As with most people's complaints, this is Flash. Apple doesn't make Flash. Apple is trying to get rid of Flash for all these reasons.
I use ClickToFlash and all this Flash crap goes away. Try it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac OS X Lion's Safari is Snappier and More Stable Thanks to WebKit2
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
As with most people's complaints, this is Flash. Apple doesn't make Flash. Apple is trying to get rid of Flash for all these reasons.
I use ClickToFlash and all this Flash crap goes away. Try it.
Given that Flash runs as a separate process and can crash without crashing the browser, I suspect it is the JavaScript associated with the Flash ad that is causing the crash. Webkit2 will run JavaScript in a separate process as well.
When Flash crashes independently, the Flash object will show "plugin failure."
You are right, any plugin blocker can prevent the JavaScript associated with Flash ads from being an issue by preventing the Flash ads from loading.
Last edited:
Thought this was interesting:
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
It's a running average of browser usage by month since 2002. It seems Apple has a lot of work to do if they want Safari to compete with the big three. Since this time last year I.E. has been hemorraging market share to Chrome, which has literally doubled its usage base in that time. Chrome is even picking up former Firefox users. Meanwhile, Safari has been hovering around 3 - 4% for the past two years.
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
It's a running average of browser usage by month since 2002. It seems Apple has a lot of work to do if they want Safari to compete with the big three. Since this time last year I.E. has been hemorraging market share to Chrome, which has literally doubled its usage base in that time. Chrome is even picking up former Firefox users. Meanwhile, Safari has been hovering around 3 - 4% for the past two years.
Am I the only one who dislikes the word "snappier"? Whenever I think of snappy, I think of windows snapping together (like with winamp). I'd prefer "faster" but oh well.
Safari on OS X Lion doesn't come with Flash preinstalled... This could also explain why it is a bit snappier as well.
Even though I'm running Lion in a VMware virtual machine, it loads pages faster than Safari on my host Snow Leopard system. Flash is such a piece of crap.
Even though I'm running Lion in a VMware virtual machine, it loads pages faster than Safari on my host Snow Leopard system. Flash is such a piece of crap.
No browser is behind Chrome, really. Use cmd+t, cmd+w.
Group of mac users? What are you talking about? Apple doesn't need user's opinions
they could change that very quick if this is true
but it isn't
https://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/1...-and-itunes-to-merge-into-single-application/
Who?
Isn't looking at the number of commits a bit of a naïve way of doing it. It doesn't assess the quality of size of the contributions.
It's a bit like looking at lines of code.
I think my Safari crashes once a month, but I use click2flash.
The only problem I have with Safari is when I open 200 tabs (really, I do every morning), it does get kind of slow. And this is on a 8-core machine. So imho, Safari can use the CPU more efficiently than it does right now. I hope webkit2 can improve on that front.
I tried doing the same with Firefox, it doesn't get slow like Safari, but it just crashes when I open so many tabs more often than not, so I stopped using firefox for that kind of load.
The only problem I have with Safari is when I open 200 tabs (really, I do every morning), it does get kind of slow. And this is on a 8-core machine. So imho, Safari can use the CPU more efficiently than it does right now. I hope webkit2 can improve on that front.
I tried doing the same with Firefox, it doesn't get slow like Safari, but it just crashes when I open so many tabs more often than not, so I stopped using firefox for that kind of load.
I can't wait
A safari that works? Does it also play youtube videos? That would be nice. Is it more than a program that loads a graphic of a spinning beach ball? That would be cool.
I swear, Safari should have force quit as a menu option... and don't tell me it's because of Flash. Did Apple purposely make a browser that doesn't work with Flash? If so, it's not a good thing... that, in fact, DOESN'T make Safari good. Since 4.0, there was supposed to be memory isolation for plug ins... specifically because Apple couldn't make a version that worked with Flash. That feature doesn't seem to work at all.
So what's the solution? Copy Google, who supposedly did what Apple couldn't - provide memory isolation for the plug ins. Tout it as a new feature... and then pretend for a day that you care how many people install your free application.
A safari that works? Does it also play youtube videos? That would be nice. Is it more than a program that loads a graphic of a spinning beach ball? That would be cool.
I swear, Safari should have force quit as a menu option... and don't tell me it's because of Flash. Did Apple purposely make a browser that doesn't work with Flash? If so, it's not a good thing... that, in fact, DOESN'T make Safari good. Since 4.0, there was supposed to be memory isolation for plug ins... specifically because Apple couldn't make a version that worked with Flash. That feature doesn't seem to work at all.
So what's the solution? Copy Google, who supposedly did what Apple couldn't - provide memory isolation for the plug ins. Tout it as a new feature... and then pretend for a day that you care how many people install your free application.
Care to share then by what metric is Apple contributing more to Webkit ? At least the poster you referred to provided a verifiable piece of evidence that Apple might be lagging behind.
Let's also not forget how Apple aggressively forked KHTML and failed to reintegrate their changes with the initial project, instead forcing KDE to move to Webkit. All that after promising to work in cooperation with the KDE project...
Well as neither Lion or its version of Safari have actually "shipped" yet, you're making a somewhat unfair comparison. It's beta code, it will have bugs in it and you shouldn't be running it if you can't accept that.
Orange™;12009602 said:
You mean just like every other modern operating system? Hardly a "feature" of Mac OSX that, it's a bit like saying "hey, this car comes with wheels.
Orange™;12009602 said:Now, only a portion of the program will crash? GO
Again, welcome feature but not new. FireFox and Chrome do it already as I recall.
I was on an IT training course the other week using virtual machines for the lesson content - the host machine was a windows desktop machine with chrome installed so we could check our email and browse t'web during quiet times. Flash was unstable as hell on these machines, crashing all the time. So, while I have more problems with Flash on my mac than I do on my PC, the week using chrome on someone else's PCs taught me that unstable flash/plugin behaviour isn't exclusively an Apple/Safari problem.
Last edited:
Firefox only sandboxes plugins by running plugins in a separate process similar to way the current Safari runs plugins in a separate process.
Then why did Apple sell the 24in imac with 2 gigs of ram a few years ago and tell everyone this was better than the windows setups.
I totally understand that. The thread was specific to Safari being snappier and more stable which in my opinion it was not.
I know this is a beta build and its going to fixed; but that was just an opinion based on a single day of run-through on OS X 10.7.
Fair enough I guess?
Last edited:
Oh you're absolutely entitled to your opinion of the current build, don't get me wrong - i'm just saying its too early to draw conclusions about final performance (and to be fair that applies to people who are saying nice things too).
I just wish web browsers including Safari, on the Mac and iPad/iPhone, had a more efficient method of going to a previous page. If they could cache the previous pages for quicker display it would make a big difference for me. The preview Safari is nice in that you can flick back to previous pages. It initially shows the previous page and it seems cached but it simultaneously seems to be reloading the page which is really annoying. If I have a web page up and it is linking to other sites I can keep opening new tabs for each link so the original page doesn't need to reload but that could be eliminated if the original page was just cached. Not many sites are constantly updating to the point they need to be reloaded every time you review it. It is worse on the ipad/iphone as every time you even select one of the prior windows it is likely to reload. Can't they just cache them out to the flash drive rather than redownload over the internet?
I also agree. Safari on Lion is really fast. I hope they bring it to Snow Leopard too. I don't want to wait till Lion comes.