PDA

View Full Version : How Safari Pretended to Be Mozilla Before It Was Released




MacRumors
Jan 4, 2013, 10:07 AM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2013/01/04/how-safari-pretended-to-be-mozilla-before-it-was-released/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2013/01/NewImage3.pngFormer Apple employee Don Melton is sharing a unique look (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/12/20/the-origins-of-the-name-safari/) behind the scenes of the Safari development team. Melton was the team leader on both the Safari and WebKit products that are now used by millions of users on both iOS, the Mac, and Windows.

Previously, Melton explained how the Safari name came about (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/12/20/the-origins-of-the-name-safari/), but today he shares the tale of Safari's User Agent string and the strategies his team used to keep the project under wraps.
Twitter and Facebook didn't exist then. Nobody at Apple was stupid enough to blog about work, so what was I worried about?

Server logs. They scared the hell out of me.

When a Web browser fetches a page from a Web server, the browser identifies itself to that server with a user agent string -- basically its name, version, platform, etc. The browser also gives the server an IP address so the server knows where to return the page. This exchange not only makes the Web work, it also allows the server to tell who is using what browser and where they're using it.

You can see where this is going, right? But wait, there's more...

Back around 1990, some forward-thinking IT person secured for Apple an entire Class A network of IP addresses. That's right, Apple has 16,777,216 static IP addresses. And because all of these addresses belong together -- in what's now called a "/8 block" -- every one of them starts with the same number. In Apple's case, the number is 17.

IP address 17.149.160.49? That's Apple. 17.1.2.3? Yes, Apple. 17.18.19.20? Also, Apple. 17.253.254.255? Apple, dammit!

I was so screwed.Melton's blog has the rest of the details (http://donmelton.com/2013/01/03/keeping-safari-a-secret/) about how his team kept things quiet before the big reveal.

Article Link: How Safari Pretended to Be Mozilla Before It Was Released (http://www.macrumors.com/2013/01/04/how-safari-pretended-to-be-mozilla-before-it-was-released/)



WAM2
Jan 4, 2013, 10:15 AM
THIS is why I love Apple. Just a bunch of geeks running a company. Now I Cant say Mr. Cook is much of a geek. But the ones who do everything to run apple, are.

iRCL
Jan 4, 2013, 10:25 AM
So, he hid Safari as being Mozilla, by changing the user agent string. MAN THIS IS ONE HELL OF A FASCINATING REVEAL

Also, Safari is the best browser out there now, but I am going to go out on a limb and say that there was nobody in the industry that cared when it was released except the Apple fans

Macrolido
Jan 4, 2013, 10:26 AM
Itīs interesting the fact that he says Scott Forstall was a great boss.

charlieegan3
Jan 4, 2013, 10:30 AM
Kind of surprised that this kind of this wasn't suspected/known about already. They could do with disguising it in geek-bench results too, but that would mean fewer rumors :(

Rocketman
Jan 4, 2013, 10:35 AM
Does anyone keep track of how many 10's of millions of instances of Safari are alive in any given day, week, month, or year?

Risco
Jan 4, 2013, 10:44 AM
So now if anyone looks their server logs and see a 17 in the IP at the beginning, they know it is a good chance of it being Apple!

Tim Cook is sure doubling up on secrecy! :eek:

adamw
Jan 4, 2013, 10:54 AM
Interesting read. I use Safari as my browser of choice. It has been fairly stable.

alex00100
Jan 4, 2013, 10:58 AM
Yes, be afraid of us, be afraid.

BJB Productions
Jan 4, 2013, 11:00 AM
Too bad Safari is awfully broken. At least for me...

Michaelgtrusa
Jan 4, 2013, 11:03 AM
Perhaps a rewrite soon.

Yvan256
Jan 4, 2013, 11:04 AM
As far as I know, Safari is no longer available for Windows.

fabian9
Jan 4, 2013, 11:13 AM
As far as I know, Safari is no longer available for Windows.

That's right, Safari 6 isn't available for Windows.

Hes Nikke
Jan 4, 2013, 11:17 AM
So now if anyone looks their server logs and see a 17 in the IP at the beginning, they know it is a good chance of it being Apple!

Tim Cook is sure doubling up on secrecy! :eek:

It has been common knowledge that apple owns the 17 class A block since forever. This is not a new revelation for those of us who have been apple followers for 20+ years.

ManWithAPlan
Jan 4, 2013, 11:33 AM
It has been common knowledge that apple owns the 17 class A block since forever. This is not a new revelation for those of us who have been apple followers for 20+ years.

Correct. And of course it would be trivial to test from another netblock through a separate Internet connection than the main Apple HQ networks, so as to NOT be using 17.x. Nor is it difficult to forge a User Agent String in a web query, it's done all the time for security reasons by various enterprise security products, etc. Even without those products, it's a trivial effort. Nothing surprising at all, wake me up when they get really stealthy. BTW, rumors around the playground are that they have indeed gotten MUCH more stealthy, and Cook is a big believer in the advantages that secrecy can give them - not that they've been always been good at it. But they realize the value in it, he said so on 60 Minutes even (doubling down on secrecy), and I would expect more and more sophisticated attempts to "hide" product plans going forward. The only question is whether those attempts will be successful. Time will tell I guess.

imgonephishin
Jan 4, 2013, 11:38 AM
I frequently used to change my user agent string when a site would tell me I had to use IE or FF to access it and 9 times out of 10 it would work fine in Safari. Can I write an article about my 1337 hacking skillz? :cool:

rmwebs
Jan 4, 2013, 11:41 AM
It has been common knowledge that apple owns the 17 class A block since forever. This is not a new revelation for those of us who have been apple followers for 20+ years.

You need to learn what "common knowledge" means :rolleyes:

hachre
Jan 4, 2013, 12:02 PM
Safari is better than ever before right now and has replaced Chrome for me since version 6 has been in beta.

tobefirst
Jan 4, 2013, 12:05 PM
I like how the MR article mentions "Mozilla" nowhere except for the title. Reading the MR article itself doesn't tell you at all that they masked Safari as any Mozilla product. That's some quality writing right there!

stevedun
Jan 4, 2013, 12:10 PM
Safari was a pain in the neck in it's early versions before becoming the gold standard in Mac web browsers. I've been a Safari advocate for years now.

