Related
i tried to sign up deepfish but it has expired i have the cab someone posted but no reg key so.
is there any other browser that is similar to deepfish available for wm6
Yea it's called Picsel Browser. you can find it somewhere on here or google it
The beta version of Mini Opera has a very good page overview feature, which is a good step forward.
Browse to mini.opera.com on your phone or go to http://www.operamini.com/beta/
Picsel browser is really really bad. It was a good concept, but it really poor implementation.
The new Opera Mini beta does an ok job, but still being a beta, it is rather buggy.
I think the key issue here is WTF happened to deep fish? Microsoft pushed it aside and to the bottom of it's list like it does with ALL Windows Mobile stuff. Such a shame MS doesn't care more about the mobile market.
Deepfish wasn't anywhere close to release, it was a development "sneak-peak". I'm sure they're still working on it. As for Picsel, it was a great browser for it's time. Don't know why you think it was poorly implemented. It doesn't have all the bells and whistles of what we require in a browser nowadays, but neither did any of the others when it came out. And as for Opera Mini, it only has overview and zoomed in modes, nothing in between, which makes it just as useless as all the current ones in my opinion. Still waiting for Opera Mobile 9 to come out.
I assure you, they have had how many months to make it work? And they haven't done anything with it...
Face it, MS doesn't care a bit about the mobile market, we will never see any real effort from MS. I'm pretty convinced they have 2 guys there that are their mobile development team, lol
I tried DeepFish months ago and it had some promise. But, MS would drag their feet on fixing the reported bugs. Also, the beta would not allow cookies even though this had been a priority request of the community. I dropped it due to lack of MS support.
GldRush98 said:
Picsel browser is really really bad. It was a good concept, but it really poor implementation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I totally disagree. Picsel browser is a fantastic piece of software and one of the first things I install after a ROM update. Not only does it to a bang-up job for daily browsing, but it is my default viewer for all documents, especially PDF and graphic files.
OP, seriously, give it a try and see for yourself... ESPECIALLY for docs.
GldRush98 said:
Picsel browser is really really bad. It was a good concept, but it really poor implementation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is it is a poor implementation , the software itself is amazing !
I've used this softawre in my E680i , no doubt , it is excellent when view M$ office document and PDF file .
So the problem should be Picsel never intend to release a general version of it's software , only for specific device ...
Ummm ... I wonder what it will looks like if a Hermes version is available .
Hmm... I don't get what the problem with Picsel is?! I never experienced any problems... No crashes, no memory errors. And I use it regularly especially for web-browsing...
i googled for Picsel browser but couldnt find any download links!?
mkmonkey: we hacked out the Picsel browser from a Samsung rom some time back, and there were any device compatible versions released. However, due to copyright reasons we were asked not to distribute it. I'm sure you'll be able to track it down though.
If you do find a copy on the board, please notify me so I or the other mods can delete it.
However, IMHO, I like it very much. There are other browsers, probably Opera or NetFront, that work more "robustly", but Picsel works nicely, and makes a good light doc viewer and pdf viewer as well, so all in, it's a good compromise. I used it for several months and it made my mobile browsing experience (on the Universal, VGA, with some hacks to make it a good deal sexier) significantly more enjoyable then Pocket Internet Explorer.
V
hmm ask not to distribute huh?
well, mabye u could send me a PM with a "hidden" link, when picsel isnt watching .
edit: nvm, found it.
Problem with Picsel is that it does not always create its own internet connection. On a XV6700, you have to open a connection first (by send/receive email or opening PIE) before launching Picsel. This is a pain to do every time. For this reason, I use it only when I need to view documents close up. Also does not seem to work with flash. Why WM devices still ship with such a crappy browser is beyond me when there are so many better alternatives, but with spotty flash support.
My biggest problem with Picsel was that when you scrolled, it did not render on the fly. You had to stop for it to display the new section of the page. Anyone have a version that did it properlY?
@obentou:
Problem with Picsel is that it does not always create its own internet connection.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I posted a workaround for that problem, maybe you're interested:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=277812&page=7
In that thread you find a small helper-program which you can bind to a key on your device to manually establish an internet-connection without having to start PIE.
shanetheclassic said:
Yea it's called Picsel Browser. you can find it somewhere on here or google it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think so, you remove the very good interface and you get a mediocre browser.
