Coconut Battery anyone?

Peter Franks

macrumors 68000
Jun 9, 2011
1,715
30
0
Just downloaded the Coconut battery app on my old MBP, Can someone tell me what the 'Charging with' bit means, When I plugged it in it was 27% but now its at less than 5%. Is that supposed to happen. What does that mean, and is there any idiot guide explanations for the 'Current charge/Full charge capacity/Design capacity' readings? Thanks
 

BLBL

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2018
663
88
0
The unit in charging with should be in Watts. You sure it says percentages (%)?
If it shows watts, then it should be normal for it to get lower as battery get near full when charging it. It usually starts to drop pretty early, and it is better for the battery that way (the best would be very low charge wattage whole time but it would be too time consuming for practical reasons for battery this capacity).

For other questions CC mean what is the current battery charge level (like fuel gauge in cars), FCC means the highest capacity your battery can reach when fully charged and the DC is the nominal full charge capacity of the new battery. Basically you compare FCC to DC to determine your battery health compared to brand new battery. Usually in new battery FCC is often even few % higher than DC, and it begins to get lower as battery ages and how it is been used (it is bad to drive battery empty or to keep it 100% charged for the long time). Basically FCC should be 80% or higher compared to DC up to 1000 charge cycles (in some newer Macbook anyway, the number is not published for the all models like MBP 2019 1.4). Usually batteries these days do not last very well and I doubt many will be usable up to 1000 charge cycles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter Franks

Peter Franks

macrumors 68000
Jun 9, 2011
1,715
30
0
Thanks for your help. Yes, definitely said 'Charging with 27.48 watts' then dropped and dropped... 25...went to around the 5 mark, thanks for clearing that up, it makes sense.

Is there a way to change Fahrenheit to Centigrade, do you know?

My full charge capacity is 3275, Design C is 5770 mAh. So, meaning 5770 when new, and now it's 3275 capacity?

Shouldn't current charge and full charge capacity stay at the same when plugged in and fully charged? 3275 went to 3449.

Fully charged is 56% Design capacity and my battery says 'replace soon' on the Mac, I'd say that should be replace now?
 

Erehy Dobon

macrumors regular
Feb 16, 2018
152
112
0
Thanks for your help. Yes, definitely said 'Charging with 27.48 watts' then dropped and dropped... 25...went to around the 5 mark, thanks for clearing that up, it makes sense.
That's the way most devices with rechargeable batteries operate in general, not just Apple notebook computers. They recharge at a high wattage when the battery(ies) is considerably depleted, then switch to a trickle charge when it nears full charge.

Is there a way to change Fahrenheit to Centigrade, do you know?
Just click on the temperature to toggle the units.

Fully charged is 56% Design capacity and my battery says 'replace soon' on the Mac, I'd say that should be replace now?
If you are happy with the lifespan, feel free to wait. That said, older batteries are more susceptible to bloating (a safety issue). Up to you really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter Franks

BLBL

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2018
663
88
0
Thanks for your help. Yes, definitely said 'Charging with 27.48 watts' then dropped and dropped... 25...went to around the 5 mark, thanks for clearing that up, it makes sense.
Then it is completely normal.

Is there a way to change Fahrenheit to Centigrade, do you know?
I should but I never needed to change it as mine shows in C. I believe it looks in location / area setting in MacOS and takes default from there. I think you should be able to change it manually in Coconut settings, see the menu on the top bar when it is open. I'm not at my computer now so I cannot check, but I'm pretty sure it is there.

My full charge capacity is 3275, Design C is 5770 mAh. So, meaning 5770 when new, and now it's 3275 capacity?
Yes. Looks like it is a lot under 80% which is considered nominal usable lowest FCC level but surely you can keep using it if the battery is still healthy, but it is not very easy for ordinary user to determine as there are many factors included in that. Like if battery is heating too much, it can be safety issue, or if the battery has been swelling it is another possible issue (if the machine bottom is getting so fat it does not stand steadily on all four feet is a good sign, or if the palm rest or trackpad is clearly bulging is another).

Shouldn't current charge and full charge capacity stay at the same when plugged in and fully charged? 3275 went to 3449.
Basically yes, but in reality it can fluctuate more or less. Like recently in my unit (practically new machine still) it has been hovering around 5170-5220 or so (DC is 5103 for it). But that has been also fluctuating more in my machine but recent OS update made it work more sensible way, especially under high CPU load as mine seemed to drop FCC hugely under load but not anymore.

