ars technica covers browser statistics - Safari "... nothing to sneeze at"

[c-Row]

From arstechnica.com

Internet Explorer [...] has now reached its lowest point in over two years at 82.10 percent. Firefox, on the other hand, has been growing steadily, reaching 12.46 percent market share. Safari holds its third place spot, but sees increasing numbers as well at 3.53 percent.

Both Firefox and Safari are seeing their highest numbers for the year, apparently at the expense of Internet Explorer. [...] Safari, while holding much smaller numbers than IE and Firefox, is also becoming nothing to sneeze at. A year ago, Safari had less than 2 percent of the browser market but has almost doubled its numbers since then.

Guess that's an interesting side effect of the introduction of the Intel Macs and the growing number of switchers.

 

[Lollypop]

Intel switch aside, Im vey glad that safari's market share is growing, will convince more web developers to be a bit more platform nutral!

 

[Warbrain]

Intel switch aside, Im vey glad that safari's market share is growing, will convince more web developers to be a bit more platform nutral!

What you mean is browser neutral. And yes, most websites are. It's Safari that has a lot of incompatibility issues because it hasn't been updated to the updated accepted standards as often as other browsers are.

 

[dmw007]

Intel switch aside, Im vey glad that safari's market share is growing, will convince more web developers to be a bit more platform nutral!

Hopefully this is the case, I love using Safari.

 

[killmoms]

What you mean is browser neutral. And yes, most websites are. It's Safari that has a lot of incompatibility issues because it hasn't been updated to the updated accepted standards as often as other browsers are.

Not true. Safari sticks to the XHTML and CSS2 standards MUCH more rigorously than other browsers. It's one of only two shipping browsers that passes the Acid2 test. The problem is web-developers coding for the incredibly broken Internet Explorer.

 

[reflex]

The problem is web-developers coding for the incredibly broken Internet Explorer.

Can you blame them with 82% market share for IE?

It has to work in IE, otherwise the website might as well not exist. And that's important if you're trying to make any kind of money out of it.

I do agree you should ideally make web content that can be viewed on any standards-compliant browser though.

 

[killmoms]

Can you blame them with 82% market share for IE?

It has to work in IE, otherwise the website might as well not exist. And that's important if you're trying to make any kind of money out of it.

I do agree you should ideally make web content that can be viewed on any standards-compliant browser though.

I do blame them when it's possible to make sites that work in IE and STILL WORK in standards-compliant browsers. I blame them so hard they can feel that **** in their SLEEP.

 

[reflex]

I do blame them when it's possible to make sites that work in IE and STILL WORK in standards-compliant browsers. I blame them so hard they can feel that **** in their SLEEP.

Now they don't sleep well enough, so they can't concentrate and make their websites even less compliant

 

[iMeowbot]

Not true. Safari sticks to the XHTML and CSS2 standards MUCH more rigorously than other browsers. It's one of only two shipping browsers that passes the Acid2 test. The problem is web-developers coding for the incredibly broken Internet Explorer.

It is true. Browse through the real CSS2 test suite to see all the problem areas.

Many of the tests that fail on Safari are areas that are supposed to be tested by Acid2. It's pretty clear that Acid2 is being special-cased, when the real goal of that test is that passing should be a side effect of a correct CSS implementation.

 

[killmoms]

It is true. Browse through the real CSS2 test suite to see all the problem areas.

Many of the tests that fail on Safari are areas that are supposed to be tested by Acid2. It's pretty clear that Acid2 is being special-cased, when the real goal of that test is that passing should be a side effect of a correct CSS implementation.

Well... color me embarrassed. Dammit Apple, stop fakin' the funk on Front Street and pass that test fo'rizzeal (or something).

 

[iMeowbot]

Well... color me embarrassed. Dammit Apple, stop fakin' the funk on Front Street and pass that test fo'rizzeal (or something).

Hey, selective benchmarking is the key component of that famous reality distortion field It is definitely a good thing that the Apple developers are trying, and the various Web-related standards are large and complicated, so much so that nobody else gets them entirely right either.

This really isn't so bad. Safari goes get a large subset of CSS right. So do the Gecko browsers and even IE. The thing that drives everyone bonkers is that each of these engines gets a different subset right

 

[whooleytoo]

It is true. Browse through the real CSS2 test suite to see all the problem areas.

Hmmm. I'm unconvinced about the test you've linked to. For example, the Length Units test ("There should be a solid vertical bar of green below.") links to a png called swatch-red.png, which unsurprisingly is, red.

If they can make mistakes as obvious as that, I wouldn't trust the results of any of their tests.

 

[iMeowbot]

Hmmm. I'm unconvinced about the test you've linked to. For example, the Length Units test ("There should be a solid vertical bar of green below.") links to a png called swatch-red.png, which unsurprisingly is, red.

The important part, of course, id the vertical bar in relation to the spaced letters, which Safari 2 does pass.

If they can make mistakes as obvious as that, I wouldn't trust the results of any of their tests.

If you look at the source of the test, it is very clear what is intended, and each test page includes a helpful link to the specification under test so that you can understand the principles. Of course, that's work, so browser writers don't bother.

 

[whooleytoo]

The important part, of course, id the vertical bar in relation to the spaced letters, which Safari 2 does pass.

Sure, I accept that. But one thing anyone testing standards compliance absolutely MUST have is attention to detail. Errors like that would shake my faith in any results of that test suite.