Discussion in 'Windows Phone Software' started by g-funkster, Oct 9, 2007.
Once again, "how fast you [sic] connection to the internet is" does NOT refer to how quickly a web page renders, but the actual download speed of your connection. If you download a file with your Q, you'd get speeds somewhere in between 300-700 kbps.
I'm not debating the quickness of Opera Mini, it offers a great online experience. We're trying to explain why the speed test is invalid. Here's what DSLReports says about its speed test:
It is invalid because your mobile device is not doing the download, Opera's servers are doing it, so the measurement you're seeing does not pertain to your device.
For some reason both of you are trying to insinuate that I or gmardre stated that Opera Mini increased the speed of our Q??? Where did we, or leaving gmardre out of it, I, ever state that??? The point here is that Opera Mini provides us an enormous amount of connection speed , which DSL Reports speed test measures...<_<...or am I missing something??
Reagrdless of how they do it (and I don't know enough about Opera Mini to offer facts), the fact of the matter is that they provide the increased connection speed.....Period!!..:2cool:
So you're saying that how fast Opera Mini loads a webpage has nothing to do with the actual connection speed that DSLReports are reporting??
DSLReports does NOT measure how fast your Q's CPU can download files...correct?? But rather the connection speed/ bandwidth...correct??
There you have it...DSL Reports speed test 'IS' valid because it is reporting how fast the connection is loading the web content (KBps) onto your Q for viewing...it's the same down the line from RoadRunner, DSL, Earthlnk, T1, etc, etc.......
Once again, I ask you, how can you say the dslreports speedtest is invalid if IE on my Q, connected to one of the Verizon servers here on the west coast,gives me connection speeds of 200-500 KBps..and this shows when trying to load a webpage with it because it's slow as hell...and then Opera Mini on my Q, connected to their server, I guess as you guys stated, gives me 1800 - 2100 KBps, and that also shows because those same webpages are loaded and ready to be viewed (pictures, graphics, and links) sometimes up to 10X times quicker???
Doesn't that validate that the speed tests are correctly measuring the speeds??
BTW...I was thinking about why Mini defaults to IE when actually downloading files to our Q...perhaps the Opera Mini software doesn't have that capability and the actual speeds when 'downloading' files to our Q is the same is because it is again back to IE and Verizon's connection...makes sense??
No, MB you are completely wrong.
I'd try to explain it further to you, but it is clear this is way out of your league of comprehension.
You don't have the pre-requisite knowledge to understand the concepts being explained.
Its like explaining quantum physics to a shoe repairmen.
ok fella's.. let's keep it civil.
HaHaHa...That's OK rudeboy. I understand if he is a little upset that he can't explain why Opera Mini is sooo much faster and merely opts to state that it's a 'facade' and that the DSLReports speedtest is a 'mirage'.
I'm not offended. Just curious. :tounge:
Didn't mean to offend you, .....Can you explain it to me in A Bit more of layman's term?? It's confusing me because your own words seem to contradict what you're saying? :} LOL
Why is the speed test invalid 'if' the speed being reported 'is' actually the speed that is being channeled to your phone?
And why is IE soooo much slower 'if' the speeds are actually the 'same' as when we use Opera Mini?
You know...in layman's term...I do want to learn...:smile:
BTW...what is your occupation? Are you an A+ certified technician or such?
I happen to be a technical architect designing web based applications for high performance on-demand systems.
I'm not upset, I just don't have the time to explain all the basics for you.
Here is an analogy that may help:
Imagine you have a decible meter you are using to test how far you can yell and still be heard.
You stand in California and put the DB meter in NY.
Then you pick up a phone and call NY and yell into the phone, thus registering on the DB meter.
Did you really have the ability to yell cross country? The DB meter may tell you so, but that is because you used the tool improperly.
Fact is, you used another means to trick the tool.
OK....I think I see where you guys are getting your info from....LOL :tounge:
"Opera Mini works by shifting most page-rendering responsibilities from the phone itself to a remote server. On that server, Opera "pre-processes" a Web page before sending a stripped-down version to the phone.
Opera Mobile, the company's existing software for the more powerful phones, uses the same rendering or browsing engine as Opera's desktop browser but with a scaled-down user-interface. In both Mobile and Mini, Opera uses a technique it calls "small-screen rendering" to rearrange the elements of a Web page to be readable on mobile device screens."
So in this is why you say that the speed test is actually testing the Opera server, right? I think I am starting to understand where you're coming from.
