it'll be interesting to see how many people stick with safari for windows
and how many will change back
and how many will change back
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 for Windows Downloads Top 1 Million In 48 Hours
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I downloaded and within half an hour I uninstalled it again. Text is so blurry as to be almost illegible. Come on Apple, you can do better than this!
Go to Preferences, Appearance. Then select the font smoothing style that is suitable for your display.
Apple uses exactly the same font smoothing algorithm in Safari for Windows as in MacOS X. When you look into "System Preferences", "Appearance" on the Mac, you'll find the "Font Smoothing" choice that you have there is in the "Appearance" preference in Safari for Windows.
It could be possible that Safari on Windows uses the LCD style font smoothing by default, even on CRT screens; that would make fonts blurry (because you have to use different methods depending on the display).
impressive, but i wonder how many of them actually use it
One patch and reboot later, and it still crash on startup...
I was actually asking if iTunes for Windows uses the same font rendering as Safari for Windows. When iTunes for Windows was released, I don't remember anyone complaining about blurry fonts.
i still can't selectively allow pop ups for sites (like my school site that needs them) and i can't make links automatically open in a new tab instead of a new window.
so...fail.
so...fail.
sad situation
As a devoted Apple user I care about Apple's good image. Unfortunately the Safari for Windows is lowering perception of Apple´s quality. Even more than Aperture scared some photographers off Apple's photo software.
It is a strange situation. Apple is proud about their one million downloads, but in their position I would celebrate no downloads over many downloads. Just like the Italian Alitalia airline that loses money for every airplane that flies. If they want to save money, they just have to hope nobody buys their tickets so that their planes can stay on the ground.
I'm tired of hearing the "it's beta software" mantra. I used beta software for Photoshop, Lightroom, Skype, and plenty of others. I almost never encounter problems.
There's a big difference between Alpha and Beta. Safari for Windows is pre-alpha. Apple should have tested its software in house until it could qualify for Beta status. They didn't. You can't distribute pre-alpha and label it as beta or people will believe that when your software reaches version 1.0 it's really a mislabeled pre-beta.
As a devoted Apple user I care about Apple's good image. Unfortunately the Safari for Windows is lowering perception of Apple´s quality. Even more than Aperture scared some photographers off Apple's photo software.
It is a strange situation. Apple is proud about their one million downloads, but in their position I would celebrate no downloads over many downloads. Just like the Italian Alitalia airline that loses money for every airplane that flies. If they want to save money, they just have to hope nobody buys their tickets so that their planes can stay on the ground.
I'm tired of hearing the "it's beta software" mantra. I used beta software for Photoshop, Lightroom, Skype, and plenty of others. I almost never encounter problems.
There's a big difference between Alpha and Beta. Safari for Windows is pre-alpha. Apple should have tested its software in house until it could qualify for Beta status. They didn't. You can't distribute pre-alpha and label it as beta or people will believe that when your software reaches version 1.0 it's really a mislabeled pre-beta.
Technically, it is Beta, I believe: (from Wikipedia, though I only glanced through so I may be missing something) (My bolding)
A beta does not necessarily have any defined level of security or stability. What signifies it is a beta is that it is released to the public.
Therefore, even Firefox so-called "Alphas" might be considered betas, technically, if they are released to the public.
Really, what "beta" means has changed. Some beta software is stable, as there were many other editions of that same software before it. Safari for Windows, however, is pretty much the first of its kind. I am pretty sure a TON of work went into porting it (it appears CoreFoundation was ported, something I noticed a few minutes after downloading Safari/Windows). Beta, which used to have no guarantee of stability, has now come to mean near-final. Take Google, for example, which has betas which last for months or years! Reminds me of a comic I read once, where they were saying that, because betas were a marketable thing now, in a few years vague notions would be marketable.
On a side note, Safari for Windows worked absolutely perfectly for me, with almost no bugs whatsoever (yet). The one bug that I remember was less of a bug and more of a slight difference of keyboard/mouse event handling between Windows and Mac versions that caused some javascript on one of my websites to act up. I've browsed quite a bit with Safari/Windows already, and it has worked perfectly.
