age234 said:
Hmmmm.....it always retains the scrollbar position for me. Odd.
Edit: You're absolutely right: I didn't notice that you'd specified textboxes as opposed to web pages. Pay attention, Jouster!! </dumbass>
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 1.3 Seeded
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hmmmm.....it always retains the scrollbar position for me. Odd.
Edit: You're absolutely right: I didn't notice that you'd specified textboxes as opposed to web pages. Pay attention, Jouster!! </dumbass>
FightTheFuture said:
Exactly! I don't need it to be faster, I just need it to work with all of the websites that I use every day.
What????
What kind of statement is that?
Yeah my browser can run JS faster then yours so I'm going to switch platforms to do the same.
In a similar vein:
My car has three cup holders instead of two, haha. You're going to regreat not having three.
jackieonasses said:
What kind of statement is that?
Yeah my browser can run JS faster then yours so I'm going to switch platforms to do the same.
In a similar vein:
My car has three cup holders instead of two, haha. You're going to regreat not having three.
Great, they speeded up JavaScript.
But, can anyone tell me whether they've finally got SSL through HTTP proxy sorted out yet? Firebird, hell, it was back in the days of Phoenix and Mozilla had it locked down.
But, can anyone tell me whether they've finally got SSL through HTTP proxy sorted out yet? Firebird, hell, it was back in the days of Phoenix and Mozilla had it locked down.
Say no to JavaScript
First off... you should always write your web sites to be compatible with the HTML and CSS standards. Period.
Most of what people use JS for in menus is doable without ANY scripting via CSS: 3D Push buttons, pop-up menus, highlighting links on hover, etc.
Take a look at the ":hover" ":focus" and ":active" selectors, these selectors work on ANY element type (not just links) as of CSS 2.1.
Some quick googling will yield quite a few sites with sample markup for pop-up menus and other "tricks". http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/ is a good start though.
My personal opinion: if you can't do it in HTML or CSS you should do it on your server unless it truly NEEDS to be interactive, in which case you should probably use Java or Flash instead.
stylewriter said:
First off... you should always write your web sites to be compatible with the HTML and CSS standards. Period.
Most of what people use JS for in menus is doable without ANY scripting via CSS: 3D Push buttons, pop-up menus, highlighting links on hover, etc.
Take a look at the ":hover" ":focus" and ":active" selectors, these selectors work on ANY element type (not just links) as of CSS 2.1.
Some quick googling will yield quite a few sites with sample markup for pop-up menus and other "tricks". http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/ is a good start though.
My personal opinion: if you can't do it in HTML or CSS you should do it on your server unless it truly NEEDS to be interactive, in which case you should probably use Java or Flash instead.
pounce said:
When sites don't work correctly in Safari and DO work correctly in MSIE, it's almost always the site that's broken. Copy the URL and go to the site: validator.w3.org and enter the troublesome page's URL.
Odds are that the validator will spit back over 50 errors in the HTML. W3.org also maintains a CSS validator if the site uses CSS (and they all should).
Copy these errors and send them to the webmaster in charge of the page(s) along with a request that the site be written to work with all browsers, not just MSIE.
gerardrj said:
i believe it, but my bank acts like it never makes mistakes!
stupid US Bank. i wondered, though, how much if any was safari's fault as text input fields on order forms from some online stores wouldn't register my quantity data input properly in safari. it seemed to do with numeric input and secure transactions. i'll run em throug the validator for grins and giggles though. seriously, if i never used msie again it would be fine with me.
ps: i just ran the cable company site through the validator and it found numerous errors while i confirmed it did not work properly. otoh, my banks site was working fine. maybe some cookie error before with the bank? who knows. here is the cable web site link... a perfect example of a company that think msie is the only browser or some **** like that.
http://www.ramelectronics.net/
try and put anything in a shopping cart, but i know a quantity of one doesn't register properly.
Macrumors said:
I don't care about Safari getting faster. What I'd like to see is security status have more than just a lock icon. At least 4 Mac web browsers let you tell whether a webpage is using 40 bit, 50 bit, 128 bit, or 256 bit encryption. With Safari, all you get is a lock icon with no statement to how secure the website is. If any of you is a Safari seed developer, please make the recommendation to Apple to add this feature. It is long overdue, and I've made my feedback known at least a dozen times that it is important on Apple's Safari bug reporter.
gerardrj, it's funny to me that you make such a css-snob type comment in a thread that mentions how a css-driven tab navigation (which is SOOO css-cool these days) is broken by a browser UP-date. I doubt a similar javascript rollover version would be so broken.
Don't get me wrong. I love CSS, and use it more and more each day. But to each his own. There are advantages to each. Seriously. Please don't spout how everything would be fixed by CSS-driven coding.
</off-topic rant>
Don't get me wrong. I love CSS, and use it more and more each day. But to each his own. There are advantages to each. Seriously. Please don't spout how everything would be fixed by CSS-driven coding.
</off-topic rant>
gopher said:
I thought that it was the actual website you were visiting that offers the security encryption? This is the first time that I have heard of 256 bit encryption. I know that the site that I do my banking has 128 bit. Thought that was the gold standard.
wdlove said:
Some websites do tell you in their documentation their encryption level, others simply say they are "secure." However, we all know less than 128 bit is not ideal. 256 bit is the highest, and found on a few sites. I don't know which ones I've seen them on, but you can probably look it up. And unless the web browser actually responds at the same encryption level, you have no idea whether or not you are using the highest encryption possible for that website. If you aren't, you may be in for a rude surprise. So it really is up to the web browser to inform you whether or not the site is at the security level you want.
