<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Engadget has the Blackberry Bold with a quaint 1990&#8242;s era WAP looking browser</title> <atom:link href="http://www.geardiary.com/2008/06/25/engadget-has-the-blackberry-bold-with-a-quaint-1990s-era-wap-looking-browser/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2008/06/25/engadget-has-the-blackberry-bold-with-a-quaint-1990s-era-wap-looking-browser/</link> <description>Everyone can understand technology; sometimes it just takes a little translating.</description> <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 02:34:00 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>By: Wayne Schulz</title><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2008/06/25/engadget-has-the-blackberry-bold-with-a-quaint-1990s-era-wap-looking-browser/#comment-37751</link> <dc:creator>Wayne Schulz</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:29:10 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.geardiary.com/?p=9667#comment-37751</guid> <description>Thanks - I just updated with the Phonescoop link.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks &#8211; I just updated with the Phonescoop link.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Torturous Trevor the Technoholic</title><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2008/06/25/engadget-has-the-blackberry-bold-with-a-quaint-1990s-era-wap-looking-browser/#comment-37750</link> <dc:creator>Torturous Trevor the Technoholic</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:16:56 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.geardiary.com/?p=9667#comment-37750</guid> <description>Wayne, here is the article that Marko was talking about:
http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=200&amp;p=361
Hope that helps</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wayne, here is the article that Marko was talking about:</p><p><a
href="http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=200&#038;p=361" rel="nofollow">http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=200&#038;p=361</a></p><p>Hope that helps</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: RedMist</title><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2008/06/25/engadget-has-the-blackberry-bold-with-a-quaint-1990s-era-wap-looking-browser/#comment-37745</link> <dc:creator>RedMist</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:32:54 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.geardiary.com/?p=9667#comment-37745</guid> <description>Any recently Blackberry has a reasonably good HTML browser built it. (And a WAP browswer)
But you can also download and use Opera if you prefer.  (I do)
There is no reason to think they have abandonded any of this..</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Any recently Blackberry has a reasonably good HTML browser built it. (And a WAP browswer)</p><p>But you can also download and use Opera if you prefer.  (I do)</p><p>There is no reason to think they have abandonded any of this..</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Wayne Schulz</title><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2008/06/25/engadget-has-the-blackberry-bold-with-a-quaint-1990s-era-wap-looking-browser/#comment-37744</link> <dc:creator>Wayne Schulz</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 10:57:36 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.geardiary.com/?p=9667#comment-37744</guid> <description>Do you have a link to the Phonescoop review of the html browser?
I will add in any additional reviews of the browser -- it&#039;s just that so far I have been unable to find any.
The first review out of the gate was Crackberry and their review proclaimed the browser largely unchanged.
Then Engadget posted some pictures from what appeared to be some sort of media event -- none of which seemed to spotlight the browser. Gizmodo followed a few hours later (after I&#039;d gone to bed) with a video that also skipped over giving an in depth review of the browser (though they did give a quick shot of it displaying Gizmodo).
Crunchgear this morning has a bunch of pictures but I couldn&#039;t make out any browser shots.
I&#039;m very interested in posting up anything that contradicts my theory that the browser could be sub-par.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you have a link to the Phonescoop review of the html browser?</p><p>I will add in any additional reviews of the browser &#8212; it&#8217;s just that so far I have been unable to find any.</p><p>The first review out of the gate was Crackberry and their review proclaimed the browser largely unchanged.</p><p>Then Engadget posted some pictures from what appeared to be some sort of media event &#8212; none of which seemed to spotlight the browser. Gizmodo followed a few hours later (after I&#8217;d gone to bed) with a video that also skipped over giving an in depth review of the browser (though they did give a quick shot of it displaying Gizmodo).</p><p>Crunchgear this morning has a bunch of pictures but I couldn&#8217;t make out any browser shots.</p><p>I&#8217;m very interested in posting up anything that contradicts my theory that the browser could be sub-par.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Marko Polo</title><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2008/06/25/engadget-has-the-blackberry-bold-with-a-quaint-1990s-era-wap-looking-browser/#comment-37742</link> <dc:creator>Marko Polo</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 10:47:36 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.geardiary.com/?p=9667#comment-37742</guid> <description>Hey Wayne, you should check out phonescoop. They have pictures of the HTML browser and it looks pretty good rendering the site.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Wayne, you should check out phonescoop. They have pictures of the HTML browser and it looks pretty good rendering the site.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: alee</title><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2008/06/25/engadget-has-the-blackberry-bold-with-a-quaint-1990s-era-wap-looking-browser/#comment-37739</link> <dc:creator>alee</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 04:08:40 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.geardiary.com/?p=9667#comment-37739</guid> <description>Well, they&#039;re looking at Engadget&#039;s mobile optimized site (http://m.engadget.com), which is NOT the same as looking at www.engadget.com.
Let&#039;s keep the misinformation to a minimum out there.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, they&#8217;re looking at Engadget&#8217;s mobile optimized site (<a
href="http://m.engadget.com" rel="nofollow">http://m.engadget.com</a>), which is NOT the same as looking at <a
href="http://www.engadget.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.engadget.com</a>.</p><p>Let&#8217;s keep the misinformation to a minimum out there.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: questionfear</title><link>http://www.geardiary.com/2008/06/25/engadget-has-the-blackberry-bold-with-a-quaint-1990s-era-wap-looking-browser/#comment-37738</link> <dc:creator>questionfear</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 03:01:20 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.geardiary.com/?p=9667#comment-37738</guid> <description>Yikes...that&#039;s not good. Maybe they should get on the phone to Firefox mobile or Opera and start talking licensing.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yikes&#8230;that&#8217;s not good. Maybe they should get on the phone to Firefox mobile or Opera and start talking licensing.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