Version 6, however, is infuriating. The reload-on-back behavior is unacceptable. I use the trackpad or Magic Mouse to swipe back a page, and the animation looks great, but the fact that it forces a reload of the page, delays me while it reloads, and often puts me at the top of the page is a real detractor. I'm trying to deal with it until something changes, but I may need to hop ship to an inferior browser if this basic functionality is not addressed.

rmwebs
Jan 4, 2013, 12:12 PM
I like how the MR article mentions "Mozilla" nowhere except for the title. Reading the MR article itself doesn't tell you at all that they masked Safari as any Mozilla product. That's some quality writing right there!

Yup. It also omits one of the major platforms that use webkit - Android. Brings me back round to this thread: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1510151

vastoholic
Jan 4, 2013, 12:13 PM
Safari is better than ever before right now and has replaced Chrome for me since version 6 has been in beta.

Hell I even tried to move to chrome last month. It was slower (more beachballs and even youtube seemed to be slower, probably just my head) and had one single fundamental flaw for me: Microsoft Office documents would not download properly, requiring me to go to the file and change the extension just to get it to open up. Silly and trivial, sure, but seriously, why is that kind of issue even there in a browser in 2012-2013?

notjustjay
Jan 4, 2013, 12:29 PM
None of this is really news to any of us. I mean, haven't we already seen articles posted on MacRumors that go like "examination of webserver logs reveal iPhone 6 is already being tested"?

Same thing.

Kobayagi
Jan 4, 2013, 12:37 PM
Safari was a pain in the neck in it's early versions before becoming the gold standard in Mac web browsers. I've been a Safari advocate for years now.

Version 6, however, is infuriating. The reload-on-back behavior is unacceptable. I use the trackpad or Magic Mouse to swipe back a page, and the animation looks great, but the fact that it forces a reload of the page, delays me while it reloads, and often puts me at the top of the page is a real detractor. I'm trying to deal with it until something changes, but I may need to hop ship to an inferior browser if this basic functionality is not addressed.

Exactly. What also annoys me is that they made the tabs so huge. Now, when you want to close a few of them, you can't simply stand on the X icon and keep clicking, but you have to track down the X every time you close a tab because they keep changing in size.

Though Safari sometimes just doesn't work as nice on some websites. I thought it might be adblock or it's blocking pop ups, but after turning both off, it's still buggy on a few sites. Then I just use Chrome.


Other than that, I really like Safari, it's neat and clean. Top sites are also very nicely done. I just hope they fix some of the issues.

Nermal
Jan 4, 2013, 12:38 PM
None of this is really news to any of us. I mean, haven't we already seen articles posted on MacRumors that go like "examination of webserver logs reveal iPhone 6 is already being tested"?

Same thing.

If anything, that just proves that Apple has lost this "masquerading" technology some time over the past 10 years!

apfeljonas
Jan 4, 2013, 12:48 PM
Hell I even tried to move to chrome last month. It was slower (more beachballs and even youtube seemed to be slower, probably just my head) and had one single fundamental flaw for me: Microsoft Office documents would not download properly, requiring me to go to the file and change the extension just to get it to open up. Silly and trivial, sure, but seriously, why is that kind of issue even there in a browser in 2012-2013?

Hmm, for me Chrome seems faster than Safari.

shurcooL
Jan 4, 2013, 12:52 PM
Safari was a pain in the neck in it's early versions before becoming the gold standard in Mac web browsers. I've been a Safari advocate for years now.
Do you really think it's better than Chrome? I like Chrome's UI so much better, it's cleaner and more minimalistic.

http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/2623/browserui.png

Version 6, however, is infuriating. The reload-on-back behavior is unacceptable. I use the trackpad or Magic Mouse to swipe back a page, and the animation looks great, but the fact that it forces a reload of the page, delays me while it reloads, and often puts me at the top of the page is a real detractor. I'm trying to deal with it until something changes, but I may need to hop ship to an inferior browser if this basic functionality is not addressed.
I've never used Safari full time, but I like the latest version the most.

I agree it sucks it reloads pages on back/forward instead of caching them. Chrome has the same problem. The only browser I've used that had proper caching was Opera, and I really wish Chrome and Safari would copy that feature.

notjustjay
Jan 4, 2013, 12:55 PM
If anything, that just proves that Apple has lost this "masquerading" technology some time over the past 10 years!

I suspect they just don't care anymore. Or, maybe more likely, they want these little tidbits of data to be "leaked", as it keeps the media buzzing.

Toltepeceno
Jan 4, 2013, 12:58 PM
I like safari on mac, but for windows it's left far behind.

Truffy
Jan 4, 2013, 12:59 PM
As far as I know, Safari is no longer available for Windows.
Isn't Chrome based on Webkit though?

Yvan256
Jan 4, 2013, 01:21 PM
That's right, Safari 6 isn't available for Windows.

It's also not available for Snow Leopard.

APlotdevice
Jan 4, 2013, 01:41 PM
Isn't Chrome based on Webkit though?

Indeed. And Chrome has what is generally considered the better JS engine. The only problem is that it can't sync with the iOS version of Safari. Sure it can sync with the iOS version of Chrome, but that's so much slower due to the fact that third party browsers on iOS must use the comparatively crippled UIWebView.

moonman239
Jan 4, 2013, 01:48 PM
Surely I'm not the only one who thinks that an Apple employee visiting a Webpage on his work computer might cause some speculation of some sort to be generated.

As an example, let's say I upload a concept video to my Website. Later, in my server logs/analytics software, I notice an IP address starting with 17, indicating that an Apple employee must have watched the video. It may be reasonable to assume that the concept has been, or will be, pitched to members of the appropriate engineering team. I'd have stronger evidence to support that claim if that page has been downloaded through Apple's network a bunch of times.

Doctor Q
Jan 4, 2013, 01:48 PM
I'm not surprised that Apple was aware of the need to hide a product under development while creating Safari, but I'm surprised that they haven't done this more routinely for all of their product development.