I agree. Apple needs to support their free browser for older OSX also.yuphorix said:
We HAD an up-to-date free browser (Internet Explorer) on the Mac, and we've still got the mozilla options. If Apple wants to make a go at having a real competitor, it has to be done properly. Developers need a single "reference" browser to test on, not 4 different versions of Safari.
Otherwise dump safari.
I know it's not easy to upgrade safari for older OS X - since Safari (webkit especially) is tied to the OS. Also, Apple's in a tight spot - they need people to upgrade to get money for what they do. I don't know how they want to walk their tightrope but if they want developer support they need to make it easy too.
Bit of a tangent but is anyone here having problems loading hotmail.com with safari. The pages never stop loading, and when I press stop, the images stop trying to load and I can navigate around. But it also seems to cut off some javascript as it becomes impossible then to send messages. I'm hoping it'll get fixed with 1.3.
Safari is notorious for making Hotmail attachment downloads impossible. At UMD, we had 14 G5's running 1.1 and 10.3.2
Potential switchers, by the droves, were getting driven nuts b/c Safari would pretend to load the "download" attachment page, but then reload and ask for your password. I actually was trying to help two students download their essays...but unfortunately, after 15 minutes of trying I just gave up. They went on the nearby Dells and were done with it in less than 20 seconds.
Since then, they have been upgraded to 1.2, but they were only upgraded to 1.2 at the VERY end of the semester -_-.
Potential switchers, by the droves, were getting driven nuts b/c Safari would pretend to load the "download" attachment page, but then reload and ask for your password. I actually was trying to help two students download their essays...but unfortunately, after 15 minutes of trying I just gave up. They went on the nearby Dells and were done with it in less than 20 seconds.
Since then, they have been upgraded to 1.2, but they were only upgraded to 1.2 at the VERY end of the semester -_-.
nmk said:
Same here. I've used it in 10.2.8 on my beige G3, in 10.2.x and 10.3.x on my iBook G3 14", in 10.3.x on my 15" LCD iMac 800, and 10.3.x on my PB 15" 1.5 GHz. Every once in a blue moon I might see a glitch, but at least 99% of the time it works perfectly for me.
I'm not even talking about downloads (which has since been fixed by the way), just normal page loading like Inbox, Sending, reading, etc. They stopped working for me about a month or so ago.
Well, I think MSN changed those links to operate via Javascript. I have a custom UserChrome.css that changes my mouse cursor to a cross hair over Javascript...let's just say its STAYS that way for quite some time on the hotmail page -_-
So, my guess is that Javascript is the culprit here:
javascript:HMFO('F000000001')
javascript:HMFO('F000000005')
javascript:HMFO('F000000002')
Those are the links for Inbox, Junk Mail, and Sent Messages, respectively.
So, my guess is that Javascript is the culprit here:
javascript:HMFO('F000000001')
javascript:HMFO('F000000005')
javascript:HMFO('F000000002')
Those are the links for Inbox, Junk Mail, and Sent Messages, respectively.
Mav451 said:
You should really report the bug to Apple through Report bugs to Apple in the Safari menu. Also ask for Hotmail support to be added to Mac OS X Mail at http://www.apple.com/macosx/feedback/
And if anyone is under AppleCare, explain to Apple's customer relations the difficulty you face with Hotmail. By the way, I honestly believe you should switch from Hotmail to a more secure e-mail server. Microsoft's Hotmail has been host to many spams as well as viruses.
Guys,
I have a display problem with two of the web sites (Blogger.Com, Fotki.Com) that I go to often while using Safari 1.3 and Safari 2.0, but the problem did not exist with Safari 1.2.x.
I think the problem has to with CSS. With Blogger, it is the navigation header at the top after login into ones account. With Fotki, it is with the display of the thumbnails. If you have either 1.3 or 2.0 version of Safari then you can see this at my Fotki site.
I have a display problem with two of the web sites (Blogger.Com, Fotki.Com) that I go to often while using Safari 1.3 and Safari 2.0, but the problem did not exist with Safari 1.2.x.
I think the problem has to with CSS. With Blogger, it is the navigation header at the top after login into ones account. With Fotki, it is with the display of the thumbnails. If you have either 1.3 or 2.0 version of Safari then you can see this at my Fotki site.
Safari 1.3
With your "reported" rumor" comes the lack of it's release. I have contacted Apple twice, and they like myself do not believe in rumors, no matter where they come from
Since I have also reported the "rumor" to the Apple store, I await your response to this non bonifide rumor. The seeeded date was 6-29-04
With your "reported" rumor" comes the lack of it's release. I have contacted Apple twice, and they like myself do not believe in rumors, no matter where they come from
Since I have also reported the "rumor" to the Apple store, I await your response to this non bonifide rumor. The seeeded date was 6-29-04
rpatrick said:
"Seeded" means the update was sent to ADC (Apple Developer Connection) members, not the general public. Safari 1.3 has not been released. Why are you contacting Apple Support and the Apple Store about information posted at a "rumor" website?