Safari on Windows, Leopard Debut at WWDC 850
comm2k writes to mention that Apple has announced a Windows version of Safari along with Leopard, the new version of Mac OS X at this years World Wide Developers Conference in San Francisco. "He said Safari was 'the fastest browser on Windows', saying it was twice as fast as Internet Explorer. A test version of Safari for Windows XP and for Vista is available for download from the Apple website. Apple is hoping to replicate the success of iTunes, which has proved enormously popular on both Macs and Windows machines."
KDE / Konqueror (Score:4, Insightful)
No, they aren't (Score:5, Insightful)
Safari...? (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Firefox is the most at risk (Score:1, Insightful)
Firefox is already very easy to get and setup. And most people who have switched from IE have decided to go with FF.
I'm one of those people who think FF is getting bloated. Just look at the preferences panels... they used to be simple and clean, even nicer than what Safari currently has, but with each version, they've been getting more and more like the kludgey ones in IE and Mozilla (pre seamonkey).
And if Safari starts getting bundled with iTunes, then watch the install base soar, and the Firefox user market shrink.
Safari is the iPhone SDK (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:OMG not another one (Score:5, Insightful)
Hopefully (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Open Letter (Score:5, Insightful)
I am split (Score:4, Insightful)
However if this steals marketshare away from firefox it will make many web developers give up on anything non IE.
- eg
89% IE
10% firefox
sounds better to make a business case to a phb to support a website site that is w3c compliant and supports firefox vs
89% IE
6% Firefox
4% Safari
Which tells the phb that only IE matters as the rest are niche players that do not make significant marketshare to be worth the investment.
Many website developers both love and hate Firefox as it is because they have more work but the hope is firefox3 will be acid2 compliant and will force IE 7.5 in the future to be as well.
Re:All of the major news (Score:3, Insightful)
Not an Apple-branded virtualisation solution? (Score:3, Insightful)
I, for one, am very happy Apple chose not to compete with Parallels / VMware. Apple and MS have already stomped on the toes of too many app developers in the past.
Re:Why Safari? (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't see a similar market opportunity in a free browser.
iPhone apps. They've broadened the developer base for apps (which they won't make money on) for the iPhone (which, presumably, they will make money on).
Re:Safari For Windows Fails For Me (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:A Kick In The Balls For Microsoft (Score:1, Insightful)
If Apple did that, they would be opening themselves up to antitrust actions, for the precise same reasons Microsoft got hauled over the coals; leveraging their monopoly in one area to gain one in another. Why the sudden glee at this thought? Is an antitrust violation now somehow a good thing if it's Microsoft on the receiving end? What sort of playground logic is this - two wrongs make a right, the enemy of my enemy...what? Why the sudden love of peoples' settings being changed transparently, and unrelated software being installed, by third-party software installers? Isn't that what RealPlayer gets slated for every so often on Slashdot?
Seriously, you're not the only one to suggest this, and it's a stupid idea. Maybe if you spend your time formulating ways to bring down Microsoft, it's a lovely thought, but to everyone else it's just plain stupid.
Re:Open Letter (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Open Letter (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words, as a web "developer" you prefer IE because you can be lazy and sloppy and it lets you get away with it.
I don't think it's fair to bash IE for not complying.
Of course it is. Standards are supposed to make your life easier, because everyone agrees up front on how it all works and there is no need to worry about your customers using a browser you havn't tested with: it's all standards, right? Except that IE breaks that, because it doesn't understand a lot of very useful standards and a lot of web "developers" (Like yourself) are sloppy and lazy and write bad code (You again, by the way).
Stop being sloppy and lazy, is what I'm saying here.
Free versus paid software (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the difference is that Microsoft needs to SELL office on the Mac whereas Apple has to give away it's PC software.
And by the way, did the PC need yet another browser (beyone IE and Firefox)?
Re:Open Letter (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Open Letter (Score:5, Insightful)
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. You don't have to worry about being standards compliant? How do you write pages? Do you just make up your own version of the standard and write to that and IE happens to read it magically, somehow?
When I generate code, I look at the spec and implement it, then I test it. I'm not always perfect at it, but I basically make things work the way the documented standard claims it should look. Then I test it. Generally it works in every browser (Safari, Firefox, Mozilla, Opera, Konquerer, OmniWeb, etc.) except IE. Then I try to add hacks to get it to look "okay" in various versions of IE all of which break the standard and all or which break it differently. I certainly can and do blame IE for being the only browser that can't work as the spec designates.
Generally, I find that when a site does not work in FF it is because I screwed up and did not get it to spec. Generally when it does not work in IE, it is because I did things right, but IE either implements the spec incorrectly and differently than all the other browsers, or because IE is 6-8 years behind the times and is still using a partial implementation of an ancient spec.
