Safari 3 (Now Windows compatible)...

[apowerr]

Real mature , considering my post had a general motive to it. I was not aiming that at you. Regardless, what I said was the truth, and you know it.

I know, I dont know why RobotSkip would have said that! I never find you posting anything thats blatantly fan-boyish at all. W/e Robotskip has his moments

[EPDM]

Runs perfectly fine for me on Vista and loads as fast as IE7/FF but..

 

I'd more less surprised if they announced they were selling MacOS stand-alone for PCs or that Steve Jobs announced he would stop being a lying whore.

 

It's working mostly fine for me on Vista but it looks completely ugly/out of place.

 

That's because the title-bar with the buttons "appears" much larger than Safari on a Mac (especially Safari2). Unfortunatly unlike EI7 where this big combined title/button-bar is transpararent in Vista, Apple in their wisdom made in it not transparant on Windows Vista (although transparancy and big title-bars were a feature that sels Vista).

 

It must be said; font rendering (if it works at all) looks very nice on Windows. I can't try it on OSX because my rig doesn't do well with 10.4.8 and above. SO I'm stuck with 10.4.7 (Safari 2).

 

Some questions:

 

- Where is the Home button ?

- Can I turn off the Bookmarks bar like I can in FF ?

- Is there an equivalent to the ctrl+enter shortcut which adds www. and .com to whatever is in the address bar ?

- Why don't the extra buttons on my mouse work like they do in FF, IE7 and other apps ?

- Is there a way to speed up scrolling or turn on some smooth scrolling type thing ?

 

Can't you add buttons on the title bar by right-clicking somewhere on it? On mac (Safari 2) there's this embeded dot between the address-bar and the google-bar where you had to right-click to customize this title-bar.

 

Anyway, I'm going to continue using FF, it looks better, has extensions, etc.. actually, IE7 also looks better, has extensions and so on too.

 

Especially on Vista. Which has transparancy. In this case it could help matters a lot because of the big ugly gray bar on top. I hope the final version works a lot better on Windows otherwise this is a missed opportunity for Apple. I also hope they make it fully 10.4 compatible on OSX and not restrict matters to 10.4.9 only because I'm not very thrilled to upgrade to a crappy OSX-revision. But I doubt they'll do this.

 

Oh well. It was nice while it lasted but I feel OSX overstayed its welcome on my P4 i915 system. Current revisions behave like {censored}. Time to go back to Windows (Vista) or Ubuntu on this P4 i915 rig.

 

Cheers

 

Apple is not going to make an OS X app look same/better and have equal functionalities under Windows, and Microsoft is not going to make a Windows app look same/better and have equal functionalities under OS X, thats a fact. You can't expect Safari 3 too look just as good under Windows like it does on OS X. The core frameworks are different, for one thing.

 

Most of the apps on Windows look out of place. Microsoft's user interface guidelines are rarely ever followed by any windows developer. Safari 3 under Windows doesnt look any more out of place than iTunes under windows does.

 

Problem is that both the mentioned apps look VERY out of place on a windows desktop. In the case of this webbrowser you can use IE7 which looks neat especially on Vista aero. Or stick with Safari which looks more of a x-windows app on both platforms but form some odd reason doesn't look so out of place on Windows. With iTunes the cards are different because you need that app to get a "flawless" interconnection with your ipod. Sure you can upload stuff with WinAMp too but that's not the same. If apple would at least allow te set transparancy on their big ugly grey tool-bars that would make a huge difference particularly on that big safari toolbar.

 

In fact if they'd apply the same transparance on Safari 3 as IE7 has then it would almost be aero-complaint ;-)

 

Cheers

[B612]

Safari for Windows is really {censored}! Wow, I have never seen such a terrible rendering in my life! None of the CSS and Java work! It is impossible to use it, unless you have to read very simple web pages. Really hope they're gonna make it better in the final version.

[Colonel Ingus]

Safari for Windows is really {censored}!

 

It's barely out of alpha stage. Why is it that some people just don't understand what the beta stage is for?

 

Really hope they're gonna make it better in the final version.

Yeah, I'm sure with over 1 million downloads in the first 48 hours that they've decided to keep it exactly like this forever

[macmaniac]

Safari on my hack running Vista works great.

 

Which got me to thinking that Apple Inc. may not be entering into the browser wars per se. They may have created it as a companion to Bootcamp so that Apple users that are using Bootcamp/XP/Vista on their intel macs can still use Safari.

 

This could explain why some of us are having great results with Safari on XP/Vista, and some of us not. Apple prioritized development to work bug free on Apple hardware first.

[track09]

Safari 3 beta on my Windows Vista runs great, flawlessly I should add.

 

Here are some notes:

It does consume more RAM than IE7 or Firefox under Vista, but not so much to make a big deal, and the load times make up for it.

