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.
Safari 1.0 Rushed?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
for Joe Six-Pack its fine
That over agressive caching sucks. I update info on page where it should refresh and it doesnt look like it did anything because it thinks it know what it should show me. bad bad bad.
I still cant log into Bank of America by hitting "enter" I must click the submit button. Lame.
That over agressive caching sucks. I update info on page where it should refresh and it doesnt look like it did anything because it thinks it know what it should show me. bad bad bad.
I still cant log into Bank of America by hitting "enter" I must click the submit button. Lame.
I have also had many problems with Safari displaying pages incorrectly, throughout all the betas and including 1.0. For those of you who like Mozilla but do not like the long startup time and other bloated aspects of the software, check out Mozilla Firebird, which is basically a stripped down version of Mozilla: http://www.mozilla.org/products/firebird/
Originally posted by vancenase
ya just have to hit the refresh button ....
BUT ... most of the games at yahoo.com are not compatible!anyone find any other sites?
http://www.popcap.com
It'll take you to the Mac games, but click on Web games instead - they all work.
www.gamehouse.com works too.
Caching
At a job where I used to work, I had problems with my co-workers using IE. I would make a modification to the web site, check it with Netscape...everything looked great. Then I'd let my supervisor know about the changes, and she would respond that there were no changes. So I would have to open up Netscape on her computer and show that the changes, had indeed, been done. I had to do this multiple times, even after telling her that IE uses a lot of caching techniques and doesn't update pages very well.
At a job where I used to work, I had problems with my co-workers using IE. I would make a modification to the web site, check it with Netscape...everything looked great. Then I'd let my supervisor know about the changes, and she would respond that there were no changes. So I would have to open up Netscape on her computer and show that the changes, had indeed, been done. I had to do this multiple times, even after telling her that IE uses a lot of caching techniques and doesn't update pages very well.
It's a friggin' 1.0, people! C'mon, how many pieces of 1.0 software aren't buggy. I'd chalk this up to just being a 1.0 than anything else. Fortunately, the bugs aren't in WebCore, apparently... OmniWeb 4.5 works GREAT!
Primary Web Browser
Lynx / Safari.
IE found it's way off my dock, then back on when I was having specific issues with specific sites, but it's way down on the right (ie not used much, especially since I mostly keep it booted into console, thus use lynx)
I know, I know, very few sites are lynx compatible these days.
I just deal with it...
Jaedreth
Lynx / Safari.
IE found it's way off my dock, then back on when I was having specific issues with specific sites, but it's way down on the right (ie not used much, especially since I mostly keep it booted into console, thus use lynx)
I know, I know, very few sites are lynx compatible these days.
I just deal with it...
Jaedreth
Safari caused me an extra hour of work figuring out why my router wasn't working (I couldn't log into it)... it turns out safari wasn't working and my router was fine
Standard MO at Apple these days
This is just all part of the 'start up mode' that is in place at Apple. One wonders when they'll ever finish starting up. I've worked for alot of startups and most of them had more commitment to design up front (as opposed to on the fly) and product quality than Apple has for the last several years.
Safari was clearly not ready. Given the alternatives available (Camino, Mozilla) there was no excuse to rush Safari out.
IMO OS X is still not ready to be called a 1.0 release. Printing and SCSI are both in horrid shape and kernel panics are far too common for a released Unix system. I should get one kernel panic a year on a heavily used system, not 3 a month. Compare the fit and finish of OS 9.2.2 to OS X 10.2.6 and you can easily see that OS X is immature. Sure, it has some great things and some great potential. But that doesn't mean it was ready to ship.
Apple's startup mode is slowly eroding it away. Products like iPhoto that are designed on the fly show that while there are some good ideas in the product, that this type of development process is majorly flawed. iPhoto is a total slug. Even with relatively small libraries. I shudder to think of the experience of a Soccer Mom on even a dual 1.25 GHz with a gig of RAM.
Middle Management at Apple needs to start being accountable for their jobs. If there is a mandate that conflicts with doing their job well, grow a pair, stand up and fight for it. It's your responsibility to do so! There's far too much ostrichism going on, too much burying of heads in the sand. Stand up tall! Open your eyes! Take Action!
Steve needs to STOP micro managing every project. While he can at times be visionary and brilliant, he's far from a UI or design expert.
And for god's sake, stop piling features on a sluggish, unoptimized, rushed out OS. Commit to tightening it up and making the OS FAST. Stop trying to hide speed issues by shipping dual processor configs. You're not fooling anyone. Everone knows OS X is slow. FIX IT. You've got the talent, just commit to the effot. Believe me, it'll be more than worth it.
