How Safari Pretended to Be Mozilla Before It Was Released

[louis.b]

I love the new Safari. I used Chrome since 2009 and now Safari is my main web browser.

[TahoeJimbo]

Originally Posted by avanpelt

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]

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]

Originally Posted by stevedun

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]

Originally Posted by tobefirst

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]

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]

Originally Posted by a0me

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]

Originally Posted by Kobayagi

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]

Originally Posted by WAM2

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.

----------

Originally Posted by Kobayagi

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]

Originally Posted by thekb

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]

Originally Posted by Rocketman

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]

Originally Posted by stevedun

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]

Originally Posted by rmwebs

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.

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:

Originally Posted by Hes Nikke

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]

Originally Posted by TahoeJimbo

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]

Originally Posted by turtlez

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!

[GodBless]

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. 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 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]

There would be so many interesting things to be revealed and they choose the boring browser that noone is interested in :P

[Yujenisis]

Originally Posted by Nozuka

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]

Originally Posted by BJB Productions

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]

Originally Posted by GodBless

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]

News flash: Since the early days of the browser wars, all browsers have pretended to be mozilla.

The Tale.

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]

Originally Posted by rmwebs

You need to learn what "common knowledge" means

Maybe 'public knowledge' would be the better term, and that nowadays is equivalent to 'easily googleable knowledge'.

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by Morshu9001

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]

Originally Posted by Yvan256

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]

Originally Posted by GodBless

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".

----------

Originally Posted by MisterKeeks

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.