Leaks from logs are still a great source of rumors for us rumormongers. Example: Mac OS X 10.9 showing up in web logs (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/11/06/early-signs-of-os-x-10-9-unsurprisingly-showing-up-in-web-logs/)

rdlink
Jan 4, 2013, 02:37 PM
You need to learn what "common knowledge" means :rolleyes:

Is this common enough for you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IPv4_address_blocks

CGagnon
Jan 4, 2013, 03:09 PM
I frequently used to change my user agent string when a site would tell me I had to use IE or FF to access it and 9 times out of 10 it would work fine in Safari. Can I write an article about my 1337 hacking skillz? :cool:

you must be in Anonymous with those skillz

RMo
Jan 4, 2013, 03:27 PM
I like how the MR article mentions "Mozilla" nowhere except for the title. Reading the MR article itself doesn't tell you at all that they masked Safari as any Mozilla product. That's some quality writing right there!

And it's not entirely accurate, either. The UA string was IE:mac for all of the development cycle until they switched it to Mozilla less than six months before launch.

This really isn't surprising at all. The only thing that makes it more interesting than "hiding" other software development is that it's a browser, Apple's IP address block is widely known, and so they'd be wise to mask the UA as something else so admins didn't start seeing a weird browser from Apple in their logs and spread the word and suspicion.

And that's exactly what they did: masked the UA string. I guess there are two other interesting parts, that they didn't mask it when it was used off-campus (probably good for testing), and they set the mask to expire regardless after the reveal. So it's interesting that they went through this much effort--particularly the last two--but not incredibly surprising. That's exactly what you'd need to do, and they did it.

seanf
Jan 4, 2013, 03:52 PM
So now if anyone looks their server logs and see a 17 in the IP at the beginning, they know it is a good chance of it being Apple!

Tim Cook is sure doubling up on secrecy! :eek:This is publicly available (http://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-17-0-0-0-1/pft) information

Sean :)

ebatalha
Jan 4, 2013, 04:04 PM
Do you really think it's better than Chrome? I like Chrome's UI so much better, it's cleaner and more minimalistic.

Image (http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/2623/browserui.png)


I've never used Safari full time, but I like the latest version the most.

I agree it sucks it reloads pages on back/forward instead of caching them. Chrome has the same problem. The only browser I've used that had proper caching was Opera, and I really wish Chrome and Safari would copy that feature.

Well, I think Safari's more minimalistic and cleaner than Chrome. I even can hide all the toolbars, Chorme can't.

rmwebs
Jan 4, 2013, 05:04 PM
Is this common enough for you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IPv4_address_blocks

You dont get it do you.

Definition of common knowledge:
anything generally known to everyone.

No. No. Its not common knowledge. It may be common knowledge in a niche group of people who study the ins and outs of who owns what IP blocks, but to the average 'Joe' it is not, never has been, and will never be common knowledge.

Get it now?

It'd be like me saying "It's common knowledge that Titanium Mobile has problems working with large SQLite databases". It's common knowledge to a Titanium Mobile developer, but not to anyone else. This is the same situation.

rdlink
Jan 4, 2013, 06:12 PM
You dont get it do you.

Definition of common knowledge:


No. No. Its not common knowledge. It may be common knowledge in a niche group of people who study the ins and outs of who owns what IP blocks, but to the average 'Joe' it is not, never has been, and will never be common knowledge.

Get it now?

It'd be like me saying "It's common knowledge that Titanium Mobile has problems working with large SQLite databases". It's common knowledge to a Titanium Mobile developer, but not to anyone else. This is the same situation.




That's absolutely ridiculous. When did you become the arbiter of the break over point when something becomes common knowledge? It's interesting that you only grabbed part of the quote that supposedly defines common knowledge. How about the complete sentence (emphasis added by me)?

"Common knowledge is knowledge that is known by everyone or nearly everyone, usually with reference to the community in which the term is used."

If you take the complete sentence in context, common knowledge would be known by anyone who is a member of a specific "community." In this case that community could be overlapping communities of Apple following geeks, networking engineers, web administrators or IP block groupies.

Under your ridiculous assertion of what common knowledge is, there would probably be only two or three things in the world that were "common knowledge."

So yes, I do "get it." You apparently do not.

rmwebs
Jan 4, 2013, 06:30 PM
That's absolutely ridiculous. When did you become the arbiter of the break over point when something becomes common knowledge? It's interesting that you only grabbed part of the quote that supposedly defines common knowledge. How about the complete sentence (emphasis added by me)?

"Common knowledge is knowledge that is known by everyone or nearly everyone, usually with reference to the community in which the term is used."

If you take the complete sentence in context, common knowledge would be known by anyone who is a member of a specific "community." In this case that community could be overlapping communities of Apple following geeks, networking engineers, web administrators or IP block groupies.

Under your ridiculous assertion of what common knowledge is, there would probably be only two or three things in the world that were "common knowledge."

So yes, I do "get it." You apparently do not.

So you think its common knowledge, that people who read macrumors.com are people who should study what IP space each company has? Right. Got it. :rolleyes:

TahoeJimbo
Jan 4, 2013, 06:40 PM
Back around 1990, some forward-thinking IT person secured for Apple an entire Class A network of IP addresses. That's right, Apple has 16,777,216 static IP addresses. And because all of these addresses belong together -- in what's now called a "/8 block" -- every one of them starts with the same number. In Apple's case, the number is 17.


That forward thinking IT person was me. :-) I managed the internal address space for Apple before the internet became the internet. We used an invalid network number (well, a public address that we didn't own) and when it came time to join the internet, we had to get a real number.

NAT didn't really exist at the time, so I justified the address space by calculating how many computers we had, our average subnet size, and showed that only a "Class-A" network (/8 in CIDR notation) could possibly work.

At first Joyce Reynolds (the amazing and now famous numbering mistress at USC's ISI) assigned us 21, which belonged to the military. After a few sweetly apologetic emails, she assigned us 17.

I joked with her that we went from being old enough to drink, to being a teenager.

I left Apple in 1993.

-JJJB

Risco
Jan 4, 2013, 06:52 PM
So you think its common knowledge, that people who read macrumors.com are people who should study what IP space each company has? Right. Got it. :rolleyes:

Totally agree with you there mate. On his assumption pretty much everything would be common knowledge as it is searchable on the internet if you look hard enough. I would not have known about it without either it be pointed out to me, or having a reason to look it up.

