Database Info

Internet Browser

Hi,
i just would like to know, what are the big differences between the web browsers (Opera, Opera Mini, Skyfire) ?
I am trying to find the browser that is most suited for my needs. I bet there's a lot of people who are wondering the same. So please, come someone enlighten us (me).

just a general note. you should try all browsers and then see as browser comfort is usually individual.
as of today i'd choose either the latest edition of Opera 9.5 or Skyfire... but for the sake of comparison.
Opera Mini is very fast and stable and is java based.. but doesn't have all the features the new browsers such as Opera 9.5 and Skyfire have.
Opera 9.5 is greatlooking and supports direct flash and has a fine comfortable interface.
Skyfire has a few options for browsing.. such as using a Mouse pointer to move across the page or sweep your finger to move the page. also it has a very comfortable home page which i use constantly with weather reports and google search. it also has a very fast loading time.
one major difference between opera and skyfire is the fact that skyfire supports most languages without having to use special language packs.
Internet Explorer sucks ass.
Netfront is great.. not as fast as the others but is very multilingual and has some new options.. you should look it up in google to see what it offers.

nir36 said:
just a general note. you should try all browsers and then see as browser comfort is usually individual.
as of today i'd choose either the latest edition of Opera 9.5 or Skyfire... but for the sake of comparison.
Opera Mini is very fast and stable and is java based.. but doesn't have all the features the new browsers such as Opera 9.5 and Skyfire have.
Opera 9.5 is greatlooking and supports direct flash and has a fine comfortable interface.
Skyfire has a few options for browsing.. such as using a Mouse pointer to move across the page or sweep your finger to move the page. also it has a very comfortable home page which i use constantly with weather reports and google search. it also has a very fast loading time.
one major difference between opera and skyfire is the fact that skyfire supports most languages without having to use special language packs.
Internet Explorer sucks ass.
Netfront is great.. not as fast as the others but is very multilingual and has some new options.. you should look it up in google to see what it offers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wow, great..thnx for the info
but i got difficulty to download skyfire. it doesnt support for my country phone number

I knew i wasnt the only one that would be helped ! =)
Thanks a lot!
I will try Skyfire, and if i'm not satisfied, i will go for Opera (but i wonder if Opera Mini could be fine).

You also forgot about one VERY important thing - both Opera Mini and Skyfire use server-side processing: the phone sends all information to opera's or skyfire's server, the server downloads the page as a normal browser would, then strips it of unnecessary data, resizes pictures, compresses the page and then sends it to your device.
So everything you browse, and all the data you send, including passwords is not exchanged directly with the target website, but instead goes trough a third party server. Of course all server-device communications are encrypted, but still i don't encourage using these browsers for sensitive data like banking or shopping using your credit card information. This might be a bit paranoid, but considering how internet looks like today, paranoia is a rather healthy thing
Besides, there were already cases where browser used incorrectly made all the encryption useless: when opera (and probably skyfire too) is started for the first time, it generates a random key to encrypt data and identify your device. But when opera is cooked into ROM or made into CAB installer after this key has been generated, the server recognizes every device using this version as the same one. So if person A logs into a email account and then person B (using the same broken opera install with the same key) goes to this email website - he'll see he's already logged in as person A and can see all of his/her e-mails.
Of course this doesn't happen often (actually i know of only one such accident and the faulty opera was quickly removed from ROM) but still - better safe than sorry.
However, the advantage of these browsers is that they're really fast - all the hard work is done on the server so our devices don't need to do any html/css/javascript/etc interpreting and only have to draw the simplified version of website (opera mini) or something like a screenshot of the website (skyfire) sent by the server. And since the data sent to the device is compressed, they both use much less bandwidth than conventional browsers which is important on cellular connections where you usually pay for transmitted data quantity.
On the other hand, Opera Mobile (all versions), NetFront, Pocket Internet Explorer (which really sucks) are _real_ browsers, like the one on your PC - they communicate with websites directly. But they also have to do all the processing and interpreting, not only drawing so they're noticeably slower than Opera Mini and Skyfire. Also, they usually download all website content and transferred data is uncompressed so they use up much more bandwidth.
Generally, i prefer to use Opera Mini for general web browsing, forums, etc. But for sensitive data (shopping, banking, e-mail), or when bandwidth is not a concern (on a wifi connection) i tend to stick with Opera Mobile or NetFront.
Of these two browsers, Opera 9.5 gives a bit nicer and more finger-friendly user interface. But this requires quite a lot of memory and processing power to work smoothly, so it's almost unusable on low memory devices like Wizard.
NetFront has much simpler UI, closer to one seen in pocketIE and while it doesn't look as impressive an Opera's, it works much better on slower and low memory phones. Since they're both in open beta testing stage, it's best to download and try both to see which one you like more.

