Home › Forums › Archives › Community Center › The BigBlueBall Lounge › Submit your poll › Safari for Windows? Anyone?
- This topic has 10 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 9 months ago by mfenech.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 15, 2007 at 12:34 am #27189LucifinaMember
Since Apple has released it’s browser- Safari- that will work on Windows, I would like to know how many of you HAVE or are GOING TO download/use the application?
June 15, 2007 at 12:55 am #162010Jeff HesterKeymasterI have only one question…. Why?
June 15, 2007 at 1:01 am #162017PhilipModeratorI’ve downloaded Safari 3.0.1 for Windows and so far (fingers crossed) I haven’t run into any problems. It’s only consuming about 28MB of memory and I did manage to import all my IE favorites. The only gripe I have at the moment is that I can’t sort all my favorites automatically-does anyone know how to do this?
June 15, 2007 at 1:38 am #162014SpikeMemberI’ve heard (from the Internet, so it may or may not be true) that it is not only slower, but less secure, as well. I definately will not be using it, Mac apps should, for the most part, stay on the Mac where they belong (minus iTunes… don’t ever take away my iTunes :p)
June 15, 2007 at 6:13 pm #162015LucifinaMemberI expected it to have a few tweaks so I haven’t d/l it yet. I do find it interesting that the report of people downloading has reached over 1 million within the first 24hrs (if my memory serves me correctly).
Spike, you were correct with the security, but supposedly that was fixed. I find your response interesting though. Just made me think of all the times Windows having security issues, but for Apple- correct me if I’m wrong- having it’s first run with something like this (other than itunes- which i love) it seems to be taken much worse. As for the slowness, I really don’t know, and I can’t give an unbiased view b/c I’m working on a Mac and safari loads way faster than my PC. Although, ibench marks looks interesting; and of course, one has to wonder the circumstances the keynote tests were run under.
Philip, I’m not exactly sure what you mean by sorting favorites automatically. If you haven’t already thigured it out- which I’m almost certain you have (b/c your really good like that 😉 ) I may be able to help you out.
Jeff- Why? Muahahahaha because we’re taking over the world!!! 😀
June 15, 2007 at 8:05 pm #162019mfenechMemberSeriously, Luci…..what does Safari bring to the table that other alternatives to IE don’t have?
June 16, 2007 at 12:37 am #162018PhilipModeratorWell, I suppose Apple just wants to encroach on Microsoft’s territory…maybe the great M will retaliate by issuing an Internet Explorer for Mac (or is there one already?)
Safari seems to be a viable alternative for me. Don’t know why, but I’ve never been comfortable with Firefox. And I do like Opera. Safari consumes about 28MB of memory on startup while IE7 consumes a whopping 60MB on my Pentium 4 with 2GB of RAM.
Of course, I’m starting to discover a lot of gripes with 3.0.1. The inability to sort bookmarks alphebatically, hard to remember shortcuts, the rather bland-looking interface, etc etc. But let’s see how the Apple guys respond.
June 16, 2007 at 5:20 am #162012DavidParticipant@Philip 219995 wrote:
Well, I suppose Apple just wants to encroach on Microsoft’s territory…maybe the great M will retaliate by issuing an Internet Explorer for Mac (or is there one already?)
[/quote]
Safari on windows could only take market share from other alternative browsers, like Opera and Firefox. The reason people use IE is either because they like it, or they don’t know how to/don’t want to/can’t download something else.Quote:Safari seems to be a viable alternative for me. Don’t know why, but I’ve never been comfortable with Firefox. And I do like Opera. Safari consumes about 28MB of memory on startup while IE7 consumes a whopping 60MB on my Pentium 4 with 2GB of RAM.IE7 uses 14mb on my computer, did you install a lot of add-ins or something?
Quote:Seriously, Luci…..what does Safari bring to the table that other alternatives to IE don’t have?It brings the Mac style of smoothing fonts, which is that “they may be harder to read or appear blurry, but its true to the font face,” which, IMO, is ridiculous. I’d like to see my fonts, I’m not printing web pages that often to care how the fonts look a bit different when printed.
