Apple's Removes Mentions of Safari for Windows, But Version 5.1.7 Still Available For Now [Updated]

[nagromme]

It doesn’t make sense that a product which leverages new OS X features and underlying technologies, should update in lockstep with its companion version for an entirely different OS out of Apple’s control: Mountain Lion certainly calls for a new Safari... but Mountain Lion certainly does NOT call for a new Windows Safari.

If Safari for Windows does live on, I think Apple should stop even trying to number the Windows version the same and let each one leverage the strength of its OS. Let Safari be a better fit for Windows than it has been, and let it advance independently on OS X. (And of course, share things when possible—definitely the rendering engine—but without the pressure of simultaneous release.)

In other words, an approach more like what Microsoft has used (at times) with Office. Office for Mac has been its own thing with separate versioning.

[Rodimus Prime]

Not surprised by it to much. Safari for windows was crap and a bad browser. What speaks volumes about how poor Safari is over all is it was at 5% market share before going windows and today it is STILL at 5% market share. That should speak volumes at how poor it is right there.

[chadua]

Originally Posted by astrorider

That's funny...try opening the PDF in OS X Preview and see what you get

I don't understand what point you were trying to make.

[acosmichippo]

The only reason I use Safari in windows is because of iCloud bookmark syncing (and reading list and tab syncing, to a lesser extent). It's either that or... IE. Luckily I rarely use windows, so I can put up with an older version when I need to.

I REALLY wish apple would open up bookmark syncing to other browsers, especially if they stop supporting Safari for windows. Would be one shrewd move to force all windows iCloud users into IE.

[ravenvii]

Safari was originally released on Windows so web developers can test their websites for Safari on Windows. However, with Chrome using Webkit and being so popular, this is much less necessary those days.

[Laird Knox]

Originally Posted by MonkeySee....

I like it too. For some reason though it keeps crashing and windows shuts it down. I've even disabled all extensions.

If you leave the browser open Flash will eventually crash. On my system (8GB, 4 core Xenon) it takes between a day and a week depending on how many Flash-heavy pages I have loaded.

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by nagromme

It doesn’t make sense that a product which leverages new OS X features and underlying technologies, should update in lockstep with its companion version for an entirely different OS out of Apple’s control: Mountain Lion certainly calls for a new Safari... but Mountain Lion certainly does NOT call for a new Windows Safari.

If Safari for Windows does live on, I think Apple should stop even trying to number the Windows version the same and let each one leverage the strength of its OS. Let Safari be a better fit for Windows than it has been, and let it advance independently on OS X. (And of course, share things when possible—definitely the rendering engine—but without the pressure of simultaneous release.)

In other words, an approach more like what Microsoft has used (at times) with Office. Office for Mac has been its own thing with separate versioning.

That's just bad. It was bad when Microsoft did it with Internet Explorer for Mac, it's bad if Apple were to do this with Safari for Windows. A lot of the new Safari 6 features don't rely on technologies of OS X (offline reading lists, omni bar, incognito tabs (did I just use the Chrome names for the new Safari features ? ) etc...) and could be made for Windows if Apple thought the product was worth supporting.

In the end though, I'd just drop it if I were Apple. There is barely any value in porting Safari to Windows. But I will strongly disagree with you. If they are to maintain the product, they should maintain both in sync and compatible with one another, contrary to Microsoft's approach with seems more than not to relegate OS X to a "2nd citizen" status.

[KCMichaelB]

Originally Posted by diamond.g

That would be a great experiment. Apple not release iTunes for Windows. At this point supposedly they don't even need Windows since you can set up iDevices OTA now.

You don't even need OS X.

[chadua]

Originally Posted by davebarnes

Opens fine using Acrobat Pro 8.

It opens fine in preview too.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y26...at122754PM.png

[Nevzorus]

WHY DO YOU DO THIS TO ME?! I hate Firefox and Chrome

[diamond.g]

Originally Posted by KCMichaelB

You don't even need OS X.

That is true.

[RedCroissant]

Originally Posted by smoledman

LOL - as if anyone ever used it on Windows. Apple software on Windows(Safari, Quicktime, iTunes) is horrible bloatware.

Whoa there! I know that before I switched to Mac, I was running Safari, Quicktime, and iTunes. I was even editing the registry to make WMP import .mp4 files so that I could stream the movies to my PS3.