Regards,
Taguapire.
taguapire said:
I don't think so, you remove the very good interface and you get a mediocre browser.
Regards,
Taguapire.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Uhm, what did that have to do with the sentence you quoted?
How do i use a proxy connection with the Picsel browser?
As far as I know Picsel does not support a proxy... Which is bad because most WAP flatrates depend on proxies... :-/
Hi there,
It was my understanding that if I use IE on my Touch HD then it will be detected as a mobile by some websites and therefore load a different version of the website. I was also of the understanding that this wasn't the case when using Opera and infact the sites would just see a normal browser and load the "real" page.
My understandings above may or may not be correct however now I've noticed that Opera is sometimes being diverted to mobile sites where it wasn't before. I think I may have upgraded the stock version in the past and I'm currently running build 15316.
Is there anything I can do to force "real" pages?
Thanks for any help/info
Justin
The solution!
Hi,
Just follow the next step.. open opera->click on left down corner -> settings -> advanced -> at the bottom select "indentify as"-> from the drop down menu select "Desktop computer"-> restart Opera
That's all !
bg100106 said:
Hi,
Just follow the next step.. open opera->click on left down corner -> settings -> advanced -> at the bottom select "indentify as"-> from the drop down menu select "Desktop computer"-> restart Opera
That's all !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In Opera 9.5 build 15613 i believe it is like that:
click on RIGHT down corner -> settings -> display -> verify that "mobile view" is NOT checked-> restart Opera
Thanks for the responses.
I don't have the menu options as mentioned in the first post. Maybe a different build?
And I do indeed have mobile view unchecked from the second post..
Bilbo Fraggins said:
Thanks for the responses.
I don't have the menu options as mentioned in the first post. Maybe a different build?
And I do indeed have mobile view unchecked from the second post..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I too am interested to know the answer to this... For the most part it brings up full web pages, but BBC and Google sites always seem to bring up their mobile content.
Does someone have an answer? As stated above mobile view is unchecked in the options...
Gisbourne said:
I too am interested to know the answer to this... For the most part it brings up full web pages, but BBC and Google sites always seem to bring up their mobile content.
Does someone have an answer? As stated above mobile view is unchecked in the options...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It probably depends on the website.
Some websites will have "sniffer" code built in that will query your device and get information out (eg OS/browser version/browser name etc etc). Nothing sinister - they're just trying to either collate user stats (eg to prove FireFox is gaining in popularity), or tweaking the look of the file slightly to improve the user experience / make sure the site renders correctly in different browsers.
I'm a web developer myself and use simple versions of these scripts to tweak CSS styling because different browsers follow the standards set in different ways.
So even if you've set your Opera to identify itself as "not" mobile version, the website you're looking at might well be looking at the actual OS (or something else entirely) to define how it presents the site to you.
Incidentally if you want to see the "User-Agent" information that a simple php browser sniffer gathers - see this link: It's basically the same sort of code that some people put links to in their forum signature bar.
Riceburner said:
It probably depends on the website.
Some websites will have "sniffer" code built in that will query your device and get information out (eg OS/browser version/browser name etc etc). Nothing sinister - they're just trying to either collate user stats (eg to prove FireFox is gaining in popularity), or tweaking the look of the file slightly to improve the user experience / make sure the site renders correctly in different browsers.
I'm a web developer myself and use simple versions of these scripts to tweak CSS styling because different browsers follow the standards set in different ways.
So even if you've set your Opera to identify itself as "not" mobile version, the website you're looking at might well be looking at the actual OS (or something else entirely) to define how it presents the site to you.
Incidentally if you want to see the "User-Agent" information that a simple php browser sniffer gathers - see this link: It's basically the same sort of code that some people put links to in their forum signature bar.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks Riceburner, this makes a bit more sense now and understand all of what you are saying...
