or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Amazon's Silk does little to accelerate Kindle Fire, HTML5
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Amazon's Silk does little to accelerate Kindle Fire, HTML5 - Page 2

post #41 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

My recollection of Opera Mini, which probably uses some of the same techniques for "speeding up" the web, is that it wasn't worth the bother.

Yes... But Silk's potential is for millions of popular page requests from identical devices to a concentrated set of servers.

Amazon could continuously determine, say, the top 10,000 page requests and continuously reload, render and cache those pages -- so that 80% of Silk requests could be delivered, preformatted, from the existing cache.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #42 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

No, consumers will not care and will only remember that it performed like crap.

True. Anyone who thinks that most people think about these products the way posters on forums do is seriously delusional. People that know from 40% to 200% of what we do comprise 10% of the tablet market if that, any size or power. Very few people know or care about anything except if they'll get their money's worth. They care not about HTML5 or HTML55, or anything except if it works OK.

These will sell or not sell based on what their neighbors say is great or sucks.

Period.
post #43 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

It's what they've been taught - That specs tell the story. Pick up Best Buy's sales ad tomorrow and see how they market PCs and Android phones: Ghz, GB, Robots, and explosion.

Also, sci-fi gladiators fighting robots with explosions. That is how the Verizon Droid is marketed on TV.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #44 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd View Post

True. Anyone who thinks that most people think about these products the way posters on forums do is seriously delusional. People that know from 40% to 200% of what we do comprise 10% of the tablet market if that, any size or power. Very few people know or care about anything except if they'll get their money's worth. They care not about HTML5 or HTML55, or anything except if it works OK.

These will sell or not sell based on what their neighbors say is great or sucks.

Period.

I believe that many of these (Fires, Kindles and PlayBooks) will be little-thought/effort-given Christmas gifts...

And 50% will be returned or get a store credit...

...works out slightly worse than giving a gift card... From a store where the recipient does't normally shop!
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #45 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Yes... But Silk's potential is for millions of popular page requests from identical devices to a concentrated set of servers.

Amazon could continuously determine, say, the top 10,000 page requests and continuously reload, render and cache those pages -- so that 80% of Silk requests could be delivered, preformatted, from the existing cache.

Potential schmotential. First, Internet caching servers are nothing new. Secondly, anything with that many page views tends to be highly dynamic web pages, say, CNN or twitter. There's no point in caching stale copies of those. Third, unless it has already cached it, the intermediate server is another network hop and processing node that stands between the web browser and the originating server, so that would be expected to add latency. Theory is nice, but real world numbers are what matter, no?

So let's say there's no net gain (some websites are faster, some are slower). How does running extra unnecessary servers to process Silk requests beneficial? It's costing someone money to run those servers in a data center, and unless the energy is from renewable sources, it's also contributing greenhouse gases too.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #46 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Potential schmotential. First, Internet caching servers are nothing new. Secondly, anything with that many page views tends to be highly dynamic web pages, say, CNN or twitter. There's no point in caching stale copies of those. Third, unless it has already cached it, the intermediate server is another network hop and processing node that stands between the web browser and the originating server, so that would be expected to add latency. Theory is nice, but real world numbers are what matter, no?

So let's say there's no net gain (some websites are faster, some are slower). How does running extra unnecessary servers to process Silk requests beneficial? It's costing someone money to run those servers in a data center, and unless the energy is from renewable sources, it's also contributing greenhouse gases too.

Totally disagree! If you can continuously cache/refresh the most reqrested (dynamically determined) web pages then deliver them from a few servers to millions of clients you have gained performance, reduced bandwidth...

Obviously, with 50,000 Fires in the field, it's overhead... But with 5-10 million Fires it would be pure gravy if 80% of up-to-date web pages could be served from teh caches.

Edit: As it is, any popular web page has been updated many times before/as it is served, downloaded (scripts, styles, etc) and rendered on a less-powerful client.