Lil Chillbil
Jan 4, 2013, 11:27 PM
I can believe that apple would do something like this

avanpelt
Jan 4, 2013, 11:54 PM
I wonder how much it cost them to grab a Class A block in the early '90's?

Lil Chillbil
Jan 5, 2013, 12:08 AM
I wonder how much it cost them to grab a Class A block in the early '90's?

a lot of dough I would say

mobilehaathi
Jan 5, 2013, 12:10 AM
I have to admit this was an incredibly boring story. Changing user agent strings? Snore....

Lil Chillbil
Jan 5, 2013, 12:12 AM
I have to admit this was an incredibly boring story. Changing user agent strings? Snore....

Well every day can't be the discovery of penicillin

mobilehaathi
Jan 5, 2013, 12:21 AM
Well every day can't be the discovery of penicillin

Perhaps I'm just not the target audience..... oh well.

louis.b
Jan 5, 2013, 01:16 AM
I love the new Safari. I used Chrome since 2009 and now Safari is my main web browser.

TahoeJimbo
Jan 5, 2013, 02:07 AM
I wonder how much it cost them to grab a Class A block in the early '90's?

Didn't cost a dime. Address space has always been basically free, you just have to justify its use.

-JJJB

a0me
Jan 5, 2013, 02:50 AM
These articles about Safari are just great.
Article 1: Safari Developer Doesn't Remember Where the Name 'Safari' Came From.
Article 2: Safari Developer Used a Fake User Agent String Before Safari's Official Release

What's next?

Anyway, to each his own but Google Chrome still beats Safari in many areas:
- Chrome is multiplatform; you can sync your tabs even if you use a pre-Lion Mac, iOS 5 devices or even a Windows PC
- Chrome's UI is cleaner and simpler
- Chrome's UI is actually snappier (Safari and Firefox were almost unusable on my old iMac because of that)
- Chrome has Flash built-in
- Chrome auto updates by default

spl456
Jan 5, 2013, 05:17 AM
Version 6, however, is infuriating. The reload-on-back behavior is unacceptable.

Please, Please, Please someone at Apple read this.

Go back, and re-load is SO BAD!!!!!! Please make it an option somewhere in the browser

jm001
Jan 5, 2013, 07:09 AM
I like how the MR article mentions "Mozilla" nowhere except for the title. Reading the MR article itself doesn't tell you at all that they masked Safari as any Mozilla product. That's some quality writing right there!

It's mentioned in Melton's blog. Click the link in the MR article regarding the blog and Mozilla is mentioned in the first paragraph. He also mentions Gecko in the last paragraph.

designs216
Jan 5, 2013, 07:40 AM
I like Safari for it's simplicity but still prefer Firefox. If I were to rank browsers by usage mine go like this: Firefox, Safari, IE, Opera

turtlez
Jan 5, 2013, 08:07 AM
These articles about Safari are just great.
Article 1: Safari Developer Doesn't Remember Where the Name 'Safari' Came From.
Article 2: Safari Developer Used a Fake User Agent String Before Safari's Official Release

What's next?

Anyway, to each his own but Google Chrome still beats Safari in many areas:
- Chrome is multiplatform; you can sync your tabs even if you use a pre-Lion Mac, iOS 5 devices or even a Windows PC
- Chrome's UI is cleaner and simpler
- Chrome's UI is actually snappier (Safari and Firefox were almost unusable on my old iMac because of that)
- Chrome has Flash built-in
- Chrome auto updates by default

while all these are true, something always pulls me back to Safari. I think it might be that safari feels more solid. It might also be that Safari matches the UI scheme of the rest of os x. I like the look of chrome but I prefer to have continuity across my OS.

EDIT: I know what it is! Scrolling! Safari is unrivalled in the department of scroll

thekb
Jan 5, 2013, 09:53 AM
Exactly. What also annoys me is that they made the tabs so huge. Now, when you want to close a few of them, you can't simply stand on the X icon and keep clicking, but you have to track down the X every time you close a tab because they keep changing in size.



CMD-W, W, W, W, W, W, W, W, W, W, W, W, W closes as many tabs as you want.

Morshu9001
Jan 5, 2013, 11:08 AM
THIS is why I love Apple. Just a bunch of geeks running a company. Now I Cant say Mr. Cook is much of a geek. But the ones who do everything to run apple, are.

I think every tech company is run by geeks.

----------

"Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_8) AppleWebKit/534.57.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1.7 Safari/534.57.2"

So THAT'S why it says Mozilla. I thought Safari actually had something to do with Mozilla.

----------

Exactly. What also annoys me is that they made the tabs so huge. Now, when you want to close a few of them, you can't simply stand on the X icon and keep clicking, but you have to track down the X every time you close a tab because they keep changing in size.


Just use the keyboard shortcut CMD+W.

Kobayagi
Jan 5, 2013, 02:11 PM
CMD-W, W, W, W, W, W, W, W, W, W, W, W, W closes as many tabs as you want.

I know that, but sometimes I'm (I'm sure more are) laid back in the chair and just wanna use the mouse without the keyboard shortcuts.
I'm not saying I'm lazy to close them this way, but when something was working nice, why did Apple break it...

jimsowden
Jan 5, 2013, 03:00 PM
Does anyone keep track of how many 10's of millions of instances of Safari are alive in any given day, week, month, or year?

No, but back then and to this day you can check server logs for abnormal registries. That's how some sites are getting instances of iOS 7 and iPhone 6,1. Throw out the 99% of logs that are known browsers and units, then sift through the remainder.

Rodimus Prime
Jan 5, 2013, 03:24 PM
Safari was a pain in the neck in it's early versions before becoming the gold standard in Mac web browsers. I've been a Safari advocate for years now.

Version 6, however, is infuriating. The reload-on-back behavior is unacceptable. I use the trackpad or Magic Mouse to swipe back a page, and the animation looks great, but the fact that it forces a reload of the page, delays me while it reloads, and often puts me at the top of the page is a real detractor. I'm trying to deal with it until something changes, but I may need to hop ship to an inferior browser if this basic functionality is not addressed.

