Apple rules the mobile web despite Android's popularity says report

[runawayprisoner]

LOL that thread's great.

1. guy complains about a site being laggy on his phone - gets called a liar basically
2. guy uploads video showing clear lag - is told "oh that's because the site's still loading"
3. guy points out the lags the worst after the site's 100% loaded. - other posters blame it it on it being a "media heavy" site.

Well, it is actually somewhat true that The Verge's website is media heavy, and it does bog down a lot of devices. I didn't get to test it on GNex with 4.0.4, but 4.0.3 didn't help much.

Also HTC One X on 4.0.4 still lags and hesitates a bit on that page even after it's finished loading. It's crazy.

iPhone 4 or 4S, on the other hand, scrolls and pans around smoothly. Zooming is a bit delayed in the iPhone 4, but not overly so. It's impressive.

About the only device I know of that doesn't lag while scrolling/panning/zooming on The Verge is a quad-core Mac running OSX Lion.

 

[WelshBloke]

LOL that thread's great.

1. guy complains about a site being laggy on his phone - gets called a liar basically
2. guy uploads video showing clear lag - is told "oh that's because the site's still loading"
3. guy points out the lags the worst after the site's 100% loaded. - other posters blame it it on it being a "media heavy" site.

Video is just over a minute long, the site doesnt load until 53 secs in, so I think thats a fair complaint.

 

[QueBert]

Video is just over a minute long, the site doesnt load until 53 secs in, so I think thats a fair complaint.

So he should have waited until it was loaded to start filming it? Since from 53-end i's every bit as laggy. Actually I agree with you here.

 

[runawayprisoner]

Video is just over a minute long, the site doesnt load until 53 secs in, so I think thats a fair complaint.

The problem is that it doesn't matter if the site is loaded or not. You can try loading the same site on your SGS2 or device of choice, and I'm sure you'll see some lag and stutter as well.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

The problem is that it doesn't matter if the site is loaded or not. You can try loading the same site on your SGS2 or device of choice, and I'm sure you'll see some lag and stutter as well.

It actually runs very well using Chrome on my SGS2, the stock ICS browser did have some lag but it was still better than that video.

 

[ponyo]

LOL that thread's great.

1. guy complains about a site being laggy on his phone - gets called a liar basically
2. guy uploads video showing clear lag - is told "oh that's because the site's still loading"
3. guy points out the lags the worst after the site's 100% loaded. - other posters blame it it on it being a "media heavy" site.

This is why I asked for video proof. Because we can all see and compare without the BS and bias. I can 100% confirm that's not normal stock 4.0.4 web browser performance behavior. Either the guy is runawayprisoner or they have the same faulty phone. Full site theverge.com is no problem for GNex.

 

[preslove]

http://www.mobileburn.com/19761/new...share-despite-androids-popularity-says-report
I wonder if it is mostly due to the iPad users.

Yup. I wouldn't brows on my phone any more on an iPhone than my sensation (I probably would do so less, considering the small screen size). I brows on my iPad MUCH MUCH MUCH more than on my phone.

 

[WelshBloke]

The problem is that it doesn't matter if the site is loaded or not. You can try loading the same site on your SGS2 or device of choice, and I'm sure you'll see some lag and stutter as well.

OK, I'll try and upload some video.

I'm sure there will be some lag but lets see.

Also dont expect anything in focus or not shaky, I have no tripod and a crappy upload speed. D:

 

[WelshBloke]

OK I have a video up but the quality is really bad.

Its the first time I've uploaded to youtube though so be gentle.

Hopefully you'll get the general idea from it though.

Link of Oscar worthy video.

(I have no idea why the first 20 seconds is black and where the artefacts came from)

 

[runawayprisoner]

It actually runs very well using Chrome on my SGS2, the stock ICS browser did have some lag but it was still better than that video.

I'm sure it's better. The SGS2 has a faster SoC and a lower resolution so both of those factors together may also mean that with the right tweaks, you can completely eliminate the slight lag on it.

What I meant when I wrote that was that I expected some (perhaps mild) stutter and unresponsiveness still.

This is why I asked for video proof. Because we can all see and compare without the BS and bias. I can 100% confirm that's not normal stock 4.0.4 web browser performance behavior. Either the guy is runawayprisoner or they have the same faulty phone. Full site theverge.com is no problem for GNex.

It's not 4.0.4. The guy stated he was running 4.0.2 in the thread that he made.

But regardless of whether it's 4.0.4 or not, the point I've been trying to make is that any phone under the Galaxy Nexus would do poorly compared to, say, iPhone 3GS or iPhone 4.

Perhaps you are right, and the GNex on 4.0.4 would be a lot better, but consider these factors:

1) Verizon GNex still doesn't get official 4.0.4 OTA. And I had a Verizon GNex.
2) GNex on 4.0.2 might have "factually" sucked performance-wise. Perhaps even 4.0.3 does that.
3) A lot of phones under the GNex still run on 2.3.x and not 4.0.x.

And that's why I think that many Android phones/tablets made in 2011 and before weren't used for web browsing because the experience sucked compared to iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad.

Not everyone owns a GNex, you know. And not every GNex is on 4.0.4, yet. Blame big red guy for that.

Android devices since the GNex have gotten much better performance, but the trend has only shifted... a few months back. That's after the report posted in the OP.

