Apple keen to push Safari 3.1 on Windows users.

If you run iTunes or QuickTime or any Apple software on your Windows PC, but not Safari, you might have seen an uninvited guest show up in the Apple Software Update earlier this week. Yes, Apple thinks you need yet another browser. They tried to slip the new Safari 3.1 in for iTunes owners, a move that has some Windows users up in arms.

The program is usually used for updating Apple software, and so getting new software with the deal wasn't something a lot of users expected. And users who don't do anything but the default, are basically going to be getting software they didn't plan to have.

Link: Tuaw via Gizmodo.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Cuban to Broadcast Basketball Game in 3D

Next Story

Sony charges $50 to remove laptop bloatware; Retracts Later

108 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Im not sure about other browser but the render speed of safari 3.1 beta will surpass over firefox not-beta and iexplorer 7 on a old pc.

And about the visual, who cares about a skin support, while there are a noticeable difference between both renders:

Ehh, I use itunes all the time for my ipod touch and its the worst peice of software I've used on a PC. Start by improving itunes, then maybe I'll think about safari.

The only option I had was to cancel the download. No option to download, nothing. For a company to do that is BS.

(MrMunka said @ #35)
So long as you have an option to install or not, I don't see what the big deal is.

It is the tactic that is used.

Simple fact is that I DON'T have Safari or iTunes installed, so they don't need to be updated. It's called "Apple Software Update"! How can you update Safari if it's not installed? I find it quite annoying that QuickTime updates are always bundled as iTunes + QuickTime. I am forced to grab QuickTime manually.

Additionally, Safari was "checked" by default. I can almost guarantee users have installed iTunes (+ QuickTime) and Safari when they probably only wanted iTunes in the first place (for the iPod, eh).

I was actually pretty annoyed by the fact that Apple would abuse their updater service to pop up a window that's trying to get me to install software that I don't want. While I'm aware MS has used WU to push software versions, you have to actively go to WU yourself to see them and, even then, they are usually off by default. This move by Apple involved popping up a window I didn't request and telling me I should download the mentioned software.

i'm still mad because of the installer behavior? why they even bother to ask whether or not you want the updater to be installed if they install it anyway?

this is an abuse, plain and simple. i installed safari 3.1 to try it out. it is as good as Firefox or IE but as someone above said, the overall look should blend into windows and for once, companies need to listen if they don't want to take "anger hits" because people won't download safari because of this.

also, itunes/quicktime bundle is an abuse. i don't use them (i have an ipod) and im happy with J. River Media Center, Quicktime Alternative and if someone close to me needs itunes there is an installer without Quicktime.

They've been doing this for a while with Quicktime/iTunes. I can't believe I paid them $30 for Quicktime 7 Pro so they could install Apple Software Update after I told the installer not to and then use it to push iTunes down my throat. That's a great way to treat paying customers.

The Google toolbar being bundled with other software is a ridiculous argument. When you uncheck the option to install Google toolbar, it doesn't install. ASU does.

And the argument about Windows including a media player and a browser are equally ridiculous. If Windows didn't come with IE, how would you get your precious FF? Are you going to use another computer, or go to a store and pick it up? Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I consider media playback and internet browing basic operating system functionality.

I have no problem with them offering iTunes, Safari, ASU or anything else during the install process. But no means no! And don't install an updater that's really a software manager used to push a growing list of applications.

Plus, when you to upgrade to a paid version of a free application, the software tends to show a little more respect to the users choices. Not Apple software! It just makes me want to scream!

I'm not saying Safari or iTunes are good are bad. I'm just saying I don't want them and I'm tired of having them pushed on me as an "update."

(shawncm217 said @ #29)
They've been doing this for a while with Quicktime/iTunes. I can't believe I paid them $30 for Quicktime 7 Pro so they could install Apple Software Update after I told the installer not to and then use it to push iTunes down my throat. That's a great way to treat paying customers.

The Google toolbar being bundled with other software is a ridiculous argument. When you uncheck the option to install Google toolbar, it doesn't install. ASU does.