If a cached, formated (no tags) page is delivered from an up-to-date cache... I suspect the latter would deliver a more recent result.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #47 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

No, consumers will not care and will only remember that it performed like crap.

Yup. I was in the telco shop yesterday. Showed a friend Siri on the demo 4s. Worked on mark bringing up the various things I was asking for (which surprised me a bit cause it isn't perfect). Then while waiting in line I played with a string of "giant" screened android units from HTC, Samsung and Moto. and from the first touch they performed poorly. Scrolling stutters, misreads of touch input with slightly mysterious and visually poor interfaces. The couple of Win7 phones were way smoother and responded to input correctly and logically.

Thing is from the first G1 I saw through to now all android units I have played with or studied others using have been clunky marignal devices.

I am savvy enough and not idle consumer but from first touch it is clear what is crap. I would gladly choose a Win7 device if I could not select an iDevice. Android might have another 5 years before it presents as usable.

Just for balance the RIM devices, well I think they were fake plastic mockups. So they responded pretty much as they would if you bought one.
you only have freedom in choice when you know you have no choice
Reply
you only have freedom in choice when you know you have no choice
Reply
post #48 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

Too much profanity for an intelligent conversation!

I disagree. Profanity does not diminish the merits of a good argument and the numerous valid points that have been laid forth. Puritanical people might find such language objectionable, but profanity is a common part of language that is used daily by virtually everybody. Even such writers as Shakespeare were fond of vulgar words. It is virtually impossible for me and it would also not be very satisfying to write anything about Android without at least a bare minimum of profanity included.
post #49 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Not exactly.

Kindle Fire is $200 and 16 GB iPad 2 is $500.

Also, I'm guessing that quite a few Kindle Fire owners will choose to sign up for Amazon prime, so in those cases, it's at least $280.

And a refurbished iPad 2, which is as good as new (Apple's refurbished products are first rate) can be had directly from Apple for $450.

If I were really, really poor, I'd rather pick up a used iPad 1 than spend $200 for a Kindle Fire.

But with Amazon Prime, a customer gets access to streaming movies and 2nd day shipping for physical products. Your comparison just doesn't work comparing apples to oranges.
post #50 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Profanity does not diminish the merits of a good argument…

It makes you seem far less professional, is all.

Quote:
…profanity is a common part of language that is used daily by virtually everybody.

Nope.

Quote:
It is virtually impossible for me and it would also not be very satisfying to write anything about Android without at least a bare minimum of profanity included.


Then,
and I say this with a staunch, unblemished record of being, myself, an Apple Evangelist (to which many an Apple fanboy and troll alike can attest ), take a chill pill.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with a large bias toward Apple. There's something wrong with finding absolutely no fault in Apple, and there's definitely something wrong when one has to behave like the raving fools that surrounded me in college (A "Christian" university, at that. SO much swearing. ) to get one's point across about competitors.

For example, I like Windows Phone 7. It's incredibly clean and crisp in its design, and it's quite responsive on all the hardware with which I've had a chance to play. However, it lacks many, MANY features that have become so integral to iOS, has a far sparser selection of third-party apps, does not integrate as fluidly with its surroundings as iOS devices do with iTunes and its Stores, and the OS itself doesn't have any soul to it.

Yes, it's gorgeous. Yes, there might even be some things in it from which Apple can learn. But I don't feel it when I use it. The definition of feel here is hard to describe, but you know it when you experience it. It's not necessarily utilitarian or spartan, it just doesn't have any heart.

I'm glad it exists; once Android capitulates, it will step up to fill the void quite nicely, and I see it growing into a fine competitor for Apple. For once, Microsoft has done beautiful work without copying anyone else to do it.

It just has no heart.


