Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple building it's own browser!
- Thread starter Quark
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I wonder if he means 'Beta testers of a new version of AOLs (AAPL: news, chart, profile) internet access application have been told it sports an integrated browser using technology developed by AOL's Netscape Communications' rather than 'Beta testers of a new version of Apple Computer's (AAPL: news, chart, profile) latest operating system have been told it sports an integrated browser using technology developed by AOL's Netscape Communications,'
I hope Apple is making an HTML browser, they already have kind of one, try dropping an HTML document onto 'Help' application.
Ensign
I hope Apple is making an HTML browser, they already have kind of one, try dropping an HTML document onto 'Help' application.
Ensign
very interesting. it says mac version which is what maybe creates a little bit of speculation about what it could be. might be related to the chimera during the presentation issue.
we'll see what comes of it though. perhaps nothing big.
we'll see what comes of it though. perhaps nothing big.
that's awesome!! 
it only makes sense that they are doing this...with all the iApps...
but how is this going to affect their relationship with Microsoft?!
it only makes sense that they are doing this...with all the iApps...
but how is this going to affect their relationship with Microsoft?!
Here is a 'in development' version of the YMUG (http://www.ymug.org/index.html) loaded in the Help app:
Attachments
Makes Sense to Me
This makes perfect sense. Apple and AOL make the following deal:
1. Apple agrees to dump IE (as default) and use a Gecko-based browser.
2. AOL agrees to allow Apple's iChat client to have access to the AIM network.
It's a win-win deal (if it happened).
This makes perfect sense. Apple and AOL make the following deal:
1. Apple agrees to dump IE (as default) and use a Gecko-based browser.
2. AOL agrees to allow Apple's iChat client to have access to the AIM network.
It's a win-win deal (if it happened).
This migh clear things up:
MacNN says it's just AOL, not Apple including the browser.
Politically, I don't think Apple can drop IE...yet.
MacNN says it's just AOL, not Apple including the browser.
Politically, I don't think Apple can drop IE...yet.
Doesn't anyone remember the specs on Sherlock3 coming out with jaguar? Its going to have html capabilities! I bet that's what they're going to do, make Sherlock the one stop app for all file related functions, including html browsing, searching, etc. Its a logical step and I remember pointing it out before, but no one seems to have taken it to the same conclusion.
I agree. This could have some very interesting possibilites for Apple. I personally would like to see them dumb IE all together. If sun Office can open, and edit files from word, Excel, etc, then why not an Apple Works pro? That would do away with the hammer hanging over our heads don't you thing? The AOL thing is their bowser, not Apples.
Isn't aligning with AOL...
Isn't aligning with AOL for anything akin to making a deal with Satan as opposed to making a deal with the devil. (microsoft) Seriously...what do you do when in 2 years you have your chat app running throughout all aspects of the OS...opening all kinds of new collaboration and workflow...and then they decide to cut you off...
Don't you think that this is a real issue...in a world plagued with "Compuserve plans to sue for use of Gif format" and "Adobe and Macromedia become sue ahppy over palletes"???
I am looking forward to finally having file sharing on the Mac...no doubt, but at what price?
Standing out in front of the AOL Time Warner building in NYC...is akin to having a picnic lunch on the surface of the Death Star's beam array. I find them just as disconcerting as Microsoft...how can they justify selling a product that they know perfectly well is a POS.
Isn't aligning with AOL for anything akin to making a deal with Satan as opposed to making a deal with the devil. (microsoft) Seriously...what do you do when in 2 years you have your chat app running throughout all aspects of the OS...opening all kinds of new collaboration and workflow...and then they decide to cut you off...
Don't you think that this is a real issue...in a world plagued with "Compuserve plans to sue for use of Gif format" and "Adobe and Macromedia become sue ahppy over palletes"???
I am looking forward to finally having file sharing on the Mac...no doubt, but at what price?
Standing out in front of the AOL Time Warner building in NYC...is akin to having a picnic lunch on the surface of the Death Star's beam array. I find them just as disconcerting as Microsoft...how can they justify selling a product that they know perfectly well is a POS.
Someone's got to do something with Mozilla
Why don't apple just use Mozilla and speed it up ?
It's got a slow as hell page renderer compared with Internet Explorer but it seems less prone to bugs.
Can you imagine if apple optimised the code and added Altivec support to javascript, We'd actually have a fast browser on the mac with no annoying bugs and no "close the top window and lose you're history" like you get with netscape.
I'm sick of web browsers on the mac all being one compromise or another, I just want a fast, efficent, 100% W3C compliant browser that works perfectly with all the standards, iFrames, DOM 2 etc... Then we won't have to sit there and write annoying work arounds for all those browsers that don't quite cut it. (Opera, Netscape 4, iCab and all the work in progress or basically old hat browsers).
It's not just the speed of displaying a page that matters, it's memory efficiency, W3C standards, stability, error handling, even the browser cache is a problem on some browsers. I don't want a folder full of ads on my hard drive after I've been online, I also don't want a browser like internet explorer where you only need to use the back arrow and it ignores the cache entirely and starts trying to reload all the images. Why do so many browsers slow down to a crawl when I'm loading a page with 50K or more of html ? I only need to go to a long thread on this site and internet explorer slows down to about 4K/s or less and that's on a cablemodem!
