[MrBS]

posted by Mac OS Rumors
...Apple's own Web browser, based on Chimera, which will premiere next year.

If this is true, do you think it's a good thing?

I've said before I think it's a bad idea for apple to have a direct presence in the not-fully standardized web. I don't want to see messages about how this site can't be viewed by apple, you need to get a PC.

What's this mean for 3rd party browsers?
~BS

[MickS]

At the moment the Mac browsing experience is largely determined by IE.

The majority of web publishers don't care about any platform other than the latest few versions of IE for Windows. Unless you have an open access evanglisit on site the designers will always go for something flashy that restricts who can view it (in my experience anyway). To this end Apple users are dependent on how quickly the browsers can keep up with these things.

There are things supported by IE on Windows that aren't supported on the Mac. IE will always lag on the Mac because the OS interface is different and MS is going to invest more money in something that benefits Windows (which earns it money) than Mac OS (which doesn't).

The other browsers are always playing catch up with limited resources. OmniWeb is a fine browser, but lacks support for some standards nevermind the MS additions. The current Mozilla based browsers leverage on a large development base but are still not compatible with all IE 'features'. It's also not a community that always does things the Apple way.

With the way that the Internet is being more integrated into the computing experience the browser is an essential part of the overall OS product. Apple needs to ensure that a quality browser is available as part of the OS. With no further guarentees from MS to keep IE up to date they have no choice than to create a branded browser.

How will this impact the alternative browser writers? I wouldn't have thought it would have any impact on any of the Mozilla based browsers as they are free. OmniWeb can be paid for but I would guess that most people don't pay. Whatever Apple comes up with I'm sure that some people will always want to use something different. I don't see this as having too much impact.

[Jeff Jones]

Oh yes, great! Yet another browser.

O.K., it is good to have a choice -- but I think there really are enough Mac-Browsers available, especially Gecko-based ones...

IE
Omniweb
Mozilla
Netscape
Chimera
Opera
iCab
and it looks like Phoenix is going to be ported over to the Mac (there is already a non-official built available at http://www.kmgerich.com/misc.html).

Of course, any of the browsers is special in its way, but I think there is absolutely no need for Apple to make another one (which would be based on Chimera, which is based on Mozilla, which is based on Netscape [which is based on Mosaic, but that they are all...])

Well, MOSR is almost always wrong, so there is hope!

JJ.

[sgrup]

wouldn't OmniWeb 5.0 be a valid candidate as Apple's default browser (even the icon - the original one that is - already looks like an apple icon)?

s

[Mac Guru]

Honsetly, if Apple bundled OmniWeb with OS X and made it the default browser, I would shoot myself in the face with a shotgun.

Mac Guru

[Zimphire]

Omniweb has nice features, but it is dog slow most of the time. Esp compared to Chimera.

I hope Apple DOES make a browser personally. We have a bunch of ok browsers, but not one really killer browser.

[Mac Guru]

If Apple makes a browser I would hope it would be built on the Gecko engine as everything else I've seen besides IE pretty much blows. I personally think that if this were to happen Apple would probably license Chimera and brand it with their own labels.

And yes, OmniWeb BLOWS.

Mac Guru

[Jeff Jones]

Well, if Apple would make its own browser, it most certainly would be based on Gecko because
- everything else would be a stupid thing to do, considering cost of development
- Apple has been pretty much cheek-to-cheek with AOL recently, and we all know where the Gecko engine comes from

Nevertheless, I still think it wouldn't be a good idea for Apple to do such a thing. The Macintosh platform has often been criticised because it is very "closed" (as opposed to open) and a lot of the software even comes from Apple as well. Looking from the outside, that draws a negative picture, looking as if Apple needs to do the full monty to keep it alive. Here is one situation where there is a lot of choice, so Apple should rather use it as an example in terms of multitude of third-party software. They should better get their software engineers refining AppleWorks to make it a real alternative.

edit: typ-O

[Toyin]

Hmmm a company bundled browser based on an open standards browser. Can anyone say Netscape Navigator and Mozilla?

I see the same thing happening too. Chimera will remain fast, light, and on the cutting edge. Apple's browser will have more features/bloat and will always be several steps behind Chimera.

Also based on the last few apps released from Apple (iPhoto, iCal, iSync, Sherlock 3, Back Up...etc ) do we really want Apple to release a browser?