Now, see? No swearing. I've not only established iOS' superiority, but I've also managed to take a subtle jab at Android and point out flaws in Windows Phone 7 while giving it a healthy amount of praise as the well-designed second-banana it is. Such praise shows that, while I prefer iOS over both alternatives and Apple's ecosystem over Windows' and Google's (lack thereof), I am not a "blind follower of The Fith", as the anti-fanboys would say.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #51 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by tylerk36 View Post

This device is more like a toy compared to the iPad. It really doesn't measure up. One thing I have noticed is that it has no email capability. I would think if you have internet access and you brows the web you should be able to get your email as well.

Browser based email is possible.
post #52 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by easy288 View Post

But with Amazon Prime, a customer gets access to streaming movies and 2nd day shipping for physical products. Your comparison just doesn't work comparing apples to oranges.

I agree with what you write, but I wonder what percentage of Fire owners did opt for that option.

The point I'm trying to make is that the Kindle Fire seems to be a very poor tablet, though it does seem to excel at one thing, being a portal for Amazon's store and their services. I also find it strange that the kind of people who would sweat over a couple of hundred dollars have all the extra cash lying around to be buying stuff on Amazon.
post #53 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Totally disagree! If you can continuously cache/refresh the most reqrested (dynamically determined) web pages then deliver them from a few servers to millions of clients you have gained performance, reduced bandwidth...

Obviously, with 50,000 Fires in the field, it's overhead... But with 5-10 million Fires it would be pure gravy if 80% of up-to-date web pages could be served from teh caches.

Edit: As it is, any popular web page has been updated many times before/as it is served, downloaded (scripts, styles, etc) and rendered on a less-powerful client.

If a cached, formated (no tags) page is delivered from an up-to-date cache... I suspect the latter would deliver a more recent result.



The problem with caching as done by Silk is that the (purely) theoretical speed benefits to the user are all lost on the niche user of this $200 product. It's a twist on a well worn axiom, in this case that the caching already taking place at the device is enough as far as where this niche user goes, and for the advanced user looking for an accelerated experience, Silk style caching won't be enough. It's ALL about data collection, and unless Amazon can make everyone go "WOW" when Silk is turned on they've got a tough sell pushing it on people who either don't care about it or are too difficult to impress.

But again, the theoretical faster experience is completely secondary to the data mining, and Amazon is pounding the speed issue in the press because it's the only way to sell these things to the people who usually opt for the least privacy intrusive option, but also because, well, who from Amazon is going to give a decent story about what a great data mining system they've come up with : )
post #54 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

It makes you seem far less professional, is all.

That may very well be true. However, I am not a professional and I am certainly not trying to represent myself as one. I am not connected to the tech industry in any way, shape or form. I am a professional in my particular profession, but that is not really tech industry related. I am merely a commentator here and a guy with a few opinions.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Nope.

Tape-recorded conversations find that roughly 8090 spoken words each day 0.5% to 0.7% of all words are swear words, with usage varying from between 0% to 3.4%. In comparison, first-person plural pronouns (we, us, our) make up 1% of spoken words.[2]

^ Jay T. (2009). The Utility and Ubiquity of Taboo Words. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4:153-161. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01115.x Entire document


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


Then,
and I say this with a staunch, unblemished record of being, myself, an Apple Evangelist (to which many an Apple fanboy and troll alike can attest ), take a chill pill.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with a large bias toward Apple. There's something wrong with finding absolutely no fault in Apple, and there's definitely something wrong when one has to behave like the raving fools that surrounded me in college (A "Christian" university, at that. SO much swearing. ) to get one's point across about competitors.

For example, I like Windows Phone 7. It's incredibly clean and crisp in its design, and it's quite responsive on all the hardware with which I've had a chance to play. However, it lacks many, MANY features that have become so integral to iOS, has a far sparser selection of third-party apps, does not integrate as fluidly with its surroundings as iOS devices do with iTunes and its Stores, and the OS itself doesn't have any soul to it.

Yes, it's gorgeous. Yes, there might even be some things in it from which Apple can learn. But I don't feel it when I use it. The definition of feel here is hard to describe, but you know it when you experience it. It's not necessarily utilitarian or spartan, it just doesn't have any heart.