And the argument about Windows including a media player and a browser are equally ridiculous. If Windows didn't come with IE, how would you get your precious FF? Are you going to use another computer, or go to a store and pick it up? Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I consider media playback and internet browing basic operating system functionality.

I have no problem with them offering iTunes, Safari, ASU or anything else during the install process. But no means no! And don't install an updater that's really a software manager used to push a growing list of applications.

Plus, when you to upgrade to a paid version of a free application, the software tends to show a little more respect to the users choices. Not Apple software! It just makes me want to scream!

I'm not saying Safari or iTunes are good are bad. I'm just saying I don't want them and I'm tired of having them pushed on me as an "update."

I could not agree more. People want Windows to have no IE or WMP or anything else but do not take the time to realize that without those things what good is an OS that can't do those things out of the box?

It doesn't bother me that Apple is doing this. It bothers me that people obviously cant be bothered to look at things before they just click right through it.

Me personally I'm loving Safari. I've ditched Firefox for it cause i was just burned out on it.
Its been working great. Safari will be my browser for the foreseeable future on Windows.
People really should back off of Apple.
Im sick of all the complaining. Maybe I'm bias cause i've never had any of the problems others have obviously had.
But it just seems so far like a really awesome browser.

(Crono21 said @ #28)
It doesn't bother me that Apple is doing this. It bothers me that people obviously cant be bothered to look at things before they just click right through it.

Me personally I'm loving Safari. I've ditched Firefox for it cause i was just burned out on it.
Its been working great. Safari will be my browser for the foreseeable future on Windows.
People really should back off of Apple.
Im sick of all the complaining. Maybe I'm bias cause i've never had any of the problems others have obviously had.
But it just seems so far like a really awesome browser.

If Apple could make software for Windows that looked like it was for Windows I would have no problem with it. The way it is there software looks like OSX that does not fit the overall look of Windows. If i wanted OSX I would reboot and run Leopard, posting this on Leopard actually. The thing is when Microsoft makes software for OSX it looks like it belongs on OSX not Windows Office 2008 looks great on OSX and does not have a Windows look not true with Apple. For that reason alone I will never use Apple software in Windows.

(bryonhowley said @ #28.1)

If Apple could make software for Windows that looked like it was for Windows I would have no problem with it. The way it is there software looks like OSX that does not fit the overall look of Windows. If i wanted OSX I would reboot and run Leopard, posting this on Leopard actually. The thing is when Microsoft makes software for OSX it looks like it belongs on OSX not Windows Office 2008 looks great on OSX and does not have a Windows look not true with Apple. For that reason alone I will never use Apple software in Windows.

Well me personally. I love the way it looks and it matches my Vista desktop well.
So i guess its all down to taste.

(Crono21 said @ #28.2)
Well me personally. I love the way it looks and it matches my Vista desktop well.
So i guess its all down to taste.

Ok. That's utter nonsense.

Absolutely no visual component of Safari comes even close to fitting in with the overall look and feel and Vista. In fact, I'd say Apple went out of their way to make it like that.

Apple is so desperate trying to get windows users. Sorry Apple you will rot before you can do that.
[EDIT] - To Apple: BTW the name of your browser (SAFARI) sucks.

That's OK.

You'll join us when you're ready. You just haven't hit rock-bottom yet. But have faith, Windows will get you there eventually.

(LTD said @ #27.1)
That's OK.

You'll join us when you're ready. You just haven't hit rock-bottom yet. But have faith, Windows will get you there eventually.

maye when the price of macs comes dows to the same as a PC, or apple lets you install mac os on a PC, i can run all the apps i want to on a mac, or hell freezes over, or a whole bunch of people escape from the mental assuyums, or i just loose my mind.

two years ago i decided never install again crapAPPLEware on my computers and glad i did that...quicktime and itunes add hundreds of registry entries , like a massive takeover...totally insane...and then they decided to push itunes with quicktime or vice-versa(i really don´t remember)...now it´s safari :suspicious:
Yeah... glad i took that decision

I think it's absolute ridiculous that Apple does this. They've been doing it through QuickTime update to install iTunes as well, and for the many of my clients who use QuickTime and leave their computers running over night, they were surprised to see iTunes on their desktop the next day... now having Safari install too? What a load of crap.