Safari I still find is a pile of crap. It never really was that good. What is crystal clear that really shows how bad it is just look at its usage stats. Before it was released to windows it was less than 5%. Release to windows it is still sub 5%. Mac usage has grown and it is on multiple platforms and yet it still is not getting much more usages. FF and Chrome have are doing better and growing. Hell pains me to say it but I find IE 8+ to be better than safari. I only use safari now days for testing when I have to. Other wise chrome or FF. On my windows PC I go Chrome, FF, IE and then god help me if I need to drop into safari.

mrxak
Jan 5, 2013, 04:08 PM
So you think its common knowledge, that people who read macrumors.com are people who should study what IP space each company has? Right. Got it. :rolleyes:

It is common knowledge in this community. It gets mentioned frequently in reference to server logs noticing Apple stuff. It gets mentioned on other tech sites in reference to IPv4 addresses running out. It gets mentioned all the time in articles like this.

When the internet was new, there were a whole bunch of major companies and institutions that grabbed /8 address blocks. IBM, Bell Labs, Xerox, HP, Apple, MIT, even Ford and the US Postal Service grabbed blocks. It's all public knowledge, always gets talked about when discussing the history of the internet and the future of IPv4. It comes up frequently in reference to leaks out of Apple HQ. It's not some super Apple secret like Risco made it out to be (a position you now seem to be defending).

Maybe it's a bit arcane, like Clarus the Dogcow and other bits of Apple lore, but people who have been around a while with an interest in Apple know about 17.x.x.x IPs. Hes Nikke's original statement about it being common knowledge, which you are arguing against now, was specifically qualified with:

It has been common knowledge that apple owns the 17 class A block since forever. This is not a new revelation for those of us who have been apple followers for 20+ years.

So, if you want to argue it's not common knowledge among newbies, fine. But then you're not arguing against anybody at all so let's just abandon the strawman.

mdpeterman
Jan 5, 2013, 10:06 PM
Didn't cost a dime. Address space has always been basically free, you just have to justify its use.

-JJJB

Address space is a lot more expensive now that we have RIRs, but it is still just administration fees, you aren't "buying" anything. Apple (and any company that was assigned address space prior to the RIRs) are "grandfathered" in and just have a $100 a year fee to Arin (if they are in the Americas). I don't know about the other RIRs. Basically the fees just pay for the record keeping. Don't need any duplicate addressing!

tech4all
Jan 5, 2013, 10:23 PM
while all these are true, something always pulls me back to Safari. I think it might be that safari feels more solid. It might also be that Safari matches the UI scheme of the rest of os x. I like the look of chrome but I prefer to have continuity across my OS.

EDIT: I know what it is! Scrolling! Safari is unrivalled in the department of scroll

Ohhhh neato! :rolleyes:

GodBless
Jan 6, 2013, 02:02 AM
The linked article states "(n)ot only was I tasked by Scott Forstall with building a browser"--this implies that Forstall was the software guy who initiated the process of bringing Safari into existence--arguably the best and most influential Apple app ever--WebKit is the core almost every mobile smart phone browser.

If anyone wants to know more about Forstall's background at Apple and in the tech world I recommend reading this article (http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/10/scott-forstall-apple-legacy/). This article states that Forstall was the key player in the following software's origin:
- Bringing Unix To the Mac
- The Aqua User Interface
- iOS
- Android (since Android was basically a cheap stolen copy of iOS)

Jobs brought Forstall with him from NeXT! Forstall has been a core Apple employee.

Apple losing Forstall might be the biggest mistake Apple made since Steve Job's passing--however I can't speak for issues he was said to have had with other Apple executives and employees (which could be a serious issue). I do believe, however, that Forstall may no longer be getting the credit he deserves for getting the software to work right at Apple--the credit that Steve gave him when he was alive.

The fat man who wants to retire (Mansfield) might just be too lazy to go along with Forstall's motivation to work hard to put in the time and effort to strive to push technology forward--same with Cook who seems to be too laid back for a serious technology company that innovates and moves things forward.

The decision to replace the key Apple hardware expert (Ive) with Apple's key software expert (Forstall) doesn't seem to be the right one considering software and hardware are as opposite extremes as land and water--Apple is trying to put the head of the Army in charge of the Army and the Navy so to speak. Land and water don't work the same--not even close! I do like Ive's apporoach however and it will be neat to see if Apple software will be more seamless with the hardware--I just hope that the things that software needs (that Ive could be unaware of being a hardware guy) don't lack because of Ive's past focus on hardware by it self. I became an Apple user because of the software--not the hardware--it is hard for me to see Forstall go.

It will be neat to see where Forstall goes next and it would likely benefit many of us to watch him. Considering MacRumors about a year (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/01/17/scott-forstall-profiled-as-apples-ceo-in-waiting/) ago shed light on Forstall being Apple's "CEO-in-Waiting"--this firing of Forstall looks a lot like Steve Jobs being pushed out of Apple when John Scully and the other board members forced him out--maybe a decade from now Forstall will return as CEO of Apple as Steve did. ;) Maybe instead Forstall will start a very successful company of his own that will compete with and overtake Apple. We will see if the decision to get rid of Forstall seals Apple's fate for Apple's quality to plummet. Overall from the information that I have come across, Forstall's ousting doesn't seem to be good news to me. :(

I am still on Snow Leopard (which I am assuming Forstall was responsible for since he was responsible for Leopard)--I can't stand Federighi's approach--I made a spreadsheet of dozens of unresolved problems with the new Apple OS X approach that are driving me away from upgrading to an inferior OS. I think this is the end for Apple's quality standard that was existent with Jobs at the forefront. I hope Forstall finds a way to still bring the world beneficial software in the future. :)

Note: I haven't posted on MacRumors in years due to religious discrimination but I thought many readers could benefit if I shared my thoughts on this MacRumors news story pertaining to Forstall. (My religion is Christianity--specifically Messianic Judaism--don't discriminate MacRumors.)