Cheers
When I visit websites that also have sites optimized for mobile phones like nu.nl and cracked.com i am direcedt to those. But I want the original site. I can't find a way to change it. I turned mobile view off.
taarmen said:
When I visit websites that also have sites optimized for mobile phones like nu.nl and cracked.com i am direcedt to those. But I want the original site. I can't find a way to change it. I turned mobile view off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't change it. It's not caused by Opera. It's the site that detects that you are using Opera Mini, and decides that you are to get a mobile site instead of the full site. Complain to the site.
Type opera:config in your address bar and poke around with the settings. It's in there somewhere.
EyeAmRubber said:
You can't change it. It's not caused by Opera. It's the site that detects that you are using Opera Mini, and decides that you are to get a mobile site instead of the full site.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And where do you think the site gets this information from? From Opera! - sending the wrong string as user agent in it's HTTP-requests.
EyeAmRubber said:
Complain to the site.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. The site does deliver correctly what the browser requested. It's definitely Opera sending the wrong request.
SE-X1 said:
And where do you think the site gets this information from? From Opera! - sending the wrong string as user agent in it's HTTP-requests.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, it's sending the right string. It's telling the site which browser it is. The wrong thing would be to lie about it.
No. The site does deliver correctly what the browser requested. It's definitely Opera sending the wrong request.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, Opera is just telling the site that it's Opera. The site is choosing what it does when it encounters Opera.
If Opera changed its user agent string to become unrecognizable, browser statistics would be messed up, and sites relying on browsers to be truthful would break.
EyeAmRubber said:
No, it's sending the right string. It's telling the site which browser it is. The wrong thing would be to lie about it.
No, Opera is just telling the site that it's Opera. The site is choosing what it does when it encounters Opera.
If Opera changed its user agent string to become unrecognizable, browser statistics would be messed up, and sites relying on browsers to be truthful would break.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So this anoying problem can be fixed by just changing one string or telling 3476587653745344378 sites to change the way they handle requests.
I think it wouldn't even mess up statistics. There are more reliable methods to identify the browser than by using the user agent. The desktop version for example is capable of identifying itself as IE or Firefox and it does not mess up statistics.
I don't get mobile versions of pages shown in Opera mobile so this should be possible in Mini too.
SE-X1 said:
So this anoying problem can be fixed by just changing one string or telling 3476587653745344378 sites to change the way they handle requests.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Changing the string would break 3476587653745344378^10 other sites. And would remove it completely from browser stats. Which would get all the whiners going on about how no one is using Opera again.
I think it wouldn't even mess up statistics. There are more reliable methods to identify the browser than by using the user agent.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Such as?
The desktop version for example is capable of identifying itself as IE or Firefox and it does not mess up statistics.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It identifies as Opera by default. When it identifies as something else, it is not counted as Opera, but as a different browser.
I don't get mobile versions of pages shown in Opera mobile so this should be possible in Mini too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course it's possible in Mini. This has got nothing to do with Opera Mini's capabilities. It's the site that chooses to send you to a mobile site.
You can argue as much as you want, it doesn't change anythink about the fact, that O-mini does not show the expected content although it could be very easily be fixed. That's ultra-anoying on any high-res-device.
There's even a checkbox in Opera's options to chose if you want to see mobile-versions if available or not, but it's just ignored.
I'm pretty sure the string can be altered in a way that does both, full-size-content AND right statistics.
Check showip.com with Desktop-Opera. It shows your user agent. It changes when you set Opera to claim it's IE or FF, but they all still include "Opera" +version in that string. Stats can still identify it correctly no matter what you select.
SE-X1 said:
You can argue as much as you want, it doesn't change anythink about the fact, that O-mini does not show the expected content although it could be very easily be fixed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not arguing. I'm pointing out the fact that Opera Mini is simply showing the content that's being sent to it. I'm pointing out the fact that it's the site that's doing this. You are arguing because you evidently don't understand the subject matter.
There's even a checkbox in Opera's options to chose if you want to see mobile-versions if available or not, but it's just ignored.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, that checkbox actually controls what Opera Mini does. It changes the way Opera Mini handles a page. This is completely different from the problem you are referring to, which has to do with what the site does when it detects that you are using Opera Mini.
