Apple releases Safari 5

Apple today has released Safari 5, the latest version of its webkit based browser. Touting several new features, Apple promises it's the most innovative web browser yet. As with the previous version, the new version of Safari is available for both Windows and Mac.

Similar to any RSS reader, the new version of Safari includes Safari Reader, allowing users to view multiple articles from a site via a scrollable environment. Users simply click the “reader” icon in the browser to display articles in Safari Reader. Safari will then load a clutter free view focused on clear, simple reading.

Several more HTML5 features have been implemented with Safari 5 including fullscreen playback and closed captioning, geolocation, sectioning elements, draggable attributes, form validation, Ruby, EventSource, AJAX History, and WebScoket.

Safari's JavaScript engine is powered by Nitro, which allows for a 30% faster performance gain over its predecessor. In comparison to other browsers, Apple states Nitro performs 3% faster than Chrome 5.0, and over twice as fast as Firefox 3.6. DNS prefetching has also been implemented, allowing for faster loading of previously visited sites when users return to them.

Apple has also created the free Safari Development Program, which allows developers to enhance Safari with extensions based on HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript code. An extension builder allows for development, installation, and packaging of extensions in an easy to use environment. Safari extensions are placed in sandbox shell, allowing for enhanced security and better stability.

Safari can be download here.

Special thanks to giga for the heads up

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Watch the Steve Jobs keynote Wi-Fi meltdown [Video]

Next Story

Microsoft excited to have Bing included in Safari search

88 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

they claim that it is the most innovative browser yet but yet they copied most of there stuff from other browsers and they have no test(s) or benchmarks to show any difference so until then they just copied stuff and not there so called innovative scheme nonsense. typical of applefail.

soldier1st said,
they claim that it is the most innovative browser yet but yet they copied most of there stuff from other browsers and they have no test(s) or benchmarks to show any difference so until then they just copied stuff and not there so called innovative scheme nonsense. typical of applefail.
http://www.apple.com/safari/whats-new.html#performance
There are your performance tests. You could also do your own, like an astute consumer.

Just installed it. I've always like the UI of the Safari especially the bubble search feature. However what I did not like was that it hogged up a lot of memory. I know this sounds a bit wrong since my favourite browser is Firefox but atleast I could excuse Firefox since I've got quite a few extension installed on it

EDIT: Sadly it's still a memory hogger. ~128,00K with only the Yahoo page open

Good But still lacks behind. Extensions not full yet... And no theme support. Why do the default browsers have to lack behind (IE + Safari) with Safari just getting add-ons and IE still not got them. And both-unthemeable yet the other main competitors do. (Chrome,Opera,Firefox)

Been using it here on Windows 7 since it was available for download and I must say, it's now my default browser. I do switch to the "Medium - Best for flat panel" font option, and I love the look. Speed has definitely improved over 4, and FINALLY the option to have windows open in tabs has arrived. With Safari 5, and the new iPhone coming out, I'm gearing myself up for a Windows to Mac move.

Quite like it actually. Bing integration, almost as fast as Chrome without Googles monitoring crap, and extensions. Not that any exist right now, but sure to change.

Combined with AdMuncher, it works well. Will take a break from Firefox for a bit and see how it goes. Never managed to not return to Firefox (on Windows).

Although it looks similar to Chrome I won't be switching.....
After trying to force me to download Safari the other day to view this HTML5 site...Apple can go jump!

Safari is good but it's just too basic to compete on Windows with the other browsers.

For all of Apple's "most innovative browser" claims, there is little additional above-the-line functionality beyond the basic functions (apart from Cover Flow in History which is just eye candy).

hatmallet said,
Safari is good but it's just too basic to compete on Windows with the other browsers.

For all of Apple's "most innovative browser" claims, there is little additional above-the-line functionality beyond the basic functions (apart from Cover Flow in History which is just eye candy).


As usual, it depends on how you look at it. It now supports extensions, which not even the feature-packed Opera does.

hatmallet said,
For all of Apple's "most innovative browser" claims, there is little additional above-the-line functionality beyond the basic functions (apart from Cover Flow in History which is just eye candy).
I find that Cover Flow is actually extremely handy in History.

They are still bundling darn QuickTime with almost everything they release.
Fortunately, you can extract the Safari standalone installer. I'm still high on Firefox with Chrome being a distant second but I give all browsers a chance when a new version is released.

ajua said,
They are still bundling darn QuickTime with almost everything they release.
Fortunately, you can extract the Safari standalone installer. I'm still high on Firefox with Chrome being a distant second but I give all browsers a chance when a new version is released.

(snipped) without QuickTime you get no video and audio tag support. By tapping into Quicktime it means that they don't need to write separate code for Windows and Mac.

Edited by Eric, Jun 8 2010, 4:19pm :

rawr_boy81 said,

(snipped)without QuickTime you get no video and audio tag support. By tapping into Quicktime it means that they don't need to write separate code for Windows and Mac.

They shouldn't need to use QuickTime for that. HTML5 isn't OS specific so Safari for Windows should be using what's already available.

