Originally posted by JayBee
For those harping on about the lack of Jag support and class action suits etc... Let's just have a calm look at the side of the Jaguar box, shall we?
Featured Applications:
Address Book, DVD Player, iChat, iMovie, iPhoto, iTunes, Mail, Sherlock 3, Adobe Acrobat Reader 5, Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.2
Do you see Safari on that list? I sure don't.
I don't see Logic, Final Cut Pro, Shake, Adobe Photoshop, Microsoft Office, Quark XPress etc. on that list either but yet I still expect that I'll be able to use the next version of those in Jaguar. Even the new iLife suite runs in Jaguar (and it actually provides new features rather than bug fixes).
I'm not trying to make excuses for Apple's lack of support, but let's be honest here - nobody's forcing you to use "Beta quality" browsing software in Jaguar. So Apple has discontinued support for Safari in Jag. Is that a great move? I don't think so, but that doesn't mean we should all start whining about it. If I consider Camino to be beta quality (and I do) then what the hell am I using it for? Likewise with Safari.
Apple is using some of Panther's new strengths in developing their browser. Jaguar it seems doesn't have these strengths. Is that an incentive to upgrade to Panther? Maybe, it's up to you.
But let's get real. Apple's refusal to update (note, that's NOT the same as refusing to SUPPORT) its software for certain systems hardly deprives you of a browser. If you considered Safari beta, then why were you using it? Was it good enough to use? If so, is it suddenly broken?
The Mozilla based browsers are much better supported than Safari. Web developers actually code for the Gecko engine. Safari is another story. I was using it because I was trying to do Apple a favor and increase the number of hits that web sites got with Safari as the navigator.useragent.
Since you're playing semantics here, let's talk about update vs support. I expect SUPPORT to include bug fixes, security updates, and the ability to properly support documented STANDARDS like ECMAscript, Java, and the W3C DOM (which Safari doesn't properly do). I expect a product UPDATE to include new functionality.
The 10.3 update has some great new features like Expose and FileVault. Great. I don't need them at this point in time so I choose not to pay for those new features. Safari, from what I can see, doesn't have much in the way of new whizbang features. It's mostly bug fixes and compatibility updates. So why should I pay for all the 10.3 features I don't need to get some bug fixes for the web browser that Apple has been providing to all 10.2 users?
MSIE 6 runs on Windows 98, Me, NT4 SP6a, 2000, and XP. And Apple can't support one previous OS version with Safari?! Hell, they themselves even call it a dot one change (though I'd say there was much more involved). It's not like I'm asking for it to run in Classic.
Go and use Omniweb, or Camino, or Firebird - and leave the lawsuits to the lawyers.
Those are
CLASS ACTION lawsuits. That means that users of their products (who probably happily shelled out their hard earned cash believing the marketing spin) are bringing litigation against them. This Safari thing is just one more drop in the bucket. You've got the lawsuit about Mac OS X not running right on older machines, the PowerBook paint problems, the iBook logic board and display problems, the iPod battery problem, the G4 fan problems, etc. And let's not get started on all the Windows users machines that were screwed up by the original iTunes installer. Apple NEEDS to do some better planning, testing, and rollout of their products.
Don't get me wrong, I want Apple and OS X to do well. Hell, I've used Macs since my Mac Plus and I even have a NeXTstation at home. I think their platform is great. But I work in an IT department for a fortune 500 company and this kind of stuff is seen as just plain unacceptable. They're never going to get anywhere with either consumers or CIOs when they do stuff like this.