Are you trolling? The spec predates any implementation and MS participated in writing most of them.
I think it is more than fair to bash the single largest, wealthiest company for failing to match the quality of a half dozen smaller companies and another half dozen projects funded by hobbyists. MS does not comply with the specs because it is in their best interests to derail the standards and hold back Web development to help maintain their OS monopoly. They are breaking the standards for personal profit and if you don't see that I have a lovely, historic bridge you might be interested in purchasing.
Re:Open Letter (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're trying to test against Safari without an actual Mac though, I think it's definitely an accurate picture of the resulting webpage.
Unoptimized CPU hog (Score:4, Insightful)
On the plus side, it's easy on the eyes. The Safari bookmarks implementation has always been smooth. And the adjustable Google search bar is better than most stabs at this on Firefox. It renders quickly, as claimed, though I can't say it renders perceptibly more quickly than Firefox.
Even on OS X, though, I don't run Safari. It's barely customizable in an age when Firefox extensions have completely rewritten the rules of browsing. Why would I want to see ads? Why browse the way some web site or computer corporation thinks I should?
This is like 1999, today.
Re:All of the major news (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:I agree 100% (Score:5, Insightful)
You clearly have never used Office 98 for Mac. This was the only Office version for Mac that truly failed in the martketplace, and fairly so. This was when Microsoft tried to shove a Windows interface and a horrendeous back-end (extensions, extensions, extensions) down the throat of Macheads. Did not work. Even included some incursion of Clippy as a happy bouncing Mac. The horror, the horror, the horror.
Re:fastest? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Safari on Windows....What's in it for Apple? (Score:3, Insightful)
What's in it for Apple? Well, the more people associate Apple with a good experience, the more folks are going to want to buy Macs rather than PCs. Then, Apple makes more money.
The iPod is part of this strategy. The iPhone is part of this strategy. Safari for Windows is also part of this strategy.
Re:So you totally missed..... (Score:2, Insightful)
And with the same browser for OSX/Windows/iPhone, I'm sure Apple will be pushing for widgets/apps/whatever that carry over from your desktop to your iPhone.
Re:All of the major news (Score:2, Insightful)
As much as Microsoft has a virtual monopoly on software, Apple has a literal monopoly on nearly everything that touches their machines.
Re:Cool (Score:3, Insightful)
Stop saying that! I do not think it means what you think it means. Personally, I like being able to see the menus for various applications at the same time. It means I don't have to click the window and wait for something unattached to the window to update before I can make changes.
If you like the single menu bar, that's fine. I'm happy for you. But it's something that always bothered the hell out of me about the macos, and I'm glad they're the only ones doing it.
You are stupid (Score:4, Insightful)
Okay, now that we've got that out of the way I can continue. Apple knows exactly what it is doing. And it will work. More and more people are finding out that many browsers are better than IE. If Apple can convince PC users to use Safari that will be one less barrier to switching over from PC to a Mac. The list is getting longer of basic applications that run on both the Mac and PC. The longer this list gets the easier and more appealing it will be for PC people to make the switch. After Apple gains a significant market share they will be in a position to take advantage of critical mass. Customers will start switching in droves. Then they can focus on making the best Mac apps (based only on Cocoa). Not just the best carbon apps so they can run on the PC too.
The more PC users use Mac apps the more people will feel comfortable switching. Ditto for Linux.
Re:Open Letter (Score:3, Insightful)
Ugly (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Let me know when... (Score:3, Insightful)
Why? Is there some advantage other than the fact that you would prefer it? You gloss over this point.
or when Safari can be installed on Gentoo.
Konqueror on Gentoo will render the same most of the time.
Then I'll be able to waste 10% of my time dealing with Safari's eccentricities
What eccentricities? Complying with standards? Have you even heard of Safari before?
I'm not upgrading Windows just because Apple says I should.
Where exactly did Apple tell you to upgrade Windows?
Re:Safari on Windows....What's in it for Apple? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I'm totally getting the Ultimate version. (Score:5, Insightful)
"We've got a basic version, which is going to cost $129. We've got a Premium version, which is going to cost $129. We've got a Business version, $129. We've got an Enterprise version, $129. And we've got the Ultimate version, we're throwing everything into it, it's $129. We think most people will buy the Ultimate version."
See, this happens because Apple, being primarily a hardware company, practice their pricing discrimination on the hardware side (which does a similar thing to Vista). Their software is incidental to that, and tied to the hardware, so they don't do much with its pricing.
Microsoft, OTOH, are primarily a software company, so they have to do their pricing discrimination on their software products.
Re:All of the major news (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I agree 100% (Score:3, Insightful)