Apple Releases Safari Technology Preview 52 With Bug Fixes and Feature Improvements

[MacRumors]

Apple today released a new update for Safari Technology Preview, the experimental browser Apple first introduced two years ago in March of 2016. Apple designed the Safari Technology Preview to test features that may be introduced into future release versions of Safari.

Safari Technology Preview release 52 includes bug fixes and feature improvements for Service Workers, Loading, JavaScript, CSS, Web API, Accessibility, Web Driver, Web Inspector, WebAssembly, and Media. Today's update also removes support for running legacy NPAPI plug-ins other than Adobe Flash.

The Safari Technology Preview update is available through the Software Update mechanism in the Mac App Store to anyone who has downloaded the browser. Full release notes for the update are available on the Safari Technology Preview website.

Apple's aim with Safari Technology Preview is to gather feedback from developers and users on its browser development process. Safari Technology Preview can run side-by-side with the existing Safari browser and while designed for developers, it does not require a developer account to download.

Article Link: Apple Releases Safari Technology Preview 52 With Bug Fixes and Feature Improvements

 

[cmChimera]

Does anyone else use this as their default browser?

 

[silvetti]

I will answer everyone's question, does it play 4K Youtube? No.

 

[csurfr]

I will answer everyone's question, does it play 4K Youtube? No.

And it never will until YouTube supports it (which they won’t).

 

[nvmls]

Does anyone else use this as their default browser?

We use it daily intensively, a lot of feedback they just don't care to fix, we always have to end up on Chrome for professional dev use, pretty sad.

EDIT: if you are a casual user it may be ok.

 

[csurfr]

We use it daily intensively, a lot of feedback they just don't care to fix, we always have to end up on Chrome for professional dev use, pretty sad.

It’s horribily unfortunate since chrome is a battery hog on the MacBook line. If safari’s dev tools weren’t so bad it would make things a lot nicer.

 

[nvmls]

It’s horribily unfortunate since chrome is a battery hog on the MacBook line. If safari’s dev tools weren’t so bad it would make things a lot nicer.

Tell me about it my friend, we have reported so much stuff we just gave up. To give an example, this has been reported since v49

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...d-feature-improvements.2104939/#post-25792767

As much as I hate Google's data mining, performance-wise they are miles ahead of Apple sadly.

 

[iOSBry]

Anyone got a fresh https://html5test.com score?

iOSBry

 

[csurfr]

Tell me about it my friend, we have reported so much stuff we just gave up. To give an example, this has been reported since v49

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...d-feature-improvements.2104939/#post-25792767

As much as I hate Google's data mining, performance-wise they are miles ahead of Apple sadly.

I had never noticed that before, as I don’t run full screen that often. Just one of the “little things” that have fallen away as of late.

 

[emdub]

Anyone got a fresh https://html5test.com score?

iOSBry

474/555

 

[iOSBry]

474/555

474, really? I get 480 on my iPhone. Did you go to the https site?

iOSBry

 

[chucker23n1]

Does anyone else use this as their default browser?

Yup.

 

[Vashetti]

It's 482, as always. Use the https version of the site and ensure you have all experimental features enabled.

 

[ikir]

I work on Safari, use dev/web features like inspector on Safari, never feel the need to switch to Chrome and its non-Apple interface, preferences and also Safari is much more lighter than Chrome!

 

[chucker23n1]

I will answer everyone's question, does it play 4K Youtube? No.

YouTube still doesn’t support the standard codec, so no.

 

[smithrh]

YouTube still doesn’t support the standard codec, so no.

It's much worse than that.

If you submit a 4K file to YouTube that's already H.26x, they transcode it to their format and delete the original.

It's a dick move.

 

[silvetti]

It's much worse than that.

If you submit a 4K file to YouTube that's already H.26x, they transcode it to their format and delete the original.

It's a dick move.

Yeah, really dickish to convert from a royalty prone codec to a free one. How dare they! Right?

FYI, I hate Chrome.
[doublepost=1521656793][/doublepost]

YouTube still doesn’t support the standard codec, so no.

Since when is HEVC the standard codec?


Here's some info for both:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Video_Coding#Patent_license_terms

 

[verpeiler]

It’s horribily unfortunate since chrome is a battery hog on the MacBook line. If safari’s dev tools weren’t so bad it would make things a lot nicer.

IIRC google improved the battery "drain" with version 57 or 58.. were at 65 now. I really can't tell a difference since quite some time.

 

[chucker23n1]

Since when is HEVC the standard codec?


Here's some info for both:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Video_Coding#Patent_license_terms

That’s problematic but irrelevant to the question on standards. HEVC is backed by ISO.

 

[isomorphic]

Yeah, really dickish to convert from a royalty prone codec to a free one. How dare they! Right?

I'm all for free codecs. But don't think Google is doing that out of the goodness of their heart--they're doing it to save money. I also wouldn't call the codec truly "free" if it was primarily developed solely by Google, even if rights are spun into a shell holding company. Finally, Google's "free" codec is of inferior quality, and transcoding between any two non-lossless codecs involves loss no matter how good the codecs.

However, the Alliance for Open Media may have some traction if it has more than just one or two tech giants in it. (I'm not saying Apple's recent membership makes or breaks it. I'm saying that you need consensus.) Hopefully together the giants can develop a high-quality, truly free codec that compares well with proprietary codecs both in quality, and in memory/CPU usage for decoding and encoding.

 

[bielekas]

Can we paste images yet?

 

[chucker23n1]

However, the Alliance for Open Media may have some traction if it has more than just one or two tech giants in it. (I'm not saying Apple's recent membership makes or breaks it. I'm saying that you need consensus.) Hopefully together the giants can develop a high-quality, truly free codec that compares well with proprietary codecs both in quality, and in memory/CPU usage for decoding and encoding.

Hopefully. But widespread adoption is likely many years off.

 

[gplusplus]

I didn’t know that anyone actually used Safari, other than on iOS where we’re forced to against our will.

 

[isomorphic]

I didn’t know that anyone actually used Safari, other than on iOS where we’re forced to against our will.

I use Firefox. I'd like to use Chrome, but it's way too expensive.

 

[chucker23n1]

I didn’t know that anyone actually used Safari, other than on iOS where we’re forced to against our will.

I use Safari. Chrome is ugly and uses more battery.