Apple Safari to be released for the Windows Platform!


Recommended Posts

To be honest with you people, this beta wasn't as bad as the betas for QuickTime 7 for Windows. Some of those beta builds back then were atrociously slow.

EDIT: I tried loading Netvibes with Safari. Holy crap, Safari instantly loaded the page. Not bad.

EDIT 2: Annoying behaviour: CTRL+W on the last tab and Safari quits. There should be an option to keep the window open. The Mac behaviour of keeping programs open in the background doesn't cut it under Windows.

Edited by rm20010

I DID IT!

I finally made Safari on Windows more faster! the rendering speed is increased with a simple modification in here:

"C:\Program Files\Safari\Safari.resources"

Make sure Safari is closed!

Open up Defaults.plist and add the following line:

<key>WebKitInitialTimedLayoutDelay</key>
<real>0.25</real>

This should make Safari Render faster :)

How hard would it be for Apple to have its Windows applications adapt to the native UI? At least Microsoft bothers to do so with its Office software and did so for its Mac versions of WMP and IE5. Instead we're stuck with sluggish (at least thus far) applications that look and feel out of place. Quicktime, iTunes and now Safari all look like b*stard children in Aero and Luna.

As for the browser experience, I would liken it to that of IE. Plain, nothing spectacular except for the load-up time and rendering time itself. However, it could be the fastest browser in the world but if I can't find a way to mimic features that I've come to appreciate in Firefox and its extensions then I won't be switching.

It's crazy how important looks is for people. No wonder Vista is successful among that group of people.

The look of Apple ain't bad. It's just that it doesn't blend with windows themes and they do lag more than native applications. However, considering that Safari executes and renders faster even with the apple UI, just imagine when they improve the performance and that this ain't beta no more? I don't know about you guys but I'm more concerned on the content and how well I can view it rather than the look of the browser. This doesn't mean that I could be happy with a browser that works great but looks like ass, but most will agree that Apple's interface doesn't look like ass. The problem is it doesn't blend with the rest of the look.

Cool news, being its first run on Windows I can forgive the problems it's having, and hope they shape it up. People have already said though that their track record for making their applications perform better under Windows is poor so time will tell. For me personally Firefox with its many extensions will be holding my attention as by moving browsers its a major give-up on functionality.

Ok... My first impressions, and I tried liking it, I really did:

  • It's as ugly as f*ck.
  • The font rendering is horrible. Completely out-of place on windows, cleartype looks tons better. Looks like someone applied gaussian blur.
  • Extreme startup time and memory usage.
  • No autoscroll.
  • No extension support. I can't imagine browsing without adblock plus and filterset.g updater.
  • No right clicking on images? What the hell?
  • Lack of icons in bookmarks. For one, I tend to recognize my bookmarks also by the icons.

Anyway, if this is the flagship browser for the Mac, I'd say those guys have some pretty low browsing standards.

(posting using it on XP)

What's good:

It's snappier than either IE 7 or Firefox 2.0.0.4 for rendering pages.

Memory usage doesn't seem too bad: 4 tabs (neowin, slashdot, BBC news, Google Maps); 113K working, 236K virtual. Maybe I'm one of the lucky ones. However, there seems to be quite a lot of processor usage when I'm not doing anything in the window. In contrast, Firefox with the same 4 tabs open doesn't even flicker on the processor when the window is blurred.

So far, no rendering problems whatsoever. I've obviously got a system that doesn't have some unknown setting that gives you the gibberish text (or none at all).

Some eyecandy I quite like, such as pulsing buttons, but that's just me I suppose.

What sucks:

The UI. Windows apps should all behave the same. I know there are exceptions (apart from Apple products), but they're normally things like 3D Studio-style apps. Fortunately I use Safari on Macs so the layout isn't too much of a surprise, but mainstream Windows applications should all work the same otherwise it confuses and annoys users:

  1. Windows apps can be resized on any border not by click-dragging some Marlett char in the bottom right-hand corner
  2. Windows apps can be minimised / restored by clicking the entry in the taskbar. Currently right-clicking gives you greyed out options. Perhaps they're still working on that, but it is a fundamental behaviour of Windows apps
  3. Windows apps remember their maximised state before minimisation and restore to that state

The font rendering is liable to give me a headache due to the blurring regardless of setting. Bold text is particularly nasty. I've got ClearType (and ClearType Tuner) and everything else is fine.

Niggles:

Preferences -> Advanced gives you the text "Option - Tab highlights each item" under the selectable tab through elements. Aside from the fact that that should be a default behaviour (as all other browsers do this, it's called an accessiblity feature and isn't switchable), what Windows user knows which key maps to the "Option" key unless they also use Macs? Potentially it has just been overlooked, but seeing as it is usually the Alt key, this is definitely wrong as Alt-Tab switches between open windows. They mean the Ctrl key in this instance.

No Apply / OK / Cancel buttons of preferences windows. This confuses Windows users as they are used to clicking something that actually applies the settings they've changed, rather than it being applied as soon as the option is changed.

Help buttons live in the title bar (for "What's this?" purposes) as well as the window. Context sensitive help would be nice as well, instead of opening the .chm (or whatever) at the index page.

As far as betas go, it isn't that shabby. YMMV but at least everyone is agreed that it needs a lot of work before it can go gold.

Edit: something weird happened there: I lost the second half of the post, had to go back and copy-paste bits into Notepad and then copy-paste back to get it to work...