 

True, the GUI is out of place, but I kind of like it. I think the feel of Safari fits well into Vista, even if it's completely different, it FEELS nice.

 

It's FAST, it takes a little time when I first open it, it's slower than IE7 or FF2.0, but once I'm browsing, it snaps up pages, I really like that.

 

For me, it's perfectly stable, I've had no issues, no crashes, and everything renders properly for me, under the new 3.0.1.

 

Safari for Windows is a welcome addition, and even though it's beta, it's now my primary browser.

Safari3>IE7>FF2.0

 

PS. I like the way it renders pages. The fonts it uses are a little softer, and pages feel a little nicer on the eyes.

[Colonel Ingus]

I can understand why Safari 3 for windows is still in beta, but the Mac version is supposed to be complete and will be included as part of Leopard, so why don't they just release the Mac version ahead of time? I find it hard to believe that Safari 3 for Mac's is barely out of alpha, and yet they somehow magically know it will be 'ready' when Leopard comes out. Weird.

 

...or maybe the working version only works in Leopard...

[EPDM]

In any case, those people who try to transform their PC to look like a mac but are too scared to do OSX86 can use this Safari.

 

What do you mean by "too scared"?

 

I case you forget. Most of us in here are doing something illegal.

 

I think we'd better keep a low-profile and definitly not encourage too many ppl to go OSX86. Especially the n00bs.

 

As for the ppl who think Safari3 sucks. Let's not forget that it's in Beta-stage (especially the PC version).

 

Cheers

[Colonel Ingus]

Most of us in here are doing something illegal.

*cough* Speak *cough* for yourself *cough*

 

Let's not forget that it's in Beta-stage (especially the PC version).

Not only that but it has only been in beta for not even a week yet. I think the windows fanboys are just looking for something to whine about

[myzar]

*cough* Speak *cough* for yourself *cough*

Not only that but it has only been in beta for not even a week yet. I think the windows fanboys are just looking for something to whine about

 

Not something to whine about but something to laugh about, safari3 under windows looks like a big joke. You can only laugh at such abortion of a web browser. I can only hope it's only intended to be the iphone sdk where you can test your wannabe javascript programs , because you can't really take it seriously as a browser under win

[xplizid]

i agree with myzar i actually think safari on mac is worthless as well however ie is worthless to me on win i have never used it and will never use ie7 cant stand it.

[R2k.]

ie and offline is not safe

 

R

[Colonel Ingus]

safari3 under windows looks like a big joke. You can only laugh at such abortion of a web browser.

See I was right! The windows fanboys are only looking for something to whine about. Case and point ^

[track09]

ie and offline is not safe

 

R

 

 

Hmm, and the Mac still doesn't have pre-emptive multitasking in it's kernel. It's using a co-operative nanokernel.

 

Well, I figured, if you were going to discuss issues from 1998, I might as well.

 

IE7 is detatched from the operating shell, requires you to authorize any active content/plugins, requires double validation to install a plug-in, has the fastest patch time, and runs under a sandbox in Windows Vista.

[robotskip]

i agree with myzar i actually think safari on mac is worthless as well however ie is worthless to me on win i have never used it and will never use ie7 cant stand it.

Wait, did you just say you have never used IE7 yet you can't stand it ? Am I the only one who realises how ridiculous saying that is ?

Hmm, and the Mac still doesn't have pre-emptive multitasking in it's kernel. It's using a co-operative nanokernel.

 

Well, I figured, if you were going to discuss issues from 1998, I might as well.

 

IE7 is detatched from the operating shell, requires you to authorize any active content/plugins, requires double validation to install a plug-in, has the fastest patch time, and runs under a sandbox in Windows Vista.

Hah, expecting them to actually do some research about something Microsoft related instead of screaming "OH NOES M$ LO IH ATE" is so cute, track09.

[lord_muad_dib]

nah, safari for windows is a big deal for web designers instead

[Colonel Ingus]

Am I the only one who realises how ridiculous saying that is ?

Give him a break, he owns a dell

 

[xtraa]

Hm,

 

let's get a view of the bigger picture with Safari on Windows. Imo it actually is a very big deal.

 

First of all, future operation systems will be browser based, at least there is a big chance on

that. Even Microsoft is about to go that way, thats why they stated that "Vista is the last OS

of its kind". We already see Google Office and equal browser-based apps that are just pre-stages

to what is coming up next.

 

Apple also successfully bootlegged Quicktime via iTunes on millions of Windows machines.

This is very important because QT is not only a videoplayer as we see it:

 

It is an own multimedia operation system.