And yes, that might read strange that I used iTunes AND WMP, but I had to stream!

[deannnnn]

Chrome offers serious competition to Safari on the Mac side. On Windows, it's no question -- Chrome all the way.

[astrorider]

Originally Posted by davebarnes

Opens fine using Acrobat Pro 8.

I'm sure it works fine in lots of things, but not OS X Preview which was what I said.

Originally Posted by chadua

I don't understand what point you were trying to make.

"Open it in OS X Preview"? If you had you'd see it was not readable, maybe a font issue. I just find it funny when you try to follow the Windows HIG on a Mac you're presented with unreadable text. See the point relative to the statement that Apple doesn't follow the Windows HIG?

[charlituna]

Originally Posted by diamond.g

That would be a great experiment. Apple not release iTunes for Windows.

There's possible legal issues if they do. Just like there were that started them releasing it. All goes into courting anti-trust fights.

Mind you they won't have all the same awesome features should iTunes for the Mac ever be mega enhanced or even split up but that's to do with the core OS more than iTunes. So iTunes for Windows will likely always be something of a mess compared to the Mac version.

ANd that Safari is stuck on 5.1.7 is a similar game. These new tricks are possible in part due to Mac OSX and iCloud. they just can't happen on Windows without a ton of work (if at all) and Apple isn't a Windows developer as its core focus so they aren't going to bother.

[Pianoblack3]

Originally Posted by deannnnn

Chrome offers serious competition to Safari on the Mac side. On Windows, it's no question -- Chrome all the way.

Chrome lacks the OS integration that Safari has, and it's… Google *shudders*

[Eidorian]

And nothing of value was lost.

[charlituna]

Originally Posted by Nevzorus

WHY DO YOU DO THIS TO ME?! I hate Firefox and Chrome

Why?

Easy. to make you have to buy a Mac if you want to use the latest Safari. It's an evil and diabolical trick that Steve and Tim learned from their true master.

[Pianoblack3]

Originally Posted by charlituna

Why?

Easy. to make you have to buy a Mac if you want to use the latest Safari. It's an evil and diabolical trick that Steve and Tim learned from their true master.

Image

Yes, cause they both knew people would dish out 4 figures to buy a computer to use the latest Safari, when they have plenty of other options besides Chrome and Firefox… Opera comes to mind.

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by astrorider

"Open it in OS X Preview"? If you had you'd see it was not readable, maybe a font issue. I just find it funny when you try to follow the Windows HIG on a Mac you're presented with unreadable text. See the point relative to the statement that Apple doesn't follow the Windows HIG?

The Windows HIG is for Windows developers. The OS X HIG is for Mac developers. And the font issue seems to be your own machine since we have a screenshot showing nothing wrong with Microsoft's PDF in Preview.

And no, I don't quite get your point... Don't follow the HIG of others but push people to follow yours... I don't get it.

[jamesnajera]

For Me,

I use Safari for regular Internet surfing, I use Chrome when I want to watch Hulu.

This way I do not have to do Click to Flash or any of those other extensions to block Flash in Safari. Safari is my "clean" web browser for general Internet surfing, and I don't waste time downloading Flash ads.

When I want to watch something with Flash, then I open Chrome. This combo seems to work really well for me.

[Lennholm]

Originally Posted by astrorider

I'm sure it works fine in lots of things, but not OS X Preview which was what I said.



"Open it in OS X Preview"? If you had you'd see it was not readable, maybe a font issue. I just find it funny when you try to follow the Windows HIG on a Mac you're presented with unreadable text. See the point relative to the statement that Apple doesn't follow the Windows HIG?

Opened it in OS X Preview, perfectly readable, no issue at all.

[Codyak]

Originally Posted by Lennholm

Opened it in OS X Preview, perfectly readable, no issue at all.

Same here.

[mono1980]

Originally Posted by ravenvii

Safari was originally released on Windows so web developers can test their websites for Safari on Windows. However, with Chrome using Webkit and being so popular, this is much less necessary those days.

But Chrome and Safari don't render everything EXACTLY the same. They use different forks of webkit as far as I know.

[Undecided]

That's too bad - I like and use Safari for Windows. I'm posting from it right now.

No one else has the "reader" feature, which I often use. Or the reading list feature. Or the spell check in text boxes (AFAIK). And, I just like the way it feels.