Apple seems to be abusing their influence.

(Mikeyx11 said @ #24)
I think it's absolute ridiculous that Apple does this. They've been doing it through QuickTime update to install iTunes as well, and for the many of my clients who use QuickTime and leave their computers running over night, they were surprised to see iTunes on their desktop the next day... now having Safari install too? What a load of crap.

Apple seems to be abusing their influence.


Totally agree!

So Apple is using their virtual iPod monopoly to push software on users? uh huh... if MS did this people be running to the DOJ to complain about it... and I know someone is gona say "thats different" well Apple has the majority share of iPod with iTunes... and they are using that position to push software... yeah they havent been declared an illegal monopoly... but its the same tatic that MS used!

Exactly.

Microsoft uses their dominant OS position to push a browser, they get in huge trouble.

Apple does the same thing with their dominant media player position, and you get a few random blog posts and a front page article on neowin.

(MioTheGreat said @ #23.1)
Exactly.

Microsoft uses their dominant OS position to push a browser, they get in huge trouble.

Apple does the same thing with their dominant media player position, and you get a few random blog posts and a front page article on neowin.

it cant be considered a monopoly if other companies can do and are doing the same thing! well not with something as big as a web browser yet , until now

Darn it, where is the EU when you need them!!

Oh right, they are spending their stolen Microsoft dollars... Well, I'm sure this will all blow over before they even notice.

(carmatic said @ #23.2)

it cant be considered a monopoly if other companies can do and are doing the same thing! well not with something as big as a web browser yet , until now

do you know what the term monopoly means?? from your comment it appears not..

Not digraced, He knew and I am sure many people from what I said is maybe not applicable to browsers, but the other "slickwear" they try and push on you. Yahoo, and google try to do this when you get one of those super whammo combo app installers these guys try to highjack your settings just as much as Apple has loaded Safari via some update app they were giving away. Other companies do it too wake up.

2 days ago, I tried safari 3.1 at work. it seems to be faster than ie or ff. because this news, I will not use safari. period.

Just wait until Firefox 3. Currently Firefox 3 beta 4 is faster than Safari. Beta 5 and the final release will undoubtedly improve even further.

And this is news? Google and Yahoo do the same exact things. I am not an "Apple" devotee, or anything but let's call a spade a spade here. I don't own an ipod, iphone, or other Apple product. I do however like Safari, and think that OS X is one sexy OS.

(NeoFyLe said @ #19)
And this is news? Google and Yahoo do the same exact things. I am not an "Apple" devotee, or anything but let's call a spade a spade here. I don't own an ipod, iphone, or other Apple product. I do however like Safari, and think that OS X is one sexy OS.

Google and Yahoo have secretly installed browsers on your operating system?

It's one thing to install a plugin, which is bad enough already, and another to install an entire web browser that takes over your operating system's handling of hyperlinks.

Anyway, the winner is Firefox. It's a fact.

(hotdog963al said @ #19.2)

I fail to see Safari 3.1 on that chart. :rolleyes:

yea old chart but, Safari 3.1 score ~3500 on my system while latest FF3 prebeta5 scores ~2500, safari 3.1 with latest webkit scored ~2900 , then it ****ed the hell of me and got deleted

(toadeater said @ #19.1)
Anyway, the winner is Firefox. It's a fact.

The SunSpider test is just one suite of javascript tests, and not necessarily indicative of what real web-pages do with Javascript. So while it's useful for indicating rough javascript engine performance between browsers (or different versions of the same browser), it's not really a "real world" test.

