or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Slow Release of iPhone Updates
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Slow Release of iPhone Updates - Page 3

post #81 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by THT View Post

You forgot that the iPhone has a 3.5" 480x320 screen while the N95 only has a 2.6/2.8" 320x240 screen. That's double the pixels and nearly double the screen area. I'd think the difference is little bit bigger than intimated.

No I didn't forget. It has nothing to do with how accurately the page is rendered, just how much of it you see at once.

To some, a smaller handset is also a positive thing in the same way people prefer iPod Nanos to big iPods. I'm not saying the N95 is a small phone though - it's a brick - but it is over a year old now.
post #82 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

[sigh]

Simply not true. Webkit's WebCore framework is a "rendering engine" used by Nokia.

http://opensource.nokia.com/projects/S60browser/

Sure, the Nokia's screen is smaller, it's graphics API different and more primitive than OSX (who's isn't!!!) and it's CPU/GPU may not be as fast but that changes nothing about the code that takes html, css and javascript and converts it into a bitmap you see on your screen. It should be essentially the same as Safari, Mobile Safari, Konquror and others - there's apparently a Windows Mobile version in the works. That's the point in using a common rendering engine - it looks the same regardless of platform.

No it's not. Which is why any 5-year old can see the difference. Nokia would like you to think the two are equivalent. But just cause a wheelchair has rubber tires does not make it a car.
Yes, page layout is performed by Webkit, but the actual pixel-level rasterization is performed by the graphics API. And that's why the iPhone's browser looks miles better.

I wonder why Nokia does not showcase the browser on its website?

C.
post #83 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

No it's not. Which is why any 5-year old can see the difference. Nokia would like you to think the two are equivalent. But just cause a wheelchair has rubber tires does not make it a car.
Yes, page layout is performed by Webkit, but the actual pixel-level rasterization is performed by the graphics API. And that's why the iPhone's browser looks miles better.

I wonder why Nokia does not showcase the browser on its website?

C.

It does.

See http://www.s60.com/browser as well as Nokia's open source project site. The s60 site has a Flash demo of the browser in action. As you can see, it renders pages as accurately as Safari does. It certainly not as pretty as an iPhone's higher resolution screen but it's just as accurate.
post #84 of 121
Here's a few comparison shots:






One other point of note: The n95 lets you zoom in and it reflows the text. A post in AI never required horizontal scrolling. I could boost the text to bigger than that, and it'd reflow it so I could read just by vertical scrolling.

IPhone still wins overall. But I do believe it's pretty close, regarding web browser. And there's another thing: to get a screenshot on the n95 I installed a single software app, ran it, and it gave me a global screenshot hotkey. To do so on the iPhone, it required jailbreaking the device, installing SSH, and using a command-line app.

Amorya
post #85 of 121
Of course, if I'm making the comparison, I will point out that I couldn't get the n95 onto my (Airport Express) wifi network while it was a closed network. I couldn't find a screen to type a network name. I had to go and make the network an open one. So, while I'm assured the n95 can do that (according to the help), it was unintuitive enough that I couldn't figure out how.

Amorya
post #86 of 121
Thanks for making those screenshots, Amorya. Both do seem to display the website in a similar way.
post #87 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amorya View Post

Of course, if I'm making the comparison, I will point out that I couldn't get the n95 onto my (Airport Express) wifi network while it was a closed network. I couldn't find a screen to type a network name. I had to go and make the network an open one. So, while I'm assured the n95 can do that (according to the help), it was unintuitive enough that I couldn't figure out how.

LOL. That's classic.
post #88 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

No I didn't forget. It has nothing to do with how accurately the page is rendered, just how much of it you see at once.

To some, a smaller handset is also a positive thing in the same way people prefer iPod Nanos to big iPods. I'm not saying the N95 is a small phone though - it's a brick - but it is over a year old now.

I did say I was sorry.

Actually, I think Apple should increase the screen size of the iPhone. They can go to 3.8" 3:2 aspect ratio by decreasing the size of the side bezels to 0.1". Every little bit helps.
post #89 of 121
Just a relevant point here:

The iPhone does support free ringtones. Garageband has an export to ringtone function, which makes whatever audio you put into it a ringtone for the iPhone.
post #90 of 121
Regarding web browsing on iphone vs N95, there is no doubt that no other device (except maybe N810) comes close to the experience what you have to remember is that unless you are in a wifi zone the speeds are slow as hell so the no matter how good it is the whole experience is ruined by the time taken to load pages. How often are you guys in a wifi zone?

