My vision of the Apple Browser

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by LimeiBook86, Oct 8, 2002.

  1. LimeiBook86 macrumors 604


    May 4, 2002
    Go Vegan
    Here is what I think Apple's new web Browser would look like, well if they made one that is... :D Well here is a picture i made of what i thought it would look like. it's basicly cut and paste off of Apple's site, it look kinda crappy, after all I did it on the PCs in school.. Dam Windoze! Anyways here it is: :cool:

  2. Mr. Anderson Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Nov 1, 2001
    You forgot an Apple logo in the top right corner that would indicate page status (loading vs. loaded)

    Otherwise, it seems reasonable enough. Although, if we do get one, they might surprise us - also give options for customizing the interface, color, icons, etc.

  3. wisher macrumors newbie

    Oct 8, 2002
    Browser Names

    Here is my suggested name: Magellan

    Why? Well, it's an internet tool like Sherlock. I really like the name Sherlock and so using another famous name seems cool.

    Magellan was a famous Navigator (get it?). He didn't actually make it all around the world, but his ship did. Lots of people know the name Magellan.

    Magellan is three syllabels like Mozilla and starts with an M, for what that's worth.

    And that's all.
  4. Tiauguinho macrumors 6502a


    Mar 5, 2002
    The Netherlands
    Fernando de Magalhães, portuguese sailor that took some ships and sailed down the coast of South America and through the strait that now holds is name. He was killed in some fights with a tribe, but his ship Vitoria managed to continue thus becoming the first vessel to circumnavigate the world.

    hope that I was able to explain to you guys on who was he :)

    go apple give us a Browser with your name on it!
  5. ddtlm macrumors 65816

    Aug 20, 2001
    To see Apple's most likely future browser, simply cruise over to:

    I use it all over the place and it works good on all OSs I have tried (Linux, Solaris, Windows 2k, Windows XP; and yes OS9 and OSX). Open source means Apple can just swoop in, change the front end, and call it a new Apple product. Easy.
  6. djcobb44 macrumors newbie

    Dec 30, 2001
    Use Sherlock

    Integrate chimera technology into sherlock........ place the navigator icon in the tool bar... and you have an All-in-one internet search app/browser/etc. What do you think?
  7. jettredmont macrumors 68030

    Jul 25, 2002
    Re: My vision of the Apple Browser

    Well, a few problems:

    1) The back and forward buttons are in the wrong place. Yeah, I know, there's nothing saying that the old Mosaic placement has to persist forever, but top-left is prime mouse-hunting real estate, and iDisk/.Mac are hardly worthy of that real estate.

    2) Tabbed browsing is missing. One can not properly convey the importance of tabbed browsing.

    3) The address is taking up way too much screen real estate.

    4) IMHO, the real Apple browser should look a whole heck of a lot more like Mozilla or Chimera Navigator. That browser has the stability IE lacks, a small footprint, and the full feature set that users have grown to expect from a browser.

    I like the Magellan name, though ...
  8. redAPPLE macrumors 68030


    May 7, 2002
    2 Much Infinite Loops
    i could swear i have heard a browser called magellan somewhere.
  9. Kid Red macrumors 65816

    Dec 14, 2001
    No offense, but if Apple's browser looks like that then I'm staying with IE/OW and Chimera.
  10. edesignuk Moderator emeritus


    Mar 25, 2002
    London, England
    Sorry LimeiBook, but I'd have to agree with Kid Red here, I'd hate to use that browser.
  11. evoluzione macrumors 68020


    Jul 19, 2002
    down the road, that's where i'll always be
    Isn't Magellan the name of a company that makes GPS products???
  12. edesignuk Moderator emeritus


    Mar 25, 2002
    London, England
    Indeed it is! :)
  13. wisher macrumors newbie

    Oct 8, 2002
    Isn't Explorer the name of a truck built by Ford? Hmm, come to think of it, so is Navigator. And Apple's original browser name was Pathfinder (think Nissan) before it was named Cyberdog by popular demand.
  14. aafuss1 macrumors 68000


    May 5, 2002
    Gold Coast, Australia
    Here's my take on the topic

    I perceive that the Apple browser will have the Aqua and optionally the iApp look. It would have instant access to iChat, iTunes, Mail, iPhoto and Address book. When the user clicks on mp3 URL, it will automatically start iTunes-and start playing it or maybe open it in a 'Media bar' like the PC version of IE (version 6) has one. It would be open source and very configurable too.
  15. medea macrumors 68030


    Aug 4, 2002
    Madison, Wi
    Sherlock is an old name, they have moved away from naming products like that now and most likely it would be either
    A. an iApp
    B. one of the state-the-obvious names like Mail and Address Book.