Anyway, technically, Safari for Windows is a beta. It may not be as stable as other betas, but other betas aren't as ambitious either. And, perhaps Apple should have tested it more before releasing it as a beta. Still, they did not, and that does not change that it is a beta, and that Apple can release a beta whenever they feel they should.
Well, I've tried to install this piece of I don't know what on MBP (BootCamp) and then on a PC. I must admit, I've never seen such a hopeless thing made even by a stand-alone hobbyist-programmer. I'm afraid that every single PC-user who's downloaded and installed this thing is a lost one for Mac. The best thing for Apple would probably be just to immediately take this garbage off its site.
Shame actually, it's fine on Mac.
Shame actually, it's fine on Mac.
Well said. I wish OSX user would be as wise as you, its easy to cheerleading, blindly praise apple whill offer nothing helpful, but to ask more from your favorite company is the sole source of its improvement, without users critics like yours (of course windows users too), apple can just drown in their arrogance.
Well you know this thought has to be passing through Steve's mind...
If we can get a million downloads this quick for an Apple software product on a PC, considering this is a beta and has not been advertised that much...what would happen if...
I honestly think this is another step to get PC owners comfortable with Apple software. It started with iTunes and then the switch to Intel processors and now Safari available for Windows. I think Apple is seriously looking at opening the floodgates on OSX.
It may never happen...but never say never...too many did that when it came to switching to Intel processors.
With all of that said...yes if Safari ends up being a lemon on Windows then they might have to try going another route to get PC users comfortable with Apple. Hopefully after a few revisions it becomes a good browser.
If we can get a million downloads this quick for an Apple software product on a PC, considering this is a beta and has not been advertised that much...what would happen if...
I honestly think this is another step to get PC owners comfortable with Apple software. It started with iTunes and then the switch to Intel processors and now Safari available for Windows. I think Apple is seriously looking at opening the floodgates on OSX.
It may never happen...but never say never...too many did that when it came to switching to Intel processors.
With all of that said...yes if Safari ends up being a lemon on Windows then they might have to try going another route to get PC users comfortable with Apple. Hopefully after a few revisions it becomes a good browser.
There are more Windows users out there, this is no secret so that means that there are more not so smart people using Windows. But that does not mean, that the average user cares about the UI. The killer argument against the oh-so-well UI in Mac OS X is the Dock bar and as a developer interested in UI you should know that this is really more an eye candy concept and not a very usefull one. Even Apple's own people said that.
And for Safari on Windows: The "close" button and the scroll bar aren't exactly at the border of the window in full screen mode. You know what that means? Fitt's Law anyone? And buttons do not have tooltips so the average user will think, that the "+" button is for opening a new tab.
I mean disable all build-in functions of some components (IE, MediaPlayer...). Microsoft was forced to let the user do that since XP SP2. This isn't technically an uninstall but has the same effect. If I am right, one couldn't "disable" QuickTime on a Mac because it is a core function.
Yes I see that, too. But why the hell didn't they realesed the first beta as "devs only"? Wasn't it a Developers Converence? The average iPod on Windows user didn't see how difficult it is to bring Safari on the Windows platform. So for a lot of people, Apple's magic could seem to be gone.
Personally, I was not attacking Windows users. I was saying that they don't care about UI, because they don't notice it. To them, Windows is how it is, that's the end of it. They don't think about it, it's second-nature. Windows itself looks like something cobbled together (at least, XP does, I haven't used Vista extensively).
I said Apple tends to make sure the animations are useful, rather than annoying. And in addition, I said that I was very interested in UI, not that I was an expert.
Still, my benchmark on how good a UI is tends to be on how easy it is for me to figure out, and how quickly I can use it. If it takes me too long to do something, I start getting frustrated. That is my key reason for hating the current Finder in OS X - the visual design of the user interface is alright, but it takes forever to "Find" anything. As such, I look forward greatly to Leopard's Finder.
