Earlier today one "analyst" published an assumption that Google would be making Chrome for iOS (iPhone and iPad) and would market it extensively, and basically bring the desktop browser wars to mobile. He didn't claim any sources, anonymous or otherwise, or any leaked information, or any good faith basis at all for the assumption. It was purely a flight of fancy, and a poorly reasoned one.

Google hasn't announced Chrome for iPhone or iPad, of course. Chrome for iOS would be very difficult to pull off as anything other than a novelty app under iOS 5.

Now Google does make Gmail and Google+, and other apps for iOS, and they work okay. But their primary function isn't web browsing. And here's the thing: Apple doesn't allow alternate HTML or JavaScript rendering engines. If you want to show a web page in a iOS app, you use UIWebView and that's it. And UIWebView, as far as I understand, doesn't have access to the significantly faster Nitro JavaScript engine that the Safari app or that Web.app (Home screen web apps) enjoy.

If you've ever noticed how much slower web pages seem to render inside an iOS app, that's the reason.

Google prides itself on the speed of Chrome. That's part of its raison d'être. From their own implementation of WebKit to their own V8 JavaScript engine, Chrome is all about speed.

Why on earth would Google want to put the Chrome brand on a much slower thin web client on iOS? Even if they skin it to look more like Chrome (and UI has always been one of the worst aspects of Chrome), it would always be worse than Safari, and that would damage the Chrome brand.

Sure, there are "alternative" web browsers in the App Store, and some people love the extra features they provide, but none of those extra features are better local performance. (And I'd argue proxy performance is minimal at best, and always a trade off.)

Apple takes control and security extremely seriously in iOS. I doubt they'll let third party browser or rendering engines onto the iPhone or iPad in iOS 6 or any time in the near or distant future. Google takes Chrome's reputation for speed just as seriously. I doubt they'll put a frustratingly slow web browser on iOS any time in the near or distant future.

Google could very well be playing around with Chrome on iOS in the labs, but there's nothing to indicate it's coming, at least not based on the information presented to date.

Right now, the only story here is the unfortunate one about how it become a story.

Google has just released the too-long-in-coming Chrome for Android browser, and Phil from Android Central wasted no time loading it up on his Galaxy Nexus, and putting it up against an iPhone 4S running Safari, for a classic head-to-head, phono-e-phono, Mobile Nations browser showdown video.

Both browsers are based on WebKit, the project Apple adapted from the old Linux KHTML Konquerer browser and has been sharing back with the open source community ever since. So it's no surprise both score 100/100 on the Acid3 rendering test. Safari makes use of Apple's Nitro JavaScript engine, however, while Chrome has Google's V8 under the hood. That let Chrome edge out Safari in the SunSpider JavaScript benchmarks.

Safari and iOS in general still offer smoother, more closely-tracked multitouch scrolling, panning, and zooming. (No doubt due to iOS placing priority on interface rendering tasks, while they're left to fight as equals on Android.)

Interestingly, Chrome, like Safari, offers no support for Adobe's Flash player, or any other internet plugin.

Chrome is still in beta and only available for Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich right now. No doubt the release version will be even better still.

Likewise, Apple isn't slowing down. With iOS 5.1 on the horizon, Safari will improve as well.

Heck, now that BlackBerry has their new WebKit-based Torch browser, and Microsoft has embraced modern Internet Explorer builds on Windows Phone, it's getting harder to find a bad browser out there.

Check out the video below for full out web rendering showdown.

Source: Android Central

Apple's latest ad wants you to buy a $500+ tablet computer that runs App Store apps. Apple wants to sell you shiny things to make money.

Google's latest ad wants you to store personal details about your child's life, from birth, on their servers. Google wants your data so they can sell it (aggregated and anonymized, of course) to others to make money.

Taken in that context, Apple's ad might be obnoxious and highly commercial, but Google's is downright creepy.

