We already have that option. Just click the icon to the left of the URL.
As for all the rendering / centering complaints, wasn't Safari the first browser to pass the Acid2 test?
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.
New Safari Seeds Continue Performance Improvements, Bug Fixes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
As for all the rendering / centering complaints, wasn't Safari the first browser to pass the Acid2 test?
Just to mention one flaw - Firefox renders my iWeb developed sites EXACTLY as designed. Safari does not - and you would think Safari would have the best integration as it is an Apple product.
Well, I'll add another: there are sites that do not function with Safari (images won't load, text overlaps) but perform properly under Firefox - I've never experienced the opposite where a site works under Safari but not Firefox (or Opera, or...)
Well, I think it goes back a few years to the earlier OS X updates, when Safari really was a lot slower than it is today, and software updates frequently made Safari actually feel "snappier" (the Finder was the other one that received performance enhancements and often also felt "snappier".
Today the "snappier" joke is used in obvious jest (e.g. after an iTunes update, something that would have nothing to do with Safari code). But there probably was a time when people would download updates and see if Safari or Finder performance was improved. Maybe in some cases they actually were, but it probably started to be a placebo effect, until it became a running joke.
And that's why today there's always someone who's just gotta say it...
Could someone tell me the story behind the "snappier safari" joke? I hear it all the time, and use it myself, but I wanted to know what it was from.
Anyway,....
I think that awhile back people were waiting for some fanciful Tuesday update and all they got was a different iPod color or something and a statement from Apple that Safari was "snappier" due to a small update. This has become a quote of sarcasm and derision in regards to what some people think is Apple's too-slow approach to things.
Anyway, my experience with Safari were terrible, continual crashes, total incompatability with many mainstream sites. Now, I have a new MBP with OS 10.5.2 running Safari 3.0.4. It is extremely stable now, not one crash in several days of ownership. I am sure there are sites and situations where improvement is needed, but it seems to now be a pretty solid system that can be built upon.
And, it is indeed snappier
Who cares how fast it starts up? That's just once, and Firefox starts up in less than 2 seconds anyway.
Proper tabbed browsing, adblock plus, and Firefox could look like made for Windows 3.11 for all I care, and those two features make it the winner.
Because it's another case of Apple delusions of grandeur. "It's from Apple, so it's has to be the best!"
I use only Safari.
It does crash too much. Once a day maybe or a few times a week. IT's annoying. Not a show stopper.
It does lose my cookies. IT seems like once or twice a week I suddenly have to relog into a site like this, but maybe these sites are designed that way. Yahoo does it with Mail I know that. But I really don't know.
Safari does render a few sites wrong and is incompatible with some.
I've always used it for Ebay although lately I think I do get some occasional weird error and have to refresh.
But overall it passes muster with me and so I use it. I like the look. I like the simplicity. I like the speed. I tried to use Firefox, but it just looks like crap and is too cluttered. Also I don't need 1000 plug-ins and features. I need really useful features. Features I actually use which always seems lost of folks trying to compare long lists of bullet points.
Anyway I like it best and also I want to support Apple's further development of it. And I want to motivate companies to ensure their sites are Safari compatible.
It does crash too much. Once a day maybe or a few times a week. IT's annoying. Not a show stopper.
It does lose my cookies. IT seems like once or twice a week I suddenly have to relog into a site like this, but maybe these sites are designed that way. Yahoo does it with Mail I know that. But I really don't know.
Safari does render a few sites wrong and is incompatible with some.
I've always used it for Ebay although lately I think I do get some occasional weird error and have to refresh.
But overall it passes muster with me and so I use it. I like the look. I like the simplicity. I like the speed. I tried to use Firefox, but it just looks like crap and is too cluttered. Also I don't need 1000 plug-ins and features. I need really useful features. Features I actually use which always seems lost of folks trying to compare long lists of bullet points.
Anyway I like it best and also I want to support Apple's further development of it. And I want to motivate companies to ensure their sites are Safari compatible.
Java 1.5
I just hope they fix java 1.5 compliance with safari. Supposedly OSX Leopard is 1.5 compliant but for some reason safari still won't properly run java 1.5 applets.
I am getting tired of running XP in parallels just for I.E. so that I can use commercial banking websites that Safari can't handle because it won't run the java applets correctly.
Safari crashes regularly and on occasion has taken down my entire Leopard system. Locking Leopard so that nothing works not even an option-cmd-escape. There is no excuse for such poor behavior of an Apple mainstream application.
I just hope they fix java 1.5 compliance with safari. Supposedly OSX Leopard is 1.5 compliant but for some reason safari still won't properly run java 1.5 applets.