I'm glad it exists; once Android capitulates, it will step up to fill the void quite nicely, and I see it growing into a fine competitor for Apple. For once, Microsoft has done beautiful work without copying anyone else to do it.

It just has no heart.


Now, see? No swearing. I've not only established iOS' superiority, but I've also managed to take a subtle jab at Android and point out flaws in Windows Phone 7 while giving it a healthy amount of praise as the well-designed second-banana it is. Such praise shows that, while I prefer iOS over both alternatives and Apple's ecosystem over Windows' and Google's (lack thereof), I am not a "blind follower of The Fith", as the anti-fanboys would say.

I agree that criticism can absolutley be written without profanity, and you have provided an example of that. But I'm sure you would agree that we all have our own particular style and tastes when it comes to different things, and I am simply a profane and blasphemous person. I guess that's just how I roll.

Not that I'm comparing myself to Picasso, but would you criticize him for having too much blue in his pictures?
post #55 of 76
Originally Posted by tylerk36
Quote:
This device is more like a toy compared to the iPad. It really doesn't measure up. One thing I have noticed is that it has no email capability. I would think if you have internet access and you brows the web you should be able to get your email as well.


Quote:
Originally Posted by easy288 View Post

Browser based email is possible.


You don't want an email client for too much on a tablet with such limited storage anyway. All it does is fill up mailboxes on what little space you've got on the device, and they want you to use the storage for content. They assume you'll use the browser for email.

But just get an email client and use it, if need be. There are plenty.
post #56 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

It makes you seem far less professional, is all.



Nope.



Then,
and I say this with a staunch, unblemished record of being, myself, an Apple Evangelist (to which many an Apple fanboy and troll alike can attest ), take a chill pill.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with a large bias toward Apple. There's something wrong with finding absolutely no fault in Apple, and there's definitely something wrong when one has to behave like the raving fools that surrounded me in college (A "Christian" university, at that. SO much swearing. ) to get one's point across about competitors.

For example, I like Windows Phone 7. It's incredibly clean and crisp in its design, and it's quite responsive on all the hardware with which I've had a chance to play. However, it lacks many, MANY features that have become so integral to iOS, has a far sparser selection of third-party apps, does not integrate as fluidly with its surroundings as iOS devices do with iTunes and its Stores, and the OS itself doesn't have any soul to it.

Yes, it's gorgeous. Yes, there might even be some things in it from which Apple can learn. But I don't feel it when I use it. The definition of feel here is hard to describe, but you know it when you experience it. It's not necessarily utilitarian or spartan, it just doesn't have any heart.

I'm glad it exists; once Android capitulates, it will step up to fill the void quite nicely, and I see it growing into a fine competitor for Apple. For once, Microsoft has done beautiful work without copying anyone else to do it.

It just has no heart.


You're such a gentleman.

But sometimes, methinks, Apple-tards need grow a pair.

The mods may not agree, heck they may even disapprove, but it's worth noting that Apple ][ is one of the rare ones that at least has one.*

*A pair, I mean.
post #57 of 76
They have the whole Kindle, Nook, and iPad line ups at Target, including the Kindle Fire. I played with the Fire for about ten minutes. That certainly doesn't make me an expert, but I can tell you this: as an iPad user, I would go nuts trying to use the Fire. It is way under powered for a multi-media device. You can touch the screen, and the device doesn't respond. You touch it again, and sometimes it responds. It is very sluggish.

I actually found the newer Nook to be more responsive. Spend two hundred more, and get the iPad if you want a real media device. For reading books, the Fire is a step backwards, a the e-ink if more enjoyable for reading for long periods of time.

