

Silk, iPad, Galaxy comparison - ck2
http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2011/12/01/silk-ipad-galaxy-comparison/

======
ck2
I really dislike the arbitrary title edits on HN.

There was nothing wrong with mine, it was a summary that was far more
comprehensive than the 4 words that replaced it.

~~~
matthavener
In the interest of community justice, what was your original title?

------
ck2
Relevant chart here:

<http://loadtimer.org/results.php?data=all>

------
laconian
I think it's odd that the author chooses to leave accleration on, despite
having just proven that it's detrimental. That, and the fact that you're
proxying all of your browsing traffic through a third party, seems like it's
all cons and no pros. If I was him, I'd keep it off until there was more of a
balance between pros and cons (though the potentially privacy issues alone
would probably be nigh-impossible to overcome.)

~~~
r00fus
Why is this confusing? I've seen numerous iPad vs. Android browser
comparisons, but yet to see an in-depth Silk test (other than the many
reviewers who said it was slower).

Silk (and whether it lives up to it's billing) is the most interesting part.

~~~
laconian
Did you read the article? In it he benchmarks Silk (accel) vs. Silk (no
accel). He's proven to himself that the acceleration system doesn't work,
using his own testing methodology, which, given that he produced the results,
he should be biased into believing.

Nothing is keeping him from turning it on later in the future, when it's
objectively proven to be faster. But he keeps it on now, basically because of
his optimism in Amazon.

------
joejohnson
Can anyone explain the "acceleration"? I don't understand why a browser would
have this option... when would you choose to not use it? Why does amazon give
users a choice, if it's supposed to be better (which apparently it's not)?

~~~
underwater
All traffic is proxied through Amazon's servers. This means that
hypothetically they can read you unencrypted HTTP session. Hence the toggle.

------
freehunter
>the browser cache was cleared between tests

How is that "real world"?* Not to mention, Silk was designed to speed up as
you use it, learning your browsing habits and caching many assets. Using it
directly from the box with caching turned off defeats the purpose.

* Ah, I see, the headline was edited before I clicked "submit" on my comment. Point still stands, nearly every one of these artificial benchmarks proves nothing of any real use.

~~~
ck2
It's realworld in the sense he used some of the most popular sites, not some
kind of laboratory test with local network.

Caching turned off is for cold-cache test. Storage is relatively small on
tablets and it's very plausible to get a cold cache first pageload.

Steve is pretty good at these kinds of tests.

~~~
freehunter
Problem is, Silk isn't marketed as just another browser. To see its effects,
you have to use it like Amazon intended for it to be used. You don't
disconnect the batteries from a Prius then say it's less efficient than a
standard car just for the sake of being "fair".