Nozuka
Jan 6, 2013, 04:25 AM
There would be so many interesting things to be revealed and they choose the boring browser that noone is interested in :P

Yujenisis
Jan 6, 2013, 05:57 AM
There would be so many interesting things to be revealed and they choose the boring browser that noone is interested in :P

Speak for yourself, Safari may not be the most popular browser on the planet but for many people it is their browser of choice. This being an Apple forum, many people have a genuine interest in the development of Apple products which they may or may not care for.

Myself, I switch between Chromium and Safari quite happily. I prefer speedy, lightweight browsers and both Safari and Chromium accomplish that task.

I do slightly prefer Safari for its interface, however. And for Click To Flash.

ikir
Jan 6, 2013, 09:47 AM
Too bad Safari is awfully broken. At least for me...

Safari? Is the the best browser outhere if you want a powerful engine but simple feature browser. fast and clean.

jnpy!$4g3cwk
Jan 6, 2013, 10:20 AM
I am still on Snow Leopard (which I am assuming Forstall was responsible for since he was responsible for Leopard)--I can't stand Federighi's approach--I made a spreadsheet of dozens of unresolved problems with the new Apple OS X approach that are driving me away from upgrading to an inferior OS. I think this is the end for Apple's quality standard that was existent with Jobs at the forefront. I hope Forstall finds a way to still bring the world beneficial software in the future. :)



I understand the appeal of SL; Lion was a mess. But ML seems somewhat improved. What are the top bugs/unresolved problems from the dozens you mention above?

ConCat
Jan 6, 2013, 01:27 PM
News flash: Since the early days of the browser wars, all browsers have pretended to be mozilla.

The Tale. (http://webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string-history/)

Although only the title of this article actually mentions Safari pretending to be mozilla, so I can't decide if this is on-topic or not. Oh well.

Anyway, if anyone's wondering, Microsoft started this Mozilla impersonation mess that is the User Agent String. One excerpt from the article:

And Netscape said, let us make fun of Microsoft and refer to Windows as “poorly debugged device drivers,” and Microsoft was angry. And so Microsoft made their own web browser, which they called Internet Explorer, hoping for it to be a “Netscape Killer”. And Internet Explorer supported frames, and yet was not Mozilla, and so was not given frames. And Microsoft grew impatient, and did not wish to wait for webmasters to learn of IE and begin to send it frames, and so Internet Explorer declared that it was “Mozilla compatible” and began to impersonate Netscape, and called itself Mozilla/1.22 (compatible; MSIE 2.0; Windows 95), and Internet Explorer received frames, and all of Microsoft was happy, but webmasters were confused.

manu chao
Jan 6, 2013, 06:12 PM
You need to learn what "common knowledge" means :rolleyes:
Maybe 'public knowledge' would be the better term, and that nowadays is equivalent to 'easily googleable knowledge'.

KnightWRX
Jan 6, 2013, 07:50 PM
So THAT'S why it says Mozilla. I thought Safari actually had something to do with Mozilla.

Actually, it says Mozilla because the KHTML folk made it say Mozilla. Heck, Internet Explorer's user-agent string says Mozilla, always had. User agent string checking in CGI scripts is as old as dynamic web pages. Browser makers have been adding bits of each other's strings as they implement compatible syntax checking and rendering so as not to break server-side HTML serving to their software (get the default crap page instead of the nice shiny page).

Mozilla just happens to be that "default" thing everyone and their brother has in their string (comes from Netscape).

MisterKeeks
Jan 6, 2013, 07:55 PM
As far as I know, Safari is no longer available for Windows.

You can still get up to date builds of Webkit for Windows. I don't have a Windows computer to test them on right now, but I assume it is visually identical to Apple's build of Safari for Windows.

KnightWRX
Jan 6, 2013, 07:56 PM
This article states that Forstall was the key player in the following software's origin:

- Android (since Android was basically a cheap stolen copy of iOS)


You just crapped all over Andy Rubin's work since 1998 with that statement. Android, the OS, has nothing to do with iOS at all. For one thing, Android is Dalvik on top of a Linux kernel while iOS is simply the Obj-C runtime running on top of Darwin. Right there you can see the OSes aren't "copies".

----------

You can still get up to date builds of Webkit for Windows. I don't have a Windows computer to test them on right now, but I assume it is visually identical to Apple's build of Safari for Windows.

Or just use Chrome, it has always had a much more recent build of Webkit than Safari anyhow.

turtlez
Jan 6, 2013, 08:09 PM
i love safari

jnpy!$4g3cwk
Jan 6, 2013, 08:22 PM
Or just use Chrome, it has always had a much more recent build of Webkit than Safari anyhow.



I would use Chrome more if it had 64-bit versions available like Firefox and Safari do.

GodBless
Jan 7, 2013, 01:01 AM
You just crapped all over Andy Rubin's work since 1998 with that statement. Android, the OS, has nothing to do with iOS at all. For one thing, Android is Dalvik on top of a Linux kernel while iOS is simply the Obj-C runtime running on top of Darwin. Right there you can see the OSes aren't "copies".

Some counterfeit watches aren't made out of the same materials as the original product either--this doesn't change the fact that the intellectual property in both cases is stollen does it? ;)

Also from the article: 'Jobs said when the first batch of Android smartphones landed in 2010. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this." '

The revenue that Google is indirectly stealing from Apple isn't nice either.

Ephesians 4:28: "Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth."

GodBless
Jan 7, 2013, 01:31 AM
I understand the appeal of SL; Lion was a mess. But ML seems somewhat improved. What are the top bugs/unresolved problems from the dozens you mention above?