As for upgrading to Android 4.0, I doubt that will happen anytime soon. Amazon can't call the device a Android device because it doesn't use Google Apps. Google likely isn't a big fan of the Fire because Amazon cut it out of the loop. In return, it can't use the newer versions of Android.
post #58 of 76
Complaining about other people using profanity is a shortcut to the high road.
Complaining about people who take shortcuts to the high road is an even shorter cut to the high road.
Ergo, I win.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #59 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Totally disagree! If you can continuously cache/refresh the most reqrested (dynamically determined) web pages then deliver them from a few servers to millions of clients you have gained performance, reduced bandwidth...

Obviously, with 50,000 Fires in the field, it's overhead... But with 5-10 million Fires it would be pure gravy if 80% of up-to-date web pages could be served from teh caches.

Yeah, but that's still a rather hand-wavy argument. It's all based on "but, ifs" that current benchmarks don't seem to show.

Tell you what, when they get 5-10 million Fires and teh caches serve pure gravy, be sure to rub it in my face, k?

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #60 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd View Post

The problem with caching as done by Silk is that the (purely) theoretical speed benefits to the user are all lost on the niche user of this $200 product. It's a twist on a well worn axiom, in this case that the caching already taking place at the device is enough as far as where this niche user goes, and for the advanced user looking for an accelerated experience, Silk style caching won't be enough. It's ALL about data collection, and unless Amazon can make everyone go "WOW" when Silk is turned on they've got a tough sell pushing it on people who either don't care about it or are too difficult to impress.

But again, the theoretical faster experience is completely secondary to the data mining, and Amazon is pounding the speed issue in the press because it's the only way to sell these things to the people who usually opt for the least privacy intrusive option, but also because, well, who from Amazon is going to give a decent story about what a great data mining system they've come up with : )

I agree with all this... But I like the Silk concept... For several reasons -- especially the ability to isolate the user from undesired content and tracking...

I expect I would opt for Amazon tracking over Google tracking.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #61 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by suddenly newton View Post

yeah, but that's still a rather hand-wavy argument. It's all based on "but, ifs" that current benchmarks don't seem to show.

Tell you what, when they get 5-10 million fires and teh caches serve pure gravy, be sure to rub it in my face, k?

k...
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #62 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by dagamer34 View Post

I expect some of these shortcomings to be fixed when Amazon updates the Kindle Fire OS to Android 4.0. Other than that, I wasn't really surprised in the results. Android 2.x isn't that great when it comes to supporting modern standards. Performance is subpar and only masked on phones because of processors that range from 1.2-1.5Ghz to make up for the OS' shortcomings.

Considering Apple gets better performance only running it's CPUs at 800Mhz, it's pretty clear to me that software matters a LOT. Heck, Windows Phone 7 devices are smoother than most Android smartphones and they only have a single core (but hardware acceleration!).

It's the software, stupid!

Are you really that stupid? The fire runs a special Amazon modified version of Gingerbread and cannot be upgraded to ICS.

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

 

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete...

Reply

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

 

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete...

Reply
post #63 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

What makes caching work, however, are lots of reqrests for the same pages -- so Amazon can just deliver from the server cache to the device (no need to re-retrieve and rerender the pages)

I suspect that there is not yet enough Fires in use to maintain enough meaningful cached pages.

Unless:
  • The route to the cache is longer than the route directly to the site.
  • The route from the cache to the site is longer than yours.
  • The cache's DNS lookups are slower than your ISP's or a local DNS cache.
  • The cache's server is under a heavy load.
  • The cache is down or the route to it is unreachable. Is Silk smart enough to try another method? Even if it does, it adds delay.
  • Silk is unable to reach the content due to certain geogpahic restrictions (YouTube is an good example of this) and returns you an error page, even though you are in a whitelisted country.
  • A site simply does not play well with proxies.
  • The cache is malfunctioning and out of date.

You're adding a massive point of potential failure into an ordinarily dead simple process. In most cases it is nothing more than a middle man; the performance gains are so minor that Amazon has no inventive to do this other than for data collection.
post #64 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekmorr View Post

I checked out the Android 4.0.1 source and had a look. They're using v8 version 3.2.10, from October 20, 2011 - http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=9719. For comparison, the current stable version of Chrome (15.0.874.121) uses v8 version 3.5.10.24, which has several performance improvements. Android 4.0.1 isn't yet using the NEON-optimized support libraries, such as libjpeg-turbo (http://libjpeg-turbo.virtualgl.org/). I'm not sure why this is, but I suspect Google will upgrade their external libraries in a future version.