So how is it then that Opera Mini gives us access to the full webpage content soo much faster?? This isn't a retoricle question...I really want to know...
And, also...Is Opera Mobile just as fast?, if using the same 'small-screen rendering'?? I don't remember it being that fast??:gasp:
Opera Mobile does not use the same technology, which is a shame.
You do not have access to the full webpages content, you only THINK you do. A webpage consists of HTML which is a markup language to describe to a browser how it looks and behaves. Browsers download the markup, render it, and display the output to you.
Mini is not a real 'browser' as defined by RFC specs. It does not render HTML, not download it. Any other browser will let you view the resulting HTML source downloaded.
Mini instead downloads an quasi-image from the Opera servers (which have really downloaded and rendered the html). You can scroll in and out of the image and click links which are just hotspots on the quasi-image.
Notice that when you enter a value in a form field (input box), you don't actually enter it there, but in a new blank window. that value is just stored behind the scenes.
Bottom line, Mini is fast, but its not a true web browser since it relies upon a middle man to retrieve and render the html. Standard Speed tests do not apply because the rules Mini plays by are not the same the Speed tests play by. The contract is broken and the result thus untrue.
Another point--if Opera's servers are taken offline, you can no longer use Opera Mini. If Opera's cuts its bandwidth in half, the speed you see is reduced in half. You are directly reliant upon Opera to GIVE you service. While its fast, it defeats the entire purpose of the Internet which is that single points of failure do not exist as only the content provider themselves provides content--not middle men.
I see, wow...so you're like a software engineer??
I'm afraid that the anology didn't make sense to me...no offense intended, but I'm thinking along the lines as that DB meter is testing two seperate phones that you use to 'yell across country'...LOL...not sure why I'm stuck still seeing it that way.
Ah well...thanks for trying to explain it in a more technical way, but in layman's terms, I just know that Opera Mini gets the pages to me light years ahead of IE...that's why I was under the impression that the speed tests were basically valid.
I won't waste any more of your time. You can use IE and I'll stick with Opera Mini...LOL...J/K :wink:
I think I am starting to see what you're saying. Using PIE thru just Verizon connects us directly to the webpage, while using OM thru Opera via Verizon is only connecting us to Opera's server, which retrieves the webpage for us, but only sends us a sort of 'shell' of the webpage instead?
Sure looks like the same content on both though...hmmm, I'll have to check out the differences in the content of both.
BTW, doesn't PIE also not render the full HTML code from the webpages and instead display a scaled down version to us?
I'm actually using Opera Mini 3.1, but Opera beta 4 looks more impressive so I took screenshots of it instead
The difference between the two is 3.1 gives you a one column view only and no zoom. Easier to navigate for me!
Edit: 3.1 can be had by navigating with PIE to http://mini.opera.com
Some, but more design and architecture than just building.
A better analogy--think of Opera Mini as a picture taken from the Hubble Telescope with the Opera servers being the telescope.
I use Mini too, but I understand its speed is dependant upon the Opera servers.
I stand corrected guys...IE does render more of a 'full' page while OM4 does scale it down, sorta like lowering the bitrate in graphics, pictures.
While many of the websites I had visited with OM4 seemed similar to IE, I just visited PGATour.com with both and seen the differences more clearly.
I now see why both of you stated that the dslreports may not be a true representation of what we're actually getting.
Thanks guys for hammering me until I got it...LOL :tounge:
OM4 is basically better for certain websites (like forums, more text than visual sites), but IE is still 'clearer' for other sites (more graphics, pictures, etc)...
I understand fully now...:wink:
Gotcha :wink:, more like a webpage designer, with a dash of HTML code writing...:smile:
BTW, this thread is really very informative, and it will probably help many, many understand exactly why OM4 seems soo much faster than IE.
Yep guys, I just tested several graphics intensive websites with both and your explanations are validated. I was watching the actual KBs being processed and seen that on OM4 it was indeed far less than when using IE. Basically it is much more visually clearer with IE...et. higher bitrate.
I think where I got stumbled was that since this mobile technology is sorta new to me, I was so used to seeing full content on my PCs that IE already looked scaled down, and then when using OM4 it looked scaled down as well compared to regular PCs, so they both looked the same to me, initially. That's why I was still under the impression that the speed tests were valid because the pages were loading way faster with OM4. Only when I compared each website side-by-side did I truly notice the differences in IE to OM4.