Safari isn't all great either. For the most part, it makes sense, but tabbed browsing is not enabled by default. There is no add tab button, a feature that would be convenient. (I still would use Command-T, but still). Also, the search engine field should be easily customizable to other search engines. The bookmarks system could also use improvements - right now, I only store bookmarks in the bookmarks bar itself, as doing anything else is a bit frustrating.
iTunes has a pretty nice design visually, but I do not like how they removed so many buttons in 6 or 7 (I can't remember which). Where did the visualizations button go? Now it is only accessible through the menubar, or a keyboard shortcut. That is a problem in my opinion.
I can go on with many other UI conventions which I dislike, but I won't. As you can see, I'm not obsessed with Apple's UIs. I just said that they are much better and more useful, in my experience, than Microsoft's and other Windows program UIs.
Now, for things I do like:
- Minimize/Genie effect: you can see clearly where the window is going, helping you remember later if you minimize several windows. Even so, it is quick and unobtrusive, which is exactly how such animations should be.
- Dashboard appearance: the dashboard appears almost instantly, but there is an effect to ease you into it, so it isn't too startling.
- Closing of a Dashboard widget: the widget fades into the "x" box, which gives a very good impression of exactly what is happening.
- iWeb (which I don't use much): reordering of pictures is animated, so that as you move one picture the others float around and slide to their new spots. This leaves no doubt as to HOW the pictures are being reordered.
- Dock - reording of items; Safari - reordering of tabs: The reordering, much like iWeb, shows the other items sliding about, leaving very little confusion as to what items are moving.
- Transparent tool windows: they look good, and are quite functional, and their transparent look separates them from the task. They could be improved by a slider in the upper-right hand corner (or anywhere else on the window) which would allow quick and easy adjustment of the transparency of the window.
- CoverFlow in iTunes: the animation as the covers go by is quite subtle, but makes sense. It happens very quickly, but is still noticeable. This way, you always know where you are in the album list, and where you are going.
- Bouncing in the Dock: However much it can annoy me at times, it is actually quite useful when programs "jump" to get my attention. For instance, it alerts me quite quickly if any program has failed, or a task has completed.
- Variable Dock icons: this allows me to see the progress of a program running in the background (photoshop, HandBrake) without having to actually go to the program or stop what I am doing.
- Exposé: much more useful than Windows's Flip 3D, it moves windows quickly and efficiently so you can see them all at once. Windows's version is all eye-candy, Apple's is much more focused on efficiency.
- Puff on removal of item from Dock and Bookmarks Bar in Safari: though their animation could probably be improved a bit, it definitely gets the point across. The user knows what is happening- perhaps too well, though, as if the user doesn't understand that the Dock is a collection of "links" to the actual items, they may think they've deleted the items themselves. Something should be done about that, but I'm not sure what, yet.
Many of those Apple could have made useless. Apple could have made windows always resize slowly (as they do when you press the shift key while minimizing them), but did not as doing such a thing would be useless.
Back to Firefox on OS X
So here's the story:
Since I came to OS X in the end of November I have been desperately searching for a web browser that actually worked and pleased me like Firefox did on windows.
Boy was I disappointed in Safari when I came over, and so I used Firefox and it was alright but it usually ran like a dog with no legs. So I lived with it. Then I went back to Safari because of it's web page load up speeds. That worked for awhile but Safari always had these little quirks that would make a web page half load, or safari would full on crash, so I had to keep Firefox and use Firefox for watching videos, playing games, etc. I tried the other browsers but they never had worked right or felt right in what I needed.
Now that Safari 3 came out I was very very very happy. Finally OS X had a browser that seemed at least a half ass approach to competing with other operating systems.
Note: Did anyone else when they heard Safari's announcement think, finally Apple put features in their browser that most everyone has had for at least 2 years?
After using Safari till about 3 days ago I have been very happy with it, but since it has screwed up MSN messenger to the point of not being able to use and it still has many problems with video and other things like that I have had to completely stop using it. What is really weird is Safari has been slowly crashing more and more or acting more and more choppy.
When it is finally released if it looses these stupid quirks, then it will be a really good browser and will finally please me as an OS X user.
