We believe there are better options available in this category, read below to learn what this software does well, and what they could do better. ⤵
.webp)
The battery optimized browser built by Apple.
This is the default browser that comes with mac devices, and has existed for over a decade.
With Safari, you're not going to get anything too cutting-edge or innovative, because they, like Google Chrome are focused on stability for their 1+ billion users.
For a further breakdown in understanding the negatives that come with browsers that have hit major scale, refer to our Chrome vs Safari comparison.
Since Apple is a hardware company at the end of the day, the whole point of Safari is that you're going to get a great cohesive experience if you're using all Apple products (Mac + iPad + iPhone).
The largest benefit to be had here, in our eyes, comes from Apple owning both the hardware and software layers. This allows them to go above and beyond with optimizations like battery life and cross-device syncing.
While they have baked in password management
We don't really see much major innovation or differentiation coming to Safari though. Why? Because this isn't Apple's core business. Not only that, but Apple has zero interest in going after the B2B and collaborative browser space. When comparing Arc Browser vs Safari, you'll see first-hand that Arc has a lot more going on in the features and differentiation space as they ultimately want to be the browser for teams and collaboration.
We do applaud Apple for adding tab groups, and allowing for them to be on the side of the browser window. There's some small similarities when comparing Safari vs Brave in the recently released sidebar tab management in Brave and Arc.
With Safari, you get a familiar and safe UI. It looks like a browser, it looks pretty much the same as it has the past decade, and it's relatively bland in terms of how it looks.
There's just not much to mention here, but the truth of the matter is some of this is by design. Their focus is to be stable, functional, and to let the content of the website you're currently on, shine.
This is where we can give Apple some props on the user-experience, if of course you're also using other Apple products. Take for example you visit a website on your iPhone, you get a prompt in your MacOS dock that shows a website was just opened on mobile. Want to open it up on your desktop? Simply click the Safari icon in your software dock.
In actually using the browser though, there's nothing in particular that stands out as an exceptional UX. This category in particular is where Arc shines. They have the smallest UX details, that just makes using the browser on the day-to-day so incredibly enjoyable.
Are you a huge Apple fan? Do you only care about getting the best possible battery performance on your MacBook and nothing else matters to you? Do you absolutely despise change? If so, Safari is probably fine for you.
If you're on the other hand sort of bored when looking at the existing browser market and wish you could get a bit more enjoyment and productivity out of your browser, then that's where you should definitely be giving Arc a shot.
Genuinely, give Arc a shot for a week straight as your daily driver, and I'm willing to bet you that you never come back to Safari again.
Arc Browser is genuinely what Apple could have made, had they re-thought the browser from the ground up, without all the baggage that currently exists with Safari. And for that reason, that's why we rank Arc at the top of our best browser apps list. Genuinely wouldn't be surprised if Apple one day acquired Arc and replaced it with Safari as the default browser for MacOS.
No shady privacy policies or back doors for advertisers. Just a lightning fast browser that doesn’t sell you out.
Firefox is one of the only privacy-focused browsers that is not built atop Chromium, in theory giving it further distance from the stronghold that Google has in the browser market.
What this ultimately means is all the Chrome extensions that people use and rely on are not compatible with Firefox unless rebuilt specifically for it. Think of it like iOS, Android, and Windows Phone/BlackBerry (which neither exist anymore, but the point is), you'll typically get developers building for iOS first (think of as Chromium/Chrome), Android second (think of as Webkit/Safari), and then Quantum Browser Engine third (Firefox).
Because of that, while you may be choosing a "privacy-focused" browser like Firefox, you're also getting substantially less third-party app support, and a higher chance of websites not performing as intended (like legacy banks or modern sites using newer technology). It simply comes down to there not being enough marketshare for web developers to focus on making everything work properly in Firefox as it only accounts for less than 3% of global marketshare.
Given this foundational difference, it means that the millions of Chrome extensions that are accessible to people, are not in Firefox, unless they rebuild it for Firefox, giving people less options if they choose Firefox as their primary browser.
For that reason, most people who use Firefox also use a second browser as well (typically based on Chromium), like Arc Browser, Chrome, or Brave for when they need full features and functionality like full Chrome Extension support.
That said, while they are a non-profit and privacy focused, they still make the far majority of their money from Google ($500M/yr) by having Google as the default search engine. So if you want to be a sustainable browser, you really need to just make a deal with Google in some way.
Some argue that Google is in some way strategically paying Firefox at this point just to make it seem like Chrome is not a monopoly.
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.jpg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg){kind=icon}
.svg)
.svg)