mr_deimos said:
You also forgot about one VERY important thing - both Opera Mini and Skyfire use server-side processing: the phone sends all information to opera's or skyfire's server, the server downloads the page as a normal browser would, then strips it of unnecessary data, resizes pictures, compresses the page and then sends it to your device.
So everything you browse, and all the data you send, including passwords is not exchanged directly with the target website, but instead goes trough a third party server. Of course all server-device communications are encrypted, but still i don't encourage using these browsers for sensitive data like banking or shopping using your credit card information. This might be a bit paranoid, but considering how internet looks like today, paranoia is a rather healthy thing
Besides, there were already cases where browser used incorrectly made all the encryption useless: when opera (and probably skyfire too) is started for the first time, it generates a random key to encrypt data and identify your device. But when opera is cooked into ROM or made into CAB installer after this key has been generated, the server recognizes every device using this version as the same one. So if person A logs into a email account and then person B (using the same broken opera install with the same key) goes to this email website - he'll see he's already logged in as person A and can see all of his/her e-mails.
Of course this doesn't happen often (actually i know of only one such accident and the faulty opera was quickly removed from ROM) but still - better safe than sorry.
However, the advantage of these browsers is that they're really fast - all the hard work is done on the server so our devices don't need to do any html/css/javascript/etc interpreting and only have to draw the simplified version of website (opera mini) or something like a screenshot of the website (skyfire) sent by the server. And since the data sent to the device is compressed, they both use much less bandwidth than conventional browsers which is important on cellular connections where you usually pay for transmitted data quantity.
On the other hand, Opera Mobile (all versions), NetFront, Pocket Internet Explorer (which really sucks) are _real_ browsers, like the one on your PC - they communicate with websites directly. But they also have to do all the processing and interpreting, not only drawing so they're noticeably slower than Opera Mini and Skyfire. Also, they usually download all website content and transferred data is uncompressed so they use up much more bandwidth.
Generally, i prefer to use Opera Mini for general web browsing, forums, etc. But for sensitive data (shopping, banking, e-mail), or when bandwidth is not a concern (on a wifi connection) i tend to stick with Opera Mobile or NetFront.
Of these two browsers, Opera 9.5 gives a bit nicer and more finger-friendly user interface. But this requires quite a lot of memory and processing power to work smoothly, so it's almost unusable on low memory devices like Wizard.
NetFront has much simpler UI, closer to one seen in pocketIE and while it doesn't look as impressive an Opera's, it works much better on slower and low memory phones. Since they're both in open beta testing stage, it's best to download and try both to see which one you like more.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you're right. my bad.

Incredible. Thanks for the update.
You guys @ XDA need a real THUMBS UP. Thanks for the fast answers, i hope that this will help a couple of users who we're wondering the same thing as I.
=)
That settles it. I'll try Skyfire & Opera Mini and find out wich one i like the most (since i don't use my cell phone for private use (banking & shopping) but more for browsing (forums & other).
YOU GUYS ROCKS!

skyfire vs mach5 browser

mach5 new browser with full flash download it for only ppc better than opera 9.7 download from this site www.netacceler.com

billapannu said:
mach5 new browser with full flash download it for only ppc better than opera 9.7 download from this site www.netacceler.com
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks
Info already posted
Anyway I´m still with Opera 9.7!!!!!!

Some wants me to pay for a browser? Really?
The website says free trial until June 2009.
They really expect us to pay for a subscription?