Of course, when they do that, I'm sure the fair-minded folks here will be sure to reevaluate their opinion of Android based on the evidence, right?

Who cares what Google does? Amazon itself decides what version of Android their devices support. Amazon's version is their own customized version of Gingerbread. No vendor has announced an upgrade to ICS from Gingerbread. A major reason is that the Gingerbread HW won't support ICS.

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

 

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete...

Reply

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

 

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete...

Reply
post #65 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd View Post

Originally Posted by tylerk36






You don't want an email client for too much on a tablet with such limited storage anyway. All it does is fill up mailboxes on what little space you've got on the device, and they want you to use the storage for content. They assume you'll use the browser for email.

But just get an email client and use it, if need be. There are plenty.

True. I guess thats where the cost issue comes in. Limited storage = lower cost.
An Apple man since 1977
Reply
An Apple man since 1977
Reply
post #66 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by bedouin View Post

Unless:
  • The route to the cache is longer than the route directly to the site.
  • The route from the cache to the site is longer than yours.
  • The cache's DNS lookups are slower than your ISP's or a local DNS cache.
  • The cache's server is under a heavy load.
  • The cache is down or the route to it is unreachable. Is Silk smart enough to try another method? Even if it does, it adds delay.
  • Silk is unable to reach the content due to certain geogpahic restrictions (YouTube is an good example of this) and returns you an error page, even though you are in a whitelisted country.
  • A site simply does not play well with proxies.
  • The cache is malfunctioning and out of date.

You're adding a massive point of potential failure into an ordinarily dead simple process. In most cases it is nothing more than a middle man; the performance gains are so minor that Amazon has no inventive to do this other than for data collection.

That's a lot of unlesses...

I'm not adding any failure points...

Even Amazon's client should be smart enough to fail-through to a non-Amazon request for a regular web page. And Amazon servers should be agile enough to re-route requests to the non-Amazon (target) web pages if the cache isn't available in milliseconds,

You are over thinking this... It works some of the time better than others... And fails-through to what you'd get if you didn't try...
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #67 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Yes... But Silk's potential is for millions of popular page requests from identical devices to a concentrated set of servers.

Amazon could continuously determine, say, the top 10,000 page requests and continuously reload, render and cache those pages -- so that 80% of Silk requests could be delivered, preformatted, from the existing cache.

What happens when I update the files on my site? Are the users going to be treated to the old site rather than the new stuff and I'm going to have a hellish trying to break the cache for amazon silk.
post #68 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

That's a lot of unlesses...

I'm not adding any failure points...

Even Amazon's client should be smart enough to fail-through to a non-Amazon request for a regular web page. And Amazon servers should be agile enough to re-route requests to the non-Amazon (target) web pages if the cache isn't available in milliseconds,

You are over thinking this... It works some of the time better than others... And fails-through to what you'd get if you didn't try...

Either way it takes more time to fall through. That's the bottom line.

I just think you're discounting the bad side to silk and assuming amazon has done something to remedy the downsides of using silk when we don't know that. Saying something should be able to doesn't mean it is. It's wishful thinking.
post #69 of 76
There is no good reason to have a native email client on your tablet other than for offline storage but gmail and iCloud have that already.
post #70 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I disagree. Profanity does not diminish the merits of a good argument and the numerous valid points that have been laid forth. Puritanical people might find such language objectionable, but profanity is a common part of language that is used daily by virtually everybody. Even such writers as Shakespeare were fond of vulgar words.

Agreed on all counts.
post #71 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Even such writers as Shakespeare were fond of vulgar words.

