Remix.run Logo
seec 11 hours ago

The reason to use Chrome is better extension support, better/more useful functionalities (translation, favicon bookmarks, Google Lens), better autofill/autologin, and better performance for web apps generally. Another very useful property is being able to sync your Chrome profile on any computer, which comes in very handy when you need to do stuff on computers you do not own. Doing the same with Safari is possible but a hassle.

I have used Safari since it replace Internet Explorer back in the days, then switched to Chrome a few years ago after a beta broke password syncing and AdBlocker Extensions for Safari were paid/not as good.

Like much of Apple's software, it has strengths and looks good but is really lacking in many ways. It also locks you into the walled garden pretty tight, which can be annoying at times.

Apple should go back to releasing a cross-platform version if they want to be taken seriously, in my opinion. In general, their incentive to build software solely for their platform is a double-edged sword because they can't manage to create hardware that can cover every need (especially for 3D/engineering), and it becomes very annoying to rely on it the moment you need to use another OS (either Windows or Linux).

Another example is Apple Notes being decent, but using it in the web browser is basically a joke (might as well not exist).

nerdjon 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

As someone who daily drives Safari as primary browser on Mac, iPhone, and iPad figured I would comment on each of those:

> translation

Safari has Translation built in

> favicon bookmarks

Yeah to my knowledge this is not possible (someone correct me if I am wrong), but I also fail to see the value given how large screens are today and favicons are kinda terrible.

> Google Lens

That alone is a reason for me not to use chrome.

> better autofill/autologin

I have never had any major issue with autofill or login on Safari. It pulls in my contact information when filling out a form, it pulls in my credit card information, and it pulls in one time codes from mail and messages when those happen. The only real issue I have here is that I use both Apple Passwords and 1Password and the popups for both interfere, but I doubt that is really a safari unique issue.

> better performance for web apps generally

Do we have data to back that up? Websites perform just fine for me.

> Another very useful property is being able to sync your Chrome profile on any computer, which comes in very handy when you need to do stuff on computers you do not own. Doing the same with Safari is possible but a hassle.

Not sure if syncing with a computer you don't own is really a feature that we should be encouraging? That seems really bad advice.

Regardless, outside of Windows (which I just don't care or have any desire to have my main computing sync too) Safari syncs just fine between my devices I care for it to sync too.

> Apple should go back to releasing a cross-platform version

I disagree with the "Seriously" part but I agree in spirit. I would love to have Safari on Windows again so I can never use Chrome or Firefox again. As far as other apps being on Windows, I care less but I would love to see icloud.com improved when needed in a pinch.

omer_balyali 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Safari has translation, bookmarks (favorites bar) can be either icon only, text only, or both text and icon at the same time, tabs can be pinned (Chrome also has it), "better" autofill/autologin is subjective. Chrome doesn't have better performance than Safari, both on macOS and iOS Safari is optimized better, both for battery and memory.

If you use Google products extensively and don't use Apple ecosystem integration features, then Chrome may look like it has better features; the same is true if you are on the Apple ecosystem (Notes, Reminders, Calendar, Passwords, multiple devices, etc). Seamless integration of Apple devices is one of the biggest advantages of using Apple software like Safari, where you can use iCloud Tabs to switch between devices. Also, Tab Groups is a neat feature; you can move Safari windows to an iPad with Sidecar and so on.

Google's ecosystem also has similar features, but you can argue that you're "locked into a walled garden pretty tight" with Google as well.

Browsers have their different advantages, but they are not so different from each other, especially when we compare Safari and Chrome. Maybe the only real difference is that Chrome has way more extensions.

KolmogorovComp 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> and better performance for web apps generally

At which cost? Huge RAM footprint, deadly battery killer, slow start time. How often do you need heavy performance for web apps versus just browsing?

asvitkine 5 hours ago | parent [-]

https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/1fguko2/everyone_say...

hu3 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> In my 3-hour tests, Safari consumed 18.67% of my battery each time on average, and Chrome averaged 17.33% battery drain. That works out to about 9% less battery drain from Chrome than Safari. Yes, you read that right, I found Chrome was easier on my battery than Safari.

With how much engineering was poured over V8, I don't doubt.

argsnd 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Since MV3 Chrome has not had better extension API support, although Apple’s insistence on publishing them on the App Store means availability is still restricted. I’ve found that using `xcrun safari-web-extension-converter` on almost any Chrome extension works fine and I’ve self-signed a few (eg. Bypass Paywalls Clean) with Xcode to run on my Mac and iPhone.

lapcat 9 hours ago | parent [-]

> Apple’s insistence on publishing them on the App Store means availability is still restricted.

This is not true. You can distribute Safari extensions outside the Mac App Store.

While it's true that you can't distribute Safari extensions outside the iOS App Store, mobile Chrome doesn't even have extension support, so in this case, Safari has vastly better extension support.

argsnd 8 hours ago | parent [-]

You do still need to notarise it with an Apple Developer membership, right? Else you have to enable unsigned extensions every time you open Safari. The cost barrier is still there even if the approval barrier isn’t.

lapcat 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, but your initial comment was kind of a strange way to phrase a cost complaint. After all, Google insists that extensions be published in the Chrome Web Store, and that requires Google's approval, a process that can often take much longer than App Store approval.

I suspect that the difference in extension availability is mostly due to desktop market share, since Safari is nonexistent on Windows and Linux.

argsnd 7 hours ago | parent [-]

There’s quite a difference between a one time $5 fee and an annual $99 fee for the economics of publishing a free browser extension.

Given almost 100% compatibility with the same Web Extension APIs that Chrome uses, I think you’d expect near-parity in extension availability between Chrome and Safari if that barrier didn’t exist.

lapcat 7 hours ago | parent [-]

> There’s quite a difference between a one time $5 fee and an annual $99 fee for the economics of publishing a free browser extension.

Yes? I didn't deny that. I said your initial comment didn't mention cost.

> Given almost 100% compatibility with the same Web Extension APIs that Chrome uses, I think you’d expect near-parity in extension availability between Chrome and Safari if that barrier didn’t exist.

It feels like you ignored the points I made in my last comment. Why would you expect near parity in extension availability when you can't even develop Safari extensions on Windows and Linux computers?