Yes, we have two types of browser available
Client side (which means your browser on you PPC/HTC does all the work) or Server side (which means a fast computer somewhere does all the work and sends your PPC pictures of what is happening)
Client Side positives
You decide settings
You install all your favourite add-ons (flash etc)
You keep all you log-on settings
The rendering and compatability is what you install/set (also could be a negative if you aren't competent here)
Server Side positives
Your PPC doesn't need to install anything extra (flash etc), as it's all done on server side
All rendering is done by Server side, so it's simply plug n' play!!
And the negatives (which usually make the choice on such small devices as PPC)
Client Side
Usually takes up memory to install all plug-ins required to visit different sited on the web (eg, flash) (i.e, the more you have installed your PPC, the more compatible it will be with more web sites/pages)
Slows the computer, and takes up memory to render the page (everything needs to be downloaded and processed)
Server Side
You're at the hands of the server (is it set up for QVGA/VGA, how does it input text etc)
The fastest it works is by sending you pictures (whereas you may have a dedicated flash player, such as TCPMP etc)
Your log-on settings are kept by the server (someone else)
The rendering is only as good as the server
The server may be in a different locale to you
The connection takes the bottle-neck (i.e, the faster your connection, the better videos will be - you really need a contract/cost limit on your data downloads!)
So as for Skyfire/Mach5 these are both "Server Side". The one advantage of Mach5 over Skyfire is that it renders as VGA. However, as pointed out, it will cost to continue using Mach5. Another disadvantage that Mach5 has is it's locale - as it's not USA/UK based (and if you are), you will find simply going to google is interesting
Opera is Client Side. This means it really can't be compared to Skyfire/Mach5.
However, Opera Mini is Server Side - and I think there's some great advances there.

Skyfire

billapannu said:
mach5 new browser with full flash download it for only ppc better than opera 9.7 download from this site www.netacceler.com
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
interesting.

scarfacedag said:
Skyfire
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whoa, super digging, dug.
Sent from my HTC One S using xda premium

skyfire got really smart, think its now better than opera or others

[Q] No bookmarklet support?

I understand that the browser in Windows Phones is based on IE6/7. However, I was under the belief that both IE6 and 7 supported bookmarklets, so I was a bit surprised by the fact that I couldn't open "javascript:" addresses from IE, nor could I open a bookmarklet that I had, well, bookmarked. What gives? Does anyone know if this was removed as a security issue, or whether it will be fixed in Mango?
I wanted to use the Readable bookmarklet or look for another one that could reverse the color scheme on websites so that all the white on the internet wouldn't kill the SAMOLED screen and my eyes.

Yea... the rendering engine is based on ie6/7 not the entire browser codebase. The code could be there, however, for speed and bandwith purposes, it is probably all locked down. Can u use bookmarklets in IE9? If u can, then there is hope for the future of mango which uses extremely similar bits of code and the rendering engine is identical across phone and desktop/laptop browser.
Hope u can get that all to work out for u

Mango does support bookmarklets - apparently not to the extent that the IE9 desktop browser does, but javascript: "addresses" can executed, either from the address bar or from Favorites.
For example, if you're missing the "Forward" menu item, try Favoriting
javascript:history.forward();
(Works for me, at least)

[Poll] Best Browser with Description!