Both these are somewhat shockingly scaled down compared to my regular PCs, one of which I just built and is ridiculously faster and more visually stunning than many systems, let alone my Q...
BTW, check out my main PC build......then you can see why I thought IE and OM4 were initially the same visually...LOL...they were both way slower and less graphic...:embarassed:
Antec 900 ATX Mid Tower
Antec True Power Trio 650W PSU
ABIT IP35 Pro LGA 775 Intel Motherboard
Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 2.4GHz CPU (Overclocking @ 2.9GHz)
XFX GeForce 8600GT 256MB GDDR3 Video Card
Patriot eXtreme Performance (2 x 1GB) DDR2 SDRAM
Seagate Barracuda(Perpendicular Recording) 320GB SATA 3.0Gb
Sorry guys, for the headaches...:embarassed:
just keeping the peace... too many forums are filled with un-necessary tensions amongst members.
carry on :}
It's all good rudeboy.
They were actually explaining it properly, but I was interpretting it wrong because I thought Operas' servers were just relaying the webpage. But after closer scrutiny I now see what they were saying. Operas' server renders the webpges and then sends me sort of a 'replica', a 'knock off' sorta speak. And I wasn't agreeing because I thought the content was exactly the same, but in truth it wasn't. Only on examining each page side by side with PIE and OM4 did I notice that indeed the OM4 was far less KBs, basically of less bitrates, and looked more blurred. Kind of like the differences of a video that is 7.8 GBs on a 41" HDTV compared to watching that same video reduced to a lower bitrate and being only 1.1 GBs, and then watching it on the same 41" HDTV. LOL
The out of their league comment was a little below the belt, but I understand. Webcrush just got frustrated because I wouldn't agree due to my thinking that it was indeed the exact same content, when it wasn't.
I'm surprised my new custom rig isn't wobbling based on it all being out of my league...LMAO...:tounge::smile: J/K
Hey quick q, I tried to follow the dir but I can't get the opera.
Navigate in PIE to http://mini.opera.com/beta and get the for the download link, follow the installation procedure.
My phone isn't recognized and I can not dl the the high or low quality file on the site i get a message that says "the file can not be viewed on this device". I have tried to run fix.exe, but my alert says it is "not a valid windows ce application".
What am I doing wrong?
I just heard something about a java or jb file? Do I need to DL this previous to this post? I am confused... I have it, but it says that it is a trial key?
This thread explains what you'll need to do to install and run the Java J9 Emulator to run the .jad/.jar files.
Especially helpful are these posts...
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 11:10 pm Post subject: Try this post for instructions:
On page 2 there is a link to get the files needed w/o registering with IBM: http://files.filefront.com//;6090608;;/
After following the page 1 instructions, I put "mini.jad" in an "apps" subdirectory and then ran "emulator.exe" and typed in the path to "mini.jad" and it ran. The next time I ran "emulator" it appeared on the midlet list.
To make it easier to start I then made an Emulator shortcut and put it in my windows/start menu folder.
If anyone has a different or better way to run this please advise.
Joined: 04 Jun 2006
Location: North Carolina, U.S.A.
Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 6:00 pm Post subject: gameday22 wrote:No that link is not hard to find but it's just a page that tells you how to d/l it to your phone... however when I do that on my Q I just get an error 'file cannot be viewed on this device'. So what I am looking for is a link where I can just d/l it to my pc and copy over to my Q.
from a PC
in the url box.
Download the jar file and transfer it over to your Q. Start the J9 emulator and run the install (left soft key). Type in the path to where the jar file is (e.g. file:///Storage Card/om4.jar)
Start Opera mini and surf.
Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 6:01 am Post subject: For those that want to try this WITHOUT the torture of registering,
navigating through the IBM site, here are the files that are required
to install on the Q as well as the instructions, which you can follow
from page 1 of this post.
Here is what the extracted file will look like:
As Per Jewalsh2k:
Quote:On your Q, go to the top level folder or root directory and create a directory called "J9" (without the quotes). Then create another folder called "MIDP20" under "J9". Copy the "bin", "lib" and "examples" folders from the extracted zip file into the new J9\MIDO20 folder. In the extracted folder there is also a "doc" folder which contains installations instructions in PDF format. Don't copy the doc folder across, the PDF is almost .5 MB and is not needed. Do read the PDF tho as it has info on how to install and run the GolfScoreTracker example.
Good luck, hope this simplifies it for you.
Separate names with a comma.