That's not an Apple fanboy perspective, that's a privacy fanboy perspective. And it's not iPhone vs. Android either. iPhone users use tons of Google services, including Gmail, Maps, and Search, and YouTube built in, and Voice, Latitude, etc. available via apps. Given over a 100 million iOS devices, we're a huge part of Google's user base, and a valuable part. And for the record, I haven't liked some of Apple's recent ads either.

But I do think about how each company makes money and what they have to sell to make that money. Apple makes almost all their money selling hardware products -- selling to you. Google makes almost all their money selling advertising -- selling you. (Or in this case, your child. Seriously.)

I'm not telling anyone to stop using Google, far from it. I'm a huge Google user myself. What I'm saying is this is not really a good ad.

(Note: As Apple ramps up iAds, this'll be a concern for iOS users as well.)

Both videos after the break.

UPDATE: Again, I'm a huge user of Google services -- this is not intended to scare anyone but simply to inform users, so users can make better informed decisions. Convenience and security are always at odds, and choosing the convenience of free cloud services like Google's sacrifices the security of your personal information. I currently find that an acceptable compromise. If you don't have a problem with it either, than good for you. Enjoy. As long as we all know the deal.

Google has recently announced that they're removing H.264 -- the video compression open standard used by everything from iPad and iPhone to YouTube and Netflix -- from their Chrome browser. Up until now Google has been the only company to support all the major video codecs, including H.264, OGG Theora, and their own, newly open-sourced WebM. Apple supports H.264, as does Microsoft, and Firefox supports only OGG Theora.

Why the sudden change? Some might say to hurt Apple, whose iOS and iTunes depend heavily on the technology and have shown no signs of slowing down even after Google decided to stop so much partnering and start much more competing with Apple directly in the mobile OS and media services space. Others might say it's simply to give Google a competitive advantage and push adoption of their own WebM format. Neither motives are mutually exclusive but again put the advancement of standards-based web technology on the back burner -- something Google once championed. (Hey, you know it's bad when Microsoft is chiding you over lack of standards support, okay?)

Google claims they don't want to support proprietary formats like H.264, which rings decidedly false since they still do -- and have gone out of their way to expand -- support for Adobe's just-as-proprietary Flash plugin. Yes, H.264 carries licensing fees for commercial content but to say those amount to little more than a rounding error when compared to Google's monthly, never mind yearly profits is an overstatement. H.264 is a an international and open standard, supported by hardware acceleration in chipsets and file format compatibility in an increasing amount of consumer video creation and playback gear. It was on its way to becoming the video equivalent of MP3 (which Google probably won't drop support for either). Yet with native H.264 support taken away from Chrome, only Adobe Flash H.264 support will remain (because Flash is packaged right into Chrome, and Flash uses H.264 for a lot of their higher quality video). So in order to watch it, you'll have to use Flash.

Why does this matter to iPhone and iPad users? Because if Google (and Palm and RIM) hadn't chosen to compete against Apple by cozying up to Adobe's Flash the amount of battery draining, phone heating web video content would be lessened today and the H.264 share would be even higher. In other words, we'd have even more iOS-friendly videos and less sites we couldn't access on our iOS devices.

Remember, Flash existed to fill a void in web technology, much like ActiveX in Internet Explorer 6, and like ActiveX (and Real) the advent of better, more efficient solutions would have led to Flash's gradual decrease until it was back to what it was ideally and originally suited for -- efficient frame-based animation.

Apple, famously, doesn't support Flash on iPhone, iPod touch, iPad, or Apple TV and doesn't even install the plugin by default in Mac OS X. Do we really want Google to be more like Apple?

I've promised to be nicer to Google this year but they're making it hard right out the outset. Still, I'm not going to complain about this as a competitive business decision, and I won't vomit even a little at how they once again disingenuously and insultingly wrapped their competitive business decision up in the cloak of openness in an attempt to pander to open software advocates. (They know better.) I'll just hope Google changes their mind before those self-same FOSSies turn on them. Beware the faboys scorned.

