Originally Posted by sapporobaby
Apple does have a higher res screen and all. I was mainly talking about the way the images appear on the screen. I have had only one site that does not render properly on my Nokia, so the post from Carniphage does not make much sense.
"render properly" is all that matters to you? Is it a binary thing? It renders, it does not render?
The Nokia browser uses crappy fonts which only approximate the intended appearance of a website. The lack of proper proportional fonts and anti-aliasing means the you have to zoom in really close to make text readable. This in turn means you can't view a whole page AND read it.
Combine this with the small screen, and a terrible the 4 way pad. And you have an experience which is clunky, slow, and unrewarding. The fact that it looks like ass is not just an aesthetic issue, it is a profoundly important user-interface issue.http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Kj2Ch4gSlig
Compare it to this.http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eGZQvfEBYT4
At the end of the day Nokia's engineers have implemented a basic browser. It renders pages. It allows navigation. Then they got up and went home. Mission accomplished.
But no one in their right minds would want to use it in such a crude form. And they don't.
The web-usage statistics bear this out. By December last year, there are more web-hits from the iPhone than the entire Symbian platform. Despite the tiny number of iPhones out there.
Nokia and the others keep making the same mistake. Web browsing became yet another feature they could add onto their ever-growing list of features. They became seduced by a false notion; That by remorselessly adding features, they were innovating.
Real innovation requires you add value to your products. For a feature to have any value at all, ordinary people have to be able to use it.