This is just all part of the 'start up mode' that is in place at Apple. One wonders when they'll ever finish starting up. I've worked for alot of startups and most of them had more commitment to design up front (as opposed to on the fly) and product quality than Apple has for the last several years.
Safari was clearly not ready. Given the alternatives available (Camino, Mozilla) there was no excuse to rush Safari out.
IMO OS X is still not ready to be called a 1.0 release. Printing and SCSI are both in horrid shape and kernel panics are far too common for a released Unix system. I should get one kernel panic a year on a heavily used system, not 3 a month. Compare the fit and finish of OS 9.2.2 to OS X 10.2.6 and you can easily see that OS X is immature. Sure, it has some great things and some great potential. But that doesn't mean it was ready to ship.
Apple's startup mode is slowly eroding it away. Products like iPhoto that are designed on the fly show that while there are some good ideas in the product, that this type of development process is majorly flawed. iPhoto is a total slug. Even with relatively small libraries. I shudder to think of the experience of a Soccer Mom on even a dual 1.25 GHz with a gig of RAM.
Middle Management at Apple needs to start being accountable for their jobs. If there is a mandate that conflicts with doing their job well, grow a pair, stand up and fight for it. It's your responsibility to do so! There's far too much ostrichism going on, too much burying of heads in the sand. Stand up tall! Open your eyes! Take Action!
Steve needs to STOP micro managing every project. While he can at times be visionary and brilliant, he's far from a UI or design expert.
And for god's sake, stop piling features on a sluggish, unoptimized, rushed out OS. Commit to tightening it up and making the OS FAST. Stop trying to hide speed issues by shipping dual processor configs. You're not fooling anyone. Everone knows OS X is slow. FIX IT. You've got the talent, just commit to the effot. Believe me, it'll be more than worth it.
MNB
Yeah. I used to work there, I know what kind of micromanagement goes on.
And the OS is very immature.
They should have gone with a more honest naming structure, right now, Mac OS X should be considered v 1.2.6, which is still a 1.x release.
In my system 7 days, I always advised my clients to avoid any software in the 1.x phase, wait til it went 2.1 at least.
Now it's *tons* better than the public beta, but it should be. I supported the public beta all the way up to 10.2.6 (I left the company that recently)...
However, it is not a mature operating system.
No matter how many people tell me how great it is, and it may be great, it may be better than Windows, that doesn't make it mature.
Don't get me wrong, I'll probably be one of the first in line when Panther is released, besides those who pre-order it. (I dislike pre-ordering.)
But the OS is *far* from mature.
Jaedreth
Yeah. I used to work there, I know what kind of micromanagement goes on.
And the OS is very immature.
They should have gone with a more honest naming structure, right now, Mac OS X should be considered v 1.2.6, which is still a 1.x release.
In my system 7 days, I always advised my clients to avoid any software in the 1.x phase, wait til it went 2.1 at least.
Now it's *tons* better than the public beta, but it should be. I supported the public beta all the way up to 10.2.6 (I left the company that recently)...
However, it is not a mature operating system.
No matter how many people tell me how great it is, and it may be great, it may be better than Windows, that doesn't make it mature.
Don't get me wrong, I'll probably be one of the first in line when Panther is released, besides those who pre-order it. (I dislike pre-ordering.)
But the OS is *far* from mature.
Jaedreth
Re: Caching
IE has settings for caching, the default is to cache very aggressivley, but you can change the setting to check for an updated page on every visit. As a Web developer i've run across this issue with many clients who complain it takes a day or two for them to see updates to their site. So i have to explain to them its because of the default IE settings and instruct them on how to change it. This applies to both mac and windows versions.
IE has settings for caching, the default is to cache very aggressivley, but you can change the setting to check for an updated page on every visit. As a Web developer i've run across this issue with many clients who complain it takes a day or two for them to see updates to their site. So i have to explain to them its because of the default IE settings and instruct them on how to change it. This applies to both mac and windows versions.
Safari Update Coming?
MacOS Rumors is indicating that there will probably be a Safari update in August.
http://www.macosrumors.com/
Looks like they are making progress, although I've been using Safari since the first public beta without many problems. I think it blew up on me once, but that might have been under Panther beta. My bank site works fine. Anyway, it's been stable and reliable for me.
