SuperSite Blog

By most innovative browser, Apple clearly means Google Chrome, because my first impression of the browser was just that: it's a re-skin of Chrome.

*shurgs*

What the hey, I'm pretty bored. I'll give it a try.

Could Apple be getting serious about Windows software? I'm gonna have to try this out, but if they are gonna utilize Aero and more Windows tools and such, I can't wait for an iTunes that doesn't load slowly on my screen and function very slowly on a regular basis.

NIce! While Safari on Mac is decent, there is nothing about it that makes me use it as the default. Firefox has that role locked up as of right now.

I'll be trying this out though there seem to be some neat features in it. Although I'm not sure about the CoverFlow history browser. Looks like ti may be cool for five minutes or so and then never used again.

"Could Apple be getting serious about Windows software?"

After the recent massive security flaws in Safari and iTunes, maybe they are....

....or else, lets just pass around that doobie again, shall we?

I'd like to try it, but after using itunes I refuse to install anything from Apple on my computer. That has been the worst experience of my life. Not to mention the pain of uninstalling it.

"... but after using itunes I refuse to install anything from Apple on my computer."

Amen to that, brutha!  When iTunes proceeded to delete my entire music library right in front of my eyes, I could only shake my head and laugh.  I had a backup, of course, and I promptly uninstalled that piece of cr@p software....

eh... so far I'm kinda both impressed and dissapointed.

Some of the animations are smooth and it seems to be decently fast and decent looking on my xp laptop.

On the other hand it wanted to install both quicktime and bonjour along with the browser.  I've never been too hot about the tabs along the titlebar look like chrome but I may come around.

Pingback from  Safari 4 Beta para Windows traz muitas novidades » WinAjuda

Not bad. It is very Chrome-ish if only because of the tabs at the top of the address bar. So far so good. It is noticeably faster than FF on my Mac and they've copied the search suggestions a la Firefox which was one of my main holdovers for Making Safari the default browser on Mac.

The visual History search is pretty neat but, like I said I probably will never use it past farting around with it today.

Top Sites, while copied from the Chrome start page, is actually pretty sleek.

Until Google gets off their asses and gets Chrome for Mac out, this is a pretty decent alternative.

Can't wait to give it a try on the Windows side. Hopefully it works this well because, honestly, Safari for Windows in it's current state is a horrible POS.

"On the other hand it wanted to install both quicktime and bonjour along with the browser."

Then when you get just Quicktime installed, it installs Apple Software Update by default, which also never tells you when Quicktime has updates just by itself.  Immediately, it will say that "iTunes+Quicktime" has an update, and wants to install iTunes.

FYI to all:  Quicktime has its own auto-updater.  You don't need to check the option "automatically update Quicktime and other Apple software" during Quicktime installation.  Any time you launch Quicktime, it checks by itself to tell you if there's an update available.  Use that method to check.  That way, you don't get any iTunes crap, or other nonsense, such as iPood support, MobileSh!te, or the Bon débarras! networking stack.

@RunTimeError

It seems much better than the previous version on Windows.  It looks like they put the same attention into making Safari on windows as they usually do on their mac stuff.  My first impressions have been very good.

"iPood support, MobileSh!te, or the Bon débarras! networking stack."

What a sad little child you are, "Waethorn".

"By most innovative browser, Apple clearly means Google Chrome, because my first impression of the browser was just that: it's a re-skin of Chrome."

You do know that Chrome was built on top of the Safari engine?

"What a sad little child you are, "Waethorn"

Daily.  Be careful he may post links to malware, and if you are running Windows then it could be harmful.

On the Mac at least it still does not fix or offer an options for a few things that irk me.  

1.  When clicking on the URL bar it wont select all, you need to tripple click or click the little icon.  Every other browser on the Mac and Windows, to include Safari in Windows defaults to select all when clicking on the URL or Search bar.  Just give us the option.

2.  No side bar for History or Bookmarks.....why??????????

3.  No way to add a new Bookmark folder when adding a bookmark....why?  FF and IE do this and I use Bookmarks like crazy, create new folders on the fly when adding a bookmark, almost daily.

4.  No sort in bookmarks, this is a joke.  The work around is to drop them onto the desktop in a folder, sort them there then delete them in Safari and drag them back.

"What a sad little child you are"

No, sad is releasing a beta to distract from this:

blogs.zdnet.com/security

"Be careful he may post links to malware, and if you are running Windows then it could be harmful."

Only from those that take IT advice from you, I'm sure.

