Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Could Apple switch to Chrome as their default browser?

E

EssentialParado

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 17, 2005
1,162
48
I've observed that since its launch, Google's Chrome browser seems have quickly reached Safari's overall quality and become equal, if not possibly even better, than Safari.

So it's made me think… could Apple simplify things by making a deal with Google to simply adopt Chrome as their default browser on Macs and iDevices?

The browsers are equal at their core - both running on the engine Apple essentially brought into being (Webkit.) And Apple could work with Google to implement their custom features (Top sites, cover flow) into Chrome.

But ultimately it seems to me it's a bit of a wasted resource to have both companies developing what are almost identical products. And it seems that Google treat their browser as more of a priority — so would it be better to just leave the browser side of things to Google?
 
EssentialParado said:
I've observed that since its launch, Google's Chrome browser seems have quickly reached Safari's overall quality and become equal, if not possibly even better, than Safari.

So it's made me think… could Apple simplify things by making a deal with Google to simply adopt Chrome as their default browser on Macs and iDevices?

The browsers are equal at their core - both running on the engine Apple essentially brought into being (Webkit.) And Apple could work with Google to implement their custom features (Top sites, cover flow) into Chrome.

But ultimately it seems to me it's a bit of a wasted resource to have both companies developing what are almost identical products. And it seems that Google treat their browser as more of a priority — so would it be better to just leave the browser side of things to Google?
Click to expand...

Why Chrome? Why not Firefox?
 
JNB said:
Not. A. Chance. In. Hell.
Click to expand...

Fixed that for ya!

Woof, Woof - Dawg
pawprint.gif
 
EssentialParado said:
The browsers are equal at their core - both running on the engine Apple essentially brought into being (Webkit.)

But ultimately it seems to me it's a bit of a wasted resource to have both companies developing what are almost identical products. And it seems that Google treat their browser as more of a priority — so would it be better to just leave the browser side of things to Google?
Click to expand...

you must be joking, apple didn't brought a browser engine into being, webkit is a fork of KHTML, which was a full featured browser at the time already.

and chrome and safari aren't identical, they are using different js engines.

and finally, your question, sure, I wouldn't mind, would apple?
 
MacDawg said:
There are tons of reasons why and most are obvious
Click to expand...
Try them.

Is it because Apple want full control to do every single little bit of their software? Because they use tons of open source software software and applications within OS X.

It it because Apple and Google are "at war"? I don't quite believe that… Maybe in the mobile phone arena, but they still collaborate in a lot of other ways (Google as default search engine, Google maps, Eric Schmidt being formerly on their board of directors…)

Maybe it's very unlikely to happen, but I'm not asking if it's "possible", I'm asking you guys think it would be a good idea for Apple to do it; wouldn't it be beneficial to them, and wouldn't it be beneficial to users?

clevin said:
you must be joking, apple didn't brought a browser engine into being, webkit is a fork of KHTML, which was a full featured browser at the time already.
Click to expand...
WebKit was originally derived by Apple Inc.
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webkit#History​

clevin said:
and chrome and safari aren't identical, they are using different js engines.
Click to expand...
That doesn't really matter to the user though. I'm saying they're close to identical in terms of features and aims (really quick and efficient full HTML 5 browser.)
 
EssentialParado said:
Click to expand...
your point? do you want to deny that webkit is a fork of KHTML? which means majority of codes were there already, apple just took it over, developed upon it, and give it a new name.

If your intention is to say apple developed a browser engine from scratch all by themselves, they its completely wrong.
That doesn't really matter to the user though. I'm saying they're close to identical in terms of features and aims (really quick and efficient full HTML 5 browser.)
Click to expand...

lol, no, you are over simplify the situation.

whats famous for chrome? multi-threads and V8.

whats not famous for chrome and safari? efficient, memory hogs are the names for them.

do they support every items in HTML5? no, they only support 87% of them, which is good, but obviously not "full".

and ask users, do they feel chrome and safari are mostly identical? I doubt it.
 