Also, for MNB:
Man, your smokin' something. I've been running Jaguar every day, all day, for nearly 9 months. I put it into sleep mode every day for months without rebooting. I have *never* had a kernel panic. I have never run out of memory (i.e. memory leaks in apps over time). There is nothing shoddy or immature about it. Apple has been very responsive with updates and improvements.
I think you're trolling.
MacOS Rumors is indicating that there will probably be a Safari update in August.
http://www.macosrumors.com/
Looks like they are making progress, although I've been using Safari since the first public beta without many problems. I think it blew up on me once, but that might have been under Panther beta. My bank site works fine. Anyway, it's been stable and reliable for me.
Also, for MNB:
Man, your smokin' something. I've been running Jaguar every day, all day, for nearly 9 months. I put it into sleep mode every day for months without rebooting. I have *never* had a kernel panic. I have never run out of memory (i.e. memory leaks in apps over time). There is nothing shoddy or immature about it. Apple has been very responsive with updates and improvements.
I think you're trolling.
Re: Standard MO at Apple these days
You, My Friend, have wayyy too much to complain about. First of all What does this have to do with the post at hand. And 2nd what are you doing and what system are you running to get 3 kernal panics a month..
I have been using OX since the 10.1 release and I use it as graphics production computer and I have never had a kernal panic (knock on wood) ... My computer gets restarted once a month at the most and thats usually by my own volition or because i installed something requiring restart. A kernal panic i have yet to experience. And I am not even running one of latest systems. I am running a G4350AGP and even running OSX its a work horse.. maybe not as fast or polished as 9.2.2, But A. there was no further Apple could go with OS9 they had to move on. B. the system OS9 was based off had what over 15yrs of development and they reached their limit with it so they had to move on.
And thats what they did they moved on and started from the ground up and produced a beautiful operating system that runs better with each new release and has none of the backwards compatability issues that windows users experience year after year release after release.
And as far as the original post goes. I am proud to say that I use safari as my main browser and I have only one site that has given me problems and it winds up being a cookie based problem. (theforce.net (speciffically the jedicouncil forums and being able to stay logged in) And it runs fast and works beatifully and its only a 1.0 release (its a known fact that all 1.0 releases have bugs) so that means it can only get better.
So many people with too much time to complain.
You, My Friend, have wayyy too much to complain about. First of all What does this have to do with the post at hand. And 2nd what are you doing and what system are you running to get 3 kernal panics a month..
I have been using OX since the 10.1 release and I use it as graphics production computer and I have never had a kernal panic (knock on wood) ... My computer gets restarted once a month at the most and thats usually by my own volition or because i installed something requiring restart. A kernal panic i have yet to experience. And I am not even running one of latest systems. I am running a G4350AGP and even running OSX its a work horse.. maybe not as fast or polished as 9.2.2, But A. there was no further Apple could go with OS9 they had to move on. B. the system OS9 was based off had what over 15yrs of development and they reached their limit with it so they had to move on.
And thats what they did they moved on and started from the ground up and produced a beautiful operating system that runs better with each new release and has none of the backwards compatability issues that windows users experience year after year release after release.
And as far as the original post goes. I am proud to say that I use safari as my main browser and I have only one site that has given me problems and it winds up being a cookie based problem. (theforce.net (speciffically the jedicouncil forums and being able to stay logged in) And it runs fast and works beatifully and its only a 1.0 release (its a known fact that all 1.0 releases have bugs) so that means it can only get better.
So many people with too much time to complain.
Re: It's only a version number
Actually, while the first public beta would have been named "1.0", the second public beta "2.0" and the final release "3.0" (or, potentially, "6.0" just to keep us geeks guessing), there would have been a minimum of one year between each of those releases, a dozen security patches that broke earlier security patches, and at least three other companies would have gone under after their proprietary technology mysteriously showed up in the next release of Safari.
Every day I wake up and thank God that there are software developers besides Microsoft ...
Actually, while the first public beta would have been named "1.0", the second public beta "2.0" and the final release "3.0" (or, potentially, "6.0" just to keep us geeks guessing), there would have been a minimum of one year between each of those releases, a dozen security patches that broke earlier security patches, and at least three other companies would have gone under after their proprietary technology mysteriously showed up in the next release of Safari.
Every day I wake up and thank God that there are software developers besides Microsoft ...
Re: Primary Web Browser
I used Lynx for about a year, so I try and keep my own web sites at least accessible to Lynx users. I probably don't get many visitors using Lynx, but as long as they can navigate through my pages, I'm fine with it. I think some of my pages are probably easier to get through than Netscape 4.7.