In the UK we have the cloud which offers around 7000 hotspots across the UK but its still not enough. If it were 3G or HSDPA that would be different but EDGE sucks.
post #91 of 121
Thanks for the screenshots Amorya. Aegis - Having looked at them, you are right. There is absolutely no difference.

C.

Apart from the readability...
and the screen size...
and the navigation...
and the layout...
and the speed of rendering...


But what have the Romans ever done for us?
post #92 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by THT View Post

I did say I was sorry.

Actually, I think Apple should increase the screen size of the iPhone. They can go to 3.8" 3:2 aspect ratio by decreasing the size of the side bezels to 0.1". Every little bit helps.

If they could, without making it more fragile, and by adding pixels not just making them bigger then by all means. I'd hate to see it get bigger physically though. It's already a little too big width x height for a pocketable device IMHO although they're kind of limited in what they can do if they've got a touchscreen qwerty keyboard to fit in there that's still typeable on with fat fingers.

It's already the best screen you can get in a phone of it's size, no question about it.
post #93 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bavlondon2 View Post

Regarding web browsing on iphone vs N95, there is no doubt that no other device (except maybe N810) comes close to the experience what you have to remember is that unless you are in a wifi zone the speeds are slow as hell so the no matter how good it is the whole experience is ruined by the time taken to load pages. How often are you guys in a wifi zone?

In the UK we have the cloud which offers around 7000 hotspots across the UK but its still not enough. If it were 3G or HSDPA that would be different but EDGE sucks.

Bav, we have already established that Edge on iPhone is as fast as 3G on N95. Because the processor on the iPhone is way faster.

It all comes down to usability. The other day I was driving, looking for a Dry Cleaners. I stopped at the lights, pressed MAP, typed Dry Cleaners, and BOOM! There were two pins, before the lights went green.

Try it on your N95. 3G or not. The unit I played with took three seconds to unlock.

In my typical use, the iPhone formula of Edge + Processor + Screen + Interface results in getting to the info faster than, tiddly screen, slow CPU, keypad and 3G. Your experience might be different.

C.
post #94 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by draggerman11 View Post

Just a relevant point here:

The iPhone does support free ringtones. Garageband has an export to ringtone function, which makes whatever audio you put into it a ringtone for the iPhone.

Indeed it does but that's a far cry from what almost every other phone does, which is allow you to just bluetooth over an mp3 and select it as a ringtone. Having to learn to use Garageband first isn't exactly user friendly.
post #95 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

Thanks for the screenshots Amorya. Aegis - Having looked at them, you are right. There is absolutely no difference.

C.

Apart from the readability...
and the screen size...
and the navigation...
and the layout...
and the speed of rendering...


But what have the Romans ever done for us?

Well, readability and layout are fine. Speed of rendering is reasonable (as in, I haven't noticed too much of a difference to the iPhone).

Screen size is of course worse, but the issue I was comparing was the browser's rendering engine. Navigation is worse but not unusable (you have a little mouse pointer you move with the direction pad, and it snaps to links as it passes).
post #96 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

Indeed it does but that's a far cry from what almost every other phone does, which is allow you to just bluetooth over an mp3 and select it as a ringtone. Having to learn to use Garageband first isn't exactly user friendly.

Very true but if they can allow sms's to be sent to multiple recipients then surely a bluetooth profile can also be added via a firmware update. Infact I hope BT file transfer is also added in the near future as it really is a basic and very handy tool.
post #97 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

Bav, we have already established that Edge on iPhone is as fast as 3G on N95. Because the processor on the iPhone is way faster.

It's not. Both are ARM11 with an additional GPU. The N95 runs at 332Mhz and the iPhone at 412Mhz (apparently - it got boosted in a recent update).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

It all comes down to usability. The other day I was driving, looking for a Dry Cleaners. I stopped at the lights, pressed MAP, typed Dry Cleaners, and BOOM! There were two pins, before the lights went green.

How did it know where you were without GPS?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

Try it on your N95. 3G or not. The unit I played with took three seconds to unlock.

In my typical use, the iPhone formula of Edge + Processor + Screen + Interface results in getting to the info faster than, tiddly screen, slow CPU, keypad and 3G. Your experience might be different.

Good for you. I don't have EDGE anywhere near me.
post #98 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

Good for you. I don't have EDGE anywhere near me.

Same here. I keep thinking that you guys are referring to GPRS when you're making those speed comparisons, since that's all I can get. I forget that EDGE is actually faster!

