Skip to main content

RIM says PlayBook Web browsing beats iPad

Image used with permission by copyright holder

RIM’s PlayBook isn’t available yet—and isn’t due to be reaching consumers until early next year, but Research in Motion is wasting no time in letting potential customers know they think they’ll be shipping an iPad-killer. First the company floats the notion that the PlayBook will be priced lower than Apple’s current entry-level iPad, and now they’re saying the PlayBook will significantly outperform the iPad for Web browsing—and the PlayBook supports Adobe Flash too.

Recommended Videos

In an online video, the company rolls a pre-release PlayBook and an iPad running iOS 3.2.2 through a series of comparison tests over a high-speed Wi-Fi network, including loading IFA.com, the Flash-intensive CBS.com, the Acid3 rendering test, and a Javascript performance test. In each instance, the PlayBook appears to trounce the iPad. The CBS.com site in particular fares better in the PlayBook—no doubt it was chosen in part because it is so dependent on Flash technology.

Although the PlayBook’s display is both physically smaller and lower resolution than the iPad’s (1,024 by 600 pixels for the PlayBook, versus 1,024 by 768 for the iPad), the PlayBook sports a 1 GHZ dual core processor, where the iPad runs on a single core 1 GHz processor. Ironically, both the iPad’s Safari browser and the PlayBook’s browser are based on WebKit, the open source Web rendering engine developed by Apple, originally from KHTML. The PlayBook is based on an operating system from QNX, rather than something home-grown by RIM, and is built entirely using Adobe’s Flash and Air technologies.

Geoff Duncan
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Geoff Duncan writes, programs, edits, plays music, and delights in making software misbehave. He's probably the only member…
iPad Air (2025) vs. iPad Air (2022): is it time to upgrade?
iPad Air (2025) vs. iPad Air (2022).

Looking for a great new iPad? The iPad Air (2025) is available now, and while it strongly resembles the iPad Air (2024), a more pertinent question for many is how well it compares to the iPad Air (2022). After all, most people who bought a new iPad Air last year won't be looking to upgrade for a while yet. But those who bought an iPad Air three years ago? Apple's changes and new features are likely looking rather tempting.

How do the two tablets compare to each other? Where does the newer tablet exceed the older, and where might age not make such a difference? We took a look at the two tablets so you know whether it's worth upgrading from the old to the new, or not.
iPad Air (2025) vs iPad Air (2022): specs

Read more
Apple iPad (2025) vs iPad (2022): a little can change in three years
Apple iPad 2025 vs iPad 2022.

After a nearly three-year wait, Apple unveiled its latest entry-level iPad this week, boasting a faster A16 chip and the same great $349 starting price that its predecessor ended up at.

The new iPad wasn’t all sunshine and roses, though. We were surprised not only by how little has changed in Apple’s latest budget tablet but also by the fact that it’s the first device released since late 2023 that lacks support for Apple Intelligence, the suite of AI features the company has been touting lately.

Read more
No, Apple’s latest iPads don’t use the newest modem — but that’s okay
M3 iPad Air 2025

Apple revealed its custom C1 modem less than a month ago with the iPhone 16e, calling it the "most power-efficient modem ever on an iPhone." It helps the 16e achieve the longest battery life of any 6.1-inch iPhone -- but the new iPads Apple announced this week will not see these benefits.

After seeing suspicious specs on the new iPads, John Gruber says he spoke to an Apple representative and confirmed that they do not use the C1. This isn't a complete surprise -- Bloomberg's Mark Gurman said in December that Apple is planning a "three-year rollout" with these modems, which means not every product will make the switch right away. Gurman did, however, believe that "lower-end" iPads in 2025 would use the C1, and it appears he was mistaken.

Read more