[SoClose]

There are a couple good reasons for Apple to produce their own browser:

1) Clean up the plug-in mess with Mac browsers. The APIs for creating plug-ins are old and crufty. They were created years ago by Netscape and grudgingly accepted by Microsoft. Now that Microsoft, on the Windows side, has removed support for Netscape-style plug-ins, that further limits the likelyhood of Mac OS-specific plug-ins being released. When Apple debuted Mac OS X they included a new piece of system infrastructure called CFPlugin that facilitates the creation, loading, running and calling of plug-ins for applications with a very modern foundation. An extra bonus is that it's somewhat COM compatible meaning that Windows developers who create ActiveX controls for IE, have a much better and leveraging the code for a Macintosh version. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple debuts something like this if they make their own browser.

2) The bulk of the code is already written. It's pretty clear that the Gecko engine that powers Mozilla, Chimera and Netscape Navigator/Communicator is a pretty strategic piece of software for AOL. Apple can leverage this open source code (as they've done with countless other pieces of Mac OS X) with small and agile development teams to produce a quality product at low cost to them.

[cpac]

Originally posted by SoClose:
There are a couple good reasons for Apple to produce their own browser

And there are a couple reasons for them not to:

(1) continued killing of developer base. Chimera and Omniweb are progressing nicely (Chimera more publicly than OW, but the reasons for this are discussed elsewhere). If Apple started bundling a Gecko based browser, how much work would continue on Chimera - some, but not as much. How many new users would even take the time to explore options other than the Apple based browser?

(2) If Apple writes its own browser and throws its lot in with Gecko, - M$ has even more reason to cease development of IE for Mac and to continue to extend the various proprietary features of IE for windows making the overall browsing experience on a mac even worse (and help eliminate their prime rival in the browser market).

(3) As mentioned above, Apple should be spending it's time on other things. iApps (iSync, iCal, iPhoto) could all use enhancements and especially some optimizations. Not to mention the whole relatively-young system that needs working on.

-----------------

Finally, *IF* Apple were to release its own browser, why take the time to duplicate Chimera/Navigator/Mozilla's efforts? (Or OW's as it's the only browser that leverages Cocoa and could benefit the most from a cash/manpower infusion?). Apple could just dedicate some time and/or money to current efforts and get places a lot faster than by duplicating work already being performed.

Apple's $4 Billion in cash is more than enough to snap up plenty of developers/code bases. Yet, they haven't.

In sum, yes, browsing on the Mac needs major improvement, but an Apple browser is a lousy way to do it.

[Drizzt]

I believe the best thing to do would be that Apple takes the Gecko engine, and plugs in system classes instead of Mozilla's. That would be the best and fastest browser ever!

They are the only one who can get that right.. and there's Omni that looks promising with their 5.0 (I just hope they'll get the standards right!)

[Socially Awkward Solo]

Great, I guy named "MrBS" is posting a store from MOSR. This smells reliable to me.

[biscuit]

Has anyone considered that Apple might bundle Chimera once it releases version 1? And maybe, just maybe they've got a person or two working on it, just contributing to the Open Source project? It'd be a great way of selling the Open Source thing. Not that they need to do that to Joe Public but it would be good...

Sorry, poorly thought-out conspiracy theory ramblings...

biscuit

[clebin]

Originally posted by cpac:


And there are a couple reasons for them not to:

(1) continued killing of developer base.

I don't think less development would necessarily go into Chimera. Apple will still have no right to influence Chimera's development as an open-source app. All they can do is contribute and make a modified version. I reckon increased exposure might mean increased development.

Less users might take the time to explore other options, but only because Chimera is better than IE.

(2) If Apple writes its own browser and throws its lot in with Gecko, - M$ has even more reason to cease development of IE for Mac

There is a danger of this, but unless you we challenge Microsoft's status quo, the web is theirs. Right now, it would problematic for MS to ignore the Mac, and so it seems like a better time to act than in 1-2 years time. Between Linux, Netscape and Apple, Gecko stands a good chance of keeping the web open.

Finally, *IF* Apple were to release its own browser, why take the time to duplicate Chimera/Navigator/Mozilla's efforts?

I don't think it's so much duplicating as building on. I doubt they'd do much to Chimera except change the icons and the name and remove the 'anti-corporate' pop-up ad blocking.

Chris

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Mac Guru:
Honsetly, if Apple bundled OmniWeb with OS X and made it the default browser, I would shoot myself in the face with a shotgun.