Fully charged is 56% Design capacity and my battery says 'replace soon' on the Mac, I'd say that should be replace now?
Good question and honestly hard to answer. Basically if battery is still "healthy" (not overheating, swelling etc...) and you are happy with operating time on battery or you don't even use it on battery ever (and / or you want to save money), then you may consider just leaving it be like that but since these batteries can be even dangerous/fire hazard if they are not healthy, you should think if you really want to take your chances with it. These batteries can be very dangerous if they start acting up.

Also I'm not sure if indicator telling "replace soon" is determining the actual safety/health of the battery in detailed way, or is it just relying to charge cycle count (usually rated for 1000 charge cycles) and/or FCC vs DC is another thing to consider. I don't know for sure.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Peter Franks

Peter Franks

macrumors 68000
Jun 9, 2011
1,715
30
0
That's the way most devices with rechargeable batteries operate in general, not just Apple notebook computers. They recharge at a high wattage when the battery(ies) is considerably depleted, then switch to a trickle charge when it nears full charge.


Just click on the temperature to toggle the units.


If you are happy with the lifespan, feel free to wait. That said, older batteries are more susceptible to bloating (a safety issue). Up to you really.
Thanks for that, and yes temperature change is as simple as that. I have bought a 'new' battery as the MBP is now over 8 years old. 56% capacity I assume should improve. And at 56% I'd hope the charge would last a lot longer with a new battery. In theory... I never got the advertised 10 hour battery life when new. It does get quite hot, but I do spend some evenings with a couple of hours on YouTube and my fans go mental. Guessing fans going OTT is not battery related? Cycles is at 1952.

Then it is completely normal.

I should but I never needed to change it as mine shows in C. I believe it looks in location / area setting in MacOS and takes default from there. I think you should be able to change it manually in Coconut settings, see the menu on the top bar when it is open. I'm not at my computer now so I cannot check, but I'm pretty sure it is there.


Yes. Looks like it is a lot under 80% which is considered nominal usable lowest FCC level but surely you can keep using it if the battery is still healthy, but it is not very easy for ordinary user to determine as there are many factors included in that. Like if battery is heating too much, it can be safety issue, or if the battery has been swelling it is another possible issue (if the machine bottom is getting so fat it does not stand steadily on all four feet is a good sign, or if the palm rest or trackpad is clearly bulging is another).


Basically yes, but in reality it can fluctuate more or less. Like recently in my unit (practically new machine still) it has been hovering around 5170-5220 or so (DC is 5103 for it). But that has been also fluctuating more in my machine but recent OS update made it work more sensible way, especially under high CPU load as mine seemed to drop FCC hugely under load but not anymore.


Good question and honestly hard to answer. Basically if battery is still "healthy" (not overheating, swelling etc...) and you are happy with operating time on battery or you don't even use it on battery ever (and / or you want to save money), then you may consider just leaving it be like that but since these batteries can be even dangerous/fire hazard if they are not healthy, you should think if you really want to take your chances with it. These batteries can be very dangerous if they start acting up. Actually seeing videos of battery failures makes me amazed that airlines still let peoples bring any li ion battery based devices on board, expect those specifically banned models.

Also I'm not sure if indicator telling "replace soon" is determining the actual safety/health of the battery in detailed way, or is it just relying to charge cycle count (usually rated for 1000 charge cycles) and/or FCC vs DC is another thing to consider. I don't know for sure.
Thanks for taking the time to reply in detail. Good spot, my Apple Notification is in that format on weather.
I get the safety issue with the battery, and you should see the end of my charging lead! Looks like the rats had it, but it's also worrying about buying batteries online, you never know what's what. Obviously because it's over 5 years old Apple call it 'vintage', and won't entertain supplying you with a battery. Ideally that would have been assuring to receive an OEM, but I have just purchased an OEM and not installed yet. Is it genuine, is it a real original and made by same company that made this one? It's never a given, It may be, but who knows. It'd have to be a certain age if it is, When I install it will it show that, but sure that can be changed by whoever made them anyway. I'll let you know about that. 1952 Cycles is over and above, but I've seen a ridiculously higher amount than that.

You lot never cease to amaze me, Been on here for over 8 years and am still learning about the MBP even when I think I know what I need to know, 8 years later, more stuff crops up....and your knowledge is tops. Thanks again people!
 