Typical Apple eye candy. Looks pretty gimmicky too. I do not like how it automatically starts filling in sites on the top sites page. Uncalled for. Looks like Chrome too.

I don't know if I will ditch Chrome and FF for this. However, their developer tools are really cool! That is where I see innovation in this browser.

Wae, wjile you're here, I tried installing .net framework 3.5 SP1 [a critical update] and I get continuous restarts on my XP SP2 box. I even tried the  Redistributable Package, as well as trying to reinstall from 2.0, but I can't even delete them. I had to restart in safemode and do a system restore. PM me if you have any suggestions.

As for Safari, I use IE on Windows and FF on the Mac. Do many Mac owners even use Safari?

"You do know that Chrome was built on top of the Safari engine?"

No, it was built on the open source WebKit engine that Safari also uses.

Don't worry, MS fans, Paul will soon return to his regularly scheduled programming of blasting Safari for no apparent reason.

No thanks, Apple. I'm very happy with IE8 RC1 as my main browser and Chrome as my backup/play with with I'm bored browser.

Some of these "innovations" sound like copies from other browsers. Top Sites sounds like Chrome's New Tab page, which was copied from Opera. Tabs on top of the address bar - Chrome.

My favorite new feature though is native look in Windows! Now that's a show stopper -- downloading Safari -- NOW!! Well, not really.

@Dipsht Admin,

When I do a who-is on webkit.org their DNS is hosted by....

Name Server:NSERVER2.APPLE.COM

Name Server:NSERVER.APPLE.COM

Name Server:NSERVER3.APPLE.COM

Name Server:NSERVER4.APPLE.COM

Apple owns them.

BTW I am glad Apple has decided to at least make Safari look like a Windows app. Maybe it'll do the same with QuickTime (not that I use QT) and also make it (QT) load fast.

I don't consider a native look a feature since that's something it should have done in the first place. Microsoft's apps have a native look in OS X, why can't Apple do the same??

"When I do a who-is on webkit.org their DNS is hosted by....

Name Server:NSERVER2.APPLE.COM

.

.

.

Apple owns them."

THIS is the snake oil you sell??!?

I can do the same thing here:

www.networksolutions.com/.../wininformant.com

It doesn't mean that Neospire owns Penton....

Apple puts money into the project.  It doesn't mean they own them one iota.

The browser looks nice and runs fast.  But the killer for me was that is used 330MB of memory to run with 3 tabs open.  Firefox and IE only used about 30 MB.  Once they trim down the memory usage, I might give it a shot.

""You do know that Chrome was built on top of the Safari engine?"

No, it was built on the open source WebKit engine that Safari also uses."

Technically, Webkit is a fork of KHTML (used by Konqeuror and KDE), done specifically for Safari.  My contention is not the rendering engine, but the fact that the UI looks like someone ripped it from Chrome, added some Apple eyecandy, and the shoved it on top of Safari, and then throwing the usual Apple spin about they're "innovating".  Apparently, for Apple, innovation is nothing more than ripping off various FOSS applications (KHTML, OpenBSD, Chromium), putting enough Apple eyecandy in it to maker it "trendy" and pseudo intellectual, and then selling it to Macolytes.

Hmmm. Not to happy about Apple software on my computer. Have to use iTunes as I love my iPhone, but oh my talk about bloated slow software that choose to crash every now and then...

I think I will give them the benefit of the doubt and at least try it out. But they really need to impress me on this one...

"Apparently, for Apple, innovation is nothing more than ripping off various FOSS applications (KHTML, OpenBSD, Chromium), putting enough Apple eyecandy in it to maker it "trendy" and pseudo intellectual, and then selling it to Macolytes."

THANK YOU!

I've been saying this for years.

"pseudo intellectual"

I like that term.  And it fits Apple to a tee.  :)

....for those uninformed:

"pseu·do

adjective  

Definition:

not genuine: not authentic or sincere, in spite of appearances"

--encarta dictionary

Holy smokes! I found this and a bunch others like it:

"Safari 4 benchmarked: 42x faster than IE 7, 3.5x faster than Firefox 3"

crave.cnet.co.uk/.../0,39029471,49301219,00.htm

I may give it a try.

The SquirrelFish javaScript engine (which I notice has been renamed "Nitro" for official release) is wicked fast.

"42x faster than IE 7"

Where are the system specs they're running this on?  I ended up getting ~20000ms for IE7, not 40000ms like they claim....

This is on a Core 2 Duo E8400 w/ Vista 64-bit and 4GB of RAM.