Mac Guru

And Darwin would be very proud.

[CharlesS]

.

[clebin]

There's some other cool stuff in that article...

Video / speech in iChat
Ogg Vorbis support in Quicktime
DivX support in Quicktime

Excellent! They say they've used this stuff, which is really putting yourself on the line, so I trust MacOSRumors in this case.

Chris

[rgoer]

Originally posted by clebin:
...so I trust MacOSRumors in this case.

tee hee hee

[clebin]

Originally posted by rgoer:
tee hee hee

gulp :o

[iamnid]

Let's hope that if Apple does make it's own browser it isn't as slow as the rest of its iApps -- iPhoto or iCal anyone?

[Simon X]

Maybe, just maybe, an Apple branded browser is not just for a desktop/laptop Mac. What else is Jobs going to demo at MacWorld? Pretty much every bit of hardware has recently been upgraded and would be pretty boring if it was just a recap. Upgraded and new iApp demos seem most likely with perhaps a new bit of hardware.

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by clebin:
There's some other cool stuff in that article...

Video / speech in iChat
Ogg Vorbis support in Quicktime
DivX support in Quicktime

Excellent! They say they've used this stuff, which is really putting yourself on the line, so I trust MacOSRumors in this case.

MOSR's only reliable source is their a$$.

[typoon]

Originally posted by Adam Betts:


MOSR's only reliable source is their a$$.

I agree which they tend to talk out of most of the time. Though some of there stuff is pretty interesting to read. Even if it is just that a good read. When was the last time they predicted anything correctly?

[timster]

You guys do know that the main developer working on Chimera was hired by Apple in July and works there full time now?

And that Chimera does use the Gecko engine?

To me, this is an extremely smart move. Apple knows they cannot depend on MSFT/IE forever. They know they don't want to put the engineering resources to build a new browser from the ground up.

And then a nice browser that uses the Gecko engine comes by, with a nice Cocoa wrapper to make it look purty sweet.

So they hire the guy who wrote it, have him work on it full time, and Apple gets a powerful, flexible browser that is fully standards compliant for mere, just mere pennies. (Basically the guy's salary, and some extra costs.).

[Socially Awkward Solo]

So if he is working at Apple new who is making the nightly chimera's?

[TimmyDee51]

Why does everyone assume OW 5 will be as slow as OW 4.1 (which isn't that bad really). If you would read up on OmniWeb, you would find out that everything but their rendering engine rocks. Their main focus at this point is to modernize and speed up their rendering engine. Once, that's done, OmniWeb will be damn fast in addition to having the nicest GUI (which in my book still counts for a lot).

[cpac]

Originally posted by timster:
So they hire the guy who wrote it, have him work on it full time, and Apple gets a powerful, flexible browser that is fully standards compliant for mere, just mere pennies. (Basically the guy's salary, and some extra costs.).

Again, where is the benefit to Apple? Chimera is chugging along at a pretty hefty pace - why bother to make two versions of a Gecko-based-cocoa-wrapped browser?

Originally posted by Clebin:
I don't think less development would necessarily go into Chimera. Apple will still have no right to influence Chimera's development as an open-source app. All they can do is contribute and make a modified version. I reckon increased exposure might mean increased development.

If Apple takes the responsibility for making a gecko-based-cocoa-wrapped browser, why should anyone work on another version of the same thing? Sure, they might have a few more features, but ultimately most people just use what their machine comes with (that's how IE got any market share in the beginning). I doubt the differences between an Apple-chimera and a non-apple-chimera would be appreciable for most users.

There is a danger of this, but unless you we challenge Microsoft's status quo, the web is theirs. Right now, it would problematic for MS to ignore the Mac, and so it seems like a better time to act than in 1-2 years time. Between Linux, Netscape and Apple, Gecko stands a good chance of keeping the web open.

Um, gecko seems to be doing just fine on its own right now. There's already three different browsers using it for OS X alone (and how much market-share does OS X have?). It's not the fact that we shouldn't encourage people to use gecko, it's that if Apple takes the (rather bold) step, of creating its own browser, (regardless of the engine on which it is based), M$ has all the more incentive to kill off rival browsers/operating systems, etc.

If, on the other hand, Apple starts "bundling" Chimera 1.0 (or OW 5, or whatever) along *with* IE, there's much less of a problem. It's the Apple-branding that hurts.