Stock Browser​
Not much to say about this browser. This browser comes with the phone and is not on the play store.
Dolphin Browser​
PROS
Intuitive interface. Supports LastPass password manager, Evernote, screengrab taker. Syncs to Google bookmarks. Supports voice- or gesture-based navigation.
CONS
No desktop version. Slower than stock Android browser.
BOTTOM LINE
Dolphin Browser 8.8 isn't the fastest Android browser in Google Play, but the latest version retains its Editors' Choice designation for balancing performance with a thoughtful collection of mobile add-ons.
Credits: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2383132,00.asp - More information about Dolphin Browser here.
Opera Web Browser​
PROS
Clean interface. Flash support. Opera Link syncs bookmarks, Speed Dials, search engines. Scrolls "like butter."
CONS
No Add-ons. Separate search, URL fields a cavalier use of mobile real estate.
BOTTOM LINE
Although it cannot be customized to the degree of Dolphin or Firefox, Opera 11 is a svelte mobile browser with full-throated multimedia support.
Credits: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2383239,00.asp - More information about Opera Web Browser here.
Skyfire​
Interface
The interface itself is clean and familiar. The new social buttons seem to load up with slight lag. The twitter social but did not recognize me the second time I loaded it but the facebook remembered me so it might be a cookie issue. Other than that transitions and menus is fluid and everything else just work beautiful and it is just so nice. You will be up and running with this browser in no time if you are coming from different browsers.
Performance
I usually click a lot of links in twitter that takes me to website that take a while to load especially in dolphin browser mini. but Skyfire browser loaded up those usual pages in lightning quick speed. One site in particular that I visit often is Android Central and it usually takes longer with my previous browsers. Skyfire cut that loading time in nearly half. I must also point out that I am using Verizon 4g lte and that is why most sites load faster, your results may vary. Pages also render very quickly thus giving the illusion that everything is just faster.
Functionality
The app functions as a browser should; it takes you to websites the user directs it to. The difference here is that it does it better. I didn’t crunch any numbers to compare load times with other browsers, but it’s exponentially faster based on my experience with the stock Android browser, Dolphin Browser HD, Dolphin Browser Mini, and Mozilla Firefox Web Browser. The app itself is a bit heavy, and feels like all these features slow down the app itself, but not the browsing. Switching tabs, and user agents is pretty slick, and the app does it’s best to make everything quicker by laying out many shortcuts to help you out. I do wish the initial app load time was as quick as Dolphin Browser Mini, but by the time that app loads and then loads a page, it’s just about the same with Skyfire.
Credits: http://androidappreviewdaily.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/skyfire-4-0-4222011/ - More information about Skyfire browser here
Maxthon​
Mention the word "mobile browser," and most people will think that you are going to start talking about the likes of Opera Mini, Opera Mobile, Skyfire or the mobile avatars of Chrome and Firefox, or maybe even some of the very good default browsers installed on some phones and tablets (such as the versions of Safari and Internet Explorer on iOS and Windows Phone devices). But there are other browsers in the mobile world as well and some of them every bit as good and in some regards even better than these worthies. And one of the very best is Maxthon.
Tech veterans will be familiar with Maxthon which started out as a desktop browser and has since also come out with mobile versions for Android devices (both phones and tablets). The browser is available for free download from Google Play. It works with all Android devices running version 1.6 and above and at about 2MB is not the heaviest around. However, it is when you start using the browser that you get an idea of what's so special about it.
Maxthon's interface is on the stark side - the launch screen will show you a row of icons linked to some popular websites, giving you one touch access to them. You can of course add to or subtract from the list, depending on your inclination. In a very neat touch, the browser comes with an App Center that gives you access to shortcuts to a number of popular websites classified according to subject - all you need to do is check the ones you want on your launch screen. You can also simply add sites by just entering their URLs Tabs are arranged neatly at the top of the browser window and the navigation toolbar at the bottom is relatively unpopulated with just forward, back, home, boomark, other options and full screen icons. The app has no ads whatsoever and best of all, browsing seems to be incredibly brisk, especially as compared to some of the other browsers we have seen.
Beneath this relatively interface are lurking a number of very powerful features. There is a download manager, support for gestures (write a 'C' on the screen to close a tab), the ability to sync bookmarks between the desktop version of the browser and its mobile avatar, to select and copy text and images, to share links across social networks, and in a vey neat touch, the option to view a web page as it would be rendered on a desktop, on Android, and even on an iPhone or an iPad. You can customise the look and feel of the browser by using themes and if you are the types that likes messing around with add-ons, there is a fair collection of them as well, including ones that let you take screenshots, read RSS feeds, kill tasks, look at missed calls and so on.
The best part of Maxthon is, however its relatively clean interface and speed. At no stage do you feel overwhelmed or confused by options. In fact, this is the kind of browser that one can simply start using in the most basic manner and then slowly start discovering new features. Its earlier editions were a tad buggy but recent updates have proved to be more solid. It looks simple, packs in lots of features, works incredibly fast, and it costs nothing. If you have an Android device and have not at least tried Maxthon for browsing the Web, you have missed out one of the best mobile browsing experiences you can have. It is the default browser on our Motorola Xoom and Desire HD already.
Credits: http://news.efytimes.com/e1/Daily App Review Maxthon Browser Android/82894 - More information on Maxthon here.
Firefox​
Choice in browsers has been an integral part in the history of computing. Mozilla has been at the heart of the push for choice in browsers from its inception out of Netscape to the introduction of Firefox in 2004. Since 2004, Mozilla has been dedicated to giving users a choice in browsers not only on the desktop, but on mobile.
The latest version of Firefox for Android, available in Google Play today, comes in the midst of heavy competition in browsers for Android with Dolphin HD, Opera Mobile, Opera Mini, and Firefox each having been downloaded more than ten million times. Perhaps even more dauntingly, Google is in the process of making Chrome the default browser in Android. Chrome made headlines in the last six weeks as it surpassed Internet Explorer to become the most used browser internationally on desktops. Mozilla is keenly aware that by developing Firefox for Android they are competing with Google in a way that is much less obvious on the desktop.
Credits: http://www.droid-life.com/2012/06/26/review-firefox-for-android/ - More information on Firefox here.
Chrome​
PROS
Fast. Streamlined interface. Easy navigation. Voice search. Excellent tab implementation. Quickly syncs between all platforms and devices.
CONS
Requires Android 4.0 and higher. No Flash. No plug-ins.
BOTTOM LINE
Chrome first full release on Android is a speed demon of a browser, combining a minimalist interface with advanced HTML 5 support.
Credits: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2406535,00.asp - More information on Chrome here.