BLBL

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2018
663
88
0
That is actually pretty amazing you got 1952 charge cycles and your battery is still that good in relation to FCC. Batteries used to be much better back in the day. I'm afraid most batteries today no matter are they original or not, are complete s**t in quality and sometimes even dangerous in almost every brand.
You often hear these days batteries swelling even after just 100 charge cycles. It would be interesting to hear how your battery looks like visually after that many cycles.

Obviously every company these days is after cheap batteries to reduce manufacturing costs and increase profit margins, but I surely hope one could still buy decent battery when paying a top dollar for the machine. I'd be even willing to pay some extra for optional long life battery… :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter Franks

Peter Franks

macrumors 68000
Jun 9, 2011
1,715
30
0
That is actually pretty amazing you got 1952 charge cycles and your battery is still that good in relation to FCC. Batteries used to be much better back in the day. I'm afraid most batteries today no matter are they original or not, are complete s**t in quality and sometimes even dangerous in almost every brand.
You often hear these days batteries swelling even after just 100 charge cycles. It would be interesting to hear how your battery looks like visually after that many cycles.

Obviously every company these days is after cheap batteries to reduce manufacturing costs and increase profit margins, but I surely hope one could still buy decent battery when paying a top dollar for the machine. I'd be even willing to pay some extra for optional long life battery… :)
But 56% is not great presumably if that's what it's working at full, Do you think that's still decent for 1952 cycles? I hear what you're saying about newer batteries, I read horror stories on here about so called replacement batteries for MBP these days. So many to choose, and none have much good to say about any of them. I get why Apple don't want to keep supplying or we'd never buy new products. But it would make life so much easier.

I opened up to change the SSD from High Sierra to older Sierra back up a few months back and the battery looked pretty normal. Or is the underside where it can look rough? How do they change visibly, and what should I be looking for?
 

BLBL

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2018
663
88
0
But 56% is not great presumably if that's what it's working at full, Do you think that's still decent for 1952 cycles?
I'd say it is. Of course we would need to know what the percentage was at 1000 charge cycles, if is was 80% or more, then definitely yes, it has been an excellent battery.

Sure if we compare it to rating 80% / 1000 charge cycles, it is not linear being now 56% under 2000 charge cycles BUT the battery is rated for 1000 charge cycles, so what happens after that is uncharted territory, so to speak.

I hear what you're saying about newer batteries, I read horror stories on here about so called replacement batteries for MBP these days. So many to choose, and none have much good to say about any of them. I get why Apple don't want to keep supplying or we'd never buy new products. But it would make life so much easier.
Bad thing is that even batteries known brand use in their new products aren't that good anymore. Like you can see threads in this forum almost daily someone with rather new computer having battery swelling and often not many charge cycles. I'd say even battery used in new product today are still rated for 1000 charge cycles, I think we will rather rarely see them last that long.

I opened up to change the SSD from High Sierra to older Sierra back up a few months back and the battery looked pretty normal. Or is the underside where it can look rough? How do they change visibly, and what should I be looking for?
Since you mentioned you have purchased a new battery (assuming it is OK), then you have something to compare your current one with. Check if they look different.

Basically you should visually inspect the battery for possible swelling or bulging (is it thicker than the new one?). If it looks nice and even on the both sides, it sounds good. I'd say it is usually something you can see at the first glance. But I suggest (if the battery is easily removable in your unit, like not glue as in new models), then check it visually on the both sides, but probably it is ok, if the side you can see looks nice and even and if the machine also looks even (it sit steadily on all four feet and there is not bulging on the trackpad, keyboard, palm rest area or bottom plate).

How does the operating time on battery look like these days? Is it considerable lower than what it was?
FCC percentage basically should give you some hint of what it is, but it does not go always hand in hand with actual operating time. Like battery is usually considered EOL at 80% FCC but how does it work that many hours in real life can be anything from slightly reduced operating time to not working at all. So battery condition can show good for battery that does not actually even work sometimes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Peter Franks

Peter Franks

macrumors 68000
Jun 9, 2011
1,715
30
0
Thanks again, So... you're probably thinking that basically companies are cheaping out on batteries now because they think that punters will be more inclined to buy a new product/Macbook instead of replacing the battery. It's obviously a given compared to the MBP of my era pre-retina, where we can swap out the HD, memory, battery etc,. with 'relative ease'. That's obviously not an option for newer models. There must be a lot of people out there who do switch out their laptop every year or two. They must be out there. It was more of a necessity pre Mac days and some of the old Windows laptops. I would have considered newer if they hadn't messed with the USB/Magsafe, keyboard etc? Sooner or later it'll be another new one in the mix, but don't know when. Like to see some changes more user friendly. Wonder if we'd ever get a 'retro' one?