I am getting tired of running XP in parallels just for I.E. so that I can use commercial banking websites that Safari can't handle because it won't run the java applets correctly.
Safari crashes regularly and on occasion has taken down my entire Leopard system. Locking Leopard so that nothing works not even an option-cmd-escape. There is no excuse for such poor behavior of an Apple mainstream application.
apple didn't go with gecko because at that time, they think gecko is too big. they wanted something small and easy to work with.
apple did not build its own browser, it forked KHTML, (who is default browser in KDE linux desktop environment and was full featured at that time), named it webkit, at that time, KHTML was said to have only 140,000 line of codes.
but now, webkit is getting bigger and bigger (i don't know the line of codes, but firefox 3 is 4MB smaller than firefox 2 after decompression, 44 vs 48MB; while webkit nightly now is 4 MB bigger than safari 3.0.4; 66MB vs. 60Mb), surprisingly, still have very few improvement in functionality.
OSX is using old version of java, and I don't know (altho I would like) if and when apple will update this.
Firefox 3 for windows/linx will use java 1.6.
I like Safari. However, it crashes several times a day and I have never seen another browser that leaks like safari does.
I dislike Firefox. It's way too "PC-ish": cluttered, "unergonomic" (if one can say that about software), and all in just cumbersome and butt-slow.
What I do, is use omniweb. While it has a somewhat large footprint, it doesn't seem to leak as bad as Safari. And that is frankly kind of weird, as it uses the same webkit as Safari.
Often I have Omniweb open for days in a row, and it sits there at 83MB, whereas Safari after 4 hours being open will sit at 345MB. I don't get it. I like how safari is indeed the fastest of the lot (sometimes Omniweb for some reason is), but the leaking, the leaking is a pain in the arse.
Add: Oh, just for comparison, I'm running 10.5.2 on a 2.33GHz MBP with safari 3.0.4 (5523.15)
I dislike Firefox. It's way too "PC-ish": cluttered, "unergonomic" (if one can say that about software), and all in just cumbersome and butt-slow.
What I do, is use omniweb. While it has a somewhat large footprint, it doesn't seem to leak as bad as Safari. And that is frankly kind of weird, as it uses the same webkit as Safari.
Often I have Omniweb open for days in a row, and it sits there at 83MB, whereas Safari after 4 hours being open will sit at 345MB. I don't get it. I like how safari is indeed the fastest of the lot (sometimes Omniweb for some reason is), but the leaking, the leaking is a pain in the arse.
Add: Oh, just for comparison, I'm running 10.5.2 on a 2.33GHz MBP with safari 3.0.4 (5523.15)
I had some issues getting it installed under WindowsXP (3.0.4 crashes as soon as you start it, but if you install 3.0.3 and then upgrade, it works ok). The thing is, under a fast system, I prefer Firefox because it's so customizeable. So I don't really use Safari on the PC. But on this PowerMac dual 533 G4, the speed difference between it and Firefox makes all the difference in the world so I end up using Safari most of the time on the PowerMac. It almost never crashes on the PowerMac either. It seems odd that stability seems to depend so much on the system it's used on. I did a bit of testing with the Activity Monitor and Safari is definitely multi-threaded and makes full use of both my CPUs. IE7 for Windows is also multi-threaded and will use both cores of my 5600+ Athlon. Firefox is NOT multi-threaded or multi-core friendly and will hang/freeze on bad-behaving javascript pages and if you're not dual-core or dual-CPU it will hang most of your system with it (busy pointer or beach ball of terror). THAT is where Firefox truly SUCKS. And from what I've read, it will not be multi-threaded in 3.x or any time in the foreseeable future. I'm afraid it's just a matter of time before Firefox is as dead as the Netscape it replaced.
Of course, if Safari added a Firefox compatible plugin system, it'd rule. That will never happen, of course. Any plugin system would be helpful, though.
I was a long time Safari user, then a long time FireFox user, but now have switched back to Safari by the means of the webkit.org releases. They are just blazing fast and spank FireFox, which is bloated to high heaven and has memory leaks all over.
Maybe FireFox 3 can bring me back, but I still can't even use beta 3 as the tab bar renders wrong on my computer and makes it unreadable (the drop shadow to the words is misaligned).
It's interesting to see how people have such strong opinions on these two very similar web-browsers. What it comes down to for me is that Safari is faster to load pages on a 2ghz G5 with only a 3mb/s internet connection, and by a large amount. Otherwise the 2 are identical to me, besides me liking Safari's aqua looks a little better.