    my bet is just Browser.....
  16. Catfish_Man macrumors 68030


    Sep 13, 2001
    Portland, OR
    I take it... don't know much about Mozilla. Mozilla is something more than a browser. It defines its own version of EVERYTHING (strings, hashtables, etc...) and is entirely platform independent as a result. However, this means that:
    1) It's not aqua and never can be anything but an aqua-ish clone
    2) It takes forever to start up as it loads all the custom stuff it needs
    3) It *should* never be able to outspeed a native browser (it does, but it shouldn't)
    4) It loses spell checking, keychains, and all the other OS X goodness

    Here and here [url] [/url] are what OS X browsers should be (although Chimera is a hack of Mozilla and shares many of its problems, and Omniweb has an *incredibly* bad layout engine which is due for replacement in 5.0). Apple (imo) will never market a non-native browser under its name. This rules out all Mozilla based projects. Omniweb is closed source, as are IE, Opera, iCab, and any others I've forgotten. If Apple wants to make a browser, they're going to have to start pretty much from scratch (or buy out one of the others).
  17. jettredmont macrumors 68030

    Jul 25, 2002
    Re: I take it...


    1: Mozilla defines its own strings et al? Well, I haven't reviewed the code, but I suspect it either uses the C++ std:string (or a thin wrapper over the top of it) or a thin wrapper over char*. C++ std:string performs better in most cases under Windows than the Windows-only MFC CString class, and unless Mozilla links with gstdc++ as a static library instead of the default shared library, does not increase program load time one iota. Cross-platform libraries aren't all that bad a thing. On the UI side, yes, Mozilla defines some widgets it could have just grabbed from Windows/OS X, and some claim that those widgets cause Mozilla to be slow (my experience is that Mozilla consistently outperforms IE on Windows, but that doesn't mean that the widgets are super-speedy; I tend to run on hardware where widget speed is largely irrelevant and even Java widgets respond well). There is, however, nothing keeping a Mozilla derivative (read: Chimera) from using OS widgets instead (the real advantage being OS uniformity and look/feel).

    2: Mozilla does keep its code cross-platform, which means that you won't find a Cocoa call deep in the call stack. However, you don't need to call OS-specific functions deep in your call stack (generally) if you design you application with the slightest bit of forethought. Exceptions would be things like socket communications (BSD sockets work well cross-platform, even on Windows aside from a few ifdef's and changed header file names), threading (pthread is nearly universal as well, except of course Windows, but again the models aren't very far apart), and inter-app messaging (which I don't see Mozilla using, but I may be wrong).

    3: Chimera is Mozilla with a Cocoa front-end, minus the extra crap (mail, chatzilla, kitchen sink). While Mozilla "proper" doesn't use platform-specific UI widgets, Chimera does. A native browser wouldn't have many advantages over Chimera.

    4: Why cross-platform? Because your developer community instantly grows from negligible to worldwide. I can guarantee you that there aren't more than a dozen programmers interested enough in putting together an OS X browser that they'd lend their time to such a project. Couple yourself to a thriving open source project like Mozilla, however, and that dozen programmers can focus on the platform-specific code instead of the same-as-every-other-browser problems. Also, you'll tend to gain more willing developers because there's at least a chance that what they develop will be successful and widely used.

    5: Past efforts. Apple has used cross-platform code extensively in the recent past, not the least of which are the entire FreeBSD underpinnings of OS X, the gcc compiler collection, and Samba (the magic behind seeing Windows shares on OS X). Why would an internet browser be any different?

    Unless Apple has some real ideas about how to revolutionize the browsing experience, they would do well to stick with the OSS community and support Chimera or build their own "Chimera" based on Mozilla (which, unfortunately or not, is more in line with their more recent actions). Or just suck up to MS and get IE 6.x+ on OS X, but IMHO IE is inferior technology to Mozilla and should be dumped if the opportunity arises.
  18. jettredmont macrumors 68030

    Jul 25, 2002
    Re: I take it...

    Didn't Apple hire the guy behind Chimera recently, or am I thinking of someone else? Maybe the guy behind Mozilla's tabbed browsing ...

    In any case, Apple definitely has the resources and OSS support to put something good out, IMHO, so long as they don't start completely from scratch.
  19. AtomBoy macrumors newbie

    Oct 7, 2002

    I use Mozilla on my Mac and my PC. It 's definitely faster loading on the PC but, after that, I don't think there's much difference between the Mac and PC versions. It's better than IE on either platform.
  20. benixau macrumors 65816


    Oct 9, 2002
    Sydney, Australia
    ahhh the great thing about rumours, we dont have a clue. If you sit back and think for a bit you realise that if apple released a web browser then it would probably be named somthing simple and obvious like web broswer and look very cool in iApps style, be p*ss easy to use, and have alot of people make IE skins for it. They did it with winamp and iTunes, why not Web Browser. Oh and it would use a tabbed interface, hint hint apple .....

Share This Page