Blackberry Bold browser really on WiFi
There is talk on the web that the video we showed of the Blackberry Bold vs. the iPhone had the Bold in fact on 3G. Another person who has a Bold has posted a video showing the Bold really running on WiFi so you be the judge if you think it’s fast enough for your needs.
Just for curiosity, I loaded the page on my LG Dare using Verizon’s network, and it took 37 seconds to completely load. It took about 59 seconds in the video using wifi on the BB.
D.
Hi James,
I have had the Bold for several days and am testing it over T-Mobile’s EDGE, AT&T’s EDGE and 3G and via Wi-Fi.
The Bold came directly from RIM and the code is beta — the latest they can give me. RIM will inform me when upgrades are available to download.
The Bold’s browser is significantly better than the previous version. The Bold’s OS 4.6 is similar to OS 4.5 (which I’ve downloaded on my BlackBerry Curve). The browser’s zoom and column view make a difference.
However, the browser is **much too slow** in too many situations — over EDGE, 3G or Wi-Fi. I assume updated versions of the OS, including the “gold” code, will offer an acceptable browsing experience.
The browser’s concept is fine — but the speed is not.
If anyone cares, I wrote a comparison of the Bold and the QWERTY-based Nokia E71, and whether they represented the future of wireless Internet. The column is here:
http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=526&doc_id=162080&
Hi James,
I have had the Bold for several days and am testing it over T-Mobile’s EDGE, AT&T’s EDGE and 3G and via Wi-Fi.
The Bold came directly from RIM and the code is beta — the latest they can give me. RIM will inform me when upgrades are available to download.
The Bold’s browser is significantly better than the previous version. The Bold’s OS 4.6 is similar to OS 4.5 (which I’ve downloaded on my BlackBerry Curve). The browser’s zoom and column view make a difference.
However, the browser is **much too slow** in too many situations — over EDGE, 3G or Wi-Fi. I assume updated versions of the OS, including the “gold” code, will offer an acceptable browsing experience.
The browser’s concept is fine — but the speed is not.
If anyone cares, I wrote a comparison of the Bold and the QWERTY-based Nokia E71, and whether they represented the future of wireless Internet. The column is here:
http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=526&doc_id=162080&
That’s flatly unacceptable for a WiFi speed test. RIM fails YET AGAIN at something as simple as a browser. I can give them some slack for anything up to and including the iPhone launch. Since then, they’ve done very little to improve the browser, and in this case it’s pretty obvious the browser is unbearably slow even on WiFi.
We’re constantly being told how innovative RIM is, yet two basic functions (a good browser that performs reasonably and HTML e-mail that doesn’t look like a 1995 web site rendered in Mosaic) seem to elude them even on their top-end devices. This one isn’t even out yet and already it’s out of date.
I’m sorry. That’s just sad.