RIM needs to 'get' the web
Posted by Jesse Rodgers on November 21, 2008 at 09:35 AM
Seems RIM’s new Blackberry Storm has a raised a few eyebrows over web related things. In the first review I read there is a mention on the browser:
…had zero issues with the Storm’s browser. Zooming in and out is simple and it seems to load most pages fine, except the NYTs as it reverts to the mobile edition and doesn’t want to load the regular site. Anything with a lot of Javascript chorks, though. Everywhere else on the device there are scroll up/scroll down keys but they’re missing on the browser. Seems like an odd move, but the navigation bar would be a bit crowded. – CrunchGear
As a person that believes the browser is the platform I think the browser is where the mobile device will be won (or lost). As much as I love the app store I hate having all those silly icons scattered on my device just to access web based content. Let me use my browser (like google does). Likely a balance needs to be found but at the moment I have app icon overload…
Living in the town of RIM (Waterloo, Ontario) I often hear things at pubs, at events, or through some second hand gossip. What I hear is usually some pretty positive stuff but at the risk of calling out a specific person, when I hear something along the lines of “webkit doesn’t support Acid2 but the Storm browser does” as a point of discussion I get a little concerned.
First, the Acid tests for web browsers are not a target that makes your web browser bad ass. You can pass it one day but not the other for good reason. But what I don’t get is that Safari passed Acid2 in April of 2005. What that person said in that statement (to me) is that they made sure they passed a test they didn’t even understand! Sure if you run Acid2 on the browser on the iPhone it has a little issue but there could be a good reason for it. AND IT DOESN’T MATTER. Web standards are guidelines… just don’t break things and force me to customize my CSS or JS for your browser.
I don’t want to put down the folks at RIM (the value of my house is directly related to their success!), they made some huge improvements. Problem is that they are against a number of new competitors that have years on them with regards to utilizing the web… they need to come across as knowing what they are talking about, even in the local gossip pools.
Comments
There are 7 comments on this post. Post yours →
LOL, that guy needs his head checked. In fact, Webkit proper passes Acid 3!! 100/100 and was the first to do so. The distinction that needs to be made is is that the iPhone browser uses components of Webkit and is not Webkit in it’s entirety. You would thing that someone in that position would be well aware of that.
I think their progress over the last 4 years (from basically not having a browser, to what they have now) speaks louder than a few employees’ bar talk.
Building a browser is no small feat. All major browser rendering engines enjoy a long lineage and massive development forces. RIMs trend has been a good one. They’re clearly getting serious, but it takes time.
A good question is: “Can a browser running inside a Java VM on a mobile processor keep pace with the internet of today?”.
@td that is the problem. Why are they even creating one from scratch when not even Google is doing that? They have to maintain a monster load of code and deal with annoying bugs that have already been fixed. They risk not being able to maintain a consistent experience for what? Just to create their own software? As you say, building a browser is no small feat and neither is maintaining one (ask Microsoft).
Where I really want to beat RIM up is on the total lack of emphasis on the mobile web experience. They don’t seem to get it at the most fundamental technical levels… maybe they do, but I don’t see it.
So, uh, actually, mobile webkit and safari webkit are not, like, the same thing. And mobile webkit on my phone (N95) does not pass acid2. why would you think that the PC and mobile webkit codebases would be the same?
As for acid2 … if it doesn’t matter then why do you care so much? Because mozilla got upset when they didn’t pass it? I mean, yay, it’s a benchmark. Everyone hates all benchmarks. They’re still useful data points.
@td: apple didn’t write a browser from scratch, they adopted konqueror.
Overall, it seems to me that adopting webkit, gecko, or something else would make life easier for RIM. But I’m not going to say that their current browser sucks.
@s woodside – it doesn’t suck but how much better would it be?
@jesse – “They don’t seem to get it at the most fundamental technical levels… maybe they do, but I don’t see it.”
Perhaps fundamental to you is not low enough. You really have to consider the network, data costs, platform/os, input methods and screen size. Those are the fundamentals of the mobile web, and I can’t fault RIM on any of those things.
@td – the carriers can’t fault them because they have been making bad networks in North America seem good. RIM isn’t a company that pushes boundaries, they are safe, boring. Good for them but now the big boys are after their space and they can’t afford to be safe and boring—my concern is that they don’t have the organizational culture to be leaders.
Post a comment
Required fields in bold.