 

[MrX8503]

I think more people web browse on iOS because overall, it's more pleasant to use than Android. On Android you have to own a power house device to have that superior browsing experience. I bet the millions that own the cheapie android handsets rarely browse the web. Then there are iPad and iPod touch users too.

 

[Ns1]

I think more people web browse on iOS because overall, it's more pleasant to use than Android. On Android you have to own a power house device to have that superior browsing experience. I bet the millions that own the cheapie android handsets rarely browse the web. Then there are iPad and iPod touch users too.

I have a new 7" android tab and still prefer browsing on my tiny 3.5" iPhone screen. The browsing experience (save for the squinty eyes) is sooooooooo much better.

 

[QueBert]

I think more people web browse on iOS because overall, it's more pleasant to use than Android. On Android you have to own a power house device to have that superior browsing experience. I bet the millions that own the cheapie android handsets rarely browse the web. Then there are iPad and iPod touch users too.

QFT, honestly screen side aside, I find browsing on my iPod Touch 2G to be a better experience than my Galaxy Note. It's really crazy to think a single core 533mhz device with 256mb of memory can best out a dual core 1.5ghz with 1gb of memory. But for many sites that's the case.

 

[Geekbabe]

I can't speak for everyone, but the larger screen & really good voice dictation are big reasons why I use my iPad 3 more than I use my phone on the Internet.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

I can't speak for everyone, but the larger screen & really good voice dictation are big reasons why I use my iPad 3 more than I use my phone on the Internet.

I thought the small screen was a plus for the iPhone? With the iPad now screen size matters?

 

[Eug]

QFT, honestly screen side aside, I find browsing on my iPod Touch 2G to be a better experience than my Galaxy Note. It's really crazy to think a single core 533mhz device with 256mb of memory can best out a dual core 1.5ghz with 1gb of memory. But for many sites that's the case.

Really? I have an iPhone 3G and I hate surfing on the thing now. The 3G has a lower clocked CPU at 412 MHz, but then again I have an iPhone 4 as well and I'm itching to upgrade because of its slow single-core 800 MHz A4, even though it has 512 MB RAM. I'm thinking the sweet spot for an iPhone will be dual-core ARM with 1 GB RAM.

Is the Galaxy Note really that bad?

 

[zsdersw]

Is the Galaxy Note really that bad?

No, it's not.

 

[Eug]

Here are Anand's benchmarks for browsing.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4951/...rks-800mhz-a5-slightly-slower-gpu-than-ipad-2

Note my iPhone 4 vs. the Galaxy S2.

I could see the Galaxy xx being a bit more jerky, because of the OS, but that's not page rendering speed. For rendering speed, the iPhone 4 and Galaxy S2 (which is slightly slower than the Note), are in the same ballpark.

I'm looking forward to the iPhone 5 with bigger screen, A5X-class CPU or faster, and 1 GB RAM.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

No, it's not.

This. My note chews up and spits out the 3gs I was using before the note. To say a 2g iPod touch is a better experience is laughable.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

Here are Anand's benchmarks for browsing.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4951/...rks-800mhz-a5-slightly-slower-gpu-than-ipad-2

Note my iPhone 4 vs. the Galaxy S2.

I could see the Galaxy xx being a bit more jerky though, because of the OS, but that's not page rendering speed.

It's worth pointing out that the Galaxy S2 is run ning a very old version of Gingrebread in those tests that has inferior browser performance to later versions. we have already seen a video of an S2 running the official ICS build in this thread so that is far more relevant.

 

[Eug]

Yeah, I was pointing out that Anand's tests put the iPhone 4 as the main competition for the Galaxy S2. The 3GS (and therefore iPod touch 2G) isn't in the same league for actual rendering speed. This ignores OS smoothness discussion.

It's interesting to note though that the iPhone 4 is single core, and the S2 is dual core.

 

[Red Storm]

This. My note chews up and spits out the 3gs I was using before the note. To say a 2g iPod touch is a better experience is laughable.

Yep yep.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

Yeah, I was pointing out that Anand's tests put the iPhone 4 as the main competition for the Galaxy S2. The 3GS (and therefore iPod touch 2G) isn't in the same league for actual rendering speed. This ignores OS smoothness discussion.

It's interesting to note though that the iPhone 4 is single core, and the S2 is dual core.

It's the old version of gingerbread, notice how the significantly less powerful Galaxy Tab 8.9 beat both the S2 and 4s. Later releases of Gingrebread significatly improved browser performance.

I just ran Sunspider 0.9.1 on my S2 and got 1887 which puts it far ahead of anything on that chart.

 

[Eug]

Well, arguably, that too is important. One of the big criticisms of early iterations of Gingerbread wass that it was very slow.

That too would have impacted on user experience when the devices came out.

In any case, I wouldn't even consider buying anything Android unless it has ICS or later. (Note though I'm not considering an Android phone. My interest in Android is for a 7" tablet.)

 

[Skel]

LOL that thread's great.

1. guy complains about a site being laggy on his phone - gets called a liar basically
2. guy uploads video showing clear lag - is told "oh that's because the site's still loading"
3. guy points out the lags the worst after the site's 100% loaded. - other posters blame it it on it being a "media heavy" site.

You’ve been here long enough to know that nothing’s ever wrong with android. To say it’s lacking at all is to cause a holy war where no matter what proof is brought to the table it’s dismissed. Only when the new version of the software is released can we agree that there was a problem with the old version, and even then it’s mostly the phone manufacture’s fault.