Comments on: Should Apple license Safari to other mobile platforms?

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 28 May 2008 20:17:02 +0000

@Robert

Yes, I believe it will. Having an Apple branded browser on a phone showing off how much better Apple software works than other software is always good advertising, and can have a halo effect on sales of other products.

By: Robert

Robert — Wed, 28 May 2008 19:55:02 +0000

Will licensing Safari help Apple sell iPhone’s or other Apple hardware (considering that’s where Apple cash cow is at)? If not, then it’s a poor business decision.

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 28 May 2008 19:38:22 +0000

@Phil

The multi-touch experience on the iPhone and the plethora of applications you won’t be able to get anywhere else are going to be the major selling points of the iPhone from June forward.

If Apple doesn’t license Safari to other platforms, eventually those other platforms will have mobile versions of Firefox, Opera, or Webkit that have the same functionality as Safari.

If Apple made Safari THE mobile browser, the way Microsoft made IE THE desktop browser, then it would have major positive implications for the company.

By: Phil

Phil — Wed, 28 May 2008 17:58:33 +0000

i’m not sure licensing safari to other mobile devices would be such a good thing for apple. it might possibly cut into their iphone sales – if i were able to get safari running on my current winmo device, i wouldn’t be looking forward that much to picking up the new iphone when i’m in the states later this year. i think the browsing experience on the iphone is one of the major selling points, so it’d be kind of silly to give that away.

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 28 May 2008 17:28:22 +0000

@John Lockwood

The advantage is in branding. Apple can become the dominant name in mobile browsing very easily.

By: John Lockwood

John Lockwood — Wed, 28 May 2008 17:18:10 +0000

Webkit as you clarify is being used by Samsung and has also been used for some time by Nokia. Webkit is Open Source and there is nothing stopping other mobile phone makes from using it as well, even RIM could if they chose use it on the Blackberry.

Of course there is somewhat more to Safari than just Webkit, for example even though the Nokia N95 uses Webkit its web-browsing experience is still dire compared to Safari on an iPhone. This is born out by the various reports showing Google searching and Internet browsing usage by iPhone users is higher than ALL other mobile phones added together! See http://www.cellular-news.com/story/29960.php?source=newsletter

Personally I see no advantage to Apple in allowing Nokia, Samsung, et al, the full Safari program.

By: Mirek2

Mirek2 — Wed, 28 May 2008 17:05:26 +0000

I don’t think it should… Although onn the one hand, it really would make mobile browsing better for those not using the iPhone, on the other hand, Apple’s trying hard to push Microsoft out of the mobile market, or so I think, and I’m guessing they may have suggested Android to Google to ensure that they do… Maybe. But making Microsoft’s phones better when they are clearly in the lead? (They make Windows stuff only because it has a lot of users and because it is, for the most part, on par with Mac OS X. The iPhone, on the other hand, has had huge success, and is WAY better, arguably, than Windows Mobile.) I don’t think so…

P.S. – what do the asterisks next to the fields mean? I’m used to having them next to required fields, but I doubt that the URL is required…