Google yanks Apple Silicon Chrome port after browser is found to 'crash unexpectedly'

Google's attempt to launch its Arm port of Chrome for Apple Silicon Macs got off to a rocky start after it was forced to pull the browser over stability concerns. "Earlier today we updated our Chrome download page to include a new version of Chrome optimized for new macOS devices featuring an Apple processor," Googler Craig …

[karlkarl]

I am already sick of the term "Apple Silicon". Can we not use "Apple-flavoured ARM" or something more literal like that.

iPhones have been using this kind of vendor specific chips for years and it is only recently that Apple's marketing twits have pushed this dumb term, trying to make vendor lock-in sound trendy.

[Dan 55]

Apple Silicon SOC or ASS for short.

[diodesign]

Apple Arm SoC v Apple Silicon

We try our best to say it's Arm compatible, or it's a desktop-grade Apple Arm-compatible SoC, and it's a case of whoever's working on a story remember to including it. We've written about the M1 a few times this week that it might be a given, but in case not, we've tweaked the piece.

'Arm compatible' is deliberate because Arm has, last time I heard, little to no involvement in the development of these cores. Apple follows the spec.

We have to use 'Apple Silicon' at some point in the article so that people searching with that term - in an outside engine or our own site search - will find this article.

There's biting the hand, and then there's blowing our brains out.

C.

[karlkarl]

Re: Apple Arm SoC v Apple Silicon

@diodesign, certainly agree that its not The Regs fault. You guys are just naming it how it is so the rest of the world knows what the heck the article is about.

Perhaps we do need a cool buzzword for it however?

- Apple [shatty] Silicon

- Apple Sillycon

- Sapple

- Applecon

- Shapple Shilicon

- Crapple Chips <---- My favorite

... nah, I'm no good at this. But from now on, I am going to try my hardest to coin the term 'Crapple Chips' whenever I can.

[RM Myers]

Re: Apple Arm SoC v Apple Silicon

Apple Sillycon FTW! Too bad you don't work in Apple's marketing department. Have one ==>

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Apple Arm SoC v Apple Silicon

> Apple Sillycon FTW!

as purveyed by the Cupertino Chip Shop

[needmorehare]

Re: Apple Arm SoC v Apple Silicon

...and then there's biting the ARM

[ThomH]

I think they're trying to hit the marketing point that the Apple chip is more than just a CPU — it's an ARM processor plus GPU, machine learning bit, security stuff and RAM. Per the image on Anandtech, the GPU looks like the physically-largest part, although not by a lot, with the machine learning segment about half the size of the four performance cores.

That said, nothing yet that calling it an SoC wouldn't normally cover, and apply your usual reverence towards marketing-derived naming.

[adrian727]

FTFY

If SoC could not describe what it is, try Multi-chip Module MCM

[Dave 126]

[Name of company that designed, commissioned and uses it] + [generic, broad term covering what it is, an SoC] = Apple Silicon

It seems like a fairly sensible term for the topic under discussion.

[Lorribot]

Ah, that would be teh developer code we left in by mistake, it just needs to connect to your bluetooth so we upload to all your connected devices... ersorry all yoru connected devices can benefit from our targeted advertising and you can buy more stuff.

[Victor Ludorum]

Just a thought

Maybe there's something in the Google code that reads the BT MAC to help generate a unique id for the installation?

[Down not across]

Re: Just a thought

You could be onto something. I was just thinking why the hell does a browser need access to Bluetooth at all let alone so bad it crashes if it can't.

[gnasher729]

Re: Just a thought

If you want a unique ID you call UUID() which gives you exactly that. Of course it’s not in Google’s DNA to use something simple like that.

But in reality it’s likely just some straightforward bug like someone assuming Bluetooth is always turned on which for some reason doesn’t crash on an Intel Mac.

[AdamWill]

unexpectedly

"Google yanks Apple Silicon Chrome port after browser is found to 'crash unexpectedly'"

Don't worry, they're working hard on fixing it to crash expectedly instead.

[karlkarl]

Re: unexpectedly

Or at the very least ensure that it sends off the remaining tracking data buffer just before the program terminates ;)

[DS999]

Why am I not surprised

That some Google software is broken if you don't enable Bluetooth. Getting every URL you browse and every search you make isn't enough for them, they apparently want to see what Bluetooth devices you have around you as well!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Why am I not surprised

Another 'episode' that makes me pleased to have banned Chrome from my home. All it's 'phone home' URL's are blocked by my firewall.

I avoid using google anything if I can. When I can't, I fire up a one time VM and use it from there. That also includes YouTube.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Why am I not surprised

On a related note:

On my 2014ish Macbook Pro, why does turning on my Bluetooth-connected speaker either not work or make Facetime disconnect? These only seem to play nice together if I'm using 5Ghz wifi. Weird.

And no, there's no way I'm upgrading the OS - I actually (shock!) have and use 32-bit applications...

[Down not across]

Re: Why am I not surprised

Given BT uses 2.402-2.480 GHz, perhaps inteference with the 2.4GHz wifi?

[DS999]

Re: Why am I not surprised

Some wifi routers have a "bluetooth coexistence mode" that needs to be enabled for 2.4 GHz wifi not to have problems if used along with bluetooth.

[bpfh]

Re: Why am I not surprised

Just been looking on the internet as I was wondering why the browser wants "low" level system access, looks like it's due to their implementation of the "Web Bluetooth API" (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_Bluetooth_API) allowing a web page to directly interact with BLE devices and transfer their data seamlessly to authorised web sites.

So, maybe not as shady as I was initially thinking, but certainly a poor show for their QA team!

[Dinanziame]

We have become spoiled

I remember that IE crashing was never unexpected. It's rather not crashing in a whole day which was unexpected.

[Tom 7]

Re: We have become spoiled

I was surprised last week when I crashed Firefox. Not sure what killed it but I was on a FB group with 2500+ members and was trying to scroll to the bottom so it may be lack of memory (I've only got 16G). Even so it shouldn't crash but that's the first time in as long as I can remember - and given some of the shit I write in JS its bloody extraordinary!

[EnviableOne]

Re: We have become spoiled

That takes some effort I have 100 tabs open and its not crashing, but i do habe uBlock and NoScript running.....

[amacater]

OK - so they lost a bit of their Chrome plating ...

but give Alphabet their due (for once): web browsers are large code bases, and fast moving. Heck, there are barely any compilers available for the new Apple. If they've fixed it in 1/2 day, then it can't have been too massive a single bug. There'll be another Chrome along real soon too - the release schedule is fairly aggressive.