I'm pretty sure the string can be altered in a way that does both, full-size-content AND right statistics.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, because the sites that are sending Opera Mini to mobile pages are doing so specifically for Opera Mini. If Opera Mini changes its UA string, those sites will simply adapt to the new string, and send that to a mobile page as well. You will have gotten nowhere, except making other people's life harder.
Check showip.com with Desktop-Opera. It shows your user agent. It changes when you set Opera to claim it's IE or FF, but they all still include "Opera" +version in that string. Stats can still identify it correctly no matter what you select.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, the sites that send Opera Mini to a mobile version are specifically looking for Opera Mini. If you change the string to include other browsers, the page will still specifically look for Opera Mini. It would solve nothing, as explained above.
Stats can identify it correctly if you don't remove Opera Mini from the string. But you seemed to suggest that they simply hide Opera Mini completely, in which case those stats sites would not be able to detect it.
Finally, what more reliable methods to identify the browser than the user agent string are there?
This is getting too much blah blah for a trivial thing. It could be fixed but it's not --> not good
It does work with Opera mobile, that's proof enough that it could work with mini too, no matter how it works.
You are right about the checkbox "mobile view", that's "Small screen rendering mode" which is something else... misleading label.
Im not the expert that can tell you how exactly the user Agent string has to look like, but it's obvious that it could work with the right one.
(Forget about "more reliable methods", seams like it does all work fine with user agents only)
SE-X1 said:
This is getting too much blah blah for a trivial thing. It could be fixed but it's not --> not good
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It needs to be fixed by the site. It is not Opera Mini which decides which page it's being sent.
It does work with Opera mobile, that's proof enough that it could work with mini too, no matter how it works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Opera Mini and Opera Mobile have different UA strings. Again, it's got nothing to do with "working with Opera Mini". This isn't caused by Opera Mini. It's caused by sites that detect that you are using Opera Mini.
Im not the expert that can tell you how exactly the user Agent string has to look like, but it's obvious that it could work with the right one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm telling you that it couldn't. These sites that send Opera Mini mobile content do so because they chose to specifically do so for whatever reason. Changing the UA string would just piss these people off, and update their scripts to send mobile pages to the new UA string as well.
It's getting boring. Have fun with ugly unreadable pages while I surf the web how it's supposed to look.
You admit that you were mistaken then, I presume?
EyeAmRubber said:
You admit that you were mistaken then, I presume?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, you're simply wrong, I just gave up convining you.
So I am "simply wrong" even though you made all the false assertions, such as "more reliable methods" (showing that you have no idea what you are talking about).
Telling me that I'm wrong when all your arguments so far have been devastated is not exactly convincing.
EyeAmRubber said:
So I am "simply wrong" even though you made all the false assertions, such as "more reliable methods" (showing that you have no idea what you are talking about).
Telling me that I'm wrong when all your arguments so far have been devastated is not exactly convincing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was wrong in a detail like I already said above. But that doesn't change anything about the rest. The problem can definitely be fixed in the Software, that's a provable fact I'm not going to discuss anymore. Saying the software is ok, just the rest of the world has to change to become compatible is just nonsense because it will not fix the problem because it will never happen.
Besides the alternative view does make sense on low end devices so it has to be Opera to decide witch view to load depending on the resulution of the device or better by the settings the user made. And don't tell me again it's not possible, that's just nonsense because it's not and does already work with other browsers.
The "problem" can't be "fixed" by Opera without breaking it for everyone else.
The rest of the world doesn't need to change. You are the one who wants sites who specifically send Opera Mini users to a mobile site to change.
As I already explained, this is not about "Opera views", this is about what kind of content a site sends to Opera. It "works" in other browsers because the sites are not sending them to a mobile site.
Again: Changing the useragen string would break ****loads of websites, and Opera would disappear from the stats. That, or the change will achieve exactly nothing, because the sites that are sending Opera Mini users to a mobile site are specifically looking for Opera Mini in the first place.
You need to stop making assertions when you are clearly severely lacking in knowledge on the subject. It gets worse when you blame Opera for something the site is doing, and claim that it's in Opera's hands.
Sure it's the Site that sends different content, nobody stated anything else. But it depends on the request made by the browser! And when I say it works in other browsers I'm NOT talking about desktop browsers. I use Opera mobile and it does what i want although I got the same results as with Mini with default settings.