Also the speed of the Javascript Engine is only one aspect relating to the performance of a web-browser. There's other subsystems that will effect a browser's speed, like the parser speed, the layout/reflow speed, the rendering speed, speed of accessing the DOM, etc.

If one browser does particularly badly in the SunSpider test then I fully expect them to make their own test suite that will test the fastest bits of their Javascript Engine and not fare so well on other browsers. Then every browser will have a JS test that they excel at and everyone can say they are the fastest

(toadeater said @ #19.1)
Anyway, the winner is Firefox. It's a fact.

According to one online test. Sorry, I just dislike when people tag their statements with "it's a fact", like it's a world truth. Often, these bold claims later have to be eaten up by those spreading them. In this case, Safari 3.1 isn't even tested, and same goes for the latest already released Opera 9.50 builds.

But yes, Firefox 3.0 Beta 4 is performing very well indeed and Firefox 3.0 may well be the top browser according to the SunSpider test once released. That much can be said, at least.

(toadeater said @ #19.1)

Google and Yahoo have secretly installed browsers on your operating system?

It's one thing to install a plugin, which is bad enough already, and another to install an entire web browser that takes over your operating system's handling of hyperlinks.

Anyway, the winner is Firefox. It's a fact.

Oh wow, let's all base our decisions on a bunch of lines with numbers on them. Mind explaining to us what this graph means?

(RPDL said @ #19.6)
Oh wow, let's all base our decisions on a bunch of lines with numbers on them. Mind explaining to us what this graph means?

I see a bunch of ms on top, so it's like, how much ms the browser takes to complete the javascript requests. If my common sense doesn't fails me.

(toadeater said @ #19.1)

Google and Yahoo have secretly installed browsers on your operating system?

It's one thing to install a plugin, which is bad enough already, and another to install an entire web browser that takes over your operating system's handling of hyperlinks.

Anyway, the winner is Firefox. It's a fact.

a winner at what, what the hell does this graph represent, speed to load java or something

Yawn, why is this a big deal? How many packages out there try to get you to install other products? at least this is one pretty unobtrusive and is made by the same company unlike others:

sun java vm - google toolbar
deamon tolls - google toolbar

I'm sure there are loads of others as well.

Ever wondered about the differences between INSTALL and UPDATE?

Tonnes of software push other softwares when installing. Few (since there is like at least one now?) actually does that when updating.

(Shokus said @ #18.1)
Ever wondered about the differences between INSTALL and UPDATE?

Tonnes of software push other softwares when installing. Few (since there is like at least one now?) actually does that when updating.

I think that Sun offers Google Toolbar when the Java VM is being updated.

(GBerner said @ #17)
Start > Control Panel > Add or Remove Programs > Apple Software Update > Remove > Shut up.

Thats fine in saying that and for me and you its ok, but for the less in the know about PC's which they are many a lot of them will see it as an update to something they already have thats is the problem here!

Yup, disgraceful behaviour from Apple.

Not so much "keen to push Safari" as "going to cram Safari down your throat whether you want it or not". If you use iTunes then of course it's natural you'll want to install a totally unrelated application when you update... oh no wait, it's not. And of course, since the way you update iTunes has given you strong 'memory-muscle' for what buttons to press, then having the "Install a totally unrelated app" pre-ticked is the best thing to do... oh no wait, it's not. (Well, it's the best thing to do for Apple I guess - it'll give Jobs some nice figures to quote in some months.)

Apple's getting more and more shady as time goes on.

(tunafish said @ #16.1)
If MS did this there would be a law suit and loads of people moan, but it seems different with apple.

Hence the EU....

(bobbba said @ #16.5)
Software bundling is not new, how long has windows had a browser and a media player...

Yeah right, like OSX doesn't bundle that crap? This is pushing software you dont already have. You know IE7 is still an optional update? Apple releases a new version of browser and immediately forces people to upgrade to it, good thing im not a paranoid admin who always let's things 'bake in'

(tntomek said @ #16.6)
Yeah right, like OSX doesn't bundle that crap? This is pushing software you dont already have. You know IE7 is still an optional update? Apple releases a new version of browser and immediately forces people to upgrade to it, good thing im not a paranoid admin who always let's things 'bake in'

OSX bundles it but in many cases you can pretty easily remove it. I expect them to become more Microsoft-like with regard to that in the near future, though.