I don't think it's so much duplicating as building on. I doubt they'd do much to Chimera except change the icons and the name and remove the 'anti-corporate' pop-up ad blocking.

So again, what's the point? If AppleBrowser 1.0 and Chimera 1.0 are the same except for icons and the like, why make the effort/risk the consequences of releasing an AppleBrowser at all?

-------------------

Bottom line? Apple should feel free/be encouraged to bundle alternative browsers along with IE. But to make an Apple branded browser essentially identical to Chimera is a bad idea.

[Completely separate would be the possibility of buying up OmniWeb, as the cash/manpower resources Apple could put behind this project would massively accelerate its development, and such development would not be duplicative of ongoing open-source efforts]

[timster]

Oh, allow me to clarify. I didn't mean anything about a separate apple brand browser. Maybe thats what this thread was about, but it wasn't what I was thinking.

The way I see it, Apple's going to bundle Chimera itself. No iBrowser, no iSurf, or whatever.

They'll be able to influence Chimera's development because they have Chimera's main developer in house. He's working on Chimera, has access to all of Apple's resources, and will be able to put those resources into Chimera.

In exchange, Apple gets a excellent browser that takes advantage of all of what OS X has, and cheaply.

There's nothing in Chimera that Apple would need to protect with closed-source approach, so they're not worried about that.

As for the question who makes Chimera's nightly builds. Nobody. It's all automated by the Mozilla build process.

The latest code as of the day in the CVS is exported, some scripts fire up, compile and build the application, create a new nightly folder, places the finished app there. And thats it.

That's why its called nightly builds. Doesn't depend on anyone in particular.

-tim

[timster]

I might add. Just because a guy works at an company like Apple, doesn't mean that person cannot work on open-source.

I know many Java development houses, they make use of a lot of open-source projects for their work, and their employees actively work on and contribute to the open-source project while on the job, which also benefits their company by getting them a better end-product.

So essentially, what you're seeing happen with Chimera IS the development of a browser by Apple. Its just a different way of doing it than what we're all used to. (Waiting for Apple to release a newly-minted application, or a Public Preview).

[cpac]

Ok - well yep the discussion was about whether an Apple-branded browser, based on Chimera, was a good idea. I've said why I think it isn't.

That said, I'm not sure how hiring a guy who works on Chimera is of particular benefit to Apple (aside from him being a good programmer or whatever).

Bundling, as I've said before, is a fine idea, much less offensive to MS, especially if IE is kept as one of the alternatives "bundled" with OS X.

[timster]

It benefits Apple because now this developer can put 40+ hrs a week into Chimera, instead of working on it when he has a couple spare hours per week. This will get it finished a lot faster.

I believe Apple wants to ditch IE as soon as possible. Their options was to go with Netscape, which has a ****-for-crap interface. Mozilla, which is better than NS, but still doesn't look anywhere native.

Your grandmother with a new 17" iMac wants a browser that renders her cross-stitching sites properly, and looks like all of the other applications she has running on her Mac.

If I were running Apple, I'd have done the exact same thing. "Who's the guy that did Chimera? Get him a desk and a Mac. Tell him to work on it full time, and we'll have a browser we can bundle with future versions of OS X a lot faster than doing our own.".

[cpac]

You're assuming what they did was tell this guy to sit there and work on Chimera full time.

While a possibility, he could also be working with apple to do any number of things (maybe it's his experience in creating cocoa-wrappers for non-cocoa code that they like, maybe they want help viewer/Mail to do better with HTML, maybe they just recognized that he was a bright guy and decided they wanted him on their team (working on god-knows-what)).

Basically, it's a huge assumption you're making.

[edit - posted without responding to the rest of your post]

My Grandma, if she had a 17inch iMac, would use whatever she came across first; probably IE. And for most users IE works just fine. You and I can tell it's not a cocoa app, etc. but your average joe couldn't care less.

Finally, Apple doesn't need to hire anybody to bundle Chimera with OS X, they can do that regardless.

