A very interesting rumor. I can see why Google (and several of their users) would love to see Chrome on iOS. But given Apple's limitations for third-party apps, I wonder how crippled it would be.
A few questions:
* Could Chrome for iOS use its own WebKit, or would it have to use Apple's?
* Could it use its own v8 Javascript engine?
* Could it be made the default browser?
* How well could background-sync'ing work, given Apple's restrictions on background processing?
* How would sandboxing work, since AFAIK iOS apps can't fork multiple processes? (disclosure: Chrome for Android doesn't have sandboxing yet either - http://support.google.com/chrome/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2440264 ) If Chrome for iOS is forced to use the system webkit, it might get sandboxing for free via webkit2.
Chrome is the best browser to use on a pc but on a mac its sux badly, far too heavy on cpu and given the lack of respect Google have for peoples privacy I think I'll pass on chrome for iOS
I don't have any issues with the three Mac's I have Chrome installed on.
I don't have any issues with the three Mac's I have Chrome installed on.
Nor do I. I think Chrome is way better than Safari except in the area of gesture control. On my MBP Safari zooms very smoothly like on a phone or tablet whereas Chrome responds to a pinch-to-zoom gesture by moving to a preset zoom level.
An integrated browser with a proper ad blocker would be nice. That said, I don't want Google to have a complete history of my web surfing history to sell to advertisers...
Agreed. I really hope iOS 6 allows Mobile Safari extensions so that we can install Adblock. They seem so focused on making iOS and ML fully consistent, Safari extensions strikes me as an obvious addition to put in.
Sure Chrome is based on WebKit as a rendering engine, but it differs by its JavaScript engine: Safari uses Nitro whereas Google developed their own V8.
It will be interesting to see what they're allowed to do here.
Also, in the current state of iOS it will not be possible for Chrome to be set as the default browser (unless maybe if you've got a jailbroken phone but that's not what I'm referring to).
People seem to think Apple has been lagging behind in their development tree of Safari. The point of WWDC and iOS 6 is to squash those rumors.
Opera is no substitute for Safari in iOS but Safari is a heap of junk and needs exterminating. It has turned internet browsing into a clunky, pot-holed road.
You talking to me? I hope not. I don't want to have to teach you why you're wrong about this in relation to what I'm saying.
Well, yeah. That's not in question. Though your attempt at calling FCPX not professional software is infantile.
l don't think I would go so far as calling FCPX non professional but there is defiantly an exodus that is happening with more users opting for better solutions now that Apple has nuetered the software.I know our training department has switched over to Avid not to long ago. I like FCPX, I think it's now easier to use.
Safari could improve by copying Google's Tabs on Top and integrated address/ search bar.
You do realize these limitations of Safari compared to Chrome aren't really relevant in the Phone space? Who wants tabs on top, when you have so little real estate. Who wants separate processes when you have so little memory available on the iPhone? That integrated Search/Address bar is not a positive thing - you do realize every URL you type is sent to Google's servers - so Big Brother knows all the sites you visit, even if you never searched for it. Combine this with Google DNS, and Google knows everything you try to do on the net - even if you decide not to do it eventually (just imagine, you attempt to search for www.piratebay.com - but decide not to do it from your office computer, because you don't want to violate office policies - your office IT staff won't know, but Google will know that you were thinking of visiting Pirate Bay!).
People do not really understand the implications of using Chrome. That is why many people use it. On iOS, considering that Google will not have any performance edge (they have to use the same WebView that everyone uses), Chrome is pretty pointless. The only useful feature is synced bookmarks.
People do not really understand the implications of using Chrome.
I understand. I just don't really care. It doesn't bother me if Google knows every single website I visit. Precisely which negative impact is that going to have on my life? The only way the info could be any use to Google is when it's combined with data from millions of other users and sold to advertisers. Why is my data alone of any value or interest to Google whatsoever, other than to serve ads?
I understand. I just don't really care. It doesn't bother me if Google knows every single website I visit. Precisely which negative impact is that going to have on my life? The only way the info could be any use to Google is when it's combined with data from millions of other users and sold to advertisers. Why is my data alone of any value or interest to Google whatsoever, other than to serve ads?
Google's mission statement is: "Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." While Google's mission statement alone isn't troublesome, Google's collection of personal information is quite troublesome because Google's business model is the aggregation of user's personal information in order to target advertising to users. Thus, Google has far more personal information about users than governments or other businesses have about consumers.
Google gathers details of how you used their services, such as your search queries (1)
Google tracks cookies that may uniquely identify your browser or your Google Account (1)
Google collects telephony log information like your phone number, calling-party number, forwarding numbers, time and date of calls, duration of calls, SMS routing information and types of calls (1)
Google logs device event information such as crashes, system activity, hardware settings, browser type, browser language, the date and time of your request and referral URL (1)
Google collects device-specific information (such as your hardware model, operating system version, unique device identifiers, and mobile network information including phone number) Google may associate your device identifiers or phone number with your Google Account (1)
While such information is gathered by competing products and services, Google's vast range of "products and services" uniquely positions Google to collect more information about consumers than any other company. The problem with Google's vast network of information gathering is that Google has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of concern for consumers through their policies and practices. Furthermore, Google has consistently used very expedient methods to comply with or meet demands whether those of stockholders or governments. The vast amount of information collected by Google has arguably made Google the greatest threat to privacy ever known, a vast unsecured treasure trove of information that attracts hackers and online thieves, and; most worrisome; governments.