As for forcing the Safari update, I don't know where you're getting that from. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt but I think you're spreading FUD.

(bobbba said @ #16.5)
Software bundling is not new, how long has windows had a browser and a media player...

these type of comments are just stupid Apple does the same shipping a browser and media player with Apple OS as does every version of linux, and also i ask this if they did not ship a browser with the OS how the hell do you get to the web to download any browser at all??

Damnit.. I just looked to see if it did install the bulls--- and yep, it's there. Could've sworn I unchecked that crap. x)

noticed this today wish i paid more attention when installing automaticly took over as defualt webbrowser when i selected it not to be. after this totaly removed itunes from my system and anything todo with it.

Yeah... I ran an Apple update and Safari showed up. Should have paid more attention.

So I figured I'd use it... all I can say is that it's pretty fugly.

LMAO, malware, how exactly...

I don't agree with it apple doing it either but these malware/spyware comments are way OTT. Was it malware or spyware when MS included a browser and a media player in windows?

(MioTheGreat said @ #9)
Pretty disgusting tactics, Apple.

This makes the Apple Software Updater borderline malware in my book.


Yeah, and damn Microsoft for putting out WGA and Internet Explorer 7 ("but it's an update to IE 6!" ) through Windows Update, too.

Get real. It isn't new for companies to pull stunts like this - Apple is far from the first. Have you been updating your java recently and seen how now you can get "OpenOffice for free, click here!"? I don't condone any of this activity - if the company wants to offer advertisements for its other products through its update services that's somewhat OK, but don't bundle new software in the guise of software updates. That's deceptive.

(Ledgem said @ #9.2)
Yeah, and damn Microsoft for putting out WGA and Internet Explorer 7 ("but it's an update to IE 6!" ) through Windows Update, too.

Get real. It isn't new for companies to pull stunts like this - Apple is far from the first. Have you been updating your java recently and seen how now you can get "OpenOffice for free, click here!"? I don't condone any of this activity - if the company wants to offer advertisements for its other products through its update services that's somewhat OK, but don't bundle new software in the guise of software updates. That's deceptive.


When I installed Windows, and turned on Windows Update, I fully expected for Microsoft to push updates to the operating system, such as WGA (I don't like it any more than anyone else, but it's hard not to classify it as an update to the licensing components of Windows), and because IE6 is already something in the OS, and IE7 actually is an update for it, IE7 (And a pretty important one, given the terrible security impact of keeping 6 installed, even if you don't use it).

However, if you install something like iTunes or Quicktime, it's not that software's job to start forcing other completely unrelated crap down your throat.

(bobbba said @ #9.1)
LMAO, malware, how exactly...

I don't agree with it apple doing it either but these malware/spyware comments are way OTT. Was it malware or spyware when MS included a browser and a media player in windows?

these comments are just stupid Apple does the same shipping a browser and media player with Apple OS as does every version of linux, and also i ask this if they did not ship a browser with the OS how the hell do you get to the web to download any browser at all??

I've never been in on these format wars. All I want is a browser that lets me see webpages, IE does that perfectly without any inconveniences whatsoever, so I might as well stick with it.

Inconvenience? IE? Nah!
Unless you count:

  • Unintuitive, disgustingly designed interface.
  • Slow-as molasses page rendering.
  • A lack of extensions, such as adblock or gestures.
  • ActiveX, the attack vector for 80% of spyware programs.
  • Every search engine and web portal in existence pushing their sh***y toolbar or search helper on you.
  • Poor adherence to standards, guaranteeing NO interoperability for years to come.
  • Microsoft's slow update cycle, leaving vulnerabilities in the wild for years at a time.

Granted, Microsoft's trying to improve... I give them some marks for effort.