Here's a list of issues (I was probably using 10.7.3 and 10.7.4 at the time) that I have had with Lion that Snow Leopard does not have--generally I listed the issues in order from most annoying (top of list) to least annoying (bottom of list)--I'm not sure how many of these issues are still present in Mountain Lion but I wouldn't be surprised if even more annoyances that have big productivity consequences exist in Mountain Lion that weren't present in 10.6 or 10.7. Considering I've combed the new feature list of 10.8 on Apple's website well, most of the new benefits don't seem appealing to me if most of what I have listed below still exists in 10.8 that was also present in 10.7:

- Xcode and 10.6 Property List Editor Have Trouble Opening 2 (or more probably) List Files With the Same Name
- Spotlight Doesn't Find Invisible File(s) Even When the Option To Include Invisible Files Is Enabled
- Various Login Screen Issues When Using Remote Login
- TextEdit Won't Prompt For Saving Unsaved Documents Upon Quitting the App
- Various Spotlight Errors:
- - Multiple Undesired Results Showing
- - Search Failed When I Took a Search Criterian Away (I ended Up with "0" Results)
- - Searching Is Slow
- When Opening .plist Files From Other HD Partition They Don't Show All Of Their Contents In Xcode and Property List Editor--This Is Really Bad For Preference Comparing
- Dictionary Popup Cuts Off Definitions When More Than One Of the Following Are Enabled: Dictionary; Thesaurus; Apple Dictionary; Wikipedia Dictionary
- Quick Look No Longer Zooms
- Quick Look Files Start Playing From Scratch Within 1 Second After They Are Dismissed (Tested With 1 File So Far--Could Have Been an Error--But Probably a New Lion Feature)
- Quick Look Box Changes Sizes When Arrowing To Other File
- In Finder Column View Width Length Changes To Default Width When Arrowing Up and Down
- Doesn't Allow For Find Previous When Using Keyboard Searching In Xcode
- Location Of HD Icons On Sidebar Is In an Inferrior Location (I understand this changed in 10.8 Mountain Lion)
- Get Info On HDs Shows Bytes First Instead of GB For Available Data
- Dictionary Popup Acts Funny--Doesn't Include Words--Shows More Than One Word Inconsistantly (Includes 2 or More Words With No Obvious Pattern To Me)
- Pill-Shaped Show/Hide Toolbar Button Is Missing In Many Places Around 10.7--Probably Since Full Screen View Is In Place Of Showing and Hiding Toolbars
- Full-Screen Is Buggy--Not Able To Use 2 Monitors--Toolbar Pop-Outs Waste Time By Popping Out and Going Away Slowly and Every Time Mouse Goes To Top Of Screen and Before the Mouse Goes to the Very Top Of the Screen--Very Bad Especially When On Screen Sharing and Trying To Click On File Menus On the Remote Computer--Full Screen Has Very Poor Design
- Pointer Finger Cursor Looks and Functions Inferiorly
- No Warning Before Closing a Window That Has 2 or More Open Tabs and No Warning When Safari Is Quit
- Missing [Deleted/Moved/Etc.?] Files Show Up In Search Results Even Though They Are Not Able To Be Accessed In Spotlight
- Quick Look Is No Longer Transparent--Takes One's Mind Off What a Person Might Be Working On Now--Before You Could Still See In the Background What You Were Doing While You Briefly Previewed a File--It Looks a Lot Uglier--Clunky and Plain Now--Before It Looked Shiny and Approachable
- Quick Look No Longer Has Big and Round Buttons and Scrollers--Makes Quickly Viewing Files a Lot Slower, Tedious and Difficult
- After a Hard Restart (i.e. After a Freeze, Dead Battery, Immediate Power Off, Etc.) All Windows Open Again Even If It Is Undesired That They Do
- Pressing Cmd+delete To Cancel a Save Doesn't Register Unless the Save Sheet Is Rolled Out Before the Keyboard Shortcut Is Pressed--This Can Slow Down My Workflow (Tested With TextEdit Only So Far)
- Large Onscreen Volume Indicator Doesn't Show Broad Scale Anymore With Icon (Besides Mute Indication)--Basic Intensity Scale Can Only Can Be Seen In Menubar Now
- Dock Movements Don't Always Stay Permanent (May Also Be a 10.6 Issue)
- Mission Control Replaces Show All Windows Exposť Feature
- Miscellaneous Confusing Screen Sharing Configuration Options
- Software Update In System Preferences Said That No Software Updates Were Available Even Though When I Checked It Manually There Were Several Updates
- Exit "Browse All Versions…" Keystroke Unknown--Escape Doesn't Work
- Arrow Keys Still Scroll In Same Direction (Not Moving the Content But Moving the Viewing Area)--This Is Inconsistant With Apple's New Scrolling Philosophy
- New "All Side" Window Resizing Takes Away the Ability To Precision Click On Toolbar Items When Floating Toolbars Are Present
- Animated Dictionary Viewer Is Slow--I Disabled Slow Animated Windows For Things Such As Empty Trash But the Dictionary Viewer Is Still Unnecessarily Animated
- Buggy When Emptying Trash--Still Thinks File Is In Use If It Was Just Previewed In Finder Preview Column in Column View (Happened At Least Once With 10.7.4)
- Small Window Close, Minimize and Zoom Buttons
- Dictionary Popup Loads Slowly When First Activated
- Spining Pinwheel Looks Inferior
- Ugly Login Screen
- Window Resize Icon Bug--Icon Showed Up Where a Window Wasn't Present (10.7.3)--I Only Remember Seeing It Once

These issues still remain for me even after I combed the internet for hours and tested third party software to solve as many problems as possible. These are my UNRESOLVED problems with 10.7 Lion--I have already resolved several annoying issues with the OS.

On my next post I will give you answers to problems I have solved with 10.7 that I documented in case I reinstalled the OS and wanted to remember how to optimize my 10.7 OS experience.

GodBless
Jan 7, 2013, 01:45 AM
(Continued from my previous post)

Solutions To 10.7 Issues:

Problem: Hidden ~/Library Folder(s)
Solution: Paste the Following Command Into Terminal (without the quotes: "chflags nohidden ~/Library"


Problem: Downloads Can Be Pasted Into Download Window But Will Replace Themselves (Only the Current or Latest One Will Be Shown)
Solution: Type a URL Into the URL Bar and Then Press Option+Enter To Download a URL Properly

Problem: Where Is Time Capsule Hardware Version Listed?
Solution: Old Snow Leopard AirPort Utility Can Be Run

Problem: Where Is AirPort Firmware Update Option?
Solution: Old Snow Leopard AirPort Utility Can Be Run

Problem: Save As… Missing
Solution: Not Too Big Of a Deal Because Files Can Be Duplicated In Finder--But It Is an Inconvienence--Also Save As Came Back With 10.8