These are my IE7 benchmarks:

http://tinyurl.com/dj7kzf

Wae, you should email the author about it. IE7 is pretty fast on my $400 Vista laptop. [you all probably thought that I was gonna stop].

IE8 is already the slowest in the crowd.

crave.cnet.co.uk/.../0,39029471,49301219,00.htm

Thank god the EU will make MS give people a choice for one of the much better browser options.

"These are my IE7 benchmarks: tinyurl.com/dj7kzf"

Wae, aren't you the guy who said, "If you're as naive enough to click on a non-descript [sic] link ... then you fail at IT, and you learned a valuable lesson the hard way.  Otherwise, continue on about your business."?

Or maybe you're the guy who said, "I always strip out the www. if it's there and prepend preview. on the link so that I can see where it's headed first."

Don't trust him, people.

"Where are the system specs they're running this on?"

Apple claims 30x faster with this setup: "All testing conducted on an iMac® 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo system running Windows Vista, with 2GB of RAM."

www.apple.com/.../24safari.html

"Thank god the EU will make MS give people a choice"

I know, thank you EU.  For what, I have no idea.

rj, I guess you are so used to your parents making decisions for you that you expect the same of the government.  Having the EU give edicts on technology is like asking Steve Jobs about humility.

Google has now joined others against Microsoft in the EU anti-trust case.

www.businessinsider.com/google-joining-europes-anti-microsoft-antitrust-pile-on-2009-2

en.wikipedia.org/.../WebKit

Apple started Webcore...then in 2005 they open sourced it and called it webkit.

Apple is the prime contributor, Apple owns hosts its DNS.

Spin any way you want weelittlehorn.

Waethorn:

How is basing your OS off of an open source platform ripping it off when you make major changes?  The whole point of open source is to encourage diversification.

And how is Windows more genuine?  After all, NT was originally tightly connected to OS/2.  Does that make Vista a ripoff of IBM's work no matter how much development has been made since?

And if Apple is guilty of producing nothing more than eye candy, that makes Microsoft worse as it has very consciously chased after Apple's UI appearance and feel with Vista and Windows 7 (and that's not hyperbole; there's e-mail unearthed in a court case which showed MS execs saying they had to have something to compete with Tiger's visuals).

"Apparently, for Apple, innovation is nothing more than ripping off various FOSS applications (KHTML, OpenBSD, Chromium), putting enough Apple eyecandy in it to maker it "trendy" and pseudo intellectual, and then selling it to Macolytes."

You're kidding right? Apple ripping off? Isn't what they did what open source is all about. They took something that is open sourced. Improved it tremendously and then gave it back to the community. Chromium and the others then benefited from that. Since all the years that Apple has been improving WebKit is then what Google and others took to base their browsers on. You don't know what you're talking about.

"en.wikipedia.org/.../WebKit

Apple started Webcore...then in 2005 they open sourced it and called it webkit."

Not exactly. From the wikipedia article we see:

"WebKit was originally derived by Apple Inc. from the Konqueror browser’s KHTML software library".

If Apple can create Safari based on KHTML and was considered "innovative" then so is Google. By this measurement, IE must be the most innovative since Microsoft developed its own engine.

"Apple claims 30x faster with this setup"

That's not what's in the review, which is what I was asking.  They say it's a PC with a Core 2 Duo 2.1GHz.  No other specs are known though.  Learn to read losta.

"Apple started Webcore..."

....which is a fork of KHTML.  Members of the original KHTML team maintain Webkit too.  Webkit is just a fork, but it's maintained by many different people, some of which are associated by different organizations, and many that aren't.

"How is basing your OS off of an open source platform ripping it off when you make major changes?"

You and Lindy should read this section:

en.wikipedia.org/.../WebKit

"Since all the years that Apple has been improving WebKit is then what Google and others took to base their browsers on. You don't know what you're talking about."

Sorry, but you all fail:

en.wikipedia.org/.../KHTML

Safari 4.0 beta is based on a Webkit version that is derived from KHTML version 526.  Only Chrome 1.0 has support of KHTML 528.

All arguing aside, if I could simply just install safari, I MIGHT try it. But seriously, I don't need itunes, quicktime, bonjour, apple update, ipodservice, ipodtask, quicktimetask, etc.

I bet you also if you uninstall safari, it leaves everything above still on your computer, minus the web browser. (Just like uninstalling itunes does)

Why make it so difficult Apple? Shouldn't they make their software work really well on Windows so people would want to switch? Or are they purposely making it run sluggish so Windows users think Windows is the problem?