In Opera mobile you just go to the setting and set "Spoof UserAgent ID" to "2" to mask as Mozilla. That does still leave "Opera 9.7" mentioned in the User agent and is still identified in browser statistics correctly, but this way you allways get fullsize content without breaking anything. Sure thing the same can be done to any other browser easily.
Maybe you just try it yourself and then we talk again who's got a lack of knowledge.
It's so funny reading all the time what's impossible while everyone can download other mobile browsers and see with own eyes that it's not.
SE-X1 said:
Sure it's the Site that sends different content, nobody stated anything else. But it depends on the request made by the browser!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In what way, specifically? What kind of request?
And when I say it works in other browsers I'm NOT talking about desktop browsers. I use Opera mobile and it does what i want although I got the same results as with Mini with default settings.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, that is because other browsers have a different UA string, and the sites haven't started specifically sending those to a mobile page.
In Opera mobile you just go to the setting and set "Spoof UserAgent ID" to "2" to mask as Mozilla. That does still leave "Opera 9.7" mentioned in the User agent and is still identified in browser statistics correctly, but this way you allways get fullsize content without breaking anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, masking as Mozilla completely removes "Opera". "Identify as" doesn't.
How do you know that it's identified in browser statistics?
BTW, please give me an example of a site which sends mobile content to Opera Mobile 7 before changing this setting.
It's so funny reading all the time what's impossible while everyone can download other mobile browsers and see with own eyes that it's not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Evidently, those other mobile browsers are not being singled out by the site and sent mobile content. Once again you show that you completely fail to understand the fundamentals of browser sniffing.
in my view i dont think mini5 is esstially much speedy & good than mini4.2 so i am still use 4.2 now
These are the 3 important things on my list about Windows Phone 7. I know initially these wont be available but i remember reading a while back that the emulator or something got hacked by someone here and revealed a file explorer in windows phone 7
is that any indication that there will be a means of exploring the contents of the device like we currently have on winmo?
also how feasible would it be for them to allow multitasking for apps? is that something impossible for this platform or could they actually do this with a update?
and whats the word on using the device as a usb drive like most phones out there can currently do?
deadwrong03 said:
These are the 3 important things on my list about Windows Phone 7. I know initially these wont be available but i remember reading a while back that the emulator or something got hacked by someone here and revealed a file explorer in windows phone 7
is that any indication that there will be a means of exploring the contents of the device like we currently have on winmo?
also how feasible would it be for them to allow multitasking for apps? is that something impossible for this platform or could they actually do this with a update?
and whats the word on using the device as a usb drive like most phones out there can currently do?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well you probably didn't follow the WP7 news....
Anyway at launch NONE of the above are available.
deadwrong03 said:
the emulator or something got hacked by someone here and revealed a file explorer in windows phone 7
is that any indication that there will be a means of exploring the contents of the device like we currently have on winmo?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The file explorer in the emulator didn't really work, but was present. It won't be available in the retail version and there will be no file system access for users.
deadwrong03 said:
also how feasible would it be for them to allow multitasking for apps? is that something impossible for this platform or could they actually do this with a update?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Multitasking will likely be added in a future update, although I would bet that this will be some iPhone-style limited multitasking where programs won't actually run in background but rather use OS services to do what needs to be done while they're not in focus. That multitasking is needed was confirmed by MS. How it will be implemented is not known, I'm guessing here.
deadwrong03 said:
and whats the word on using the device as a usb drive like most phones out there can currently do?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This won't be available. After all, it's not really useful without file system access.
So in these areas WP7 is very similar to the iPhone. To get this features, WP7 devices will need to be jailbroken (or whatever the process will be called).