In truth, my battery time was always a disappointment from brand new 2011, but maybe the fact it never held a particularly long charge is the reason for it's longevity, it's never had to over-work itself? They should never boast a 10 hour battery life without saying, 'If you don't actually touch it for 10 hours'. Heat and fans are maybe more prominent now, but I think a lot of the HD videos and YouTube used to always induce the fans. Browsers, particularly Chrome is not a friend of Mac CPU/fans, but I've experienced it on Safari and Firefox exactly the same too.

If I get time over the weekend I'll open up and compare the batteries.
 

BLBL

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2018
663
88
0
Thanks again, So... you're probably thinking that basically companies are cheaping out on batteries now because they think that punters will be more inclined to buy a new product/Macbook instead of replacing the battery.
No, I mean the batteries they use these days even in new machines are like that. I'd don't expect to see ones sold today reach anywhere near as much charge cycles and use as they did few year back.

I remember back in the day Lithium ion batteries lasted very long and did not swell or bulge. Heck, I have got an ancient Acer laptop from year 2008 and while battery is pretty much dead as capacity wise, the battery itself is in tact, no swelling or bulging. That one reads (on the removable battery) clearly cell made in Japan... I remember back in the day most products with these kind of batteries use to read made in Japan or at least cell made in Japan.
Also I have got over 10 year old Nokia phone, were use it kind of a land line replacement at home with separate phone number for it. That one is running on the original battery still and battery has no sign of swelling and it still has the same operating time as new, it run easily 1 week per charge! Battery has been charged way over 500 times.

It's obviously a given compared to the MBP of my era pre-retina, where we can swap out the HD, memory, battery etc,. with 'relative ease'. That's obviously not an option for newer models.
I think this all soldered on the mainboard is not all bad thing. With less connectors there is less change of problems with them and that is pretty crucial thing with laptops. Also it makes repairing easier as there is less diagnostic needed as pretty much all is in the mainboards, so there are only few parts per machine.
But side effect is that you practically cannot update them at all later and out of warranty repairs will cost too much.

In truth, my battery time was always a disappointment from brand new 2011, but maybe the fact it never held a particularly long charge is the reason for it's longevity, it's never had to over-work itself? They should never boast a 10 hour battery life without saying, 'If you don't actually touch it for 10 hours'. Heat and fans are maybe more prominent now, but I think a lot of the HD videos and YouTube used to always induce the fans. Browsers, particularly Chrome is not a friend of Mac CPU/fans, but I've experienced it on Safari and Firefox exactly the same too.
Yeah, I have been also very disappointed with battery running times on my brand new 2019 Pro 1.4. There is no way it run for 10 hours doing anything practical. It may last that long if the screne brightness is set low and you run some text editor to write something. But as soon as you have even web browser in use, it basically hogs the battery in few hours.

I was expecting more from Apple as I bought year ago Zenbook and that one has only 50W battery that has lost FCC within year and around 40-50 charge cycles to about 45W!!! (10% percent). BUT that one easily runs for 8-10 hours without battery even empty. My wife has been using it sometimes at taking some classes that last full 7-8 hours and machine has been on all day long just turned off during lunch break and battery has still got over 1/3 left!!! So it easily runs in real life as long as they advertise.

I guess battery / power consumption optimization in MacOS is lacking a lot from Windows these days. This MBP is my first approach to MacOS, I've been using Windows from the day it was released and still use it mostly and I must say MacOS in many ways feel like Windows at Windows NT 4.0 era. Also I have been very disappointed with graphics in MacOS, you still see a lot of gradient (like gray gradient) banding. That used to be something I saw in Windows machines before 16.7M color era and again when the first cheap LCD panels became popular (those 6+2bit panels).


If I get time over the weekend I'll open up and compare the batteries.
Good idea.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Peter Franks

Erehy Dobon

macrumors regular
Feb 16, 2018
152
112
0
Chrome and Firefox are well-known longtime resource pigs.

If you are on an Apple notebook computer and are running off of battery, it is preferable to use Safari. If you are running off of AC power, go nuts.