Amorya
post #99 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

It's not. Both are ARM11 with an additional GPU. The N95 runs at 332Mhz and the iPhone at 412Mhz (apparently - it got boosted in a recent update).

The N95 seems to be 2 or 3 times slower doing the same thing. I suspect that the iPhone is offloading graphics rendering to a co-processor. I'm guessing that the Nokia is not. I prefer to judge these things from *outcomes* (how fast it is) and not *inputs*. (what processor it has)

If you look at the page layouts in the screenshots, you'll see that the paragraph after "Welcome to Apple Insider" is correctly rendered full-width on the iPhone. But on the Nokia is wrapped using only the first third of the screen. So despite having a smaller screen, it makes poor use of the limited real-estate. Webkit or not, the page looks like ass.

Acceptable, possibly. Identical, err, no not really.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

How did it know where you were without GPS?

The map search is centered on the last search. My previous search was the same city.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

Good for you. I don't have EDGE anywhere near me.

Maps are OK on GPRS, as is Google search. Pages with lots of individual file references which are sluggish. Edge is faster. Wifi is faster still. But I am not interested in the "bit-rate". All I care about is how long does it take me to get to the fact.

C.
post #100 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

How did it know where you were without GPS?

The good news is that it doesn’t have to, aegisdesign. You simply type in what you’re looking for, perhaps with the name of your city, and then hit search – the results come right up. I’ve impressed several people (of the 29 that bought an iPhone after witnessing mine) with that and this is while using EDGE, not Wi-Fi. After bringing up what they’re looking for, I then show how they can press a single button and easily make it a bookmark, get directions to it, or turn it into a contact, among other options.

For the most part I keep the city in the map field and then just type in front of it for what I’m looking for. Over EDGE it’s faster than looking for a phone book then flipping through the pages. It’s also free, as compared to calling information.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

Good for you. I don't have EDGE anywhere near me.

I understand aegisdesign and Amorya. Hopefully it comes to you sooner than later.

This drives the point home, however, that for those that keep talking about 3G iPhones being what Apple should have started out with, as what would have been a mistake. EDGE is far more dominant in the US than 3G – not everyone has EDGE, let alone 3G. It makes far more business sense to introduce a new cell phone with a large and solid infrastructure, using the fastest data speeds that the most people can get. Now that over a million people in the US have an iPhone they will likely introduce a 3G – even if there are less places that can make the most of the higher speed – as it otherwise shifts down to EDGE.

Apple might release the US 3G after June, if only because that would be a solid year from when the first one came out. That effectively gave AT&T a year to improve and expand their 3G network.

For most uses, the iPhone works great for accessing the net and doing whatever you wanted to do. Sure, there’s room for improvement but after twenty years even Windows isn’t perfect, hehe.
post #101 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kephisto View Post

I understand aegisdesign and Amorya. Hopefully it comes to you sooner than later.

This drives the point home, however, that for those that keep talking about 3G iPhones being what Apple should have started out with, as what would have been a mistake. EDGE is far more dominant in the US than 3G not everyone has EDGE, let alone 3G.

Yeah, I understand why they did it for the US one.

The difference is, here 3G has 70% of the UK covered, and EDGE has 30%. That's why we're bitter. I'd be OK if O2 would improve their EDGE network, but there's no real incentive for them to do so. There will be a 3G iPhone next year (touch wood), so they're probably just waiting for that rather than increasing coverage of EDGE.

Amorya
post #102 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amorya View Post

Yeah, I understand why they did it for the US one.

The difference is, here 3G has 70% of the UK covered, and EDGE has 30%. That's why we're bitter. I'd be OK if O2 would improve their EDGE network, but there's no real incentive for them to do so. There will be a 3G iPhone next year (touch wood), so they're probably just waiting for that rather than increasing coverage of EDGE.

Amorya

I'm sorry, Amorya, I wrongly assumed you were in the states. From what you've said, that certainly explains why some of you are bitter about the situation.
post #103 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

If they could, without making it more fragile, and by adding pixels not just making them bigger then by all means. I'd hate to see it get bigger physically though. It's already a little too big width x height for a pocketable device IMHO although they're kind of limited in what they can do if they've got a touchscreen qwerty keyboard to fit in there that's still typeable on with fat fingers.

It's already the best screen you can get in a phone of it's size, no question about it.

