... is the best breakfast cereal. no 2 opinions about that. Just try it.

any chance of chrome on iPhone/Touch? Then I might pick up one.

The writer's ignorance of the nearly decade-long absence of IE from Macintosh computers aside, I was also disappointed that there was no mention of some of the other browser projects happening on Mac OSX.

Having grown tired of Firefox's listless, memory-hogging performance, I recently switched to the faster, sleeker Camino, which boasts a fully OSX native implementation of the same Mozilla rendering engine. I've been using Camino for several months now, and it has nearly everything I liked about Firefox (extensions notwithstanding), but without the sluggishness and bloat. I'd say Camino is comparable to Safari, but much crunchier in terms of configurability and page-rendering ability.

Let's also not forget Opera and Omniweb, both of which are more than viable alternatives for OSX. These apps may not be put out by the biggest names in tech, but they do deserve mention at the very least.

First, as another commenter pointed out, there is no IE for mac any longer. Second, IE holds the crown for two reasons only. Windows owns the market share and IE is included by default. Also, most users don't have a clue and just use the default browser without understanding their are better options out there. FIrefox is a great browser, but it doesn't hold a candle to IE or Safari's speed. All browsers tested, Safari is the hands down best browser with firefox coming in a close second. If you think otherwise, you probably haven't spent much time using a mac. Most mac haters are people who have never used one or used one for only a very short time. If you spend equal amounts of time on both, the typical person chooses the mac.

That was one of the worst articles I've ever read. Not only, as everyone above has pointed out, was it poorly researched, it read like it had been written by a man who'd spent lunchtime in the pub, and then come back into the office a little late having knocked back one too many pints with the barman. Before slumping into his chair and laughing loudly at his own inane comments. Oh wait, that'll mean you ARE a real journalist...

You are posting this on the internet. Why not use it and do a little research?

........ wikipedia if anything ffs.

Get real.
First: IE does not have a Intel version and the last PPC version is (I think) 5.5. All MS products for the Mac are/were crappy. Sadly for some there are difficult replacements (m$ office).
Second: Just because Google puts it out doesn't mean that it has the share that Firefox or Safari have now. That will take time.
Third: The only thing that can make it good and gave it more chances at market share is if it not a resource hog like all/most other browsers.
btw: some of us use more than 1 browser at the same time.

I have not been so annoyed by article as I am now for a very long time.

I am baffled that anyone would let you write about technology in general and browsers specifically. So much bad info here it hurts my head. First of all under the hood safari and chrome both use webkit so if one chokes on a site so will the other. Apart from the browser chrome (cough way to go google on making standardized terms confusing by naming products after them) the only real difference is the javascript engine, and despite your statements to the contrary my profiling has found chrome to be faster. Also how can you suggest using ie on the mac as even a possibility? It has not received an update since roughly 2001 and anyone and everyone has considered it a dead browser for half a decade. If you're going to write articles about web browsers it might be a good idea to try and learn a little about them first.

You cant be serious saying this about Safari: "It can, however, be a little flaky with some complex sites."

You obviously have no idea about web standards. I stopped reading after this worthless line. Get a clue...

You can't understand why people debate web browsers, as if it is like breakfast cereal or a pencil?

Meanwhile, we have Microsoft roaming the planet like an evil beast, ripping up W3C web standards, and making its non-standard browser dominant. It doesn't bother you that one company is attempting to control the world's web standards? That doesn't matter any more than what brand of pencil you use?

If its any consolation, the evil beast of Microsoft is about to step over a cliff (yeay!, the audience cheers). The most popular client for accessing the internet will soon be the mobile device, where thankfully, the beastly Vole is failing with its poisonous proprietary protocols.

In the mobile world, Webkit browsers will dominate, of which both Safari and Chrome and many others are based. Microsoft's Internet Explorer's market share will plummet even more rapidly than its failed Windows Mobile OS, and both will fall over the cliff to their demise.

Talking about Safari, you said "It can, however, be a little flaky with some complex sites". That is not quite true. You mean sites that have been built with Microsoft tools, specifically for Microsoft's browsers.

Web sites that conform to the W3C standards render fine in most browsers, including Safari. The notable exception is Microsoft Explorer. Mac users don't require sites to me "Mac compatible" or "Safari compatible". They just need to be standards compliant.

doesn't even have a Mac version anymore.

is my Firefox.

It's so flexible. I can take it as is, or jazz it up with berries and fruit.

the best breakfast cereal ever.

I think maybe you're overstating the blandness of a browser. For example, if you're in IE 7, there's a great deal that you can't see on the web due to poor coding standards.

I use firefox, but it also serves as my FTP, my web page debugger, and translator. If that were a breakfast cereal, it would also brush my teeth after I ate it.