For sure, Apple publishes their battery performance figures using Safari and not a third-party browser.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter Franks

Shadowbech

macrumors 603
Oct 18, 2011
5,058
1,314
0
Apple iPhone World
Chrome and Firefox are well-known longtime resource pigs.

If you are on an Apple notebook computer and are running off of battery, it is preferable to use Safari. If you are running off of AC power, go nuts.

For sure, Apple publishes their battery performance figures using Safari and not a third-party browser.
I tend to agree with this. When I use Chrome, I noticed it's draining the battery relatively quickly. But after switching to Safari, I've notice significant improvement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter Franks

BLBL

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2018
663
88
0
Chrome and Firefox are well-known longtime resource pigs.

If you are on an Apple notebook computer and are running off of battery, it is preferable to use Safari. If you are running off of AC power, go nuts.

For sure, Apple publishes their battery performance figures using Safari and not a third-party browser.
I never use anything else than Safari with my MBP, and still do not get anywhere near promised 10 hours per charge use.



Some off topic but I could not resist.
I have never understood the concept of using other browser than the one that comes with the operating system...
I have always used Internet Explorer and later Edge in Windows, and now of course Safari with MacOS. The last time I used something else was somewhere around 90's when Internet was quite new thing for the public and Windows did not come with one. At that time I think it was Netscape that I used back then. :)
I have never had any problems with OS embedded browsers, so I honestly do not get why peoples use anything else.

I often see other peoples using something else, it is like my dads computer, some of my sisters kids keep installing these other browsers in his laptop and every time when my dad calls me about the problem he is having with "the internet thing" it turns out to be that he has been using some of these other browsers that are god knows from what year and never been updated since the installation date... Problem solved every time I ask him to start that "internet thing" using the blue e icon. :)
These embedded browsers are always up to date as they get updates with each OS patch, while these "other" browsers need much more attention from their users. I'm sure there must be good for some reason but I never seen any need for them myself. I like to think so that if there is some web page that does not work with Edge, Internet Explorer or Safari, the root cause for the problem is elsewhere than in these browsers.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Peter Franks

Peter Franks

macrumors 68000
Jun 9, 2011
1,715
30
0
Yep, that’s what I meant, that even the batteries in the new MBP are inferior. I want to get a new 13” at some point, but not yet. I’ve never spoken to anyone who tells me that you have to buy one, and they’re so much better than the old ones. Not yet anyway.

Don’t get me wrong, I never used to use another browser other than Safari, but found Chrome was faster and a lot more useful. Only in recent years did I switch to 3rd party browser.
I’ve tried going back to Safari on many occasions, and do use it for stuff like YouTube, (even though it's infuriating not having the moving thumbs)thinking it may be less of a hog, It isn’t because it still goes fan over-heat nuts, same as Chrome.

As I said, I only started using Chrome in recent years, but even with the same ad blockers on Chrome and Safari, Chrome blocked threats that Safari did not. I had a real onslaught in Safari not long ago where you can’t stop the bug throwing repetitive downloads at you. Literally, It was relentless, and a real unsettling pain. It made me think Safari is not safe at all, and the same web page when on Chrome blocked whatever that was. Some of you may know what I'm talking about, it was not something I asked to download, the virus/bug page just threw hundreds of folders into downloads without asking. Why didn't Safari stop it? Why doesn't Safari play moving video on Twitter when I click the play button on top of the thumbs, why does it always show a load of lines on pics on Twitter? It's not great.... and it's not usable for a lot of things

As for Firefox, I’ve got it but never use it. I’ve never been able to get used to it, or like it, but couldn’t tell you why exactly. It just doesn’t feel as right as Safari and Chrome does. Tried Opera and didn’t like that much either. And all the so called extras didn’t work. Brave is talked about a lot at the moment, but also a CPU lover. Could a battery that is this old be working so hard as to make the fans get more work?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BLBL

BLBL

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2018
663
88
0
Thank's was heads-up on possible Safari issue with autoloading possible malware!

As an old Windows user, I have gotten used to that every download pretty much needs user intervention, even when clicking the download link you get one more confirmation you need to accept first until it starts to download. I have noticed in Safari that the first click of any download link pulls the file immediately to default location, so that has been annoying.

