MS Mobile 2003 IE browser...

rittervonali · 07-02-03, 10:39 AM

DOes the 2003 OS have a more advanced version of the 2002 browser? Are you able to visit encrypted sites without having to tweak the registry?

Thx

Ritter

smeg36 · 07-02-03, 11:45 AM

From what I have heard, it is supposed to be a much better version, and doesn't need registry tweeks. We'll see soon though!

07-02-03, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by smeg36
We'll see soon though!

Not soon enough ;). This wait is murder!!

rodent · 07-02-03, 12:37 PM

condensed from msdn article:

Quote:

Updated Browser

Support for things like HTML 4.01, XHTML and Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) makes it a valid browser client for most uses....the update to WML 2.0 is also very welcome. WML 2.0 is mainly the WML 1.x standard converted into XHTML and is also a common mobile phone standard.

The Microsoft JScript® support (JScript 5.5) is now up to the same level as in Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.5, which means that in combination with a more complete document object model (DOM), most scripts written for desktop applications will be able to run on Pocket PC 2003.

The support for the "next generation Internet", IPv6...

On Pocket PC 2003, XML is supported the same way as in Internet Explorer 5. However, there's no backward compatibility with the XML DOM support in Internet Explorer 4 and data binding is not supported. However, there is DOM accessibility for XML via Jscript.

When detecting that a Pocket PC 2003 device is connecting to a Web site, you could look at the new agent string (in Internet Information Server this is provided in the HTTP_USER_AGENT server variable):

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows CE; PPC; 240x320)

The imaging support is also considerably improved. The formats PNG, JPEG, GIF, WMBP, 2BP and BMP are natively supported. Also, image maps and animated GIFs can now be used. Through the extensible imaging library third parties can also add support for other formats.

KLappDOgg · 07-02-03, 12:54 PM

I cant wait I just ordered mine today.

Pilot · 07-07-03, 07:06 AM

I ordered off the Dell web site and got the 10% discount. I guess they have now pulled the web ordering option, and you how have to call them. I am hoping the new browser can handle higher wireless download speeds. I currently have the Linksys WCF12 card and can only download at 125Kb/s. This is on a broadband connection where the other computers on my network are downloading at 2000Kb/s. I don't know what is causing the slower speed, but hope the new browser will help.

Pilot

Radar On Paws · 07-07-03, 03:42 PM

Haven't done any timed testing or benchmarking. However, on my HP h2215 (MM2003), PIE loads pages a LOT quicker than my Axim (still on PPC2002). It seems to have less trouble with more complicated pages. Well, you read the list of new features supported above. But it does feel quite a bit quicker, so much so that I had long ago given up web browsing with PIE on the dell, now I like to sit downstairs or lie in bed and surf the web for a little bit each day.

I think you'll be happy (or happier, anyway). It could always be better, but then what couldn't!

One other item of interest that may be MM2003 related, but might be HP vs. Dell related, I don't have any of the hotsync difficulties or quirks with the 2215 that I had with the Dell. I don't know what the difference is, but activesync just works. Never times out, never needs a soft reset before activesync will work as the Axim ocassionally does. I'm hoping that the reason is that MM2003 and the activesync on the PDA itself is better in some regard.

Ehien · 07-07-03, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pilot
I ordered off the Dell web site and got the 10% discount. I guess they have now pulled the web ordering option, and you how have to call them. I am hoping the new browser can handle higher wireless download speeds. I currently have the Linksys WCF12 card and can only download at 125Kb/s. This is on a broadband connection where the other computers on my network are downloading at 2000Kb/s. I don't know what is causing the slower speed, but hope the new browser will help.

Pilot

What wireless AP/router are you using? That might be the culprit.

I also use WCF12. When I first started with D-link, the link was not only slooooow, but very sporadic. Then I got Netgear MR814v2. Wow... connection all the time and 600~800kb/s throughput. Still far slower than advertised Wi-Fi 11Mb/s speed, but plenty good for web surfing (my cable modem gets up to 2Mb/s).

Ehien

PC-in-my-pocket · 07-07-03, 09:06 PM

I sure hope with all the advances of the new IE it doesn't now support pop-ups! :D

Pez · 07-08-03, 12:45 AM

ITS SOOOO FAST!!

On my 2215.. I dont need aximsites archived forums anymore.. I can read the regular forums w/o having to deal with it freezing on me.. or slowing downa nd taking like 3-4 mins YAY!

