[General Topics] Menneisyys:
Fit-to-screen (tested with the PPCMag test)?:

As can clearly be seen, PIE has always delivered pretty bad results, unlike with all the comparable and fit-to-screen-capable alternatives (except for Minimo, where SSR doesn't always work). Both NetFront's "Just-fit rendering" and Opera Mobile's "Default" mode are far better at really crunching the horizontal contents of a Web page to the available screen estate and, in most of the cases, are perfectly usable on especially VGA devices.

Minimo's SSR mode (whish is enabled by default) is a different animal - it doesn't work with many sites (see the RedHotPawn example). When it does work, however, it also delivers good results.

Opera Mini doesn't have a comparable rendering mode at all (as it's solely using an One column mode). Finally, Thunderhawk renders the page using the original layout, which is pretty much OK in most cases.

One (single) column view?:

As can be seen, the reviewed apps use vastly different approaches. The best approach is, without doubt, that of NetFront for the reasons outlined above. It's closely followed by all native One column-capable browsers: PIE in WM2003SE+, Opera Mobile (particularly now that, with the brand new, 8.65 version, the old bug with the limited horizontal column width has been fixed) and Opera Mini (incidentally, the latter doesn't have other rendering modes at all).

As has been pointed out, it's only with WM2003SE and later WM operating system versions that the built-in PIE supports the One Column mode. In earlier operating system versions, should you really want to have One column rendering and still want to stick with PIE (while, of course, Opera Mobile is far better a choice on WM2003), you will want to take a closer look at PIEPlus, the only PIE plug-in to force the incoming Web content into one column.

Note that you can achieve the same effect with ANY browser using external one-columnizer services like Skweezer, MobileLeap and the like. However, they may result in some problems (for example, because they also get rid of JavaScript code); therefore, you may still want to go for something else.

Rendering mode (does it show the start of the document even when it’s not entirely downloaded?): this test elaborates on how the given browser loads a new document: does it start rendering it only some 2-3 seconds before fully finishing the download (that is, does the user face an empty screen for, say, 90% of the download), or, does it try to render the page as soon as possible?

As can clearly be seen, there are two types of browsers: one set of them (PIE, Opera Mobile) will start rendering the page as soon as possible, while some wait until the download & parsing is almost entirely done (Minimo and the proxy server-based solutions). NetFront is a strange animal because in the normal Full Rendering mode it sometimes delivered very good (starting to render right at the beginning), while, at other times, pretty bad (starting to render only later) results.

Note that NetFront also offers a "Rapid-Render" mode, which guarantees the content will be rendered during page fetching. I can't at all recommend this mode, however, because of the HUGE time overhead, which is particularly an issue in the new, 3.4 version, where the difference in time needed for page fetching can easily be fivefold. Furthermore, the rendered contents you're presented aren't the final ones; they will only be presented later, after a really distracting full screen clear. This may be pretty annoying for the user because he or she may even forget where he/she was and/or will have to scroll around a lot to find it.

Multiple page operation (multitabs) group: in this group, I've elaborated on how the application handles multiple pages; is it, for example, possible to open a link in a background page for background download, and, then, get notified when it's downloaded. All this in order to avoid having to waste time on waiting for the page to be downloaded, which is especially important with slow connections.

Feedback on page loading events (sound effects / bringing to the foreground)?: A decent browser should notify the user when a page has completely been downloaded and rendered in the background. For example, the desktop Opera browser turns the color of the text on the tab where download has ended to blue, which is very easy to notice, even with disabled sounds. In here, I've listed how the tested browsers behave in this respect. Unfortunately, the Windows Mobile version of Opera doesn't do the same trick as the desktop one (and not any sound notification either). This is the case with all the other browsers too. Actually, it's only PIEPlus and MultiIE that lets for configuring what should happen in these cases. Kudos to their developers!

Opening links in…-support, particularly as opening something in a background tab is concerned: in here, I've listed whether it's possible to open a link in a new and, particularly, in a background new tab in order to avoid having to manually switch back to the current one to continue reading it while the requested page is loading in the background.

As can clearly be seen, some browsers don't let for background link opening at all; unfortunately, Opera Mobile, NetFront and Minimo also belong to this group. Actually, it's only the three "real" PIE plug-ins that offer background link opening capabilities.

Max. number of tabs open at a time?: die-hard Web browser users may want to prefer having as many pages open as possible. Most browsers and PIE plug-ins do let the user do so; the most important exception is NetFront, which only lets for opening up to five tabs. This is far from perfect and you'll run into this restriction pretty easily if you often open a link in a new tab.

Something should also be emphasized. The Windows Mobile operating system, as of now (the WindowsCE 5.2-based WM6; it's only the brand new WindowsCE 6 and the forthcoming WM version based on it that (will) have got rid of this restriction), doesn't let for more concurrent processes than 32. Most of the reviewed applications (except for, for example, Opera Mini), however, create a separate process for each tab. This means, depending on the operating system used and the number of other programs you run, in general, you can't have more than 20-28 tabs opened with a browser before these start to be terminated (which, in cases, may result in terminating all the browser processes at once). Again, this restriction doesn't apply to Opera Mini - with it, I had 30 pages opened several times without any problems.

Note that, as both opening new tabs (at least with PIE plug-ins; with non-PIE-based browsers, the memory consumption in these cases isn't at all bad) and rendering Web pages (which is an issue with several Web browsers; most importantly, with PIE) may be memory-intensive operations, it's highly possible you fill up your dynamic RAM program memory much faster than reaching the process limit of the operating system. With the least memory-hungry application, Opera Mobile, I've had no problems in browsing some 27-28 tabs at a time, however - that is, you can make a good use of your dynamic memory very easily.

Tabs constantly on the screen, their taking up screen estate etc. group: while the previous group didn't concentrate on the visual representations of the multiple browser document windows, this one does. In here, I elaborate on whether you can alter the tabs' size (and their taking up valuable screen estate), whether they're displayed in full screen mode, whether you can configure the system to open the new tabs next to the current one, or, strictly at the end of the tab list; whether the tabs have context menus (in this respect, Minimo is clearly the best) and, finally, whether the tabs can easily be closed with, say, only one screen tap.

Misc. group: the tests in this group speak for themselves. Please make sure you consult the screenshots, should you still not get the point what they are all about. I only elaborate on the Access to standard PIE favorites? group, which elaborates on whether the given browser is able to access the PIE favorites for either reading or writing, or both.

As can clearly be seen, while the traditional file system representation of favorites is very simple to handle, only three browsers have support for it: Thunderhawk, Opera Mobile and NetFront; neither Minimo nor Opera Mini have support for them. (The latter is, of course, understandable, taken the restricted “sandbox” midlets are provided, file access-wise.) Furthermore, Opera Mobile isn’t able to create PIE-compliant favorites (not even when you create these favorites explicitly in the Internet Explorer Favorites folder); this means favorites added in Opera Mobile will not be visible to other browsers and you can’t synchronize them back to your desktop computer(s) either.

Note that the WM operating system also stores favorites in the Registry; both NetFront and Opera Mobile were able to read these Registry-based favorites.