Nice information! But chrome does support incognito mode which I assume you mean by safe browsing mode.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda premium

shimp208 said:
Nice information! But chrome does support incognito mode which I assume you mean by safe browsing mode.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure, if you would want to investigate there is credits below and make sure to vote!

google chrome = lag city
my favourite browser speed wise is samsung galaxy s3 browser.
though overall (better tab multi task) stock android browser

boat browser ftw!

Chrome doesn't lag at all in my galaxy s3

Dolphin Browser with Dolphin Engine (beta) is, at least in my opinion, the fastest browser around. Except for maybe Opera Mini, but that one doesn't count . It has all the good things about Dolphin, themes, plugins, gestures etc. Gestures takes some time to get used to, but now that I remember them, I use them a whole lot. I like the interface a lot, the bookmark bar on the left is really useful, though on my old HTC Hero I had to disable it cause I made it expand a whole lot on that tiny screen. Not a problem on my One S. I kind of miss Chrome tab sync, but Chrome to phone is okay. Overall I would say it is by far the best android browser (even the Dolphin browser on Play Store doesn't compare)
Edit: found out the beta is on the market as well: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.dolphin.browser.lab.en

I've been back and forth with chrome and dolphin although a feature I don't like about chrome is once you leave the app and once you open it again your tabs are still open. I usually forget to close which can get annoying but for some people this is a great feature.

Bump .

Bump .

Chrome does great Work.
Cheers.

Chrome's "request desktop version" increasingly ineffective.

I recognize that this issue is really with Chrome and not specific to my Nexus 5, so if this should have been posted elsewhere instead, my apologies in advance.
The problem -
I am finding that increasingly Chrome's "request desktop version" option is unable to get me out of mobile site versions. When the site doesn't have its own mechanism for changing between the two, this glitch can become annoying.
I know that site designers probably have a role in breaking this functionality, but at the same time, it seems to me that all browsers must be able to appear as a desktop if they really want to, because browsers determine what header information / system specs to communicate to the site. So why are there an increasing number of sites where I can't escape the mobile version using this menu item in Chrome?
In the past, I've solved this by using Dolphin, set permanently to desktop mode. However, a couple problems with this work-around exist:
- I've now run into sites that even Dolphin can't force to go desktop version.
- I don't particularly like Dolphin, and it's a pain to switch to it for one-off uses.
Any thoughts?
It seems like a great idea to make a browser whose sole selling point is that it returns the exact system / browser info that a vanilla desktop browser would, and provides no indication to the website that it's a mobile device. There are just so many sites with horrible mobile versions

rhd-android said:
I recognize that this issue is really with Chrome and not specific to my Nexus 5, so if this should have been posted elsewhere instead, my apologies in advance.
The problem -
I am finding that increasingly Chrome's "request desktop version" option is unable to get me out of mobile site versions. When the site doesn't have its own mechanism for changing between the two, this glitch can become annoying.
I know that site designers probably have a role in breaking this functionality, but at the same time, it seems to me that all browsers must be able to appear as a desktop if they really want to, because browsers determine what header information / system specs to communicate to the site. So why are there an increasing number of sites where I can't escape the mobile version using this menu item in Chrome?
In the past, I've solved this by using Dolphin, set permanently to desktop mode. However, a couple problems with this work-around exist:
- I've now run into sites that even Dolphin can't force to go desktop version.
- I don't particularly like Dolphin, and it's a pain to switch to it for one-off uses.
Any thoughts?
It seems like a great idea to make a browser whose sole selling point is that it returns the exact system / browser info that a vanilla desktop browser would, and provides no indication to the website that it's a mobile device. There are just so many sites with horrible mobile versions
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From my experience, this is because sites are basing which site to display on the resolution of the device rather than the user agent. In the case of the N5, whether you have Desktop mode or Phone mode enabled, you're still reporting a 1080x1920 resolution (note the order). No desktop computer will have a screen width of 1080px (desktop monitor in portrait notwithstanding) thus it concludes you're on a 1080p mobile, therefore mobile website for you!
it is utterly infuriating and I share your pain...