GreyWolf said,

They shouldn't need to use QuickTime for that. HTML5 isn't OS specific so Safari for Windows should be using what's already available.

You are right. And if you download iTunes, Safari or QuickTime you will end up having AppSupport, Bonjour, etc in every one of their installers. It's like bundling .NET Framework with every Windows application installer.

GreyWolf said,
They shouldn't need to use QuickTime for that. HTML5 isn't OS specific so Safari for Windows should be using what's already available.
Yea, just like how Firefox and Chrome use the system codecs. Oh wait, they use their own bundled codecs.

Why reinvent the wheel to save a person from installing some harmless stuff?

Pretty nice release and I'm glad to have it. The reader is really nifty, the blue load bar returning is great (though I was used to the professional look of the "Loading" in Safari 4), the addition of extensions is exceptionally amazing, and the speed improvements are very welcomed. I am quite excited to see where developers take extensions now, and I am also excited to see what they will be capable of (please let them be able to make a true Adblocker).

My only two dislikes, which are relatively minor compared to what was gained in this release, are the gradient on Top Sites and the lack of even an option for the top tabs from the Safari 4 Beta.

archer75 said,
It's HTML5 score is still lower than chrome. http://www.html5test.com

I've noticed that test isn't right all the time. For example, Safari does support MP3 and AAC audio elements but it says it doesn't.

Safari will also support Ogg Vorbis and Theora if you have the QuickTime codecs installed.

Elliott said,

I've noticed that test isn't right all the time. For example, Safari does support MP3 and AAC audio elements but it says it doesn't.

Safari will also support Ogg Vorbis and Theora if you have the QuickTime codecs installed.

Just out of curisoity, how does the HTML5test actually detect the features? you're correct in that Quicktime supports MP3/Wav/AAC etc, Safari uses Quicktime, so how does HTML5Test come to the conclusion that it is unsupported?

Elliott said,

I've noticed that test isn't right all the time. For example, Safari does support MP3 and AAC audio elements but it says it doesn't.

Safari will also support Ogg Vorbis and Theora if you have the QuickTime codecs installed.


Its browser test ,not plugin test

bogas04 said,

Its browser test ,not plugin test

It uses QuickTime libraries just like IE9 is going to use DirectShow. Why rewrite something if you already have it and it works well.

You can still say Safari doesn't support Vorbis and Theora because QuickTime doesn't come with baked-in support, but MP3 and AAC are definitely supported.

Then again, testing for codecs is an inherent flaw with the test in the first place. The HTML5 spec has no set codecs.

Elliott said,

I've noticed that test isn't right all the time. For example, Safari does support MP3 and AAC audio elements but it says it doesn't.

Safari will also support Ogg Vorbis and Theora if you have the QuickTime codecs installed.


Yeah. The HTML5 Test tests for the wrong MIME types for MP3 and AAC.

Apple states Nitro performs 3% faster than Chrome 5.0

I won't believe it until Apple does the potato speed test comparison.

.Neo said,
Do they hold a patent?

Of course they don't - but thats besides the points for the juvenile fanboys here who bash Apple regardless of what they do.

Good.

May be out of line here but why anything that Apple releases has to be "the most innovative/revolutionary [insert product here] yet"?

wrack said,
Good.

May be out of line here but why anything that Apple releases has to be "the most innovative/revolutionary [insert product here] yet"?


Because saying, 'we've a new browser out now. it's ok, download it if you want, or not, whatever' doesn't have the same effect.

I'll be going back and forth between Safari and Chrome until Safari gets the extensions I use in Chrome. But in my own tests, I find Safari slightly faster. Overall I prefer Safari because it looks the way Mac apps should. But the reader feature owns as .Neo stated above!

I don't see how it's "much better". It has some options yes, none of them I need. "Reader" in Safari can increase text size as well. Safari is free too you know...

.Neo said,
The reader feature owns! Cool unique default feature to set Safari apart from the other browsers.

I agree with that! But sometimes I see RSS, sometimes I see Reader, it's not clear what is what. But I've tried it and it owns for real.

.Neo said,
The reader feature owns! Cool unique default feature to set Safari apart from the other browsers.

You guys got to be joking!!!
Firefox with Sage or Sage++ extensions do this (if it is what I'm thinking) for years...

onesolo said,
You guys got to be joking!!!
Firefox with Sage or Sage++ extensions do this (if it is what I'm thinking) for years...

What part of "default feature" don't you understand?

Elliott said,
Much better? Not by a long shot.

Agreed. Readability doesn't support multipage articles.

Readability is actually worse and doesn't do anything special Safari Reader doesn't. (besides supporting some basic theming and typeface size support, not that it matters to most)

Edited by Northgrove, Jun 8 2010, 2:41pm :

If you're running it under OS X it's nice, can't say for Windows yet. Some sites that had some lag issues streaming HD content don't lag anymore (ex: crunchyroll.com). Also, Gifs load a lot faster than they used to. It used to pause after the gif was loaded and sit there for a bit. Not they start playing immediately.