(cyberdrone2000 said @ #8.1)
Inconvenience? IE? Nah!
Unless you count:
  • Unintuitive, disgustingly designed interface.
  • Slow-as molasses page rendering.
  • A lack of extensions, such as adblock or gestures.
  • ActiveX, the attack vector for 80% of spyware programs.
  • Every search engine and web portal in existence pushing their sh***y toolbar or search helper on you.
  • Poor adherence to standards, guaranteeing NO interoperability for years to come.
  • Microsoft's slow update cycle, leaving vulnerabilities in the wild for years at a time.


Granted, Microsoft's trying to improve... I give them some marks for effort.


I'm gonna take a stand as one of the many people who enjoys the updated IE interface. I find layouts like Firefox's bland and uninspired afterwards, much like opening NCSA Mosaic would make you feel in the IE4-6 days. I find IE7's bars fluid and--believe it or not--intuitive, whatever that may say about my senses.

I'm not quite sure, but I think there were a lot of complaints about the stop/reload buttons not being right next to the back/forward buttons? That has nothing to do with keeping it intuitive, that's just about what people are used to. It would be very, very...extraordinarily rare to push back/forward and need to immediately push stop/reload afterwards, or vice versa. Once your mouse hand learns where the buttons are, you never think twice about it again.

Honestly, complaining about the layout just makes people sound like a bunch of old farts whimpering about how things used to be and the evils of change.

* Unintuitive, disgustingly designed interface.

And yet it's still more appealing than FireFox or Safari? Wow, you sure are picky.

* Slow-as molasses page rendering.

Also, the sky is green now. Yes, green.

* A lack of extensions, such as adblock or gestures.

I guess the IE experience is good enough on it's own to not need this extra crap. Sorry that your browser isn't.

* ActiveX, the attack vector for 80% of spyware programs.

Stop giving the talking moose your credit card number or downloading things you shouldn't be and you'll be fine.

* Every search engine and web portal in existence pushing their sh***y toolbar or search helper on you.

As opposed to Apple pushing Safari on iTunes users or Java pushing OpenOffice on you? Take 2 seconds and click "No" when you are asked if you want it. It's really that simple. Really. Next time, READ a software setup screen, don't just click 'Next' through everything and assume you know what you're doing.

* Poor adherence to standards, guaranteeing NO interoperability for years to come.

Another statement that makes no sense. What is IE not interoperable with? Get back to me if you find something.

* Microsoft's slow update cycle, leaving vulnerabilities in the wild for years at a time.

Weekly updates? That's so much worse than Mozilla's "when we get around to it" schedule for sure.

Sounds like someone needs to try IE before crapping all over it

(C_Guy said @ #8.3)
* Unintuitive, disgustingly designed interface.

And yet it's still more appealing than FireFox or Safari? Wow, you sure are picky.

* Slow-as molasses page rendering.

Also, the sky is green now. Yes, green.

* A lack of extensions, such as adblock or gestures.

I guess the IE experience is good enough on it's own to not need this extra crap. Sorry that your browser isn't.

* ActiveX, the attack vector for 80% of spyware programs.

Stop giving the talking moose your credit card number or downloading things you shouldn't be and you'll be fine.

* Every search engine and web portal in existence pushing their sh***y toolbar or search helper on you.

As opposed to Apple pushing Safari on iTunes users or Java pushing OpenOffice on you? Take 2 seconds and click "No" when you are asked if you want it. It's really that simple. Really. Next time, READ a software setup screen, don't just click 'Next' through everything and assume you know what you're doing.

* Poor adherence to standards, guaranteeing NO interoperability for years to come.

Another statement that makes no sense. What is IE not interoperable with? Get back to me if you find something.

* Microsoft's slow update cycle, leaving vulnerabilities in the wild for years at a time.

Weekly updates? That's so much worse than Mozilla's "when we get around to it" schedule for sure.