Google has done very little to protect Android users from malware. Considering that many people have significant amounts of personal information on their mobile devices, I find this completely unacceptable.
According to Sunnyvale, Calif., security firm Juniper Networks known instances of Android-related malware -- "virtually all" involving apps - have jumped steadily month by month from 400 in June 2011 to 15,507 in February 2012 (2)
"San Francisco-based Lookout Mobile Security reported In August 2011, that "an estimated half-million to one million people were affected by Android malware in the first half of 2011." (2)
Trend Micro of Japan, which has U.S. headquarters in Cupertino, Calif. - identified "more than 1,000 malicious Android apps" last year, 90 percent of them on Google's site and noted that the number of bad apps grew last year at 60 percent per month. Trend Micro has estimated the total this year "will grow to more than 120,000," (2)
Google proclaims that "Since the beginning, we’ve focused on providing the best user experience possible. Whether we’re designing a new Internet browser or a new tweak to the look of the homepage, we take great care to ensure that they will ultimately serve you, rather than our own internal goal or bottom line." (3)This is in direct conflict with Google's business model which serves advertisers and is a serious, undisclosed conflict of interest.
Google removed links to an anti-Scientology site after the Church of Scientology claimed copyright infringement in 2002. (4)
Google handed over the records of some users of its social-networking service, Orkut, to the Brazilian government, which was investigating alleged racist, homophobic, and pornographic content in September 2006. (4)
Google's mission statement "to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful" didn’t stop Google from censoring their Chinese search engine to gain access to a lucrative market. (4)
Privacy International has named Google the worst company in their 2007 survey and "hostile to privacy." (5)
Comments
A very interesting rumor. I can see why Google (and several of their users) would love to see Chrome on iOS. But given Apple's limitations for third-party apps, I wonder how crippled it would be.
A few questions:
* Could Chrome for iOS use its own WebKit, or would it have to use Apple's?
* Could it use its own v8 Javascript engine?
* Could it be made the default browser?
* How well could background-sync'ing work, given Apple's restrictions on background processing?
* How would sandboxing work, since AFAIK iOS apps can't fork multiple processes? (disclosure: Chrome for Android doesn't have sandboxing yet either - http://support.google.com/chrome/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2440264 ) If Chrome for iOS is forced to use the system webkit, it might get sandboxing for free via webkit2.
* Will it support USB debugging? https://developers.google.com/chrome/mobile/docs/debugging
I suspect the answer to all of these questions is "no."
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoadm
Chrome is the best browser to use on a pc but on a mac its sux badly, far too heavy on cpu and given the lack of respect Google have for peoples privacy I think I'll pass on chrome for iOS
I don't have any issues with the three Mac's I have Chrome installed on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony
I don't have any issues with the three Mac's I have Chrome installed on.
Nor do I. I think Chrome is way better than Safari except in the area of gesture control. On my MBP Safari zooms very smoothly like on a phone or tablet whereas Chrome responds to a pinch-to-zoom gesture by moving to a preset zoom level.
I use the Google Search App for a browser. I like the almost full screen feature.
Agreed. I really hope iOS 6 allows Mobile Safari extensions so that we can install Adblock. They seem so focused on making iOS and ML fully consistent, Safari extensions strikes me as an obvious addition to put in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordeagle
Sure Chrome is based on WebKit as a rendering engine, but it differs by its JavaScript engine: Safari uses Nitro whereas Google developed their own V8.
It will be interesting to see what they're allowed to do here.
Also, in the current state of iOS it will not be possible for Chrome to be set as the default browser (unless maybe if you've got a jailbroken phone but that's not what I'm referring to).
People seem to think Apple has been lagging behind in their development tree of Safari. The point of WWDC and iOS 6 is to squash those rumors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
People seem to think Apple has been lagging behind in their development tree of Safari. The point of WWDC and iOS 6 is to squash those rumors.
Really? I see no indication they're going to do anything better with Safari.
Heck, it still crashes instantly every time if you try to reopen more than one closed tab.
Opera is no substitute for Safari in iOS but Safari is a heap of junk and needs exterminating. It has turned internet browsing into a clunky, pot-holed road.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloodshotrollin'red
…Safari is a heap of junk and needs exterminating. It has turned internet browsing into a clunky, pot-holed road.
And I see no indication of that, either.
Care to elaborate?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You talking to me? I hope not. I don't want to have to teach you why you're wrong about this in relation to what I'm saying.
Well, yeah. That's not in question. Though your attempt at calling FCPX not professional software is infantile.
l don't think I would go so far as calling FCPX non professional but there is defiantly an exodus that is happening with more users opting for better solutions now that Apple has nuetered the software.I know our training department has switched over to Avid not to long ago. I like FCPX, I think it's now easier to use.