Pilot · 07-08-03, 12:45 AM

I just did a few download tests using a Wireless (Linksys WCF12) and activesync. I tried 2 different Axim's, both have the rom 03 upgrade, and one has the Xcale 250 CPU and the other has the 255. I tested both on the same ActiveSync unit, and then both on the same Linksys WCF12 card, swaping back and forth. I did the download tests using the free test at www.pcpitstop.com. I did the test multiple times to make sure it was accurate.
The speed was the same for each unit using the activeSync or the Wireless Linksys WCF card. It was nice to know that there was no speed loss for using the wireless connection! The Axim with the Xcale 255 brought the higher download speed at a steady 200 kb/s, using both activeSync and the Linksys WCF card.
The other Axim with the Xcale 250 CPU was slighly slower at 150KB/s, again using the same ActiveSync and the same Wireless card. The Axim with the 250 showed a difference between 138kb/s and 167kb/s, where the Axim with the 255 showed dead on steady for repeat tests. Both Axim's are the 400Mhz model. The PC running ActiveSync is a Dell Optiplex, hard wired to a wireless Linksys router, and having a cable broadband connection. I have also tested the 3 computers which are all networked together, with 2 being wireless and one being hard wired. All 3 computers tested at the exact same download of 2000KB/s, again showing that the 2 with wireless connection are testing the same as the unit that is hard wired to the router. All using the same download test. The end result shows that the Axim CPU/Software combo are what is slowing down the broadband download speed. Not that these download speeds are bad (still 3 to 4 times) greater than the fastest dial-up modem could give.
I will repeat the same tests on both Axim's when I get the new OS upgrade later this month. I am hoping the speed will increase with updates to the browser that. I don't expect a large increase in speed due to the limitations in the Xcale cpu, but I will post the results.

Pilot

Handy · 07-15-03, 03:18 AM

I did some tests using wi-fi to transfer files to and from my desktop PC. I found a big difference in speed between downloading or uploading to RAM vs. SD Card or Built-in storage. RAM is fastest, SD Card is much slower, Built-in storage is slightly faster than SD Card.

I originally had moved my PIE cache files to SD Card, until I found out that really slowed down the browser. I would not recommend doing that.

Ehien · 07-15-03, 12:28 PM

Hi Pilot,

Nice set of tests.

Wonder why I got faster download (PC to RAM) speed than yours? I clocked ~43sec for downloading a 3.6MB (28.8Mbits) file, or about 670kbps. And my Axim is the 300MHz Basic with 255 CPU.

Handy, you are right. RAM is faster than SD. But in my case the difference is not huge. Downloading the same file to SD took me ~50sec, about 16% slower than RAM.

BTW I did the test through Axim's File Explorer and copied the network file on PC. Maybe this is faster than going through ActiveSync?

Or maybe my Netgear MR814v2 is doing a great job? I do have 64-bit WEP enabled.

Ehien

Pilot · 07-15-03, 02:39 PM

My tests were all thru the Axim IE browser using the Linksys WCF 12 wifi card in the Axim. My setup was using 128bit WEP. Before I did the test on the Axim's, I first tested the other 3 computers on my Wifi network. All are set to 128bit WEP, and all tested at 2000 kb/s, which is what my ISP claims it to be. I then knew before the Axim test what the benchmark was for the desktop wireless system using the same linksys router, the same download test ect. The only difference would be the Axim using the same wireless system with all the setting the same. The download speed for the Axim was far below the PC's, and I assume this is because of the limits on the Xscale cpu, as well as the limitation on the Pocket PC browser.
I also used 2 separate Axim's using the same WCF 12 card. The newer Axim with the Xscale 255 cpu was slightly faster in repeat tests, then the older 250 cpu. The extra bus speed on the 255 must have helped the download, or this is what I believe is the case. None of these tests were anything more than measuring my own hardware in my home, and are not scientific by any measure. I just wanted to post my findings, for what it is worth.
I would assume by the above post, that the download using a file transfer would be higher as you are not using the browser, but just the wide open speed of the CPU and the memory in the Axim, along with its ability to receive this data. Just my opinion. The Linksys WCF 12 card is a 11 mps, which is the same as my desktop computers. This is many times more speed between computers than attempting to measure the download speed off the internet. Both tests do show that the Axim is incapable of high speeds between computers, nor high-speed downloading off the internet using a broadband connection. The file transfer speed of 670kbs on the above post is way below the 11mps, which is 11000 kbs between computers which the Linksys WCF 12 card is capable of doing in perfect conditions. Again the limitation is inside the Axim, CPU, memory, and browser, depending on if it is a file transfer or a browser download. There is nothing wrong with the Axim, it is a fine machine. It just has limitations which are nice to know about.

Pilot

Ehien · 07-15-03, 03:29 PM

I agree. The "stuffs" inside Axim is what limits the wireless speed. At 670kbps I have no complaint as this already allows me to play 300k movies through Internet or listening to MP3 files stored on my PC (with proper cache setting).

But I'm curious to know what other PPC (like HP2215) can do with this same card. Or are there any PPC that can approach 11Mb?

There is never too much bandwidth!

Ehien