What possible motivation would Apple have to take a nearly 10 year old mature browser that 1) they've spent a significant amount of money on and 2) is very much integrated into their products (i.e. iPhone, iPad, iTunes) and just throw that away in favor of a competitor's brand new product?

No, it's not a good idea for Apple. No, it won't happen.
 
clevin said:
your point? do you want to deny that webkit is a fork of KHTML? which means majority of codes were there already, apple just took it over, developed upon it, and give it a new name.
Click to expand...
Surely that's no different than arguing that Apple didn't create OS X because it's just based off a fork of Unix?

SwiftLives said:
What possible motivation would Apple have to take a nearly 10 year old mature browser that 1) they've spent a significant amount of money on and 2) is very much integrated into their products (i.e. iPhone, iPad, iTunes) and just throw that away in favor of a competitor's brand new product?
Click to expand...
Well my reasoning was: Both companies are fundamentally trying to achieve the same thing, but both are spending money developing very similar products. Usually in a marketplace this wouldn't be unusual, but both their browsers are free and non-profit.

What incentive is there for Apple to spend money in this area if Google are already doing what Apple wants, but better, and when Apple could simply use Chrome for free?

My reasoning is simply, wouldn't it make more sense for Apple and Google to pool resources and collaborate on a single, much better browser, instead of conducting two different efforts to create two separate, but distinctly similar products? — Am I the only one who wonders if it could be better for us, and the internet as a whole, if the better features of both browsers were merged into one, single, lightning fast, efficient, good-looking browser that actually had a chance at the dominant market share?
 
I may have missed it as I skimmed but...Apple gets money from Google to have the default search in Safari as Google. I don't think it was much, and there is also the matter on the front page of MR...100 million or something reasons.
 
EssentialParado said:
Well my reasoning was: Both companies are fundamentally trying to achieve the same thing, but both are spending money developing very similar products. Usually in a marketplace this wouldn't be unusual, but both their browsers are free and non-profit.

What incentive is there for Apple to spend money in this area if Google are already doing what Apple wants, but better, and when Apple could simply use Chrome for free?

My reasoning is simply that wouldn't it make more sense for Apple and Google to pool resources and collaborate on a single, much better browser, instead of conducting two different efforts to create two separate, but distinctly similar free products? — Am I the only one who wonders if it could be better for us, and the internet as a whole, if the best features of both browsers were merged into one single browser?
Click to expand...
You make a very valid point. Personally I wouldn't even consider doing this, if I was Apple, until Chrome became stable enough to not have the beta flag. Even then I'd be wary of data Google might be collecting.
 
Besides several reasons stated above, I see the biggest being Apple not wanting to have a major part of their OS tied to another company. One of the reasons Safari was created in the first place is that IE for Mac was seriously lagging behind and the Mac needed a first class browser to be competitive. Even right now Chrome for Mac is lagging Chrome for Windows, so why replace Safari with it?

Besides, having multiple browsers fighting for first place isn't a bad thing. More competition = more innovation, so even though they are similar they aren't the same. For instance, I prefer Safari's top sites to Chromes new tab page, but I prefer Chrome's extensions over Safari being closed to legitimate modification.

Besides saving a few bucks for Apple, I can't see any good reason to adopt Chrome.
 
VforVelveta said:
Besides several reasons stated above, I see the biggest being Apple not wanting to have a major part of their OS tied to another company. One of the reasons Safari was created in the first place is that IE for Mac was seriously lagging behind and the Mac needed a first class browser to be competitive. Even right now Chrome for Mac is lagging Chrome for Windows, so why replace Safari with it?

Besides, having multiple browsers fighting for first place isn't a bad thing. More competition = more innovation, so even though they are similar they aren't the same. For instance, I prefer Safari's top sites to Chromes new tab page, but I prefer Chrome's extensions over Safari being closed to legitimate modification.

Besides saving a few bucks for Apple, I can't see any good reason to adopt Chrome.
Click to expand...

Exactly, it would complicate things even more so
 
Would Microsoft make Firefox/Opera/Chrome/Safari the default browser on Windows? No. Apple will do no such thing, either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back