Is there a site we can test that on? Flip to landscape...
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

rootSU said:
Is there a site we can test that on? Flip to landscape...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Engadget is an example, and flipping to landscape doesn't solve it.
So it must be detecting something other than screen resolution and user agent.

rhd-android said:
Engadget is an example, and flipping to landscape doesn't solve it.
So it must be detecting something other than screen resolution and user agent.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
probably detecting the OS and forcing it that way.

rhd-android said:
Engadget is an example, and flipping to landscape doesn't solve it.
So it must be detecting something other than screen resolution and user agent.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I found engadget and npr.org in another thread and landscape didn't fix it. Maybe as @Zepius says
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

rootSU said:
Yeah I found engadget and npr.org in another thread and landscape didn't fix it. Maybe as @Zepius says
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
looking at engadget's source, they use the service optimizely. which looks to be a website optimizer for mobile. i bet it checks the OS to determine how to display the webpage.

Zepius said:
looking at engadget's source, they use the service optimizely. which looks to be a website optimizer for mobile. i bet it checks the OS to determine how to display the webpage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe this is a silly question, but why can't the browser lie about that too?

rhd-android said:
Maybe this is a silly question, but why can't the browser lie about that too?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
because its querying the system every time there is a request for the OS.

Zepius said:
because its querying the system every time there is a request for the OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, I should have phrased that differently, my response wasn't very clear -
If Chrome actually wanted to "request desktop version" feature to works, wouldn't they want to tell websites that the OS was Windows? In other words, if "request desktop version" spoofs in a user agent from a desktop browser, why wouldn't that feature also spoof the OS when asked by the website?

rhd-android said:
Sorry, I should have phrased that differently, my response wasn't very clear -
If Chrome actually wanted to "request desktop version" feature to works, wouldn't they want to tell websites that the OS was Windows? In other words, if "request desktop version" spoofs in a user agent from a desktop browser, why wouldn't that feature also spoof the OS when asked by the website?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
because thats not the way the app is coded. the websites are hard coded to ignore user agents (i believe) and to go based on the OS to tell if its mobile or desktop. you would need a browser or a mod to fake the OS name/version.

Well. In reality, websites can't really determine that you're using Android as chrome removes this information when you're using the "desktop version" checkbox. Here's an exemple of the useragent sent by chrome with/out the checkbox :
Without the "show desktop version" : Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.4.2; Nexus 5 Build/KOT49H) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/35.0.1916.117 Mobile Safari/537.36
With the "show desktop version" : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/35.0.1916.117 Safari/537.36
On a real chrome desktop (windows) : Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/35.0.1916.114 Safari/537.36
So, there's not really any information (just the Windows NT 6.1) that could say to the website is they need to show a mobile version of their website.
Maybe the website is coded to adjust itselft automaticaly to the screen resolution (responsive design) or, maybe they just put a cookie when you go on the website without the "show desktop version" and, when you enable it, cookie is still present, and they continue to display the mobile version ? (So, try to clean cookies, etc, before checking the box )

Charlus97 said:
Well. In reality, websites can't really determine that you're using Android as chrome removes this information when you're using the "desktop version" checkbox. Here's an exemple of the useragent sent by chrome with/out the checkbox :
Without the "show desktop version" : Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.4.2; Nexus 5 Build/KOT49H) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/35.0.1916.117 Mobile Safari/537.36
With the "show desktop version" : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/35.0.1916.117 Safari/537.36
On a real chrome desktop (windows) : Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/35.0.1916.114 Safari/537.36
So, there's not really any information (just the Windows NT 6.1) that could say to the website is they need to show a mobile version of their website.
Maybe the website is coded to adjust itselft automaticaly to the screen resolution (responsive design) or, maybe they just put a cookie when you go on the website without the "show desktop version" and, when you enable it, cookie is still present, and they continue to display the mobile version ? (So, try to clean cookies, etc, before checking the box )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I cleared cookies - that didn't help.
In fact, I also just tried an app:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.appo2.ua
It launches an instance of Chrome with the user-agent already changed (no clicking "request desktop version" required). I launched an instance as IE 10. I went to a user agent site to confirm that the UA was changed (in fact, I already felt pretty confident because the google search results were full desktop size/scale). UA was confirmed. Cleared all cookies, cache. Set my phone to landscape. Visited engadged by typing the ULR fresh (not a bookmark or anything). Boom, still goes to the mobile version
Doing some googling, I ran into some techniques for detecting mobile browsers. I'm betting that Engadget (and others where this occurs are using a CSS based technique similar to #5 or #6 here:
http://designm.ag/resources/8-techniques-for-mobile-retina-devices-detection/

