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

Safari for Windows?

Originally posted by testnull
iTunes 4 uses the WebCore component for its HTML rendering!
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. Feel free to browse the package or examine the app binary. It does use WebServicesCore, which is an entirely different framework for XML-RPC stuff. That basically means that the app can talk to a specialized web app without a browser interface.

iTunes does link to the rather primitive HTMLLib in Carbon, so I suppose they could replace that with WebCore in the future if the situation demanded it.
 
Something up their sleeve?

Unless Apple has something up their sleeve, I don't see how this makes any sense. However I do wonder if porting these apps over to Windows has anything to do with Apple possibly moving to x86 processors.

Personally, I think Apple has something up its sleeve.
 
Re: Something up their sleeve?

Originally posted by bryank1
Unless Apple has something up their sleeve, I don't see how this makes any sense. However I do wonder if porting these apps over to Windows has anything to do with Apple possibly moving to x86 processors.

Personally, I think Apple has something up its sleeve.
Click to expand...

Maybe it is not the switch to PPC970 that will be anounced in June, but switch to intel/amd chips.
 
I can't think of one good reason why Apple would want to port Safari to Windows.

iTunes yes, as Apple receives a cut for each track sold via the iTunes store. But what will they get for Safari? They can't charge for it (who would pay?) and there's no way they will even dent IE's strangle hold on the PC browser market - so whats the point. If anything it's just going to reduce the incentive to buy Apple hardware.

Sounds & smells like bullsh*t to me.
 
Just a crazy thought...but what if they were porting slowly all the apple software to the pc world? And maybe open up Mac os x for non-mac hardware? I read an article a few days ago about some company making a pc that wud also be able to run mac os x...hmmm
what do you guys think if apple really tried to make its software available to wintel machines too? including mac os x?
I mean they sure would give a real alternative to windows to all the other users and they could make a big profit too. At least this would give the windows users an idea of what mac os x is like and what apple can do! Until now they are just very mistrustful and they believe all bull**** ppl say about apple being lame etc...
 
Re: Apple Software ported?

Originally posted by MisterEdNZ
I know from a reliable source that Apple's long term business plan is to move from focusing on hardware to software. This will apparently go as far as releasing a version of OSX that will run on an X86 chipset ... yup that's Pentiums, Athlons etc. to you and me.
Click to expand...

Obviously, they're trying to emulate the success of OpenStep on the Intel platform..... oh dear...

Or maybe, they're trying to emulate the success of BeOS on the Intel platform.... oh my....

:)
This could only be as a last resort; once Apple moved to x86 they concede any lead they have in hardware/software integration; and concede any control they have over their own destiny; they would be reliant on Intel/AMD, who would tailor their efforts to their biggest target audience, Windows.

Mike.
 
If Apple were to port Safari, i doubt that it would have anything to do with moving the platform to x86. Maybe they are porting it to increase the user base of non-IE browsers. If successful more sites would be stds complient rather than IE complient, improving the surfing experience for non-IE users.

just my 2p
 
OK, lets say Apple are shifting there focus from hardware to software, wouldn't it make more sense to port an application they could charge for and would be competitive in the Windows world, such Final Cut Pro?

And if this is the case why are ceasing development of the Windows version of Shake?

Doesn't make sense to me.
 
That would be great! Then at school I could use a browser that actually works!

why 66% of you think this is negative. If windows users see that itunes4, ipod, and safari are great, they might switch over to the mac
 
Personally speaking I'm not trying to be negative, I use a PC at work and would love to use more Apple software - I'm looking forward to the realease of iTunes for the PC.

But Safari is a different case, think of it from Apples position. Why go to all the trouble of making a piece of software for a rival platform, which already has a truly dominant embeded application available already? On top of which they can't charge for it.

iTunes on the other hand encourages people to buy iPods, and music from the online store, for which Apple gets a cut. On top of which owning an iPod may make people look more favourably on other Apple hardware such as iMac's and iBooks etc.

I think Safari, as good as it is, on the PC would just end up as some minority oddball browser, that people who are forced to work with PC's use.
 
Originally posted by Billicus
This might be a good idea, but when Apple releases their products for the dark side they remove a reason to switch to the Macintosh, don't you think?
Click to expand...

On the contrary, with users upgrading their PCs every 2 -3 years, I think it makes them more aware of another option when it comes time to get a new machine.
 
Ok, I don't do software. I loathe programming.
But. it seems to me that the addition of the Music Store to iTunes 4 is "browser" stuff. Quite possibly, once that's done for Windows, there's very little work to porting the rest of the code to make Safari stand-alone. It's all about making the Music Store viable and secure from IE tweaks from Redmond.
Anybody remember how much trouble QT for Windows was a few years back? Now almost every PC I see at work has QT on it.
 
Not to crash the party, but Mozilla had tabbed browsing long before Safari.

The only reason Apple would do this is that it is needed to support iTunes.
 
Miss the connection?

This eWeek article says AOL 9.0 is dropping Real Player in favor of quicktime:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1099484,00.asp

See the second page of the article. As well with ITMS out the word has been AOL wants ITMS for their primary music delivery service as well. 2 apple products now bundled with AOL software. Certainly AOL does have netscape as its browser of choice in some instances. But would they just skip netscape and instead use Safari if Apple ported it? If that is the case, IE would suddenly find a new competitor on the scene who just jumped up in market share.

Will have to wait and see.
 