Again, can't speak for Windows, but so far it's looking like a decent improvement for Mac.

It looks much better, but the UI is confusing to me, and it is NOT faster than IE or Firefox, that's for sure. (Where the heck is the "Home" button?)

GreyWolf said,
(Where the heck is the "Home" button?)

You don't know how to customize a toolbar?

I don't fully understand how the UI is in any way confusing.

.Neo said,

You don't know how to customize a toolbar?

I don't fully understand how the UI is in any way confusing.

No need to be snappy. I didn't say you found it confusing. I shouldn't have to customize the toolbar to have a home page button, and I shouldn't have to turn on "developer" mode to enable one of the new features they're touting, and there is no obvious access to your history.

GreyWolf said,
I shouldn't have to customize the toolbar to have a home page button

Apple basically replaced home page with Top Sites which is visible by default. Sounds more like a matter of principle rather that it being confusing.

GreyWolf said,
and I shouldn't have to turn on "developer" mode to enable one of the new features they're touting

My guess is it's disabled until extensions are actually available.

GreyWolf said,
and there is no obvious access to your history.

The "History" menu isn't apparent enough for you?! Also, on the Top Sites page there are multiple ways to access your history.

DigitalE said,
You still use a "Home" button?

He's probably the same sort of person who uses the history in lieu of bookmarks like my old man does

rawr_boy81 said,
He's probably the same sort of person who uses the history in lieu of bookmarks like my old man does
Using home button =/= that. I have a very healthy selection of bookmarks, yet use a home button because news.bbc.co.uk is my "main" site.

GreyWolf said,

No need to be snappy. I didn't say you found it confusing. I shouldn't have to customize the toolbar to have a home page button, and I shouldn't have to turn on "developer" mode to enable one of the new features they're touting, and there is no obvious access to your history.


Safari : more of the same old crap!

Kirkburn said,
Using home button =/= that. I have a very healthy selection of bookmarks, yet use a home button because news.bbc.co.uk is my "main" site.
I also use the home button in Firefox. I've tons of bookmarks neatly organized but the "home" button is still useful for me.

Kirkburn said,
Using home button =/= that. I have a very healthy selection of bookmarks, yet use a home button because news.bbc.co.uk is my "main" site.

Nope, I still can't work my head around as to its benefit.

GreyWolf said,
It looks much better, but the UI is confusing to me, and it is NOT faster than IE or Firefox, that's for sure. (Where the heck is the "Home" button?)

It should definitely be faster than IE and Firefox since it's based on recent WebKit and Nitro code. Benchmarks should confirm this too.

GreyWolf said,
It looks much better, but the UI is confusing to me, and it is NOT faster than IE or Firefox, that's for sure. (Where the heck is the "Home" button?)

Set your "home" address to the new tab address, and open a new tab to go "home".

Northgrove said,

Set your "home" address to the new tab address, and open a new tab to go "home".

I just went back to my old browser. It's not for me. It's much slower at displaying web pages than Firefox on Windows. If other users don't want a "home" button I suppose that's fine. I do.

@rawr_boy: You have fun with that. I use the browser history constantly when moderating Neowin.

naveeed said,
Will it be on iphone 3gs also?????

Well, this is about the desktop version of Safari. Usually major updates to the engine get transfered over to the iPhone version though, possibly in version 4.0

Extensions and Reader are probably desktop-only features.

I like safari for Mac. But in windows I'd have a hard time leaving chrome. I have to admit though, safari for windows isn't half bad. It's better than many people will have you believe.

3% faster than Chrome? Isn't that in the margin of error, and cited only to show it's speed is better than Chrome, which is probably is in half the tests?

ccoltmanm said,
3% faster than Chrome? Isn't that in the margin of error, and cited only to show it's speed is better than Chrome, which is probably is in half the tests?

The important thing is that you get a pleasant browsing speed, Im not ready to leave My Chrome comfort zone, but I must say i'm impressed; and The Reader function, man I just love it, I spend quite a lot of my time reading web articles and I was waiting for something like this (yeah I know some troller it going to say that firefox have a better add-on), my top 3 its now Chrome, Opera and Safari (waiting for extensions and I'll get rid of Opera) \m/

geeman89 said,
Looks the same as Safari 4.
Topsites now has a gradient, and newer GUI elements.

However, the best part is the return of the blue progress bar! I'm very happy it's returned.

Xero said,
Topsites now has a gradient, and newer GUI elements.

However, the best part is the return of the blue progress bar! I'm very happy it's returned.


Oh heck yeah! I'll update it now for sure.

warwagon said,
Looks a little more pretty.

You know the screenshot in the article - is that the actual screenshot or a modded version? if it is the actual version then it appears that maybe Apple is realising that producing applications that aren't native looking doesn't win converts. Just as Mac users rightly complain about frankenstein applications, so it is correct for Windows users to equally complain about out of place applications

They were talking about hardware acceleration in the Windows version, does that mean they're using Direct2D/DirectWrite or are they hooking right into DirectX? from the specifications it appears they're hooking into DirectX 9