 

Quicktime contains an own HAL (hardware abstraction layer) and is capable of dealing with

multimedia content far away from what ASF and other formats can do. For example you can

include layers into movies, edit them and even create interactive content like links and polls

in any movie. Additionally, because of its own HAL, every software can use this stuff. Like

embedded QT movies in Word, Excel whatever.

 

(There has been a big war about Microsoft and Quicktime in the past. MS Video for Windows

was not able to play movies smooth, so Intel had to implement MMX into the CPU just for

Microsoft. At this point, Apple already played movies in realtime on Windows by bypassing the

sourcecode of Windows and makin an own hal with their QT technology. A short time later,

the QT sourcecode could be found in the Windows source, used by MS itself... lasts there until

today.)

 

 

So if we know ^^that and combine the possibilities of Safari and QT, then Apple does not only

ensure Windows compatibility, but also a leading role in upcoming interactive media content.

Hollywood already did its part when they decided to set Apples QT and MPEG4 as the new standard

format and screwed Microsofts closed source container ASF.

 

Thats why they are in such deep cooperations with Google. Guess why they bought YouTube for a

Quantastizillion $. Rumors are already talking about a fusion of Apple and Google and if you see

what they are up to and what they could do together, then this is far away from some fanboy blogging

flubdub. Next gen PC will be mobile. The iPhone and Larrys company are heavily prepaired for this

future. It just fits. And let's face it: His Steveness won't be able to be iCEO forever

[Colonel Ingus]

Great post xtraa

[robotskip]

.. except for all the glaring mistakes, for example.

 

- If you all OS are web-bounded how do you plan on running the browser to access them ?

- You're taking that quote about the 'last of it's kind' horribly out of context.

 

After seeing those 2 I didn't even bother to really read the rest. :censored2:

[xtraa]

Great post xtraa

 

Thank you

 

.. except for all the glaring mistakes, for example.

 

- If you all OS are web-bounded how do you plan on running the browser to access them ?

 

Damn, you are right, browsers can't boot. What were these guys thinking.

 

Honestly, you do not boot a browser, but you will have an OS that is 90% browser, because the desktop equals what we call

a Browser today. And the 3rd party apps written in OS-independent languages are not stored on your HD. Why should they,

we spend 90% of our perceived time somewhere else but not at home and that way you can access anything from anywhere,

connecting your mobile device to the big screen. The desktop as we know it is already dead. Look how notebooks and mobile

devices changed their marketshare in the last decade.

 

You will have something like what Apple calls a digital hub at your home, but this is more like a household appliance, and has

nothing to do with what we still see as a "computer" these days. Thats why they already screwed this part of the companies

name.

 

Take the AppleTV for example: Steve calls it a hobby but it actually is a test balloon for a digital hub. Next step would be to

add games. This is a long run milestone, because you can't just enter the console market. But take a look at Apples strategy

on working together with companies like EA Games and ID. They already started.

 

- You're taking that quote about the 'last of it's kind' horribly out of context.

 

Gartner was able to put the cost for Vista development at 10 Billion Dollar. Steve Ballmer said he can't tell because he don't

know but it's "a lot".

 

 

Now this is a dead end street. Times have changed and today it is more important to have your stuff available everywhere,

instead of basecamping 127.0.0.1.

 

"The next version of Windows will be a transition from where Microsoft is to where it needs to be," says Rob Enderle, a principal

at consulting company the Enderle Group. "Vista is our last operating system that looks backward." But that's only if Ozzie and his

lieutenants can pull off a major overhaul. Most of the work still lies ahead.

 

...

 

Put another way, Vista could be the last whopping Windows operating system designed to run on a single PC, giving way

to a sleeker design that divides functions across the PC and the Web. "Is Vista the last big release of Windows?" says Gartner

analyst Tom Bittman. "I firmly believe that it is."

Source

[borisbadenov]

I read the reviews and opinions about Safari 3 for Windows. I heard how fast it was. It seemed impressive. So I downloaded it, installed it. I thought, how nice, one single web browser between Linux, Winblows and Apple. Yes, yes, yes, there is already Firefox but what can I say, I like the Apple look.

 

Well, on giving Safari a test run, I found that the load time is just perfect....for timing a three minute egg. Hell, on my system, it really blows. I am staying with Firefox. Why did I ever stray? And I love, love love the extensions that Firefox offers as well

[FreakyMac]

ok, Safari is the Best Browser i have ever used (IE7 sucks), Sure when you start it up, it is slow but when its loaded and ready to go, It is VERY fast, I have all the plugins, (Java, Flash, Shockwave etc) Work like a charm. Safari on my system, Hardly uses any memory, its a Resource-Light Browser, (a Update for Safari 3 came out today) I won't Be Suprised if iLife comes to Windows.

 

Safari, Best Resource-Light Browser made.

[empreality]

Firefox ftw!

[OSXon86]

can you skin safari 3 on windows to look like os x?