Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Safari 4.0.1 vs Firefox 3.5

Consider that the fact that Firefox has a much bigger market share than Safari is also because Firefox is pretty much the only real choice you have on Windows. IE is not even to be considered, Safari for Windows is crap, Opera is as slow as hell, and not everyone likes being spied by Google (or the terrible customization options in Chrome). On a Mac, you have at least 3 choices: Firefox, Safari, Camino, the three very good.
 
Safari is still the faster browser for me but Firefox is not far behind and is far more customizable
 
clevin said:
gecko and webkit are too bare-boned to generate end user interests. IMO. After all. end users are presented, and using a browser, not a bare-boned engine.

Engine comparison, maybe worth a separate topic, if you like to create one.

chrome....mmmm.. its hard to factor that in when its in very early stage and could not be used by normal users on a day to day basis.

chrome is using webkit as layout engine, plus google's V8 js engine. Thats all i can say for now. It will be worth discussing more when it reaches a stable stage.

There is no need to put in all the minor forks, that would make the topic much more messier than most people would like, since most people dont use those minor browsers. Its not a judgment on their quality, just a simple fact.
Click to expand...

I mention this because quite honestly, without talking about the engines, its just another FF vs Safari thread. If you guys want to start a real conversation and finally get some base, its time to consider the way pages load :eek:.


Chromium/Google Chrome are both very early in their stages, but when you come to think of it, its open source like Firefox and can advance quickly, and these speed improvements, I actually notice. When Apple says Safari is faster than FireFox, I can believe that, but just because of the way the page loads, it seems faster, but I don't notice a difference in FF VS Safari.

However, despite barely using Chrome (on a mac, used it on school PCs), I can actually notice the speed differences, they are pretty amazing.

Just trying to get a good debate going :) :apple:
 
First of all,


They are really good browsers. Both of them. I use Firefox for work purposes. That's because I really like the speed and flexibility. Also Firefox runs some websites that Safari never did. I think that's because more people use Firefox.

Safari is a whole different story. I use Safari for entertainment. Youtube, email, Facebook, Mysapce ect. I just find it much easier to use when it comes to personal entertainment. Really Really love the new bookmarking attachment.
 
I can't live without Firefox's AwesomeBar. I was hoping Apple would've put it into Safari 4 but no show, so I'll have to sacrifice these supposed speed increases in favour of a piece of usability that matters a great deal to me.

Speed matters, but it's not everything.
 
bluedoggiant said:
I mention this because quite honestly, without talking about the engines, its just another FF vs Safari thread. If you guys want to start a real conversation and finally get some base, its time to consider the way pages load :eek:.


Chromium/Google Chrome are both very early in their stages, but when you come to think of it, its open source like Firefox and can advance quickly, and these speed improvements, I actually notice. When Apple says Safari is faster than FireFox, I can believe that, but just because of the way the page loads, it seems faster, but I don't notice a difference in FF VS Safari.

However, despite barely using Chrome (on a mac, used it on school PCs), I can actually notice the speed differences, they are pretty amazing.

Just trying to get a good debate going :) :apple:
Click to expand...

thats admirable, I dont think Im able to go very deep in that. I do not know how each layout engine render the page. Only thing i know related to this is that Opera renders page as soon as data is received, without waiting for the page styles. This, however, is a 3 year old impression, I do not know if anything changed ever since.

I dont think chrome load page faster than others in any significant way. Its after all a webkit engine, it might have faster js, but that can hardly translate into page rendering speed. It is significantly faster to start on windows at least, but it does preload stuff in the system. and for modern computers with decent cpu, the start up speed difference is tolerable for all browsers.
 
here is my technical perspective on this issue:

first I was all about Firefox,

then I was all about Safari,

now I am back to being all about Firefox.

(But Safari is my mobile browser of choice).

I think Opera blows, sorry Opera fanboys.
 
Biolizard said:
I can't live without Firefox's AwesomeBar. I was hoping Apple would've put it into Safari 4 but no show, so I'll have to sacrifice these supposed speed increases in favour of a piece of usability that matters a great deal to me.

Speed matters, but it's not everything.
Click to expand...

I agree and to that point Safari has integrated features that Firefox does not have. Both bookmarks and keychain can now be synced to the iPhone. For me I would use the same kind of plugins on Safari that I would use on Firefox so it would not consider Firefox as having an advantage. I also feel that Safari is better at rendering web pages than Firefox.

Both have features I would want the other to have. Firefox still bothers in not being 100% Cocoa. It looks as if it has one foot in the Mac and the other in Windows.
 
I use Safari exclusively except for when I'm doing something that doesn't support, i.e. downloading W7 RC.

I really like auto pager for FireFox and wish I could get it in Safari.

I use Safari because I don't like the scrolling in FireFox. And Safari is faster.
 
Safari would be a lot better in my opinion if it support the wide range of add-ons that Firefox does. But when it comes to speed, Safari definitely does outperform.
 
