firefox beta did not have any problems like this.
Firefox has certainly had its share of vulnerabilities too. And I think if you'd investigate, you'd find that IE has had just about one security vulnerability for every line of code.
firefox beta did not have any problems like this.
Security issues or not, I'm using it. . .
I think my days of being a Firefox user have just come to an abrupt halt. If only Apple would incorporate the feature from FF where it clears your passwords, cache and history when you quit, it would be perfect.
While some may not agree with it, Denial of Service vulnerabilities (aka "crashers") is broadly considered a security vulnerability, although it is typically ranked lower than privilege escalation, arbitrary code execution, and remote vulnerabilities. Here's what Secunia gives advisories for, for instance:
http://secunia.com/about_secunia_advisories/
It would have made MUCH more sense for Apple to just install an additional Safari application so you could switch back to the old Safari easily if you wanted. As it is, it looks like you first have to un-install the beta (using the included uninstaller), and then re-install Safari from your installation CD. That is NOT how a public beta is supposed to be handled, in my opinion.
D
Would you ever install ANY software that could or could not have security holes?
I found a bug already running under windows with multiple screens. But I wasn't surprised, instead, I went to menu "Help" > "Report bugs to apple", and told them about it along with my system setup.
It's Beta software, if you use it, expect bugs, and when you find htem, report them like a good kid.
You pepole aren't downloading the beta expecting to use some free piece of software, expecting perfection and never having to actually beta test, are you?![]()
bludy windoze! haha thats really quite funy, you can take the safari out the os, but you cant take the flaws out the os
In my world a "beta" should at least "work" on 90+% of all machines where it could be installed. This isn't even good enough to be considered an "alpha" IMO
Does beta mean it's allowed to have security holes?
Would you ever install ANY software that could or could not have security holes?
I don't understand why Apple didn't do this. They should have released the beta separate from the GM.
It is called private browsing...
EDIT: I do believe you are experiencing the "placebo effect." The time it takes to load a html page from Safari to Firefox is insignificant.
2. IT'S BETA -- STOP HAVING A HISSY FIT OVER IT.
In my world a "beta" should at least "work" on 90+% of all machines where it could be installed. This isn't even good enough to be considered an "alpha" IMO
Maybe apple should at least RUN it on a Windows machine (even though it surely hurts and the guy with the windows machine isn't allowed to sit at the same table in the cafeteria?) at least once before releasing it to the world instead of just making sure it compiles and releasing it?
Selecting private browsing from the file menu is Safari doesn't stick. If you close the window, it revert to non-private. In Firefox's preferences, you can specify that Firefox wipes cache, cookies, passwords, history, etc. every time you quit the app and that stays and happens every time. Also, you have a great deal of granularity with it (i.e., I can keep my cookies but dump the cache and history) whereas Safari's private browsing is all or nothing.
Secondly, the slow down Safari experiences is actually from the AJAX Digg uses on its forums so it's not totally HTML-related. Safari beta 3's handling of AJAX is greatly improved--better than Firefox now, I would say.
I use Windows live messenger to chat to all my friends almost everyday so I can't be without it. Unfortunatly the Safari 3 Beta caused Messenger to crash everytime I closed a conversation window so I am back with version 2 - its still great though! I do have the latest version of Messenger btw. Just wondering if anyone else noticed the same problem.
That's one of tens of posts all saying the same thing: This is Beta, so bugs are to be expected.
Well, yes, bugs are to be expected. But you don't understand the difference between a bug and a remotely exploitable security hole (forgivable since you're probably a mac user and don't generally have to worry much about those). How are people supposed to test software/report bugs if by using the software they are opening up their computer to a remote exploit?![]()
Security issues should have been dealt with in alpha, especially in this day and age. I imagine it's not a happy day at Cupertino today.
Absolutely, this is a public beta, and this is the time to find these vulnerabilities. But in the case of the Mac OS X, the beta overtakes the old Safari.app.
It would have made MUCH more sense for Apple to just install an additional Safari application so you could switch back to the old Safari easily if you wanted.
1. Thank you for finding the bugs. Please report them to Apple to fix.
2. IT'S BETA -- STOP HAVING A HISSY FIT OVER IT.