But even if they don't, what will happen? Will YouTube go through the massive re-encoding effort to switch to WebM? Will Netflix? Will iTunes? Probably not, so as usual it will just be us users who suffer. Or switch back to IE...

Use Google's Chrome browser on your Mac or Windows PC and wish you could easily transfer data on to your iPhone, iPod touch, or iPad? Well thanks to a Chrome Extension you can and we'll show you how after the break!

Chrome to iPhone is a little extension that sits in the upper right hand corner, and sends the page you are currently looking at to your iPhone.

• Download the Chrome Extension, Chrome to iPhone
• Install the plugin onto Chrome.
• The options page should automatically open (if not right click the "iPhone" next to your address bar and select options)

• Copy the link onto your iPhone (this is the one bit of manual typing you'll have to do)
• Follow the instructions on your iPhone to add the extension to your iPhone home screen.
• Once you've done this you are ready to start using "Chrome for iPhone"

When you are viewing an ordinary website, press the extension on your Chrome browser and open the home screen icon on your iOS device, it will redirect you to the same website you were looking at on your browser.

If you are viewing a YouTube video, when you press the extension, it will open the YouTube application and play the same video you were watching.

Unfortunately due to Google's Maps restriction, there is an extra step to get this working with Google Maps, however it still works great if you need "directions" on your phone.

After setting your route, be sure to click "Link" located on the right hand side of the map, and copy that back into your address bar before pressing the extension.

Finally if you highlight any piece of text, you can right click and copy the text straight to your iPhone. This will open a "clipboard" with the text there ready to be used.

A great thing about this extension is that it works over 3G so your iPhone doesn't even have to be connected to the same Wifi as the Mac/PC.

If you give it a try let us know how it works for you and if you have any questions, fire away in the comments!

Tips of the day will range from beginner-level 101 to advanced-level ninjary. If you already know this tip, keep the link handy as a quick way to help a friend. If you have a tip of your own you'd like to suggest, add them to the comments or send them in to dailytips@tipb.com. (If it's especially awesome and previously unknown to us, we'll even give ya a reward...)

Should you go around with a naked iPhone or do you need a case? If you do need a case, what kind should you get? That's a question we get asked all the time and it's the topic for the third episode of our new, conversational video podcast, TiPb TV.

Rene and I discuss the pros and cons of bare, barely there, and full on armor for iPhone 4. We also show off several of our favorite cases including the Case Mate Chrome and Ivy, the Incipio Ultra Light, the Golla Bag, the Otterbox Defender, and more.

We take on the argument of case vs. case vs. naked, the cost and benefits of protecting against the bumps and scratches of avoiding bulk. So if you've been trying to decide which type of case is best for you, or if you're daring to go bare with no case on at all, we'll help you make the best choice possible.

Watch along and then leave us a comment and tell us -- which case, if any, do you use?

The Case-Mate Barely There Chrome Case for iPhone 4 is just stunningly beautiful. If you've been following me on Twitter you know it's my new favorite iPhone 4 case and considering how long I used the Case-Mate Barely There Chrome Case for my iPhone 3G it's likely to remain so for a long time to come.

But looks and personal preferences aren't everything -- hard to believe, I know! -- so check out the video above and keep reading after the jump to see how it performs.

Case-Mate Barely There Chrome Case for iPhone 4 is easy to put on. Just slide it in volume control side first and press it down into place. Once safe and secure, you still have access to all the buttons and ports and it's cut generously enough around the dock that most 3rd party cables should have no problem fitting in.

Thin and smooth around the sides it doesn't do anything to help your grip but it doesn't hurt it much either. If you're worried about the infamous death-touch, yes it prevents that problem in weak signal areas.

The build quality is fantastic. The edges are smooth and well-finished and perfectly tapered so you can run your finger freely across the screen without bumping into them. Because it's a slim case, while it will prevent your iPhone 4 from getting bumps and scrapes it probably won't do much to protect it from high impact drops.