Edited by mrbester

Why is a company that is constantly making fun of microsoft and its alleged inconsistency when design is involved, ignoring every windows design guideline in the book? It looks fugly on my vista box, it looks out of place on my xp box.

Apart from that, rendering is horrible, 10% of the time text is left out or rendered incorrectly, everything is fuzzy, and some websites make the browser crash. It certainly has some gdi leaks which causes part of the high memory. And it has more bugs then any beta i have seen.

This should have been an alpha or internal beta release, not a public one.

Ok... My first impressions, and I tried liking it, I really did:
  • It's as ugly as f*ck.
  • The font rendering is horrible. Completely out-of place on windows, cleartype looks tons better. Looks like someone applied gaussian blur.
  • Extreme startup time and memory usage.
  • No autoscroll.
  • No extension support. I can't imagine browsing without adblock plus and filterset.g updater.
  • No right clicking on images? What the hell?
  • Lack of icons in bookmarks. For one, I tend to recognize my bookmarks also by the icons.

Anyway, if this is the flagship browser for the Mac, I'd say those guys have some pretty low browsing standards.

Haha, I agree, and this is a pretty poor excuse for a browser, even in beta. It leaves out text on lots of sites for me (even after I tried reinstalling), and crashed after 15 mins of usage. This has to be some kind of record as for flawed browsers. Sure, it's beta, but for Apple's own sake, I wouldn't release something like this if I were them. It will just cause a crapload of bad publicity.

Besides the bugs and resource usage (150 MB within minutes of browsing), it's really about time Apple discovers subpixel rendering for LCD's with their browser. ClearType looks like a godsend in comparison...

Basically the only thing I can say this browser has going for it is speed, once it's been loaded. It's pretty nice in that area for me, but pretty much everything else about it is bad after testing. It doesn't even follow the Windows interface guidelines.

I agree with everything that has been said in this thread.

I took ages to load and then it is not even loading the apple startpage. At the momment there is no way I am going to be using it over Opera. Or even over IE 6! or IE 7!

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The useful lapdogs  
    • Nobody is buying a PS5 only for playing Until Dawn 2. Their loss.
    • If you actually used it instead of responding like a petulant child you might be surprised. I switched from Google some time ago and have been very satisfied.
    • I am one of the first people to use the DXVK technology. In the channel below you can see some videos that I have made using this technology, including Assassin's Creed Odyssey. https://www.youtube.com/@nahum7995/videos Assassin's Creed Odyssey experienced several bugs and technical issues during its first months after release. It launched with its own fair share of funny but frustrating glitches. I ran it on DXVK 9 days after its release and I played it for many hours but didn't see a single significant bug on Linux. Assassin's Creed Odyssey is widely celebrated for pushing the franchise in bold new directions and specifically for nailing several elements better than any other title in the AC series: Player Choice & Branching Narrative, The Mercenary & Cultist System, Mythological Integration, Overpowered Combat Abilities, Open World Exploration But what I'm trying to point out is that this game wasn't quite playable on most windows systems, until a few months after its release when most of the bugs were fixed. However, on Linux it ran completely flawless from day one, although DXVK had seen little development and refinement at the time. What do you think the situation will be in 2026 now that most bugs and glitches of DXVK have been completely eliminated? This is information from Google about these situations that I am quoting. In many cases, using DXVK (a translation layer that converts DirectX 9, 10, or 11 into Vulkan) can result in more stable frame times and higher performance than native Windows rendering. This happens primarily by bypassing driver overhead and multithreading draw calls that were previously restricted to a single CPU core. Older APIs (like DirectX 9 and 11) are largely single-threaded on the CPU side. DXVK translates these calls to Vulkan, which is highly multi-threaded. This reduces CPU-bound stuttering on weaker processors. In certain cases, GPU manufacturers (especially AMD) have significantly better and more modern Vulkan drivers than they do for legacy DirectX. Vulkan gives developers—and in this case, the translation layer—closer control over how resources are held in VRAM. This can prevent micro-stutters and sudden frame drops during chaotic gameplay. Yes, certain games, particularly older DirectX 9 to 11 titles, can run with fewer crashes on DXVK than on native Windows. By intercepting DirectX draw calls and translating them into the modern, highly efficient Vulkan API, DXVK bypasses the limitations and poor driver support that cause instability in aging game engines. PlayStation 1, PlayStation 2 and PlayStation 3 can be easily and perfectly emulated on Linux. In fact, modern Linux emulators offer high-performance upscaling, widescreen patches, and automatic controller mapping out of the box.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 PlayStation 1/2/3 games look drastically better on Linux thanks to resolution upscaling. Furthermore, it is also a fact that you cannot play many fun games on Windows either, isn't it? - The Nintendo Switch has an extensive library of exclusive games. - PlayStation has an extensive library of exclusive games - Android has "mobile-exclusive" games, meaning they are exclusive to mobile devices (iOS and Android) and aren't available on PC or consoles. And finally, it is also the case that in the next five years there will be games that millions of people will say you absolutely must play and that they want to play this specific game that released a few days ago. However, the other side of this story is that currently, absolutely no one cares that they cannot play these upcoming games right now.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      nothanks earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      B2Proxy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      MadMung0 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      jefred earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Apprentice
      JoeyNeo went up a rank
      Apprentice
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      486
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      232
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      79
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      68
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      58
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!