It's clear there's a lot of self interest with regard to browser market share and more concern with browser GUI features than actually efficient and fast browsing, I think if Apple started working on their own mozilla based browser it would be one of the best iName products they've ever made.
Why don't apple just use Mozilla and speed it up ?
It's got a slow as hell page renderer compared with Internet Explorer but it seems less prone to bugs.
Can you imagine if apple optimised the code and added Altivec support to javascript, We'd actually have a fast browser on the mac with no annoying bugs and no "close the top window and lose you're history" like you get with netscape.
I'm sick of web browsers on the mac all being one compromise or another, I just want a fast, efficent, 100% W3C compliant browser that works perfectly with all the standards, iFrames, DOM 2 etc... Then we won't have to sit there and write annoying work arounds for all those browsers that don't quite cut it. (Opera, Netscape 4, iCab and all the work in progress or basically old hat browsers).
It's not just the speed of displaying a page that matters, it's memory efficiency, W3C standards, stability, error handling, even the browser cache is a problem on some browsers. I don't want a folder full of ads on my hard drive after I've been online, I also don't want a browser like internet explorer where you only need to use the back arrow and it ignores the cache entirely and starts trying to reload all the images. Why do so many browsers slow down to a crawl when I'm loading a page with 50K or more of html ? I only need to go to a long thread on this site and internet explorer slows down to about 4K/s or less and that's on a cablemodem!
It's clear there's a lot of self interest with regard to browser market share and more concern with browser GUI features than actually efficient and fast browsing, I think if Apple started working on their own mozilla based browser it would be one of the best iName products they've ever made.
I am running Mozilla RC 2 right now, and although I have seen a few problems, it seems to work faster than Netscape and probably a little faster than Internet Explorer, although I hardly ever use it.
I think that the theme for an Apple web browser to be integrated into Sherlock may be alright, but I would rather see an iApp of some sort, as many have previously mentioned.
And, yes, this web browser competition is getting a little out of hand. Mozilla even takes too long to load with a G4. I would expect Apple to create a G4 operative web browser.
__________________
Any time is a great time for iPod.
I think that the theme for an Apple web browser to be integrated into Sherlock may be alright, but I would rather see an iApp of some sort, as many have previously mentioned.
And, yes, this web browser competition is getting a little out of hand. Mozilla even takes too long to load with a G4. I would expect Apple to create a G4 operative web browser.
__________________
Any time is a great time for iPod.
Here's my $0.02 USD (now $0.04 AUD thanks to brilliant economic management :
Apple would need a major reason to put an iBrowser out there. If they did - MS would probably drop office and then we'd be relying on OOorg or AW... Apple only puts iApps out there to improve the user experience and while the user experience in IE, granted isn't great, it's certaintly not worth, at least at this stage, to piss of Microsoft. Without IE and Office, the platform is most certaintly NOT dead, but it will still be hard for sales people to convince PC users to get a mac when there's absolutely no m$ products at all (especially office). Also, note that at the iChat announcement, SJ said "We'd prefer to use a open standards client [such as Jabber], but we have to [pick AIM and] go for the large user base"... So, reading between the lines, _if_ apple released a browser, it probably wouldn't be AOL, more likely Mozilla. I'd be extremely pissed off if apple is deciding to jump out of bed with one devil and get into another devil's pants instead... Just because ms is winning against aol (in browsers at least) doesn't mean that aol isn't just as satanical as they were before. Now for Sherlock 3... Sherlock 3 is a much needed upgrade to Sherlock 2... Sherlock 2 for OS X sucks @$$ . It's slow and it freaks me out everytime i see that icon for "people search" -- look at that woman and tell me she doesn't scare the bejesus out of you... I also think apple's had its eye on Watson for a while now -- I even remember Phillip Schiller saying "One of the best third-party programs from small developers we've seen is watson. it's just fantastic" in an OS X video quite a while ago. The watson features in sherlock 3 will be great and having fast find back makes finding files on your hard disk a hell of a lot easier. IMHO, that's all apple should do in Sherlock 3 -- and intergrating a web browser into sherlock would be a stupid decision... So in the meantime, I think we're stuck with IE and I hope Apple stays in bed with them until the Open Source community has something which really competes (i'm talking about office here)... Apple shouldn't ally itself with AOL -- it's not healthy.