[passmaster16]

Wouldn't it be easier for Apple to just license the Gecko engine and integrate into the OS so that other apps can use it? I think one of the reasons why IE is decently fast on windows is because of it's integration into the OS. Now that got them into some legal trouble not to mention I think it takes away from system stability...when it crashes, it crashes hard. I agree with the other posters; it would be foolish to release another browser if it's not any better than what we have now. I also agree that their best bet would be to license Chimera rather than building their own from the bottom up. As far as IE on Mac, I think MS will continue to do it because they like control. Will it ever be as good as the windows version? Probably not but they will need some rendering engine for their msn service so I don't see them taking it away soon. I think the more competition, the better it is for us because that keeps some pressure on software developers to improve their stuff.

[Drizzt]

Like I said.. if Apple would take only the HTML parser and put everything else native , it would be a hell faster and wouldn't require years of developpement

[cpac]

Gecko's got a lot of platform independent code that just isn't necessary. (this is why the codebase for OmniWeb is orders of magnitude smaller than that for Gecko).

And you want Apple to integrate that into the operating system? Besides the potential licensing problems, are you sure you want all that code running around inside your system all day long?

(extra bonus - potential for more security issues!!)

[cpac]

Originally posted by Drizzt:
it would be a hell faster

perhaps you meant "be hella faster" ?

regardless. What makes you think so? Just because it's in the operating system doesn't mean the code somehow becomes more efficient.

Rather, it could make the whole system slower.

[passmaster16]

Originally posted by cpac:
Gecko's got a lot of platform independent code that just isn't necessary. (this is why the codebase for OmniWeb is orders of magnitude smaller than that for Gecko).

And you want Apple to integrate that into the operating system? Besides the potential licensing problems, are you sure you want all that code running around inside your system all day long?

(extra bonus - potential for more security issues!!)

I'm not sure about all that. I think they could figure out a way to utilize some type of rendering engine so that other apps for example, mail.app could take advantage and use. My expertise isn't coding so I'm not going to get into a discussion of whether or not it could be done. I'm sure you guys know more on that level than I do. If there's no_possible_way to do it without having it run all day long, then I wouldn't attempt it. I was just suggesting that as a way to speed up apps that use html rendering.

[foamy]

I don't really care either way if Apple brands their own browser.

However, one big benefit that *might* come out of such a relationship is significant advances to Gecko in the areas of Text rendering, Input boxes and form widgets.

If Apple makes changes to the core rendering engine that give us real anti-aliasing, real, properly sized widgets, and efficient, spell-checkable text boxes, then any OSX browser based on Gecko will inherit those advances because of the MPL...at least that's how I understand it. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Brazuca]

Apple just doesn't strike me as the best developer of apps, with a few exceptions. I don't have too much faith in an iBrowser and I expect it to be of the quality of iChat, iCal, etc.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Drizzt:
Like I said.. if Apple would take only the HTML parser and put everything else native , it would be a hell faster and wouldn't require years of developpement

Uh, isn't that what Chimera is?

[Eriamjh]

I can't believe it hasn't been said...


Cyberdog!

[Drizzt]

Originally posted by CharlesS:

Uh, isn't that what Chimera is?

No, they are using Mozilla classes.. this is why the text input is slow..

I didn't meant being in the system like Internet Explorer in Windows.. I meant replacing the platform abstract classes with system classes.

Mozilla uses abstract classes for everything, everything was reimplemented on every platform so it would run the same everywhere.. it would be nice to have the exact step backwards. The resulting program would use less memory and less disk space, and would be faster because the classes would already be loaded.

This would be, specializing Gecko/Mozilla for MacOS X

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Drizzt:


No, they are using Mozilla classes.. this is why the text input is slow..

I didn't meant being in the system like Internet Explorer in Windows.. I meant replacing the platform abstract classes with system classes.

Mozilla uses abstract classes for everything, everything was reimplemented on every platform so it would run the same everywhere.. it would be nice to have the exact step backwards. The resulting program would use less memory and less disk space, and would be faster because the classes would already be loaded.

This would be, specializing Gecko/Mozilla for MacOS X

Hmm? Using standard NSView subclasses is the reason that OmniWeb's rendering is slow. Gecko's rendering is faster because it doesn't do this.

[JB72]

Originally posted by cpac:
Ok - well yep the discussion was about whether an Apple-branded browser, based on Chimera, was a good idea.

It's a worthwhile topic. For most people using computers, the non-technophiles, web browsing is the experience that most defines their perception of a computer's capabilities, and therefore it's value.

I think an Apple browser is a good idea, as long as they use an open source rendering engine. We do have almost too many browser options for OS X, but none of them in themselves seem to do the job. Having to maintain two different browsers is awkward, and unMacish. I would hope that an Apple would be able to add the polish and features to Chimera, to the point where I'm using it 99.9% of the time.