I used Lynx for about a year, so I try and keep my own web sites at least accessible to Lynx users. I probably don't get many visitors using Lynx, but as long as they can navigate through my pages, I'm fine with it. I think some of my pages are probably easier to get through than Netscape 4.7.
Re: Psychological...
No, "1.0" means ready for public consumption. "Beta 3" means it may inadvertently format your hard drive if it can't connect to a web site; use at your own risk.
OTOH, I find Safari 1.0 to be incredibly un-buggy for a 1.0 product. Every application ever written has bugs, design failings, and missing features. While Safari 1.0 doesn't perfectly emulate Internet Explorer, it does a damned good job at rendering standard-compliant web sites.
Regarding 1.0 vs betas ... I ran the last public beta for quite a while, and was averaging a crash on it every other day. In fact, one particular web site (www.tomshardware.com) would crash every beta of Safari aside from the initial version (which just wouldn't display it correctly), and another web site (www.extremetech.com) would crash the final public beta any time one was unfortunate enough to use the "back" button. Also, using tabs was inherently unstable in the last public beta (start loading a page on one tab and switch to another tab before the first tab's connection was made and you'd have about a 30% chance of hitting the spinning beach ball of death and, about two minutes later, an "unexpected" crash).
1.0 is a HUGE stability improvement for me. With the Debug menu on, I can tell Safari to send in Internet Explorer ID's, and can hit every financial institution that I work with without problems. In fact, the ONLY stability/compatibility issue I have with Safari 1.0 is that it "times out" when a reply takes >60 seconds in coming back (like, say, a web application that does actual processing ...)
No, "1.0" means ready for public consumption. "Beta 3" means it may inadvertently format your hard drive if it can't connect to a web site; use at your own risk.
OTOH, I find Safari 1.0 to be incredibly un-buggy for a 1.0 product. Every application ever written has bugs, design failings, and missing features. While Safari 1.0 doesn't perfectly emulate Internet Explorer, it does a damned good job at rendering standard-compliant web sites.
Regarding 1.0 vs betas ... I ran the last public beta for quite a while, and was averaging a crash on it every other day. In fact, one particular web site (www.tomshardware.com) would crash every beta of Safari aside from the initial version (which just wouldn't display it correctly), and another web site (www.extremetech.com) would crash the final public beta any time one was unfortunate enough to use the "back" button. Also, using tabs was inherently unstable in the last public beta (start loading a page on one tab and switch to another tab before the first tab's connection was made and you'd have about a 30% chance of hitting the spinning beach ball of death and, about two minutes later, an "unexpected" crash).
1.0 is a HUGE stability improvement for me. With the Debug menu on, I can tell Safari to send in Internet Explorer ID's, and can hit every financial institution that I work with without problems. In fact, the ONLY stability/compatibility issue I have with Safari 1.0 is that it "times out" when a reply takes >60 seconds in coming back (like, say, a web application that does actual processing ...)
safari will be a great browser in 1 to 2 years. For now it's just good and has bugs. The caching is bad you notice it if you browse and post in a lot of forums. The page will not refresh but show a chache of the page with out new posts. Some websites still do not work right and have content missing. Safari, yes a good browser but not a great browser yet.
Re: Standard MO at Apple these days
3 kernel panics a month? You have some bad hardware in there somewhere.
I have not had an OS X system crash for over a year. No crashes since I installed Jaguar, in fact.
No, I don't have any funky hardware attached, but you can rest assured that I do my best at trying to corrupt system memory while debugging my programs
IMHO, and this is the basis of many a religious war I know, the "fit and finish" of OS X is vastly superior to that of OS 9.2.2. They aren't even in the same league. Does OS X have inconsistencies? Of course. But OS 9 had many more conceptual difficulties than OS X by my count. As I said, IMHO.
3 kernel panics a month? You have some bad hardware in there somewhere.
I have not had an OS X system crash for over a year. No crashes since I installed Jaguar, in fact.
No, I don't have any funky hardware attached, but you can rest assured that I do my best at trying to corrupt system memory while debugging my programs
IMHO, and this is the basis of many a religious war I know, the "fit and finish" of OS X is vastly superior to that of OS 9.2.2. They aren't even in the same league. Does OS X have inconsistencies? Of course. But OS 9 had many more conceptual difficulties than OS X by my count. As I said, IMHO.