Yup. And it needs to get better. We arm-chair Apple CEOs have been dreaming up entire iPhone lineups. From the Menlow/Silverthorne thread in FH:

I think it is a really good idea for Apple to diversify the iPhone line to 3 versions: a nano cheap version at 4 x 2 inches in size, the current iPhone size of 4.4 x 2.4 inches, and a pro version of 4.8 x 2.8 size or so. This would allow for screens of 3.2", 3.8" and 4.2" diagonal 3:2 aspect ratio screens, if they can thin out the current iPhone [bezels] in half or so to 1/8 inch, and carry prices in the $150-250, $300-400, $450-$550 range. With the pro version having a larger screen, a half inch wider, I imagine a soft QWERTY would be a bit easier, while the nano version will have to resort to T9.

And the mid-range would have 0.2 inches wider screen too! We will leave the engineering to the underlings...
post #104 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amorya View Post

Yeah, I understand why they did it for the US one.

The difference is, here 3G has 70% of the UK covered, and EDGE has 30%. That's why we're bitter. I'd be OK if O2 would improve their EDGE network, but there's no real incentive for them to do so. There will be a 3G iPhone next year (touch wood), so they're probably just waiting for that rather than increasing coverage of EDGE.

Amorya

Actually when Apple first went into talks with O2 and Telefonica O2 did mention they would be willing to build an EDGE network but then they decided against it after hearing how soon after the 3G one would follow so natuarally it makes sense. But yeah for us brits im sure its a nice piece of kit to have but damn I need 3G for those train journeys home from work haha! Most networks have 99% coverage by the way for 3G. I know 3 does, as does Voda. O2 must have too, not sure about Orange but I get 3G when I am.
post #105 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bavlondon2 View Post

Actually when Apple first went into talks with O2 and Telefonica O2 did mention they would be willing to build an EDGE network but then they decided against it after hearing how soon after the 3G one would follow so natuarally it makes sense. But yeah for us brits im sure its a nice piece of kit to have but damn I need 3G for those train journeys home from work haha! Most networks have 99% coverage by the way for 3G. I know 3 does, as does Voda. O2 must have too, not sure about Orange but I get 3G when I am.

99% coverage by population perhaps but 3G certainly isn't 99% by geography.

Then again I'd be very surprised if EDGE covers even 30% of the population on O2 never mind geographically.
post #106 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kephisto View Post

...This drives the point home, however, that for those that keep talking about 3G iPhones being what Apple should have started out with, as what would have been a mistake. EDGE is far more dominant in the US than 3G not everyone has EDGE, let alone 3G. It makes far more business sense to introduce a new cell phone with a large and solid infrastructure, using the fastest data speeds that the most people can get. Now that over a million people in the US have an iPhone they will likely introduce a 3G even if there are less places that can make the most of the higher speed as it otherwise shifts down to EDGE...

A 3G iPhone should have had both 3G and EDGE. Therefore everyone would have access to the fastest network available in their area.
post #107 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by darngooddesign View Post

A 3G iPhone should have had both 3G and EDGE. Therefore everyone would have access to the fastest network available in their area.

I was under the assumption that 3G was reverse compatible with EDGE. Is this just in the US. Or a complete fallacy?
post #108 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by darngooddesign View Post

A 3G iPhone should have had both 3G and EDGE. Therefore everyone would have access to the fastest network available in their area.

As HyteProsector said, the 3G iPhone would use 3G first and then shift to EDGE when unable to effectively access 3G - at least in the US.
post #109 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by darngooddesign View Post

A 3G iPhone should have had both 3G and EDGE. Therefore everyone would have access to the fastest network available in their area.

Varients are made sometimes for different regions depending on what networks used the most. eg: K800/K790 - We didnt see the K790 in the UK becasue there is hardley any edge. Only Orange has EDGE and I dont even know what % coverage that is. Ideally though yes you would assume that a phone should just be made to make use of all possible network speeds.
post #110 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyteProsector View Post

I was under the assumption that 3G was reverse compatible with EDGE. Is this just in the US. Or a complete fallacy?

Not really. It's a different frequency and technology. UMTS 3G isn't that far off CDMA in the US and is quite different to the GSM 2G tech. But that's not important, most phones support both, usually with two chips. If 3G isn't available it'll drop back to EDGE (if available either on the phone or the network) or GPRS. In most of Europe, that means the iPhone is operating on plain GPRS since we didn't bother with EDGE for the most part and went straight to 3G some years ago. Now we're rolling out HSPA (7.2mbps). EDGE is actually fairly rare on handsets too for that reason although you do get it on some of the cheap handsets that don't do 3G, of which there are still quite a few.