:Apple would need a major reason to put an iBrowser out there. If they did - MS would probably drop office and then we'd be relying on OOorg or AW... Apple only puts iApps out there to improve the user experience and while the user experience in IE, granted isn't great, it's certaintly not worth, at least at this stage, to piss of Microsoft. Without IE and Office, the platform is most certaintly NOT dead, but it will still be hard for sales people to convince PC users to get a mac when there's absolutely no m$ products at all (especially office). Also, note that at the iChat announcement, SJ said "We'd prefer to use a open standards client [such as Jabber], but we have to [pick AIM and] go for the large user base"... So, reading between the lines, _if_ apple released a browser, it probably wouldn't be AOL, more likely Mozilla. I'd be extremely pissed off if apple is deciding to jump out of bed with one devil and get into another devil's pants instead... Just because ms is winning against aol (in browsers at least) doesn't mean that aol isn't just as satanical as they were before. Now for Sherlock 3... Sherlock 3 is a much needed upgrade to Sherlock 2... Sherlock 2 for OS X sucks @$$ . It's slow and it freaks me out everytime i see that icon for "people search" -- look at that woman and tell me she doesn't scare the bejesus out of you... I also think apple's had its eye on Watson for a while now -- I even remember Phillip Schiller saying "One of the best third-party programs from small developers we've seen is watson. it's just fantastic" in an OS X video quite a while ago. The watson features in sherlock 3 will be great and having fast find back makes finding files on your hard disk a hell of a lot easier. IMHO, that's all apple should do in Sherlock 3 -- and intergrating a web browser into sherlock would be a stupid decision... So in the meantime, I think we're stuck with IE and I hope Apple stays in bed with them until the Open Source community has something which really competes (i'm talking about office here)... Apple shouldn't ally itself with AOL -- it's not healthy.
We're not stuck with IE.
Try Mozilla RC2. Once you get used to it, theres no way in hell you'd go back to IE. And dont say its slow, everything renders twice as fast as Internet Explorer even on a G3 (granted opening the application and new windows take a little while. But u only open the app once, and after the first window is up, all u need to do is add more tabs.). I havent touched IE in 3 weeks now.
Try Mozilla RC2. Once you get used to it, theres no way in hell you'd go back to IE. And dont say its slow, everything renders twice as fast as Internet Explorer even on a G3 (granted opening the application and new windows take a little while. But u only open the app once, and after the first window is up, all u need to do is add more tabs.). I havent touched IE in 3 weeks now.
Agreed, Biggles. He!!, I am even using dial-up and Mozilla runs much faster. I switched from Netscape recently (and did not switch from IE since I basically never use it) and Mozilla is just plain faster. Now I just need to convert my father, who used to use Netscape 6.2, but then switched to IE. What a shame.
As for what j763 said about having Apple keeping some PC products to convert PC users, then that kind of does defeat the purpose of having another browser on the Mac. What sense would it make to have two browsers on your computer? That is just like saying two word processing applications, two mp3 players, two Quicktimes.
But I would really like to see what Apple comes out with anyways, if anything.
__________________
Any time is a great time for iPod.
As for what j763 said about having Apple keeping some PC products to convert PC users, then that kind of does defeat the purpose of having another browser on the Mac. What sense would it make to have two browsers on your computer? That is just like saying two word processing applications, two mp3 players, two Quicktimes.
But I would really like to see what Apple comes out with anyways, if anything.
__________________
Any time is a great time for iPod.
The browser was called Cyberdog, which was based on OpenDoc, which was similar to Java I think, but it flopped, and brought Cyberdog with it. Apparently, Cybedog was a very good browser for it's time.
OpenDoc
Here is Apple's description:
Cyberdog was a browser and e-mail client. Saying it was "good for its time" will piss off some of the true believers around here, especially since you haven't had the opportunity to try it. Some still swear it is better than anything else out there, but it can't render everything on the web now since its development stopped years ago.
Here is a good link for information about OpenDoc.
Chris
Right about the browser name, Sluthy, and about it being "based on" OpenDoc. However, OpenDoc bore no resemblance to Java whatsoever. It was a development platform that was, in many ways, absolutely brilliant. It probably failed for capitalistic reasons.
Here is Apple's description:
In OpenDoc, developers wrote "parts". These parts could be combined to create applications. It probably failed because, it created turf issues. Combining, for example, my word processor part with your 3-D rendering part was possible, but who got the royalties? In retrospect, it is both silly and understandable why this would have created problems.
Cyberdog was a browser and e-mail client. Saying it was "good for its time" will piss off some of the true believers around here, especially since you haven't had the opportunity to try it. Some still swear it is better than anything else out there, but it can't render everything on the web now since its development stopped years ago.
Here is a good link for information about OpenDoc.
Chris
Re: Mozilla
Mozilla replaced IE on my mac. I am running RC3 and it's fast. It takes a bit longer to start up but it faster than IE at rendering pages.
Mozilla has all the features of IE and you gotta love tabbed browsing.
I think until Chimera becomes version 1 I will use Mozilla.
One feature that I wish Mozilla had that IE has is that after you close all the windows if you click on the icon in the dock, IE will launch a new window, mozilla doesn't. I know that this is a small feature but I wish Mozilla had it.
Mozilla replaced IE on my mac. I am running RC3 and it's fast. It takes a bit longer to start up but it faster than IE at rendering pages.
Mozilla has all the features of IE and you gotta love tabbed browsing.
I think until Chimera becomes version 1 I will use Mozilla.
One feature that I wish Mozilla had that IE has is that after you close all the windows if you click on the icon in the dock, IE will launch a new window, mozilla doesn't. I know that this is a small feature but I wish Mozilla had it.