Like stated above. Many if not all the things you are looking for may be missing on launch. But future updates may change this. Also don't doubt the good people at XDA-Devs not to find some sort of way around getting USB Mass Storage access as well as a File Explorer. Never Say "Never" around this place.
what about downloading through the web browser? like downloading pictures or like i do with my tp2 download music and albums will any downloading be possible at all thru the browser? since theres no file explorer now im guessing not
IM0001 said:
Also don't doubt the good people at XDA-Devs not to find some sort of way around getting USB Mass Storage access as well as a File Explorer. Never Say "Never" around this place.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm pretty sure we will get a USB Mass Storage mod, I just hope it isn't a long process like on the iphone.
deadwrong03 said:
what about downloading through the web browser? like downloading pictures or like i do with my tp2 download music and albums will any downloading be possible at all thru the browser?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is possible for file types supported by the OS - images, office documents. All other file types will be downloadable via webbrowser controls within third-party applications to their isolated storage areas.
vangrieg said:
Multitasking will likely be added in a future update, although I would bet that this will be some iPhone-style limited multitasking where programs won't actually run in background but rather use OS services to do what needs to be done while they're not in focus. That multitasking is needed was confirmed by MS. How it will be implemented is not known, I'm guessing here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think some kinds of multitasking are available. Read this post: bolingconsulting[dot]com/blog/?p=46
Azatey said:
I think some kinds of multitasking are available. Read this post: bolingconsulting[dot]com/blog/?p=46
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is first party multitasking for some apps e.g. Zune. No third party multitasking e.g. no Pandora.
-R
sketchy9 said:
There is first party multitasking for some apps e.g. Zune. No third party multitasking e.g. no Pandora.
-R
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but there is a iPhone esque multi-tasking. They call it tombstoning. The app gets put into a saved state when you switch apps, and when you hit the back button it gets brought back up as if you never left, but it is not running in the background, just saved. But if you go to the home/star menu and start the same app it gets started as if you never had it in the tombstone state.
the toombstoning sounds awefull for anything that uses bluetooth or gps....
Tombstoning is NOT multitasking and it is NOT an alternative.
crow26 said:
Tombstoning is NOT multitasking and it is NOT an alternative.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
in most cases it is the same as multi tasking with the exception of music other than zune or gps / bluetooth however i do not see a need for a gps app to be running when its not in the foreground. but any other will act the same as it would on a phone with multi tasking. i would be intrested in you posting your example that you think wp7 cant do (with the exception of what is listed above).
It's not at all the same, never. Completely different thing that has nothing to do with multitasking.
crow26 said:
It's not at all the same, never. Completely different thing that has nothing to do with multitasking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you keep making the claim but have yet to give an example... wp7 current way of "multi task" vs andriod "multi task"
WP7:
1. App is running in the forderground
2. App is frozen in the RAM and only some threads are still running
3. App is frozen in the Flash memory and only some threads are still running
4. App is not running
Andriod
1. App is running in the foreground
2. App is frozen in the RAM and only some threads are still running
3. Just a portion of an app is running in the background as a service, the main app is deflated and residing in memory, or has been killed, leaving only the service.
4. App is not running, but is still in Memory in a deflated state until RAM runs out.
5. App is killed and not residing in memory. It may leave call to the OS to revive it periodically when conditions are met.
and here are a few examples people have explained how they use "multi task"
listen to my music
surf on the Internet,
check some addresses with Google Maps.
Also I use the camera.- wp7 possable
listening to music
open my twitter program
open a link from one of the twits
pause twitting to write a SMS - wp7 possable
The fact is there are very few areas where we do need "real multitasking", they are music+whatever and navigation+receiving a call/email. And of these, it is only navigation that seem not to be working as we all expect in first release of WP7 at least. Music, mail, phone are 1. party apps, and those will run in background when needed.
What people often think about when they say; "But I need multitasking"...they often just think about that they want to work in one app, then jump to another app, and then back to the first and continue where they left off...and that is something that is handeled by saving and loading of state. For us users...it will be as it was running in the background.
And then there are multitasking-scenario where you want for example to get notified when there is a new Twitter that mentions you, or when you airplane is delayed, and so forth...and that is also possible in WP7, if the developers use PushNotifications.
for now this is what most people really use as far as "multi task" goes...
Honestly, WM 6/6.5 style multitasking would be instant death for WP7. People who are computer-retarded (the majority of people) wouldn't be able to use it properly. When the memory fills up, the phone simply "stops working" for them and it's time to get an iPhone.
This new system makes much more sense... yes, it's not the same, but it will work just fine in the long run.