Re: Miss the connection?

Originally posted by synergy
But would they just skip netscape and instead use Safari if Apple ported it?
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt it - it's taken almost 5 years for Mozilla (nee Netscape) and its variants to become usable (and they are very usable now). I don't think they'll chuck that investment away that quickly.
 
Sounds smart.

Perhaps IE will still be faster because of its integration into Windows. However, Apple has been on the right track making "innovation" its focus of attention during this economic period thus developing its name as a brand synonymous with quality.

STEP 1: Develop Brand for Excellence. Check!
STEP 2: Port that brand over to the PC market to continue developing Brand awareness within the PC community. Check!
STEP 3: Allow awareness of quality products such as the IPOD, ITUNES 4, and SAFARI to establish Apple as the center of the digital lifestyle. Check!

Since M$ has cornered the perception that it is the market authority in the business, sector, why not let Apple make the biggest splash where the consumer really cares: at home? Hmmm. Way to go, Apple. Sounds like a good idea.
 
the record

just to correct the first page of posts-

tabs and (free) pop-up blocking existed in windows browsers (mozilla for one) long before safari or camino.
 
1. Typically Apple sofware has always sucked on Windows. One word: Quicktime.

2. All I use now under Windows at work is Firebird. Awesome. I'm looking forward to seeing how the Mac version of that goes, but it's still way too clunky, interfacewise. But the extensions RULE.

3. People in difference places keep on saying that Firebird copied Safari's Google search bar. I may be wrong, but I believe that Phoenix (before it was called Firebird) had this before Safari even came out. So I think Safari had it after, and maybe copied Phoenix.

So anyway, I think it's a dumb idea to port Safari to Windows. I bet it would suck.
 
Re: the record

Originally posted by pcp_ip
just to conrrect the first page of posts-

tabs and (free) pop-up blocking existed in windows browsers (mozilla for one) long before safari or camino.
Click to expand...


Yes but Mozilla kinda sucks for windblows. It's not pretty....Flame me already...Anyway Windblows lacks a good browser, besides IE. I would LOVE to have Safari for windblows!!!! I work on a Mac, but at home I'm on a PC. So I'm stuck using IE for at home...Tabbed browsing, for me, is no big deal...I just want a better browser then IE...Sh** I would take Camino over IE!!!!!!
 
Re: Re: the record

Originally posted by CaptainScarlet
Yes but Mozilla kinda sucks for windblows. It's not pretty....Flame me already...Anyway Windblows lacks a good browser, besides IE. I would LOVE to have Safari for windblows!!!! I work on a Mac, but at home I'm on a PC. So I'm stuck using IE for at home...Tabbed browsing, for me, is no big deal...I just want a better browser then IE...Sh** I would take Camino over IE!!!!!!
Click to expand...

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firebird/

Seriously. It's actually come to the point that I am looking forward to the Mac version getting more Mac-like, like Camino. It's amazing. When I first started using Phoenix on Windows at work it was because IE decided not to load images anymore. I Was using Chimera at the time on the Mac. Phoenix/Firebird has now lept way past Camino in functionality, but as I said that Mac version is still clunky. The extensions have become invaluable. Tabbed browser extensions, mouse gestures, etc.
 
I think it's a terrible idea. Why? Because Microsoft is notorious for changing around it's OS code to make other products look bad. Microsoft could bog the speed down of Safari which would make Windows users think Apple is just a looks cool but but buggy and slow system. IE works well on the PC because and only because of it's integration into the OS.

Then again, who's to say Microsoft won't try to sabatoge iTunes. Even though Windows Media Player doesn't compare whatsoever.
 
Apple is becoming greedy

Hasn't anyone noticed Apple is becoming greedy? They have been charging for more and more things and they are now starting to make products for Windows. iPod, iTunes, SAFARI for crying out loud. THIS IS BULL****. Honestly. Where is their Mac spirit? I for one am becoming disgusted with Apple recently. I think I might start a petition to not buy Apple products until they stop making products for Windows. Apple is becoming a big, pride-less, greedy piece of **** company, honestly.
 
Re: Sounds smart.

Originally posted by GeneR
Perhaps IE will still be faster because of its integration into Windows.
Click to expand...

Going once, going twice, going three times....IE IS NOT FAST AND IS NOT TIED "INTO" WINDOWS.

Sorry. Just had to set that straight again. In this respect alone x86 Safari would be welcome. Sure, FireDuck is sweet. But there's nothing wrong with a bit of competition to stimulate innovation (and COMPLIANCE!).

Originally posted by GeneR
However, Apple has been on the right track making "innovation" its focus of attention during this economic period thus developing its name as a brand synonymous with quality.
Click to expand...

Yes!

So if we see Safari for windows it's because of some wider strategy for leveraging the Apple brand amongst the Windows population.

It may be as simple as "Ok, here's iTunes to make your iPod sweet and let you use the iTMS, while you're at it why don't you install this neat browser as well?" Suddenly everyone with a WinPod is looking at an Apple logo everytime they surf. HOW VALUABLE IS THAT? That's damn valuable.

All those billions people on Slashdot would be either using FireDuck or Safari. And if they're IT administrators they'll probably think about switching their stock of machines over too. Canyou say BRAND IDENTIFICATION? Apple making the best browser for Windows. Joe user might not care, but it would certainly catch the attention of the people who matter - IT administrators. Word spreads.

There's lots of good reasons why Apple might do this.
 
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