Problem: Open With… Dialog Boxes Not Allowing Draging a File Into Them In Finder
Solution: Can Use Cmd+Shift+G In Open With... Dialog Boxes and Paste In a Location In Order To Navigate To a Copied File Location--To Copy a File Location It Must Be Done Before Selecting Open With…, First Navigate To the Desired Location In Finder, Then Press Cmd+I To Get Info and Finally Copy the File Path--This Way You Can Navigate To Apps Within Apps, Apps Within Bundles, Apps Within Packages, Etc. In the Open With... Dialog Boxes

Problem: Two Finger Horizontal Scrolling Slow and Choppy In Finder (Vertical Scrolling Is However Smooth)
Solution: I Tested This For About 20 Minutes and It Seemed Not To Be That Big Of an Issue

Problem: Grayscale Sidebar Items--Harder To Find--Less Vibrant (Duller) Looking
Solution: Use Of a 3rd Party SIMBL Based Software That Launches On Login Can Put Semi-Reasonable Looking Icons In Sidebar (I think that I remember reading that this came back with 10.8 without needing to use 3rd party software)

Problem: Revisiond Error Prevented Disk Image From Ejecting In (10.7.3)
Solution: Have Not Seen Error Since--Probably a Non-Issue That Only Occurred With a Full Read/Write Disk Image

I had other issues too but these were the ones that I documented--with these issues I decided 10.6 was the best for me out of 10.6 and 10.7--perhaps I will try 10.8 soon or maybe even the latest version of 10.7--but I can say for sure that I don't have as much confidence in Apple's software as I did previously. I have seen iOS' quality go down with the latest iOS 6 in some respects (especially in regards to color and contrast choice) and iTunes quality has plummeted too (in overall usability, efficiency and logical design). It would be great if Apple could get its act back together soon. Steve Jobs' passing was significant for where Apple stands today.

By the way (back on topic)--Safari and Keynote are probably my two favorite Apple apps so I like to read history like this about Safari.

God Bless,
GodBless

KnightWRX
Jan 7, 2013, 03:45 AM
Some counterfeit watches aren't made out of the same materials as the original product either--this doesn't change the fact that the intellectual property in both cases is stollen does it? ;)

What IP are you referring to ? None of the copyrighted code from Darwin/Springboard are found in Android, so it's hardly a copy (copy/pasting code). Please be specific.

Also from the article: 'Jobs said when the first batch of Android smartphones landed in 2010. ďIím going to destroy Android, because itís a stolen product. Iím willing to go thermonuclear war on this." '

Article is wrong then, first batch of Android Smartphones landed in 2008. Jobs also had a misconception that Apple owned the whole of multi-touch on smartphones.

The revenue that Google is indirectly stealing from Apple isn't nice either.

What revenue are you referring to exactly ? Care to point it out in their financials ?

JAT
Jan 7, 2013, 02:03 PM
Exactly. What also annoys me is that they made the tabs so huge. Now, when you want to close a few of them, you can't simply stand on the X icon and keep clicking, but you have to track down the X every time you close a tab because they keep changing in size.

Use middle-click. Doesn't need to be the front tab, or use the X. Also useful if you happen to use bookmarks in a toolbar, opens them in new tab.

This works for me in Safari, IE, and Firefox. So, someone must have agreed with everyone else.

Kobayagi
Jan 7, 2013, 02:28 PM
Use middle-click. Doesn't need to be the front tab, or use the X. Also useful if you happen to use bookmarks in a toolbar, opens them in new tab.

This works for me in Safari, IE, and Firefox. So, someone must have agreed with everyone else.

The middle-click doesn't work with Safari 6, it did with the previous version. Another thing they messed up. :mad:

JAT
Jan 7, 2013, 02:41 PM
The middle-click doesn't work with Safari 6, it did with the previous version. Another thing they messed up. :mad:

Ah. Really sounds like a bad upgrade. I'm still on SL, so it hasn't come up.

GodBless
Jan 7, 2013, 03:36 PM
What revenue are you referring to exactly ? Care to point it out in their financials ?

When an Android phone is purchased instead of an iPhone Apple loses revenue. No need to be more specific than that.

CyBeRino
Jan 8, 2013, 12:20 AM
I'm not surprised that Apple was aware of the need to hide a product under development while creating Safari, but I'm surprised that they haven't done this more routinely for all of their product development.

Leaks from logs are still a great source of rumors for us rumormongers. Example: Mac OS X 10.9 showing up in web logs (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/11/06/early-signs-of-os-x-10-9-unsurprisingly-showing-up-in-web-logs/)

That's easy to explain: they don't care about that. We all know OSX 10.9 is coming at some point. There's no secret there. If the version after 10.9 were to be called 11.0, that'd be a secret again. (Btw, I expect it'll be 10.10).

No one knew Safari was coming. Big secret, and now one of their biggest products (as you know Safari's engine, WebKit, is the basis for almost all mobile browsers and a bunch of desktop browsers among which Chrome.)

It's kind of the same with the hardware revision numbers. Every now and then a big whoop will be made about a new iMac32,1 number showing up in some plist file. Apple doesn't care about that: it tells you nothing, except that at some point in the future there will be a model iMac that is newer than the current model iMac. Which we all already knew. Now, if you were to find a new model RackMack in there that'd be interesting again (and unlikely because it'd be kept secret), seeing as how the RackMac (better known as the Xserve) was discontinued. The same goes for any completely new platform. No FlatMac1,1 will appear in any plist file before a machine calling itself FlatMac1,1 is announced.

newagemac
Jan 8, 2013, 03:08 PM
I know that, but sometimes I'm (I'm sure more are) laid back in the chair and just wanna use the mouse without the keyboard shortcuts.
I'm not saying I'm lazy to close them this way, but when something was working nice, why did Apple break it...

Then click on the little rectangle on the far right of your tabs to switch to Tab View and then clicking the X works like you want. No keyboard required.

newagemac
Jan 8, 2013, 03:45 PM
Ah. Really sounds like a bad upgrade. I'm still on SL, so it hasn't come up.

Safari 6 is so much faster than Safari 5 on Snow Leopard it isn't even funny. Scrolling in particular is smoother than any browser out there. I used to use Chrome but it has fallen significantly behind Safari in the speed department now.