Maybe FireFox 3 can bring me back, but I still can't even use beta 3 as the tab bar renders wrong on my computer and makes it unreadable (the drop shadow to the words is misaligned).
It's interesting to see how people have such strong opinions on these two very similar web-browsers. What it comes down to for me is that Safari is faster to load pages on a 2ghz G5 with only a 3mb/s internet connection, and by a large amount. Otherwise the 2 are identical to me, besides me liking Safari's aqua looks a little better.
I could do without snappy, but what about ad blocking (no, I don't want to use pithhelmet or another haxy that will break or need constant updating, I want ad blocking native to safari and no, I don't want to use any other browser either)
Pithhelmeth is good, though. And that is the only "haxy" I use (I dislike that sort of thing in general). To me, that is the closest you will ever get to "native" in Safari.
I never understand why so many Mac users think Firefox sucks because of its appearance. Do you even know that it can be THEMED? Look into it. You can make it look any way you want, including like Safari or IE7 or whatever else and it's SO simple to load them (literally click to install). I like Noia 2.0 Extreme, personally. And with extensions/add-ons, you can make it behave almost any way you want too. Don't judge its behavior by its default is what I'm saying. Browsers like Safari are completely unthemeable without hacking. It's Apple Knows Best. Heck, I'd prefer the Aqua look on Leopard to this new steely thing, but again, Apple Knows Best.... (ugh).
As for speed, I agree Firefox sucks there. It's been steadily getting slower over time too. I've heard 3.x is an improvement, but it seems like it will never be completed. And it STILL won't be multi-threaded.
Odd you complain how bloated and slow Firefox is than say how you prefer a browser with a 'large footprint'. I think Safari will eventually be the browser Apple advertises it to be and given its speed, it might even end up getting used on my XP machine as well, but it needs SOME kind of plugin functionality. That is the one area Firefox absolutely rules in. You can plugins to address almost any browsing desire or shortcoming you have.
Obviously it not just the looks. It's the feel. I can skin Windows as well, making it look like OS X, but it will still be cumbersome and windows.
Propably, but themes are the least of my worries or interests.
Thank you (for agreeing, that is).
Er, out of context, perhaps? Omniweb seems to leak (a little) hence creating a larger footprint than necessary, but far from the humongous one of Safari (and that with using the exact same webkit. Go figure). I don't even know how large a footprint Firefox makes as I only use it when absolutely necessary, and shuts it down immediately after these sessions. I guess, I could explain it by saying "Firefox is very, very inefficient".
firefox 3 is a very impressive update (app snappiness, memory footprint, performance, wonderful 2D engine of cairo, etc), I am quite confidant you will find it very fast, if not faster than safari 3.1 on mac, and much faster on windows for the reason of PGO than any other browsers (im waiting for PGO to make into mac version, but probably won't happen fast enough for firefox 3, maybe 3.1 later).
In other news, Netscape is offically dead as of today.
But if there's one feature I wish Safari had it would be fast tab switching. For example, being able to hit cmd + left/right arrow key to go from one tab to another. Adium has a feature like this and I absolutely love it.
But if there's one feature I wish Safari had it would be fast tab switching. For example, being able to hit cmd + left/right arrow key to go from one tab to another. Adium has a feature like this and I absolutely love it.
In other news, Netscape is offically dead as of today.
But if there's one feature I wish Safari had it would be fast tab switching. For example, being able to hit cmd + left/right arrow key to go from one tab to another. Adium has a feature like this and I absolutely love it.
CMD+arrows is for going back and forth in history in Safari.
Try CMD+Shift+arrows. That should work for going through tabs.
I understand the complaints against Safari, but for some reason I rarely experience any of the complaints. I have used multiple different browsers over the past year and I have found Safari to be the best. My Safari rarely crashes, it's fast, and I just like the overall feel of Safari more than other browsers. I am not saying it's the best for everyone, but for me it is. With the number of different browsers available these days, I think it comes down to personal preference because every browser out there has some flaws, it's just a matter of what ones bother you the least.
For a semi PC user like me, am I going to see any of these updates even with a code for Windows!? The mac and windows versions of Safari are completely different - for one the Windows version is pretty crap and the Mac version is good!
Until Safari supports Gmail Chat (Google Talk), I won't use it. I think it's stupid that I can use basic Gmail features in Safari, which is supposed to be the latest-greatest-it-peels-potatoes browser!
I don't if the fact Google Talk doesn't work in Safari is Google's fault, or Apple's. They're working together so well on the iPhone that I would expect them to also work together on Safari.
I don't if the fact Google Talk doesn't work in Safari is Google's fault, or Apple's. They're working together so well on the iPhone that I would expect them to also work together on Safari.