Also I haven't yet gotten around to get installed an ad blocker for Safari, I was considering wipr. I have been using some Adblock Plus in Windows Edge but I think I saw some mentioned those not working well in MacOS Safari. Also good to know that Safari also may have issues with malware infected or malware spreading sites where it may pull malware without notifying user in any way. Could that have been issue with older versions that have not yet been patched against the current malware issue that time, or is it really like that today? I'm still so fresh MacOS (just over 2 months) user that I have very little personal experience with it but so far no problems.

I also browsed thru Safari settings and see there are quite may adjustments for safety, like Google Safe Browsing to prevent entering knows pages with "issues" and also there are settings for autoplay in websites, so maybe those could prevent some of possibility to autoload malware?
 

Peter Franks

macrumors 68000
Jun 9, 2011
1,715
30
0
I had everything covered on Safari, security wise, but it's not up to it, compared to Chrome. I'm not in love with Chrome by any stretch of the imagination, it's a pain with resources, and I used Safari for years and could never understand why any other browser would work better on the Mac. Until I tried one. Surely not, I'd love Safari to be as it was when it worked great with Snow Leopard 8 or 9 years ago but it lost it's way (for me). I used AdBlock and ABPlus, but it didn't stop that attack so you could be right. It's quite incredible that Apple haven't got THE perfect top notch browser to work on their own products. If it's different on Mojave, great, but my MBP can't operate that OS. High Sierra is the last usable OS for me.
 

bobnugget

macrumors regular
Nov 15, 2006
244
34
0
England

Erehy Dobon

macrumors regular
Feb 16, 2018
152
112
0
Mozilla reckon they have found the cause is this, and that Firefox 70 will drop power usage by 66%: https://www.zdnet.com/article/upcoming-firefox-update-will-decrease-power-usage-on-macos-by-up-to-three-times/
It's vaporware until it arrives in actual released software.

It's one thing to hype up your nightly releases but it's something else to deliver in actual supported software. Like most sane people, I wouldn't touch beta browser software with a ten-foot pole.

If the Mozilla Foundation wants to talk the talk, they have to walk the walk -- something they have failed to consistently do for many years.

Firefox browser marketshare on macOS is abysmally low and it's not because Mac users are capricious.

I have Firefox installed on my two Macs and I see no justifiable reason to use it as a web browser on a regular basis at this time.
 

BLBL

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2018
663
88
0
I had everything covered on Safari, security wise, but it's not up to it, compared to Chrome. I'm not in love with Chrome by any stretch of the imagination, it's a pain with resources, and I used Safari for years and could never understand why any other browser would work better on the Mac. Until I tried one. Surely not, I'd love Safari to be as it was when it worked great with Snow Leopard 8 or 9 years ago but it lost it's way (for me). I used AdBlock and ABPlus, but it didn't stop that attack so you could be right. It's quite incredible that Apple haven't got THE perfect top notch browser to work on their own products. If it's different on Mojave, great, but my MBP can't operate that OS. High Sierra is the last usable OS for me.
OK, I see. thanks for the warning. I will definitely keep an eye on this to see if Safari is good all around browser for me. I'm not familiar with previous MacOS but I guess they have received App updates even OS itself not? I mean Safari is still up to date? If not then I guess it is even more prone to malware.
 

bobnugget

macrumors regular
Nov 15, 2006
244
34
0
England
It's vaporware until it arrives in actual released software.

It's one thing to hype up your nightly releases but it's something else to deliver in actual supported software. Like most sane people, I wouldn't touch beta browser software with a ten-foot pole.
This isn't vaporware. Vaporware is software that doesn't exist. This is a fix that is available right now. You can download it (yes, unsupported), get the source code along with a documented and QA-test proven fix, and has a supported release date of October. That's all in the article, or linked from it (the bugzilla entry).

On releasing: A beta release is a release, but not a final, supported release. It's on beta 6 right now. Final release is 22nd October.
 

Peter Franks

macrumors 68000
Jun 9, 2011
1,715
30
0
OK, I see. thanks for the warning. I will definitely keep an eye on this to see if Safari is good all around browser for me. I'm not familiar with previous MacOS but I guess they have received App updates even OS itself not? I mean Safari is still up to date? If not then I guess it is even more prone to malware.
Like I say Safari on Mojave may be a lot better, and there may be apps out there to add to it for better protection. I've asked the question a few times on here but not had anything back. The adblockers don't cut it for me though.

With regards to the new Firefox imminent fix being discussed on here, anyone else get a horrendous flickering when ever trying to watch YouTube on it, No update has ever cured it, and boy do they do a lot of updates. It gives me a headache just watching Firefox.