Perfect example I use my phone for navigation. I'm driving and my friend wants to surf the net while I drive. My friend takes my phone and starts browsing the net. Navigation is still running in the background giving me voice guided directions. Can WP7 do this?
What about surf the net while on a skype call?
What about Pandora while playing a game?
vetvito said:
Perfect example I use my phone for navigation. I'm driving and my friend wants to surf the net while I drive. My friend takes my phone and starts browsing the net. Navigation is still running in the background giving me voice guided directions. Can WP7 do this?
What about surf the net while on a skype call?
What about Pandora while playing a game?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
as mentioned above in many post "with the exception of navigation" and not all people use pandora zune will do for current. and yes you are what most consider to be a more "advance user" however this is not the norm as most people use one app at a time.. so although its not giving you all that you are looking for at the current it will fufill 95% of the users and they way they use apps. and the most important thing is it will run alot smoother and better than android, wm 6.5, 6.1, rim... i will take this over a few things not being able to run in the background anyday!!!
"Tombstoning" is nothing. Every OS can do that.
Multitasking means running applications in the background. On WP7, nothing is running at all = NO MULTITASKING.
= no navigation in the background
= no internet radio in the background
= no downloads in the background
= no skype in the backround
= no server in the background
= ...
Is that so hard to understand?! Are you somehow retarded or what's wrong with you?
Crow26, why do you have to be rude? Politeness never hurt anyone.
After I read the review on WM7 on GSMArena, I finally made up my mind: I will never downgrade to WM7, because it's what it actually is: a downgrade.
I use navigation a lot and, obviously, I receive calls while I drive. Is my HD2 the last phone with which I can do that? Is this the end of the line?
WM7 feels like another one of those OS for people who know nothing about computers (the majority). It is such a downgrade from WM6.5 in that sense...
Anyone else give this a try? Design is one of the worst I've ever seen but tab swiping is smooth as silk.
Attach the xap if you have it, i'm curious
Ruwin said:
Attach the xap if you have it, i'm curious
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.windowsphone.com/en-US/apps/e76acaa3-759f-4e37-81e5-f43dea7a8e26
It's in the Marketplace.
bmstrong said:
It's in the Marketplace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it's good for being in early stages.
How do they get away with calling this 'Chromium'? Don't think Google would be too happy.
CrownSeven said:
How do they get away with calling this 'Chromium'? Don't think Google would be too happy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agree, it's really stupid or just a kind of "puffery". It's WebBrowser class (Pocket IE wrapper) based and far away from the real Chromium engine.
it's a good work
bmstrong said:
http://www.windowsphone.com/en-US/apps/e76acaa3-759f-4e37-81e5-f43dea7a8e26
It's in the Marketplace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For i don't know what reason i couldn't find it from the phone, only when i searched the market form the desktop. But yeah, it works now.
First thing. The design is really poor, the page view area is small, the loading is pretty slow. But the worst thing is the keyboard that opens above some option buttons. If you type fast and without looking at the keyboard, you might push the buttons below instead of space. I know i did.
Second thing. I hate the name. It has nothing to do with Chromium.
Third thing. The swipe to switch tabs is interesting, but the way the tabs are displayed eats too much screen real estate.
Fourth thing. This are just my opinions.
good app for the development stage
please attache xap file here.
Xap
Here is the XAP file - this is the latest build, I have not updated the marketplace version yet.
Still curious - why did you call your app "Chromium"?
P.S. BTW, better to move this thread to Windows Phone 7 Apps and Games, ask mods.
Renamed
It has been renamed to Kromi, app id is: eea60df6-faa9-4323-af06-774259cd6825
Not sure how to find it with the app id, but searching for Kromi yields no results...
The Internet Explorer is better than "Chromium".
It´s faster and looks better.
Please make it look better
Opera Mobile is nice and for me the only alternative
I think this app is in Bazaar now.
It's now bad for a beta, can fullscreen the browser to hide the weird tab interface, and tab switching is the best I have seen on WP7.
There is no bookmark or homepage setting as of yet though, and you cannot press to open context menu (such as open in new tab) but it's still one of the best WP7 browsers around
Is this the same as the one available in bazaar?