Chrome is already gaining more and more of market share day by day. It will give a chrome a chance now to capture Iphone market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
Safari could improve by copying Google's Tabs on Top and integrated address/ search bar.
You do realize these limitations of Safari compared to Chrome aren't really relevant in the Phone space? Who wants tabs on top, when you have so little real estate. Who wants separate processes when you have so little memory available on the iPhone? That integrated Search/Address bar is not a positive thing - you do realize every URL you type is sent to Google's servers - so Big Brother knows all the sites you visit, even if you never searched for it. Combine this with Google DNS, and Google knows everything you try to do on the net - even if you decide not to do it eventually (just imagine, you attempt to search for www.piratebay.com - but decide not to do it from your office computer, because you don't want to violate office policies - your office IT staff won't know, but Google will know that you were thinking of visiting Pirate Bay!).
People do not really understand the implications of using Chrome. That is why many people use it. On iOS, considering that Google will not have any performance edge (they have to use the same WebView that everyone uses), Chrome is pretty pointless. The only useful feature is synced bookmarks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macarena
People do not really understand the implications of using Chrome.
I understand. I just don't really care. It doesn't bother me if Google knows every single website I visit. Precisely which negative impact is that going to have on my life? The only way the info could be any use to Google is when it's combined with data from millions of other users and sold to advertisers. Why is my data alone of any value or interest to Google whatsoever, other than to serve ads?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious
I understand. I just don't really care. It doesn't bother me if Google knows every single website I visit. Precisely which negative impact is that going to have on my life? The only way the info could be any use to Google is when it's combined with data from millions of other users and sold to advertisers. Why is my data alone of any value or interest to Google whatsoever, other than to serve ads?
Google's mission statement is: "Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." While Google's mission statement alone isn't troublesome, Google's collection of personal information is quite troublesome because Google's business model is the aggregation of user's personal information in order to target advertising to users. Thus, Google has far more personal information about users than governments or other businesses have about consumers.
Google gathers details of how you used their services, such as your search queries (1)
Google tracks cookies that may uniquely identify your browser or your Google Account (1)
Google collects telephony log information like your phone number, calling-party number, forwarding numbers, time and date of calls, duration of calls, SMS routing information and types of calls (1)
Google logs device event information such as crashes, system activity, hardware settings, browser type, browser language, the date and time of your request and referral URL (1)
Google collects device-specific information (such as your hardware model, operating system version, unique device identifiers, and mobile network information including phone number) Google may associate your device identifiers or phone number with your Google Account (1)
While such information is gathered by competing products and services, Google's vast range of "products and services" uniquely positions Google to collect more information about consumers than any other company. The problem with Google's vast network of information gathering is that Google has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of concern for consumers through their policies and practices. Furthermore, Google has consistently used very expedient methods to comply with or meet demands whether those of stockholders or governments. The vast amount of information collected by Google has arguably made Google the greatest threat to privacy ever known, a vast unsecured treasure trove of information that attracts hackers and online thieves, and; most worrisome; governments.
Google has done very little to protect Android users from malware. Considering that many people have significant amounts of personal information on their mobile devices, I find this completely unacceptable.
According to Sunnyvale, Calif., security firm Juniper Networks known instances of Android-related malware -- "virtually all" involving apps - have jumped steadily month by month from 400 in June 2011 to 15,507 in February 2012 (2)
"San Francisco-based Lookout Mobile Security reported In August 2011, that "an estimated half-million to one million people were affected by Android malware in the first half of 2011." (2)
Trend Micro of Japan, which has U.S. headquarters in Cupertino, Calif. - identified "more than 1,000 malicious Android apps" last year, 90 percent of them on Google's site and noted that the number of bad apps grew last year at 60 percent per month. Trend Micro has estimated the total this year "will grow to more than 120,000," (2)
Google proclaims that "Since the beginning, we’ve focused on providing the best user experience possible. Whether we’re designing a new Internet browser or a new tweak to the look of the homepage, we take great care to ensure that they will ultimately serve you, rather than our own internal goal or bottom line." (3) This is in direct conflict with Google's business model which serves advertisers and is a serious, undisclosed conflict of interest.
Google removed links to an anti-Scientology site after the Church of Scientology claimed copyright infringement in 2002. (4)
Google handed over the records of some users of its social-networking service, Orkut, to the Brazilian government, which was investigating alleged racist, homophobic, and pornographic content in September 2006. (4)
Google's mission statement "to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful" didn’t stop Google from censoring their Chinese search engine to gain access to a lucrative market. (4)
Privacy International has named Google the worst company in their 2007 survey and "hostile to privacy." (5)
1. http://www.google.com/policies/privacy/. Google. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
2. Steve Johnson. Posted March 17, 2012. Updated March 23, 2012. http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_20182226/android-apps-targeted-by-malware?source=rss_viewed. San Jose Mercury News. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
3. http://www.google.com/about/company/philosophy/. Google. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
4. Adam L. Penenberg. October 10, 2006. http://motherjones.com/politics/2006/10/google-evil. MotherJones. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
5. Unattributed. June 8, 2007. https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/race-bottom-privacy-ranking-internet-service-companies. Privacy International. Retrieved March 29, 2012.