Safari 3 from Apple

anyone giving it a try? HTML Performance JavaScript Performance Application Launch Blazing performance.

The fastest web browser on any platform, Safari loads pages up to 2 times faster than Internet Explorer 7 and up to 1.6 times faster than Firefox 2.
And it executes JavaScript up to 2.8 times faster than Internet Explorer 7 and up to 1.6 times faster than Firefox 2.

What does all that mean for you? Less time loading pages and more time enjoying them.

Performance measured in seconds. Testing conducted by Apple in June 2007 on a 2.16GHz Intel Core 2 Duo-based iMac system running Windows XP Professional SP2, configured with 1GB of RAM and an ATI Radeon X1600 with 128MB of VRAM. HTML and JavaScript benchmarks based on VeriTest’s iBench Version 5.0 using default settings. Testing conducted with a beta version of Safari; all other browsers were shipping versions. Performance will vary based on system configuration, network connection, and other factors.
http://www.apple.com/safari/

 

It is faster than IE7,FF2 & Opera. And it renders pages much better than FF2 and Opera. Installed with the Flash Plugin too. Unlike the other browsers where you have to hit a certain page before you realize you need to download plugin.

EDIT: I found a bug ....... it has to do with howardforums and the quicklinks.

 

It's kind of odd, but according to the polls here, people on OS X prefer Firefox over Safari.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=1038


Now that safari's available in Windows, I wonder if people using Windows will prefer Safari to Firefox instead

 

Yeah, personally I prefer to use Firefox over Safari on OS X, but I may switch back to Safari 3 (if nothing else to use the functionality to make dashboard widgets out of webpages from within Safari). And Firefox has been getting a little less stable for me on Windows and OS X, so I'm willing to give it a shot.

But the real reason this is being released probably has less to do with trying to compete with Firefox and IE as that Safari on Windows will make it easier for Windows devs to make and test out iPhone apps (since basically if it works in Safari, it works on the iPhone).

 

Well the Firefox Add-ons/Extensions are inreplaceable. I can't speak for the peformance on a Mac.

 

Tidbit of information: Safari uses the KHTML rendering engine, which is originally from the KDE team, which Apple extends and tweaks into being useful on OSX and now on Windows

 

^^ It's kind of annoying how proprietary software makers can borrow from open-source developers, but not vice-versa.

 

Apple contributes WebKit code back into the community (and Konqueror and others who use WebKit have been able to benefit from Apple's own contributions).

It's actually probably one of the best examples of how the relationship can work.

If your point is that open source can't borrow from closed source; well, yeah, but that's the difference between open and closed source.

With open source, you are sort of acknowledging that proprietary software developers could use and benefit from your work. One could always choose a super-restrictive licensing term though to prevent that if they like though.

 

Anyone else have trouble with the tab settings? Is there a way to get it to always open up popups in new tabs instead of windows?

(e.g. clicking on an external link from inside this forum, or clicking on an external link from inside gmail, etc.)

 

Last I checked, Safari rendered pages pretty badly. At least, not up to the standards of FF2 and Opera.

Has that changed?

 

That depends on the license... GPL doesn't allow it, for example. (If you use GPL'ed software, you have to make your anything that uses it GPL as well)

If someone release open source software under a license that allows it to be used in closed-source proprietary code, then you can hardly complain that it is used in those cases.

Personally, I'd never use the GPL license... Open source is not a religion or a war for world domination to me. If I want to open-source something, I want to make it available to people *whether or not* they themselves opensource their software.

 

That's what the GPL is for. If you do open-source development, and you don't want proprietary software developers to use your stuff in their proprietary products, you can use the GPL to make it illegal for them to do that.

Edit: Ah, Jalf beat me to it.

 

WebKit (the engine behind Safari, and also being used by Nokia, Adobe and some other companies now), is actually very standards compliant...... sometimes too much so perhaps.

I think the bigger problem has more to do with how webpages are coded; a lot of times WebKit won't deal with incorrect code as well as IE or Firefox (and Firefox and IE themselves will deal with incorrect code in different ways).

 

Hey, for those who have tried it... does Safari for Windows have a Mac-like UI (Aqua scrollbars and all) like iTunes?

Also, does it run any processes in the background like iTunes does? Like SafariHelper or something?

 

It does have Aqua scrollbars. It is iTunes-esque, except it is brushed metal. You can see what it looks like in the screenshot at :

http://www.apple.com/safari/

 

I don't think so...I think its more iTunes-like...in the Windows version I think there's no brushed metal, according to the demo video. But yes I see the "blue-jello" scrollbars.

Standard webpages work fine on Safari. Its the "odd-one-out" that doesn't really work well...but the same was said for Firefox until it gained 15% market share.

EDIT: According to this picture I can't see any brushed metal...its on Windows, because you can't see the X buttons on the left side.

 

Ahh, you're right.... looked closer at the one on apple.com/safari too. Maybe they're finally doing away with brushed metal forever everywhere.

If WebKit really does start to take off, I guess anything is possible........ Adobe's using WebKit as the HTML layout engine for Apollo..... Nokia uses it for their browser. And of course Apple uses it.

 

I just downloaded it and don't really like it. It did not seem faster than FF to me and most of the websites I visited didn't render too well. I'll keep it anyway. I'm sure it will get better in time as it's only a beta.


Changed my mind and got rid of it. I'll stick to my Firefox.

 

i dont know about u guys, but safari 3 is a MAJOR memory hog. Compared to FF2(which is pretty bad itself in terms of memory management), this thing gets fat pretty quickly. So yeah, I'm staying away from it until they fix this problem...

 

^That's what I was about to ask. Memory management. Thanks for keeping me with firefox.

 

Pros: Speed,speed & more speed, Gui feels good.

Cons:

Many, but its a beta, so we have to bear with it.
1.The external link thing already mentioned above.
2.Bookmarks donot have the dropdown like in FF.
3.It did not work sites like sony.com,hp.com, i thought its a problem with my system or the plugin, but i checked i had the latest plugins.
The sites opened fined in FF.
4.When u minimize the browser and then click on it again, it resizes, itself, instead of being maximise.
5.Big, big memory hog. I had a instance where the taskbar showed it taking over 1,01,200(Could not belive my eyes).
6.Also wanna check another difference, lets try the apple website itself.
Try to watch the leopard preview i.e tour of the features.
First try the FF, it will lauch quick time and while buffering, it will show a progress bar, which is visible(Black bar increasing....)

now check the same thing with safari, it will play the video fine, but the progress bar is not visible.
It surely make a difference when u r on using a slow internet connection.

There are many to name them...

This is not safari's mistake, but have you people tried out the FF 3 beta.
its available through downloads.com as grand.. something..

Its fast, very fast, just like safari.

I think apple should be

The reason for safari on windows: I-phone,I-phone & I-phone nothing else.....