Quote:I do find it interesting that the report of people downloading has reached over 1 million within the first 24hrs (if my memory serves me correctly).The thing with that is that downloads don’t mean anything. I downloaded it twice, and I’m not going to use it. I’ve downloaded Firefox at least 20 times, and I’m the only user.
Downloads does not equal market share. Who wouldn’t want to check it out? There’s just no reason to want to continue to use it.
Quote:Jeff- Why? Muahahahaha because we’re taking over the world!!!Actually, ironically, a lot of the new Apple users have only switched because they have the ability to run windows now. That’s all well and good, but it proves a dependency on Microsoft. Apple may be becoming slightly more popular, but its not going to overtake, or even equally co-exist with Microsoft, ever.
Quote:I’ve heard (from the Internet, so it may or may not be true) that it is not only slower, but less secure, as well. I definately will not be using it, Mac apps should, for the most part, stay on the Mac where they belong (minus iTunes… don’t ever take away my iTunes )I don’t believe it is slower, but Safari has trouble with a lot of websites, it doesn’t support evreything when it comes to DHTML/DOM and Javascript that Firefox and IE do. Sure it can render faster… but it’s not as powerful or feature-rich. I’ll take the slightly slower browser over one that I can’t use all the time. I already need to switch to IE from Firefox a good 5% of the time.
The security issues are interesting. The Apple programmers ported Safari from the Mac directly. There layers of security that don’t exist in Windows, but do in OSX. (This has changed with Vista, actually, I think. Though I’m not sure if it’s a direct parallel) The Safari beta was not ported properly, it was forced to work, but it doesn’t look like any of the programmers did any kind of a security examination. I have little respect for Apple’s ability to provide high-quality Windows software. iTunes is a great example of a damn fine interface, but a failure in functionality. I’d expect a company like Apple to do better than a half-baked browser and media player, when the software that is *designed* for OSX is so high quality.
I’m not quite sure what the point of Apple releasing Safari for Windows is. Is the idea that once one uses the “great” apple software on windows, they’ll switch to the Mac? That wouldn’t make much sense with the direction they are taking their software. There is no longer a way to install *just* QuickTime, you *must* install iTunes with it. Not only that, but QuickTime does not buffer as elegantly as Windows Media Player or Winamp does.
One would gather from all this that I’m pro-Microsoft, and I am. I have a lot of respect for the high quality software they put out. Sure Windows has it’s problems, but the fact is, is that windows is an abstracted Operating System. For example, OSX Leopard is slated to be completely 64bit. This is great, but Microsoft could never have done that for Vista. Microsoft’s software architecture supports drivers from hundreds (if not thousands?) of different vendors. OSX’s primary drivers are provided completely by Apple, and I don’t doubt that the software guys talk to the hardware guys constantly about changes and how the design should be done, in order to make it easiest for both teams. This is a great approach, but it allows for much less flexibility in the market.
Microsoft is also a business company. Like it or not, personal users are not a huge concern when it comes to their business strategy. The best software they make is their enterprise line of software. Exchange, Visual Studio, SQL Server, Windows Live Messenger, Windows Server. I’ve worked with another large enterprise software company, and I can tell you that the Microsoft tools are far more advanced than anything this company puts out. There is a reason they are number one, and a reason they’re going to stay there for some time.
[/offtopic]
June 16, 2007 at 5:21 am #162011detn8rParticipantI downloaded and installed it, but maybe I’m missing something. All the menus were blank, god awful slow to load pages, and not to mention I don’t even know WHERE to enter a web address! Doh!
June 16, 2007 at 5:24 am #162013DavidParticipantThis is a *beta* build. The term beta is supposed to be associated with bugs and the software having some issues on certain configurations. Google and other applications have been abusing this term, which is a shame.
June 16, 2007 at 8:12 pm #162016MrEggsaladParticipantA lot of the slowness people may be experiencing is this (to Windows users I think, although Opera might do this, not sure since I change all my browsers 😛 ) different way of loading pages where it loads like everything then shows the page. I believe IE7 and Firefox load as content comes up, leading you to think that they are in fact faster, when it’s just different loading styles. I do prefer IE7/FX’s loading to Safari’s though, however I think there are ways to change it.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.