What about in terms of memory management? I remember that before, Firefox has been better at doing that. What's the standpoint on that now?
 
str1f3 said:
Firefox still bothers in not being 100% Cocoa. It looks as if it has one foot in the Mac and the other in Windows.
Click to expand...
if its not cocoa, what is it?

i think u misunderstood what cocoa is, looks has nothing to do with cocoa.
 
clevin said:
if its not cocoa, what is it?

i think u misunderstood what cocoa is, looks has nothing to do with cocoa.
Click to expand...

LOL, much of Firefox is done with XUL, Mozilla's own interface language.

http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/The_Joy_of_XUL

It just uses more Cocoa than it did.
Can you use the default keybindings that work in any Cocoa app in Firefox? Have you got access to the Services menu?
Can you get word-completion by hitting F5 after you begin typing a word in a text-field in Firefox?
Can you call the OS X dictionary by pressing Control+Command+D, as you can in any Cocoa app?

You can see the application isn't built entirely from Cocoa by looking in the package. Right-click on Firefox's icon in the Finder and choose "Show Package Contents"Navigate to the directory called "Mac OS" and have a look. In any native app there will be an executable in there, and that's all. That's not true of Firefox. Compare what's in Mail.app in the "Mac OS" directory, for example.
 
str1f3 said:
LOL, much of Firefox is done with XUL, Mozilla's own interface language.

http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/The_Joy_of_XUL

It just uses more Cocoa than it did.
Can you use the default keybindings that work in any Cocoa app in Firefox? Have you got access to the Services menu?
Can you get word-completion by hitting F5 after you begin typing a word in a text-field in Firefox?
Can you call the OS X dictionary by pressing Control+Command+D, as you can in any Cocoa app?

You can see the application isn't built entirely from Cocoa by looking in the package. Right-click on Firefox's icon in the Finder and choose "Show Package Contents"Navigate to the directory called "Mac OS" and have a look. In any native app there will be an executable in there, and that's all. That's not true of Firefox. Compare what's in Mail.app in the "Mac OS" directory, for example.
Click to expand...

LOL ;-) you have no idea ;-)

OS X dictionary by pressing Control+Command+D for example
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=301451

the reason is: No support for Apple's accessibility API
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=157209

all you examples have something to do with missing Gecko features and have nothing to do with XUL or Cocoa.

By the way,
these missing Gecko features should be added in the next version:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Namoroka

Cheers
 
str1f3 said:
LOL, much of Firefox is done with XUL, Mozilla's own interface language.

http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/The_Joy_of_XUL

It just uses more Cocoa than it did.
Can you use the default keybindings that work in any Cocoa app in Firefox? Have you got access to the Services menu?
Can you get word-completion by hitting F5 after you begin typing a word in a text-field in Firefox?
Can you call the OS X dictionary by pressing Control+Command+D, as you can in any Cocoa app?

You can see the application isn't built entirely from Cocoa by looking in the package. Right-click on Firefox's icon in the Finder and choose "Show Package Contents"Navigate to the directory called "Mac OS" and have a look. In any native app there will be an executable in there, and that's all. That's not true of Firefox. Compare what's in Mail.app in the "Mac OS" directory, for example.
Click to expand...

ur post further indicate you dont know what cocoa is. your complaints might be valid, but you are blaming the wrong reason.
 
clevin said:
ur post further indicate you dont know what cocoa is. your complaints might be valid, but you are blaming the wrong reason.
Click to expand...

My complaints might be valid? They are valid. Firefox is not 100% Cocoa. Period. For the end user looking to use these features, they are apparent. You asked what it was and I told you while providing proof. Maybe you think I'm talking about the GUI and if that's the case you haven't been paying attention. Now you show me any statement by the Firefox team that they say it is 100% Cocoa app.
 
str1f3 said:
My complaints might be valid? They are valid. Firefox is not 100% Cocoa. Period. For the end user looking to use these things, they are apparent. You asked what it was and I told you while providing proof. Maybe you think I'm talking about the GUI and if that's the case you haven't been paying attention. Now you show me any statement by the Firefox team that they say it is 100% Cocoa app.
Click to expand...

You will find not one app. written 100% with Cocoa. Period :D
 
str1f3 said:
My complaints might be valid? They are valid. Firefox is not 100% Cocoa. Period. For the end user looking to use these features, they are apparent. You asked what it was and I told you while providing proof. Maybe you think I'm talking about the GUI and if that's the case you haven't been paying attention. Now you show me any statement by the Firefox team that they say it is 100% Cocoa app.
Click to expand...

XUL is a language, cocoa is an API, exactly how you can put them together and talk like they are equal in any term is beyond me.

the features missing is because mozilla didn't use them, did NOT use them is completely different from using another API to accomplish the task.

missing feature is legit bug, to accuse something irrelevant is just muddling the water.

exactly why don't you just check more references before making so many bizarre statements?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back