something.
    nova_8 likes this.
    10-16-11 01:41 PM
  6. s219's Avatar
    the playbooks browser is zillion times better than on any tablet, let alone ipad....
    Apparently you're not comparing speed eh? The PlayBook browser is among the slowest of all tablets I have tried (in fact, it benchmarks 2-3X slower than iPad 2).
    10-16-11 11:43 PM
  7. nova_8's Avatar
    Apparently you're not comparing speed eh? The PlayBook browser is among the slowest of all tablets I have tried (in fact, it benchmarks 2-3X slower than iPad 2).
    have to agree on tht.its not the fastest around..i just love the tab capability in pb browser and swiping across other opened appswhich is why pb standout from rest of the tablets for me
    10-16-11 11:53 PM
  8. MrBugMan's Avatar
    i find when I dissable flash, my PB is pretty close to the iPad2 . I wonder why that would be? Oh yeah, no flash on iPad!
    rsxsniper, Jince and rjshahan like this.
    10-17-11 12:00 AM
  9. bounce007's Avatar
    Apparently you're not comparing speed eh? The PlayBook browser is among the slowest of all tablets I have tried (in fact, it benchmarks 2-3X slower than iPad 2).
    Apparently you're not taking into consideration what the PlayBook loads eh? Go to Wolfram Research: Mathematica, Technical and Scientific Software on both the iPad and the PlayBook (if you do have both devices) and tell me if you notice the difference... It's blatantly obvious and should give you an idea of why the PlayBook might load a page a little slower than the iPad
    10-17-11 12:14 AM
  10. s219's Avatar
    Apparently you're not taking into consideration what the PlayBook loads eh? Go to Wolfram Research: Mathematica, Technical and Scientific Software on both the iPad and the PlayBook (if you do have both devices) and tell me if you notice the difference... It's blatantly obvious and should give you an idea of why the PlayBook might load a page a little slower than the iPad
    Just so you know what I am talking about, here is a head to head test of both devices loading the full desktop version of the engadget website, with Flash off on the PlayBook to be fair (it's not required for the site either way, it's just off for even testing):





    If you turn off javascript, the PlayBook is about as fast as the iPad with javascript on. But, if you turn it off on the iPad also, it again regains the performance advantage.

    Here are SunSpider benchmarks, which measure javascript performance (lower times are better):

    iPad 2 / iOS 5:
    SunSpider 0.9: 1825
    SunSpider 0.9.1: 1826

    PlayBook / 1.0.7:
    SunSpider 0.9: 4313 (2.4X slower)
    SunSpider 0.9.1: 2420 (1.3X slower)

    Javascript is the weak link in the PlayBook's browser. Everyone focuses on Flash either to demonstrate that the PB does heavy lifting, or as an excuse for it being slower, but javascript is the real issue, and it's something that is far more fundamental and essential than Flash. RIM has some work to do in this area.

    By the way, Wolfram's website looks fine on iOS, same as on my desktop computer. They have obviously coded an HTML5 version so that Flash is not needed.
    kbz1960 likes this.
    10-17-11 10:28 AM
  11. brucep1's Avatar
    Just so you know what I am talking about, here is a head to head test of both devices loading the full desktop version of the engadget website, with Flash off on the PlayBook to be fair (it's not required for the site either way, it's just off for even testing):





    If you turn off javascript, the PlayBook is about as fast as the iPad with javascript on. But, if you turn it off on the iPad also, it again regains the performance advantage.

    Here are SunSpider benchmarks, which measure javascript performance (lower times are better):

    iPad 2 / iOS 5:
    SunSpider 0.9: 1825
    SunSpider 0.9.1: 1826

    PlayBook / 1.0.7:
    SunSpider 0.9: 4313 (2.4X slower)
    SunSpider 0.9.1: 2420 (1.3X slower)

    Javascript is the weak link in the PlayBook's browser. Everyone focuses on Flash either to demonstrate that the PB does heavy lifting, or as an excuse for it being slower, but javascript is the real issue, and it's something that is far more fundamental and essential than Flash. RIM has some work to do in this area.

    By the way, Wolfram's website looks fine on iOS, same as on my desktop computer. They have obviously coded an HTML5 version so that Flash is not needed.
    I had no idea that the Playbook browser was so much slower. Guess I just never really used any other tabs to compare. Either way it seems to work alright for me.
    black hole likes this.
    10-17-11 10:36 AM
  12. symphara's Avatar
    By the way, Wolfram's website looks fine on iOS, same as on my desktop computer. They have obviously coded an HTML5 version so that Flash is not needed.
    I doubt it - just checked my iPad (iOS 5) and the big banner ("Bring documents to life") is just a static image. Same story in desktop Safari.

    On Chrome, Firefox or the PlayBook you can see the fancy animation.
    10-17-11 12:41 PM
  13. bounce007's Avatar
    Here are SunSpider benchmarks, which measure javascript performance (lower times are better):

    iPad 2 / iOS 5:
    SunSpider 0.9: 1825
    SunSpider 0.9.1: 1826

    PlayBook / 1.0.7:
    SunSpider 0.9: 4313 (2.4X slower)
    SunSpider 0.9.1: 2420 (1.3X slower)

    Javascript is the weak link in the PlayBook's browser. Everyone focuses on Flash either to demonstrate that the PB does heavy lifting, or as an excuse for it being slower, but javascript is the real issue, and it's something that is far more fundamental and essential than Flash. RIM has some work to do in this area.

    By the way, Wolfram's website looks fine on iOS, same as on my desktop computer. They have obviously coded an HTML5 version so that Flash is not needed.

    What do benchmarks tell you? BenchMarks are great at divulging comparitive info between browsers, BUT what you and many people FAIL to understand is BenchMark information is only useful when comparing different browsers on a SINGLE piece of equipment. Numbers alone are meaningless, it's the way that they are presented in context that give them significance. So of course running the iPad's FEATHER WEIGHT browser on it's relatively solid hardware will be "faster" and give "better" benchmark scores. I have both devices and the general usefulness of the iPad's browser pales in comparison to that of the PlayBook's.

    ...and like the user I quoted below said 'the big banner is static on the ipad' while on the PlayBook, the big banner is dynamic. So check it again!

    I doubt it - just checked my iPad (iOS 5) and the big banner ("Bring documents to life") is just a static image. Same story in desktop Safari.

    On Chrome, Firefox or the PlayBook you can see the fancy animation.
    10-18-11 09:31 AM
  14. peter_betos's Avatar
    Hold the flare guys!
    touch.facebook.com now works perfectly on OS 2.0!
    woohoo! best bbx os build yet!!
    10-19-11 12:54 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD