RIM demonstrates PlayBook with faster Web browsing than Apple's iPad

1246714

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 273
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by halfyearsun View Post


    of course not.



    but do you really believe anyone is contributing any semblance of original or provocative thought when they say "oh, this is great because competition will make apple better?"



    it's a cop-out...a broad statement that nobody in their right mind would disagree with usually made by posters who are meek and non-confrontational. and it's annoying to hear it so frequently



    So your saying rational people need not contribute? I think he gave alot of balance to a thread over-run by a bunch of statist crybaby flakes, such as yourself.
  • Reply 62 of 273
    akacakac Posts: 512member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stevetim View Post


    Oh sarcasm.



    i'm just congratulating RIM on the very fine rendering engine they use for the web. The funny thing is i believe they got the webkit from Apples open source. If that is true, they are implementing it better than Safari, similar to what Chrome is doing to desktop market with Apples Webkit.



    I also like the flash, but the jury is out on it.



    I doubt they are implementing it better than Safari. It looks more like simply put the iPad is a single core CPU running at 1Ghz while the PlayBook is using a new dual core CPU at a higher speed. Its no wonder it runs faster. Safari LIVES to run on multi-core processors.
  • Reply 63 of 273
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by xSamplex View Post


    Apple has just been punk'd. Get working on the browser, boys!





    Well you should keep in mind that Apple was at this point in the original iPad development in January of 2010. So after nearly a year RIM has a working prototype using much faster CPU and more ram with a smaller screen and possibly faster wifi hardware. Who knows what kind of battery life they are getting. That is what makes Apple devices so pleasantly usable - It is the proper balance of speed, features, price, with a well thought out interface and a very nice ecosystem.



    Taking everything into consideration I'd say they have a ways to go to catch up to Apple.
  • Reply 64 of 273
    Well, I'm sold!. Where can I unload my iPad for pennies on the dollar?
  • Reply 65 of 273
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by applemanfab View Post


    Hi



    Rim can thank Apple for the Webkit. ( why don't you build your own! )



    Will not sale, maybe 10,000 at most, just wait for iPad V2 blow Rim away



    And Apple can thank the KHTML people.
  • Reply 66 of 273
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by agolongo View Post


    So your saying rational people need not contribute? I think he gave alot of balance to a thread over-run by a bunch of statist crybaby flakes, such as yourself.



    no, i'm saying spineless people need not contribute.



    Also, name calling is not equivalent to logic.



    there's plenty of people who are anti-apple and like to trash them and tout whatever iphone/ipad/ipod killer is on the horizon. i for one have no qualms attempting to call them out, not because i'm some religious fanatic, but because poor logic and anti-apple hype isn't particularly good for my stock.



    perhaps it does make me a statist (?) crybaby flake. To which i reply, i know you are, but what am i.
  • Reply 67 of 273
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Akac View Post


    I doubt they are implementing it better than Safari. It looks more like simply put the iPad is a single core CPU running at 1Ghz while the PlayBook is using a new dual core CPU at a higher speed. Its no wonder it runs faster. Safari LIVES to run on multi-core processors.



    You may be right. We don't know from that little video, but on the desktop any objective user will tell you chrome blows safari away. Not because google is better, but because iOS has apples attention right now. Apples safari updates are few and far between.
  • Reply 68 of 273
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    The apparent speed differences could be due to them exploiting differences in caching behavior. It's not exactly a controlled test, it's a propaganda film, so it's hard to determine how much weight should be given to it.



    Could also be DNS servers.
  • Reply 69 of 273
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    Well you should keep in mind that Apple was at this point in the original iPad development in January of 2010. So after nearly a year RIM has a working prototype using much faster CPU and more ram with a smaller screen and possibly faster wifi hardware. Who knows what kind of battery life they are getting. That is what makes Apple devices so pleasantly usable - It is the proper balance of speed, features, price, with a well thought out interface and a very nice ecosystem.



    Taking everything into consideration I'd say they have a ways to go to catch up to Apple.



    It's been 6 months since RIM bought QNX --- that's quite far away from being "nearly a year".
  • Reply 70 of 273
    z3r0z3r0 Posts: 238member
    I wonder how the QNX OS compares to Mac OS X/iOS performance wise.



    QNX has been running on embedded systems for a while and more then likely is more optimized.



    I'd love to compare both kernel and OS designs. I'm have a feeling that the QNX OS is better designed in many respects. It doesn't take much to beat Mac OS X's messaging system,

    its pretty dog slow by design. Here are some sample tests (a bit old) but interesting nonetheless:



    Ubuntu vs Solaris vs Freebsd



    Ubuntu vs Mac OS X



    Ubuntu vs Win7 vs Mac OS X



    Kernel design really effects performance. I would love to see how QNX compares.
  • Reply 71 of 273
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    It's been 6 months since RIM bought QNX --- that's quite far away from being "nearly a year".



    His/Her point would not be greatly affected if s/he properly substituted "half a year" for "nearly a year."
  • Reply 72 of 273
    grkinggrking Posts: 533member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by halfyearsun View Post


    the poster (and others like it) are incorrect in straight out labeling it vaporware. but there are enough similarities to raise an eyebrow



    Again, I do not disagree. We shall see what happens, and if they can pull it off. Yes, this is an Apple fan site, and people are betting against RIM.



    The thing is, RIM, unlike many other companies, does not really have a history of vaporware IIRC, or seriously missing deadlines as a general pattern, so pessimism is a bit misguided.
  • Reply 73 of 273
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by halfyearsun View Post


    no, i'm saying spineless people need not contribute.



    Also, name calling is not equivalent to logic.



    there's plenty of people who are anti-apple and like to trash them and tout whatever iphone/ipad/ipod killer is on the horizon. i for one have no qualms attempting to call them out, not because i'm some religious fanatic, but because poor logic and anti-apple hype isn't particularly good for my stock.



    perhaps it does make me a statist (?) crybaby flake. To which i reply, i know you are, but what am i.



    According to you, the biggest problem for you is Steve Jobs --- who lost $10 billion because he didn't believe in Apple and gave up that much in stock options.



    If you made money off Apple stock, it is because you got lucky --- not because you have some sort of superior business logic.
  • Reply 74 of 273
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    It's been 6 months since RIM bought QNX --- that's quite far away from being "nearly a year".



    Doesn't matter. But ok let's say it took RIM 6 months to figure out they don't have the chops to do it on their own- better buy some company that does have the necessary talent. The fact is they started out easily a year behind Apple. And with a blue print - an iPad.
  • Reply 75 of 273
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,031member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Akac View Post


    I doubt they are implementing it better than Safari. It looks more like simply put the iPad is a single core CPU running at 1Ghz while the PlayBook is using a new dual core CPU at a higher speed. Its no wonder it runs faster. Safari LIVES to run on multi-core processors.



    It's a moot point really. It's the experience that matters. Or so I'm told. The specs should be more or less invisible to the operator.
  • Reply 76 of 273
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    According to you, the biggest problem for you is Steve Jobs --- who lost $10 billion because he didn't believe in Apple and gave up that much in stock options.



    If you made money off Apple stock, it is because you got lucky --- not because you have some sort of superior business logic.



    Luck usually has a shorter lifespan than a decade.



    http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor...apl&CP=0&PT=10
  • Reply 77 of 273
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by halfyearsun View Post


    Luck usually has a shorter lifespan than a decade.



    http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor...apl&CP=0&PT=10



    But Steve Jobs lost more than $10 billion because of it. The emperor really has no clothes.
  • Reply 78 of 273
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by halfyearsun View Post


    no, i'm saying spineless people need not contribute.



    Also, name calling is not equivalent to logic.



    there's plenty of people who are anti-apple and like to trash them and tout whatever iphone/ipad/ipod killer is on the horizon. i for one have no qualms attempting to call them out, not because i'm some religious fanatic, but because poor logic and anti-apple hype isn't particularly good for my stock.



    perhaps it does make me a statist (?) crybaby flake. To which i reply, i know you are, but what am i.



    An eye for an eye, you just called the original poster spinless.



    What really aggrevated me is seeing this guy, being beaten up for promoting the free market and in-turn accelerating Apples innovation and contribution to society. Its sickening to read posts from people such as yourself that step in and say, "No you must pick a side, your either with them or us". Really? Does Apple pay for your baby-sitter or something? Why are you guys so determined to defend a faceless corporate entity, that doesnt give a damn about you. I would never go out of my way to defend RIM or MSFT and I have family that works for RIM.



    Im sorry you went long on Apple at a all-time high, not in 2004, but this thread will not affect your stock price, Apple has a marketing department with a multi billion dollar budget to look after di$#$s like me with an independant thought.
  • Reply 79 of 273
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    RIM also touted that their device can run Adobe Flash...



    Is it really something to tout when it's between "can" vs "can't" & "can" vs "I don't want to" wherein Apple is clearly the latter?
  • Reply 80 of 273
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    Doesn't matter. But ok let's say it took RIM 6 months to figure out they don't have the chops to do it on their own- better buy some company that does have the necessary talent. The fact is they started out easily a year behind Apple. And with a blue print - an iPad.



    So? Google bought Android, they didn't have the talent either.
Sign In or Register to comment.