To paraphrase a well-known quote, you sir are no Shakespeare. Nor did Shakespeare struggle with language so much that he found it necessary to use it in a quarter of all his sentences to express his ideas.

Hopefully this site doesn't appear all that often in search results when kids/mothers/families/grandparents etc, research Apple topics if forum members use of profanity is now considered to be an admirable and desirable trait when commenting to others. Far from only puritanical, it's common courtesy to avoid it's use when communicating with other than close friends or family that you know or hope won't be offended. I don't think anyone's ever been insulted or offended by it not being used.

Just my take on it.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #72 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

That's a lot of unlesses...

I'm not adding any failure points...

Even Amazon's client should be smart enough to fail-through to a non-Amazon request for a regular web page. And Amazon servers should be agile enough to re-route requests to the non-Amazon (target) web pages if the cache isn't available in milliseconds,

You are over thinking this... It works some of the time better than others... And fails-through to what you'd get if you didn't try...

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

What happens when I update the files on my site? Are the users going to be treated to the old site rather than the new stuff and I'm going to have a hellish trying to break the cache for amazon silk.

Likely, your web site updates will not be cached by Silk, Google or similar search/aggregator services unless it is very popular. If it meets the popularity/caching criteria, then the caching servers should continuously monitor the target sites for changes, and refresh tha cache as necessary.

When you update your site now, how long does it take Google to reflect those changes in its search results?

However, if someone requests your page directly the caching service should check the cache to see if the cached page (if it exists) has been updated, say, within the last 2 minutes -- if not, then fail-through: re-access, re-cache and re-serve the page.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

I just think you're discounting the bad side to silk and assuming amazon has done something to remedy the downsides of using silk when we don't know that. Saying something should be able to doesn't mean it is. It's wishful thinking.

I suspect that Amazon is as adept at server management as Google, Yahoo, MS Bing, eBay et al.

They have a shopping service that spans millions of web pages that are continuously updated, cached and served.

If they don't have the capability to do this efficiently it would be reflected by many disatisfied buyers and sellers.

Who does a better job of this than Amazon?

Why wouldn't Amazon exploit this capability in Silk?

As an aside, I think that Apple's Siri web searches will cache and deliver web pages in the same way Silk does.

Based on their track record, I suspect that Amazon does a better job on a much larger scale than Apple... or almost anybody.

"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #73 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by EgoAleSum View Post

Silk is an excellent feature, but I'm not surprised it doesn't give a big advantage over WiFi...
However, should Amazon release a 3G version of the Fire... Well, then you will really notice a difference with Silk!

The same things happens to BlackBerries. Browsing in 2G (and even in 3G, sometimes) is much faster on BlackBerries than in other phones, thanks to the BIS...


well if on wifi with silk its slow, it will be unbearable on 3G with silk as 3G is even slower than WIFI
post #74 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I agree that criticism can absolutley be written without profanity, and you have provided an example of that. But I'm sure you would agree that we all have our own particular style and tastes when it comes to different things, and I am simply a profane and blasphemous person. I guess that's just how I roll.

Not that I'm comparing myself to Picasso, but would you criticize him for having too much blue in his pictures?

Much better, even, dare I say, "endearing!"

Best
post #75 of 76
Technically, Amazon doesn't get access to newer version of Android nor can it sell its products using the Android trademark because only products that use Google's apps and follow Google's rules get access to the latest version of Android and can use the marketing term. Amazon may never get to use 4.0.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Realistic View Post

Who cares what Google does? Amazon itself decides what version of Android their devices support. Amazon's version is their own customized version of Gingerbread. No vendor has announced an upgrade to ICS from Gingerbread. A major reason is that the Gingerbread HW won't support ICS.
post #76 of 76
The point of Silk is that it learns your browsing habits over time and prefetches relevant information. You can't test it on day one and conclude it doesn't speed you up any. I'd like to see the same tests done in two or three weeks.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Amazon's Silk does little to accelerate Kindle Fire, HTML5