Safari vs. IE
Rushed as it may be, and with far less $ resources than anything m$ does, I think it's a great browser overall... And definately better than IE... I actually LIKE IE, and wish m$ would develop it further for the Mac (I mean, they're supposed to be a software company, right?)... But for now - Safari is my favorite..
Rushed as it may be, and with far less $ resources than anything m$ does, I think it's a great browser overall... And definately better than IE... I actually LIKE IE, and wish m$ would develop it further for the Mac (I mean, they're supposed to be a software company, right?)... But for now - Safari is my favorite..
Re: Safari vs. IE
Yeah i feel exactly the same way about both browsers.
One of my few nit-picky complaints about Safari is the "Download image" function. it saves it to a default location and doesn't let you specify per image...
Yeah i feel exactly the same way about both browsers.
One of my few nit-picky complaints about Safari is the "Download image" function. it saves it to a default location and doesn't let you specify per image...
Just because *you* have had a perfect time with OS X doesn't mean everyone else has. Don't jump down people's thrats just for saying what's happened to them on their machines.
I agree, in some repects, that OS X is immature. However in others it's way advanced. For that reason OS X is my main system.
However you have to bear in mind that OS 9 was 15 (17?) years of tweaking, nipping and tucking. OS X is a baby in comparison. It'll evolve over time to become a fantastic OS. Panthers already shaping up.
About these 'rumored' Safari 90+ builds, surely we would have heard about them? I want them, if I could stop Safari unexpectedly quitting on my favorite forum every time I post, I'd be a happy chappy.
AppleMatt
I agree, in some repects, that OS X is immature. However in others it's way advanced. For that reason OS X is my main system.
However you have to bear in mind that OS 9 was 15 (17?) years of tweaking, nipping and tucking. OS X is a baby in comparison. It'll evolve over time to become a fantastic OS. Panthers already shaping up.
About these 'rumored' Safari 90+ builds, surely we would have heard about them? I want them, if I could stop Safari unexpectedly quitting on my favorite forum every time I post, I'd be a happy chappy.
AppleMatt
Re: Standard MO at Apple these days
Disagree on both counts. Safari has been as stable as any other browser, and *far* better than IE, for months now. And it's important that Apple have an "official" browser after MS dropped Mac IE. Camino isn't at 1.0 yet (even though it's still my primary browser), and Mozilla just isn't Mac-like.
Correct. Therefore something is seriously wrong with your system, quite possibly hardware-related.
Are you seriously saying that OS X should not yet have shipped? I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. I'll grant that 10.0 was really public beta 2, but since 10.1 it's been more than capable for full-time use.
They are. 10.1 was faster than 10.0. 10.2 was faster than 10.1. By all accounts 10.3 will be faster still.
Disagree on both counts. Safari has been as stable as any other browser, and *far* better than IE, for months now. And it's important that Apple have an "official" browser after MS dropped Mac IE. Camino isn't at 1.0 yet (even though it's still my primary browser), and Mozilla just isn't Mac-like.
Correct. Therefore something is seriously wrong with your system, quite possibly hardware-related.
Are you seriously saying that OS X should not yet have shipped? I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. I'll grant that 10.0 was really public beta 2, but since 10.1 it's been more than capable for full-time use.
They are. 10.1 was faster than 10.0. 10.2 was faster than 10.1. By all accounts 10.3 will be faster still.
Untrue. Use http://www.lordofthecows.com/safari_enhancer.php
Safari Enhancer. With the Debug menu select User Agent as Internet Explorer 6 for Windows, and Buymusic will let you in.
Re: MNB
So the point is........?
Mac OS X is not mature! Hello? Of course it's not. Windoze is not mature and it's got many years on OS X. Will it reach a level of stabiltity and "maturity" you desire? Of course it will. Apple is not stupid... they will eventually give you a very mature stable OS with a flexible browser. Just wait a bit. They haven't had that long to get it right. M$ has had much longer and they still have not, and likely will never, get it right. Meanwhile. I have yet to see a kernel panic, use the system every day, all day and it really works.
So your point is?
So the point is........?
Mac OS X is not mature! Hello? Of course it's not. Windoze is not mature and it's got many years on OS X. Will it reach a level of stabiltity and "maturity" you desire? Of course it will. Apple is not stupid... they will eventually give you a very mature stable OS with a flexible browser. Just wait a bit. They haven't had that long to get it right. M$ has had much longer and they still have not, and likely will never, get it right. Meanwhile. I have yet to see a kernel panic, use the system every day, all day and it really works.
So your point is?