The K800/K790 is a good example to use since we got the UMTS 3G and GPRS K800 whereas the US and Canada got the EDGE only version. The K800 didn't have EDGE because it'd be pointless here. Apple don't seem to have worked that out.
post #111 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bavlondon2 View Post

Varients are made sometimes for different regions depending on what networks used the most. eg: K800/K790 - We didnt see the K790 in the UK becasue there is hardley any edge. Only Orange has EDGE and I dont even know what % coverage that is. Ideally though yes you would assume that a phone should just be made to make use of all possible network speeds.

T-Mobile do too though not a lot. That's why pre-launch of the iPhone most people expected either Orange or T-Mobile here. When it went to O2 it was a surprise but a few weeks before launch O2 users in London were mysteriously reporting O2 had started installing EDGE on their towers.
post #112 of 121
Does anyone know when iphone will offer full flash support. N95 8gbs latest firmware updaet has flashlite 3 which allows to browse native youtube as well as dailymotion. Apple needs to get a move on!
post #113 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bavlondon2 View Post

Does anyone know when iphone will offer full flash support. N95 8gbs latest firmware updaet has flashlite 3 which allows to browse native youtube as well as dailymotion. Apple needs to get a move on!

When I last looked, SWF's code was shocking bad. It renders everything on the CPU, which would suck down battery life and probably be slow on the iPhone's large screen buffer. Apple will probably not implement it until they have a proper hardware-rendering solution.

They might not bother. Apple hates SWF, and eveyone (YouTube and Adobe included) is moving to h264 for video playback. In fact h264 *is* the new video format for Flash.

I thought Flash was dying out. Are there any Flash sites worth visiting?

C.
post #114 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

When I last looked, SWF's code was shocking bad. It renders everything on the CPU, which would suck down battery life and probably be slow on the iPhone's large screen buffer. Apple will probably not implement it until they have a proper hardware-rendering solution.

They might not bother. Apple hates SWF, and eveyone (YouTube and Adobe included) is moving to h264 for video playback. In fact h264 *is* the new video format for Flash.

I thought Flash was dying out. Are there any Flash sites worth visiting?

C.

Hulu, Joost, YouTube (the real youtube with all the content, not the iPhone version that isn't complete), NBC Direct, Shockwave.com, Google Photo slideshows embedded in html pages, etc. Flash isn't going anywhere. It really doesn't matter if the video is handled by h264 if the rest of the site is designed in flash, that still means that its a site you can't visit. Regular Flash is still the most efficient way to get large graphics and animation in a site without bogging down with large graphics.
post #115 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bavlondon2 View Post

Does anyone know when iphone will offer full flash support. N95 8gbs latest firmware updaet has flashlite 3 which allows to browse native youtube as well as dailymotion. Apple needs to get a move on!

Adobe needs to get a move on.
post #116 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by darngooddesign View Post

Hulu, Joost, YouTube (the real youtube with all the content, not the iPhone version that isn't complete), NBC Direct, Shockwave.com, Google Photo slideshows embedded in html pages, etc. Flash isn't going anywhere. It really doesn't matter if the video is handled by h264 if the rest of the site is designed in flash, that still means that its a site you can't visit. Regular Flash is still the most efficient way to get large graphics and animation in a site without bogging down with large graphics.

If you remove the video streaming - that's a very short list.
post #117 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by klimegreen View Post

I understand that 1.1.3 is due soon. Many of the blogs e.g., http://personafile.com/iPhone-apps.html said 1.1.3 was due this week. But Apple is yet to release it. I think because 1.1.3 will support the forthcoming SDK and that isn't due until MacWorld. This happened with 1.1.2 too, bloggers said it was due in days and then it took a few weeks. I think 1.1.3 will include copy and paste, or I sure hope it does!

The SDK isn't due until February so the 1.1.3 release may be entirely unrelated to it.
post #118 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

The SDK isn't due until February so the 1.1.3 release may be entirely unrelated to it.

Remember, though, that Intel wasn't due for awhile when the iMac and MBP were released. I wouldn't be surprised that the SDK is in 1.1.3, released in February. It could work that SDK is released early with a new iPhone update.
post #119 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaEsperanza View Post

Remember, though, that Intel wasn't due for awhile when the iMac and MBP were released. I wouldn't be surprised that the SDK is in 1.1.3, released in February. It could work that SDK is released early with a new iPhone update.

Who knows.

They could release 1.1.3 next week and the SDK in Feb, or both in Feb, or both next week, or a 1.1.4 with the SDK in Feb, or both late in March, or 2.0 alongside the new 3G phones.
post #120 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

Who knows.

Wisest words on this post so far.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Slow Release of iPhone Updates