I just don't get it.

I am all that is man.

Quicktime install gave me an option to install the updater. iTunes was a separate DL, but QT is ppart of it of course. I have notice all kinds of remnants in program folders after 'uninstalling' many programs. That's why I don't like to test many apps these days. Like I posted above, a simple 'critical' update from Microsoft crippled my PC. [.net framework 3.5 SP1] and I wasn't alone when I googled the update and 'problems'.

I could careless who owns what for webkit. Thats pretty much a moot point since most browsers are using webkit. I just want Apple to aggressively address one issue in Safari. SECURITY, SECURITY, SECURITY!!!

Get it done. And please, can we get patches done faster than the average 95 days of risk?

If they did that, I'd be open to trying Safari on a Windows Machine.

I will try it on my win7 beta install....I am one of the few people that didn't mind safari 3 on windows (only on certain monitors/resolutions though - sometimes the font styling looked horrible, but on the right setup it actually looked pretty good) - save for the huge memory footprint....unfortunately from the comments above it looks like 4 will be more of the same - though it is just the first beta...and safari 3 came a long way from its first beta (not enough to convince me to use it as my primary browser though).

If Microsoft does start to bundle other browsers in Windows, who will be responsible for security and stuff? Imagine Microsoft bundling Safari with Windows. Yikes! Knowing Apple, the company will be the first to point fingers at MS when the brower's security holes are exploited. Of course, in the end, the user benefits, that is, if the user is someone sitting in China or Russia, writing software code to exploit Windows.

Horrible, with 1 tab open on Windows it was using over 400mb of RAM.

I've downloaded it and installed it. The only thing I found annoying about the install was that it installed bonjour. If you look back at the other version of safari I have to say that the UI is very nice compared with the gray theme of OSX. I love it on a mac, but on a pc it looked horrible, and did some weird things. I love the tabs like in chrome it gives you more space to view you pages.

For me it worked ok, not gr8. I found that it consumed too much memory. when I had about 6 tabs open it almost reached a 200m of ram!! And it seemed a little sluggish if you compare the performance between firefox and chrome, well it's still in beta.

I think apple is doing a good job of refining there software on windows so it could work better. I hope they port this to Itunes and make it work like it should on windows.

btw I love the areo glass so nice. Microsoft should do the same for IE 8!!!

@waethorn: re webkit, open source, etc. you really have no idea, do you?

I think if Microsoft really wants effective advertisement for Windows, they should use someone like robertsjoe. It's not like they're not using school kids now, but this one is sure to tilt things in Microsoft's favor.

More tests show IE7 and IE8 to be last in the pack.

weblogs.asp.net/.../acid-3-test-safari-4-beta-safari-3-5-ie-7-ie-8-firefox-3-06-firefox-3-1-and-chrome.aspx

"you really have no idea, do you?"

I know twice as much as you claim, and care half as much as you know.

I just downloaded Safari 4. I've read some of the benchmarks, as well as some of the bickering that goes on here. Best I can tell, Safari 4 is quite fast. Paul's site loads much faster than it does in IE 6 or 7. That's gotta count for something, no?

@waethorn: don't you peddle Microsoft's wares for a living?

blogs.zdnet.com/security

Apple playing catch up.

OH NOES!  Trouble brews:

"the crucial malware block is powered by Google’s blacklist of malicious sites"

news.xinhuanet.com/.../content_10750730.htm

"don't you peddle Microsoft's wares for a living?"

Aren't you sick of dancing around in your cage while collecting peanut donations off the ground from the circus-goers?

"Google has now joined others against Microsoft in the EU anti-trust case."

And that is supposed to give it legitimacy?  Google is a competitor, and one that has developed a Google centric browser, so I think they have an incentive.  "Do no evil" my a**.

As mentioned, what about updating this software when the inevitable security vulnerability is found?  MS should not have to be responsible for third party software being installed on their OS.  Likewise, shouldn't Apple and the various Linux distros be required to add alternative browsers as well?  And shouldn't Apple be required to open up iTunes and iPod's to third party software and hardware?  Include the Zune marketplace with an install of iTunes?  It's basically the same thing, and it is ridiculous in either case.

@Dipsh: "Do no evil" my a**.

:-)

I think Google realized that instead of paying OEMs to bundle Chrome, this way, they could get it done for free. Or Google might adopt a two pronged strategy against MS - bundling through OEMs and bundling by MS. Either way, Opera will end up a big loser.

@Sharky:

Google should be made to bundle IE with Android.  :)