If I had a dream browser though, it would probably be Omniweb, but based on Gecko, with the Apple-branded finish and follow through. But then again I really like Mail, iChat, and the Address book (iCal is getting close,) so that says something about my tastes, and where I'm coming from.

[libraryguy]

Well, my roommate isn't really to fond of Macs. I love them and try to convince him differenlty but to no avail. The reason for that is his experience using the internet on a Mac. If he wants to view something (a realplayer file, quicktime movei, vivo movie, avi, Divx) something always seems to go wrong. It doesn't load, IE quits, a window will load but won't play anything, the format is not supported. It's gotten to the point where he just expects it not to work on a Mac. I'm usually able to help him out. By option-clicking the file and just downloading it or by other means. But, the point is it shouldn't be like that. I just want to click on something and not get and error due to some plug in...that I may even have installed...but doesn't work. If Apple does make a browser, the ONLY way I will think it is better is if it solves these problems. It should just work! Isn't that what they're saying these days?

[cpac]

Originally posted by JB72:
as long as they use an open source rendering engine. ... If I had a dream browser though, it would probably be Omniweb, but based on Gecko, with the Apple-branded finish and follow through.

Why is an open source rendering engine so necessary? I don't see why it would be more or less desirable from a user's point of view...

"OmniWeb based on Gecko" would be a big mess (why has been explained countless times in other threads).

The big problem currently with OW is its outdated rendering engine. This both causes slowdowns (and yet despite huge hits in certain areas, it's at least competitive in terms of speed with Chimera for my use) and rendering issues, but as it is this element that will be replaced when OW 5.0 hits, we should have a browser that leverages all cocoa has to offer without any of the overhead of platform independent code. If OW is nearly as fast as Chimera with its outdated engine, updating the engine ought to allow it to scream.

In sum:

(1) Apple should not come out with an apple-branded browser for the reasons I've mentioned above.

(2) If Apple *does* come out with an apple-branded browser, they ought to buy/support/etc. OmniWeb rather than Chimera or a similar Gecko-based browser because of the advantages a browser designed for OS X can offer.

This discussion is supposed to be about (1) and not (2) though, so lets keep it there.

[cpac]

Originally posted by libraryguy:
I just want to click on something and not get and error due to some plug in...that I may even have installed...but doesn't work.

Agreed. But a large bit of this problem (at least as I understand it, which might be poorly) is that the plug-ins currently available are, shall we say, less than works of beauty?

MS made theirs proprietary (it wont work in anything other than IE)

Flash? well it's coming along; slowly, but really they don't have the same motivation to make it work or optimize it when OS X is a small bit of the market.

Real? please. We've seen how dedicated they are to the Mac platform.

Quicktime? I haven't had any problems in any browser other than Chimera actually.

Other things? These are probably proprietary IE/Windows only type stuff. Maybe if the government would take some real action against MS we'd get some relief, but the way things are looking, its not going to happen any time soon.

So would an Apple branded browser actually solve any of these plug-in related problems? Probably not. Perhaps Apple should instead get a team to sign NDAs and work with the various plug-in people to get decent versions of the various plug-ins written.

[waffffffle]

I've said this before in other places. What I think is that Netscape should market this browser and not Apple. I think Netscape could very nicely repackage Chimera into "Netscape Navigator for Mac OS X" and people would accept it. People still remember the Netscape name and it would look much better for Apple since they won't be the ones to enter the browser game. I think Apple should definitely ship a second browser with OS X (since they still ship Netscape 4 with OS 9 alongside IE). I think Netscape 7 is not worthy and Omniweb isn't free, but a commercial-grade Chimera would be great. I just don't think Apple should risk putting their own name on it. I really think this is something that an Apple-partner needs to do.

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by TimmyDee51:
Why does everyone assume OW 5 will be as slow as OW 4.1 (which isn't that bad really). If you would read up on OmniWeb, you would find out that everything but their rendering engine rocks. Their main focus at this point is to modernize and speed up their rendering engine. Once, that's done, OmniWeb will be damn fast in addition to having the nicest GUI (which in my book still counts for a lot).

With no intention to be rude... who cares?

Right now it blows. If OmniWeb 5 impresses me, great - but it isn't here yet.