rhd-android said:
I cleared cookies - that didn't help.
In fact, I also just tried an app:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.appo2.ua
It launches an instance of Chrome with the user-agent already changed (no clicking "request desktop version" required). I launched an instance as IE 10. I went to a user agent site to confirm that the UA was changed (in fact, I already felt pretty confident because the google search results were full desktop size/scale). UA was confirmed. Cleared all cookies, cache. Set my phone to landscape. Visited engadged by typing the ULR fresh (not a bookmark or anything). Boom, still goes to the mobile version
Doing some googling, I ran into some techniques for detecting mobile browsers. I'm betting that Engadget (and others where this occurs are using a CSS based technique similar to #5 or #6 here:
http://designm.ag/resources/8-techniques-for-mobile-retina-devices-detection/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hm.. What's the exact URL of the mobile version of the site you're redirected to ?

Charlus97 said:
Hm.. What's the exact URL of the mobile version of the site you're redirected to ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The URL just stays at the engaget root URL (www.engadget.com).
I've observed something interesting though. When I visit this site in Chrome on Android:
http://www.whatismybrowser.com/
... it actually lists a very low screen resolution (376 x 557)
On that basis, I can see why sites (engadget, etc) show the mobile version. The question is why Chrome would report a lower screen resolution.

rhd-android said:
The URL just stays at the engaget root URL (www.engadget.com).
I've observed something interesting though. When I visit this site in Chrome on Android:
http://www.whatismybrowser.com/
... it actually lists a very low screen resolution (376 x 557)
On that basis, I can see why sites (engadget, etc) show the mobile version. The question is why Chrome would report a lower screen resolution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, chrome doesn't seems to send the information itself. Maybe a JS script detect it. 'Gonna check that
---------- Post added at 09:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:14 PM ----------
Yep, whatismybrowser.com detects screen size with a bit of JS
Not sure that we can change it even on a real desktop browser..
---------- Post added at 09:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:17 PM ----------
So, of course, engadget.com too.
It detects screen resolution changes and adapt his style to the resolution. You can check it easily pen the page on a real desktop browser and resize the windows of the browser : same style as mobile version.
And there's nothing we can do about that :/

can't even do a *about:debug* in the addy bar anymore..
when pressing go, chrome hits the web, with the addy bar reading chrome://debug/ -

check this out -
Brandon Arnold 4 months ago
With mobile first design you don’t need a site switcher, because it’s the same site. There’s nothing on the desktop layout that you don’t see on your mobile, but its better formatted for its screen. The Chrome option you're mentioning is a legacy thing, thats taking actual mobile sites (non-responsive) and requesting to remove the M-dot from the domain. This is necessary because most mobile sites offered a limited amount of content that differed from the desktop. Even the Google Chrome Responsive website, when viewed in the chrome mobile browser has that option to switch grayed out.
With that said, you can try some javascript solutions that change the viewport, like this one*
http://https://github.com/chrismorata/Responsive-View-Full-Site
*Note: This has not been tested with F5
in response to:
I know it's been asked before in the forum but he thread is closed so I can't add anything. I'm aware of Foundation's mobile first principle but it's not mobile ONLY.
Is there an elegant way to give people an option to view a desktop version?
Both Android's default browser and Google Chrome mobile has options in the menu so I don't think it's a minor feature.
...it stalemates there, with an added;
Thanks for your replies. I'll checkout the javascript solution posted above.
It's just that some users really prefer seeing what they're used to on a desktop. I know it's the same content but the truth is some visitors just want to see what they're used to.
.. looks like for now, android chrome has gotten a gnome d.e. thingy effect..