The Case-Mate Barely There Chrome Case for iPhone 4 includes a mirrored screen protector. It looks beautiful when the screen is off but does darken it and shift colors slightly towards the blue spectrum when the screen is on, which is something the iPhone 3G/3GS version didn't do. If it bothers you, don't use it.

Overall the Case-Mate Barely There Chrome Case for iPhone 4, available from the TiPb iPhone 4 accessory store, is just gorgeous and very, very classy looking. I'd recommend it to anyone who doesn't need a higher level of protection. If you want your iPhone 4 to look great and attract attention this is absolutely the hottest case on the market at the moment.

I absolutely love it.

Pros

• Gorgeous
• Easy to take on and off
• Excellent fit and finish

Cons

• Screen protector darkens and tints screen

CrackBerry Kevin decided to put the brand new BlackBerry Torch 9800's brand new BlackBerry OS 6 WebKit browser up against iPhone 4's iOS 4 Safari and Captivate's Android 2.1 Chrome in a good, old-fashioned browser battle royal.

The results? Win, lose, or draw, RIM has certainly come a long way when it comes to browsers. See the video above and CrackBerry.com's play-by-play for more. Let us know your thoughts below.

Say hello to the Case-Mate Barely There Chrome Case for the iPhone [$19.95 iMore Store Link]. It's a streamlined case with a chrome outer shell and a mirrored screen protector. And it's the hottest iPhone case to come around in a while.

If you haven’t already bought a gift for that special man/woman in your life, then just pick this one up. The perfectly mirrored surface is beautifully complimented by the gleaming chrome case. Yes, if Hercules had had this case he would have been able to defeat Medusa and make sure his hair still looked good. The back of the case also has a “beauty spot” for your apple icon (a hole in the case so you can see the apple logo). This case is such a stunner that it got a gasp of approval from one of my more difficult to please male friends.

This case offers protection for the iPhone without being bulky and cumbersome. It covers the edges and corners of the phone while allowing easy access for volume, mute and charging.

My favorite feature on this case is that the sides are protective but it fits below the level of the screen. This means that you can swipe right off the edge of the phone, without hitting the edge of the case. (I find cases that have a raised side edge very constraining and disruptive.)

The case easily comes off and on the iPhone. You place the iPhone into the case sideways with the volume and mute button going in first. Taking off the case is easy if you first gently pry off one of the corners and then use the Apple logo cutout to push out the phone.

Every case has an Achilles heel and one of the drawbacks to this case is that it would not offer the phone a lot of protection in case of a high drop.

Also, I was hoping that this case would allow me to place my phone into its base charger. It is close but you still need to remove the case to charge it into a base charger.

I enjoyed this case so much that I removed my Gelaskin backing so that the apple logo would be properly displayed! (Yeah, I'm cool geeky like that).

Disclaimer: iMore Store provided the case for this review.

To learn more, check out TiPb's iPhone Accessory Store...

The intertubes are positively being flooded with what has to be some of the biggest browser news since Apple debuted MobileSafari on the iPhone: Google is getting in the game.

The advertising juggernaut has revealed that they'll soon be releasing "Chrome" (Beta), built on the same Apple-contributed, open source WebKit framework that forms the foundation of Safari on OS X (and also powers Nokia and Adobe web rendering). Paul Thurrott secured the screenshots above (with accompanying analysis), and Apple Insider gets deep down into the guts of the thing, including it's sandboxed tabs, "incognito" surf mode, and V8 Javascript engine. A Windows version will ship first, followed by Mac and Linux some point in the future.

Google, via referral fees for the search boxes built into Firefox and Safari, has bankrolled Mozilla, and to a lesser extent, Apple's browser for years. Will creating Chrome and making a play for the browser and WebApp space turn some former allies into enemies? Google's already begun down that path with the Android OS for handsets, and in the content space via Knol and YouTube (though they've thus far not managed to monetize it).

Looking for some Apple-like 360 degree spherical integration of their own, perhaps? And, as Google seems poised to become the next Microsoft, are we still safe in believing that whole "don't be evil" motto?