Qualcomm is allegedly working on an ARM version of the Google Chrome web browser for Windows 10 on ARM.
“We are,” Qualcomm’s Miguel Nunes said when asked by Android Authority if the firm was working to port Chrome to ARM. “We’re still working with the different [PC makers] and designs. I expect you’ll see it probably around (the) second half of next year. Every [PC maker] will decide whatever their launch timeline is, but we’re actively working on it.”
Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday — and get free copies of Paul Thurrott's Windows 11 and Windows 10 Field Guides (normally $9.99) as a special welcome gift!
"*" indicates required fields
This statement requires a bit of decrypting.
The repeated references to Qualcomm’s PC maker partners suggests to me that Chrome for ARM will be something that PC makers will bundle with their new PCs. This makes sense to me, given the train wreck that is Microsoft Edge. But I assume—and hope—it doesn’t preclude Chrome for ARM being made available for free on the web. After all, any user of Windows 10 on ARM should be automatically supplied with this version when they visit the Chrome website.
Of course, this publication never thought to ask if Google was involved, so perhaps Qualcomm is working with the freely-available Chromium web browser instead. That browser is the basis for Google Chrome, and would be an acceptable substitute. But such a thing is also less interesting than “real” Chrome coming to Windows 10 on ARM. Which would, of course, require Google’s involvement.
And that’s where reality hits the fan: While Qualcomm and the PC makers that support Windows 10 on ARM absolutely have a vested interest in getting Chrome on this platform, Google does not. And Google ignoring such an unpopular platform, as it did with Windows Phone previously, unfortunately makes sense. So we’ll what’s happening. But I bet this is just Chromium and not Google Chrome.
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#355490">In reply to FalseAgent:</a></em></blockquote><p>IMO Edge is a victim of the UWP approach. They released a product that the vast majority of existing Windows users couldn't install using technology that wasn't as capable as that used to program IE. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#355615">In reply to FalseAgent:</a></em></blockquote><p>Obviously if you limit the audience for your product, it's going to be adopted less. That's fundamental. </p><p><br></p><p>Unless you know the internal design of Edge, you can't really say whether being a UWP app limits it or not. It certainly doesn't have all the functionality of IE whatever the reasons.</p>
stmorr82zw5zml
Premium Member<blockquote><em><a href="#355520">In reply to unfalln:</a></em></blockquote><p>I’m not sure what Paul perceives is a negative with Chromium. I recently installed it on Ubuntu Budgie, and for all intents and purposes, it’s identical to Chrome – including sync and pinned web apps. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#355600">In reply to longhorn:</a></em></blockquote><p>I don't think a lot of buying decisions are based on which browser is available. Both products support the web so it would really come down to UWP apps vs. Android apps. If WoA could fully run legacy Windows programs at full speed without an increase in price, than the competition would pretty much be what it is today: full Windows vs Chromebooks.</p>