Sounds like someone needs to try IE before crapping all over it ;)

Sorry C_Guy but he is right on every count, you just got your trashed worked. IE blows all day long. FF kicks all kinds of ass. Ad-block and all the other ad-ons that IE doesn't have just make it that much better. I will never go back to that pig IE. Rock on!!!

(waxman830 said @ #8.4)
Sorry C_Guy but he is right on every count, you just got your trashed worked. IE blows all day long. FF kicks all kinds of ass. Ad-block and all the other ad-ons that IE doesn't have just make it that much better. I will never go back to that pig IE. Rock on!!!

actually i think C guy is a lot more correct in his statements than the other guy, especially this one "Microsoft's slow update cycle, leaving vulnerabilities in the wild for years at a time." he has no idea what he is talkign about as MS actually is considered one of the best at fixing flaws..if you or he can name one flaw that MS hass known about and left for 'years then please let us all know' and i hope he isnt comparing it to any of the other browsers becasue they are worse in my opinion

i actually dont mind IE7

this is yet another way for apple to bolster their rather myopic look at the world. in a few months mr jobs will stand up at the podium and proclaim yet another success in that safari is growing in user base. this of course will be leaving out the fact that its growth is due to a "push" method on apples part to get it on windows machines. the self propelled PR machine never stops at apple.

Course it's not just Safari is it, it's iTunes as well - if you've only Quicktime installed it recommends you upgrade to the new version of iTunes...

Apple Software Update should stick to what it says on the tin; offering updates for installed software, not forcing you to install software that you don't have in the first place in order to get the upgrade you really want. It'd be like Firefox Auto-Update forcing you to install Thunderbird in order to update Firefox.

Perhaps Ad-aware, Spybot, etc. ought flag Apple Software Update as malware until Apple ceases this behaviour.

I have only Quicktime installed, so I can watch movie trailers. Doesn't stop Apple to bother me every week with install requests for Itunes, and now for Safari as well. Think I'll just uninstall Quicktime again and re-install without the updating option.

(Odom said @ #3.1)
I have only Quicktime installed, so I can watch movie trailers. Doesn't stop Apple to bother me every week with install requests for Itunes, and now for Safari as well. Think I'll just uninstall Quicktime again and re-install without the updating option.

You can turn it off

(Angel Blue01 said @ #3.2)

You can turn it off

Think so? Good luck with that.

Choosing to not install the Updater doesn't work either, it installs it no matter what you say.

I wonder when people will start notice that even if safari is your first apple software on the windows pc it force installs the apple update software regardless to what ever you choose during safari installation

Pay attention, when you install Safari on windwos and uncheck the option to install apple update software the installtion will install the software none the less!

(Galley said @ #2.1)
Are you sure? I've got Safari and nothing else by Apple installed on my work PC.


I am sure although I only tested it on my main PC with vista utlimate on it, everytime I install safari 3 (since beta days) I always uncheck all the optional software and each time I find that there is apple software update installed and running on my PC

Look in windows program uninstall options in Programs and Features (if its Vista) or Add/Remove Programs (XP) at the control panel

It's true, I noticed this when installing QuickTime once. I definitely unchecked the Apple Update thing but it installed it anyway.

I've experienced this too when installing Safari. Regardless of whether or not you select it the Apple Software Updater it still gets installed. I only bother with Safari on Windows because I'm a web developer, but I don't trust Apples software installers at all.

I'd use Safari if it weren't for the fact that it looks out of place compared to, say, iTunes. C'mon Apple, where's your much loved Unified interface?

Less usable than Opera. And it's been rather hard to find a mouse gestures plugin. And the backwards button on my mouse doesn't seem to work in Safari. So it's basically useless. I leave it on there mostly as a bit of a test item. When one has 300 gb to spare, why not.

(PureLegend said @ #1)
I'd use Safari if it weren't for the fact that it looks out of place compared to, say, iTunes. C'mon Apple, where's your much loved Unified interface?
Exactly! If they could just make it skinable so it's not so mismatched with Windows' theme.