So here's the story:
Since I came to OS X in the end of November I have been desperately searching for a web browser that actually worked and pleased me like Firefox did on windows.
Boy was I disappointed in Safari when I came over, and so I used Firefox and it was alright but it usually ran like a dog with no legs. So I lived with it. Then I went back to Safari because of it's web page load up speeds. That worked for awhile but Safari always had these little quirks that would make a web page half load, or safari would full on crash, so I had to keep Firefox and use Firefox for watching videos, playing games, etc. I tried the other browsers but they never had worked right or felt right in what I needed.
Now that Safari 3 came out I was very very very happy. Finally OS X had a browser that seemed at least a half ass approach to competing with other operating systems.
Note: Did anyone else when they heard Safari's announcement think, finally Apple put features in their browser that most everyone has had for at least 2 years?
After using Safari till about 3 days ago I have been very happy with it, but since it has screwed up MSN messenger to the point of not being able to use and it still has many problems with video and other things like that I have had to completely stop using it. What is really weird is Safari has been slowly crashing more and more or acting more and more choppy.
When it is finally released if it looses these stupid quirks, then it will be a really good browser and will finally please me as an OS X user.
Safari is a pretty strict task master which strives to adhere to W3C compliancy (unlike the iterations of another browser), and when faced with having to spit back the sloppy coding of first gen, second gen Windows webmasters it sometimes chokes in indignation, particularly on alot of the IE skewed javascripting that plagues the intertubes.
How many websites don't have a DocType in their header, or are laced with syntax errors, or wholly imaginary HTML and CSS elements, or cobbled together from a labyrinth of nested tables? IE/Microsoft is hospitable towards these sites because it has to--it created the mess and perpetuated the bad coding habits--in order to retain marketshare.
I don't think Jobs, Apple or Safari should go out of its way to accommodate the poor standards keeping of its major competitor and thus keep standards compliancy always at an arm's reach away.
It's an incentive toward progress...which, unfortunately, many seem adverse to: "but it works in Windows/IE...blah, blah, blah....".
I've been using the Safari 3 beta since it arrived and I'm neither offended by its performance nor its modest functionality. It does what it's supposed to do, and very well, in fact.
How many websites don't have a DocType in their header, or are laced with syntax errors, or wholly imaginary HTML and CSS elements, or cobbled together from a labyrinth of nested tables? IE/Microsoft is hospitable towards these sites because it has to--it created the mess and perpetuated the bad coding habits--in order to retain marketshare.
I don't think Jobs, Apple or Safari should go out of its way to accommodate the poor standards keeping of its major competitor and thus keep standards compliancy always at an arm's reach away.
It's an incentive toward progress...which, unfortunately, many seem adverse to: "but it works in Windows/IE...blah, blah, blah....".
I've been using the Safari 3 beta since it arrived and I'm neither offended by its performance nor its modest functionality. It does what it's supposed to do, and very well, in fact.
1. You are absolutely right about the W3C standard issue, which is very important, altho I admit IE7 has some improvements compare to IE6, it still has a long way to go.
2. main complains about safari for win, IMHO, is not standard problem so far, rather, they are non-native, font smoothing, system resource usage, application stability, security, speed, etc.
Apart from the subjective response to new visual stimuli, i.e. Mac-centric font smoothing in a Windows font blockiness environment, the other issues you mention can, for the time being, fall under that catch-all umbrella: "it's a beta".
Of course, if none of these issues prove themselves resolved to some noticeable degree, well Apple's got it coming to it.
Sidenote: And this speaks to my own bias, of course, but for the life of me I can't understand these endorsements for a compromised viewing experience. One of these days it's going to be technically feasible for a designer to incorporate any font under the sun into her/his CSS (without resorting to cumbersome Flash and javascript work-arounds), and if Microsoft is still clinging to its cookie cutter approach to font rendering I would expect these same 'creative' types, whatever their platform preference, rejecting the Microsoft straight-jacket wholesale.
Besides, what does an MBA in loafers know about the art of typography anyway?