Safari 3.0.4 Beta

[giga Veteran]

For single window mode, i use Saft. SafariStand does it as well too.

Would be nice if they included it by default though.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

I just use middle click on my mouse, and I end up doing the same in Firefox (since some windows i want to open in the background instead of replacing the current tab), but I'd like to be able to avoid multiple windows unless I specifically open it.

And I'm talking about this port (or "sub-port") http://www.atoker.com/blog/2008/02/10/webk...-cairo-support/

[Thaumbody]

I just use middle click on my mouse, and I end up doing the same in Firefox (since some windows i want to open in the background instead of replacing the current tab), but I'd like to be able to avoid multiple windows unless I specifically open it.

And I'm talking about this port (or "sub-port") http://www.atoker.com/blog/2008/02/10/webk...-cairo-support/

Well, my laptop doesn't have other than an emulated middle click, and I dug up that cairo with windows subport. Now if they can just get it out the door for us. I also learned about the epiphany webkit project and the various other webkit on Linux and devices that are out there. I love search engines.

[Calum Veteran]

Safari needs to look native in Windows, or else it will never take off.

I agree that it needs to look more native to Windows, just like iTunes needs to. However, I don't agree that it needs to look more like that in order to take off because iTunes took off and that doesn't look native to Windows...

If they aren't going to make iTunes or Safari native to Windows then they should at least make them consistent with each other on the Windows platform and put the same Close, Maximize and Minimize buttons on Safari which they have in iTunes.

[jazzyfan]

Thanks for explaining what you couldn't stand about it...

It was really slow (when it worked).

I think that says enough. And I have cable internet.

[Quillz]

i heard 3.1 is coming out soon

Yes, it is, at least on the Mac platform. Not sure if they are planning a simultaneous release on the Windows platform.

Am I the only one who loved the way the fonts looked on the Windows Safari?? :s

Not at all, I think Safari has great font rendering. It looks good on Windows, although its actual methods of rendering were borrowed from OS X's Quartz technology. It looks as good as ClearType does on Vista, I think.

I tried Safari 3.0.4 and went back to Firefox in 20 minutes. Couldn't stand it.

That's a new record.

I agree, Safari doesn't belong on Windows, it's just not "there." It really sticks out, just like Firefox 2 does on OS X.

Safari needs to look native in Windows, or else it will never take off.

Agreed. Between Safari and iTunes, Apple seems far too concerned with the aesthetics of the software itself, and not how it integrates into the rest of the platform. One of the reasons people are drawn to OS X is not because it looks beautiful, but because everything works together. Safari for Windows (as well as iTunes), does not. And I doubt this will change because it would go against Apple's (smug?) image.

[ObiWanToby]

Coding Horror put it better, Non-Native UI sucks.

[iwod]

May be Safari on Windows Aren't that great. But i dont think anyone could deny Webkit is a good Engine.

Once GTK Port and Cario Works out then we may see an Native Look on Windows.

I really hope webkit takes off. It is about time we steal more market from IE.

[ViperAFK]

Yes, it is, at least on the Mac platform. Not sure if they are planning a simultaneous release on the Windows platform.

Not at all, I think Safari has great font rendering. It looks good on Windows, although its actual methods of rendering were borrowed from OS X's Quartz technology. It looks as good as ClearType does on Vista, I think.

I agree, Safari doesn't belong on Windows, it's just not "there." It really sticks out, just like Firefox 2 does on OS X.

Agreed. Between Safari and iTunes, Apple seems far too concerned with the aesthetics of the software itself, and not how it integrates into the rest of the platform. One of the reasons people are drawn to OS X is not because it looks beautiful, but because everything works together. Safari for Windows (as well as iTunes), does not. And I doubt this will change because it would go against Apple's (smug?) image.

I think firefox looks hella lot more integrated in OSX than Safari does on windows. At least it tries to have a somewhat osx-like look. Safari looks ridiculously out of place in windows and so does itunes.

[tsupersonic]

Safari, imo, is a terrible browser (on Windows).

It hogs more memory than I've seen any other browser. It loads pages slower than Opera, the interface is not for me, the font rendering is crap. Also, certain pages don't work right or look right. Did I mention the fact that it's a huge memory (Virtual memory too) hog?

God damn, Apple software on Windows is MAJOR FAIL.

[BlueFiberOptics]

I will agree that Apple software ported to Windows is absolutely terrible. (iTunes, Quicktime, Safari, QUICKTIME)

However, I will say I like the ability to run Safari and render websites how they would look in OS X. The font rendering looks a lot nicer depending on what I'm viewing.

[DigitalE]

In my opinion, the font smoothing in Safari looks blurry and much harder to read.

[Rappy Veteran]

Am I the only one who loved the way the fonts looked on the Windows Safari?? :s

No I loved the way it displays the web pages but I think the memory is the only let down otherwise I would use it all the time.

[jazzyfan]

I liked the way Safari looked, but it was so slow. It just took 10 seconds to do what Firefox did in 2. And then sometimes you might get that "web page can't load" thingy.

[jazzyfan]

I tried it again last night but didn't keep it since it was in beta. I actually liked it this time around and will definitely give it another shot when it's finalized. :)

Sorry for the double post, I didn't see an edit button on the first.

[XX55XX]

Safari's non-native UI didn't really bother me too much. In fact, it looked quite refreshing (despite the dull shade of grey that was all over the place). But however, like others said, it used too much memory for its own good, the fuzzy font rendering looked terrible in my eyes, and it used twice the disk space of Firefox.

And it lacks one crucial thing that Firefox has: PLUGINS!

I tried Safari 3.0.4 and went back to Firefox in 20 minutes. Couldn't stand it.

That's a new record.

Same here, brother, same here.

[Thaumbody]

Gee, I'm liking Safari for Windows, a lot.

Sure it does not have the plug-in extensibility of FF, and it could do with the ability to change the HSV of the various widgets, and the bookmarks manager lacks some right click facility. However, I like it, and I like using it. The Find features are nice, the grammar checking, etc.

The only issue right now is that the 3.1 beta cannot log into Neowin so I will have to back up and go with 3.0.4. Which is no real problem, as I don't have to be bleeding edge.

[Wakers]

Safari is pointless on Windows until they fix the damn memory usage. My system has 2gb of ram under Windows XP, after Safari has been open for 10 minutes its using 10% of my memory alone. It can use up to 500mb on its own, which is ridiculous. Not a problem, unless you're like many people that have a web browser open in the background while they do other stuff.

Its just not usable, no matter how fast it is.

[Thaumbody]

Safari is pointless on Windows until they fix the damn memory usage. My system has 2gb of ram under Windows XP, after Safari has been open for 10 minutes its using 10% of my memory alone. It can use up to 500mb on its own, which is ridiculous. Not a problem, unless you're like many people that have a web browser open in the background while they do other stuff.

Its just not usable, no matter how fast it is.

Where have I heard this complaint before?

Oh, I know against Phoenix, now Firefox for years now. I'm betting others have heard it against Opera.

On my computer, Firefox 2.0.x through 3.0.b4 have had huge memory footprints, as has Opera. And yes, sometimes Safari will eat up to 70 MB with several tabs, but so has Firefox. And looking at them both via Task Manager, I note that Safari seems to release ram when minimized by default, unlike Firefox.

But then both 3.0 versions, whether Firefox or Safari are in beta and issues like that must be expected.

[Rappy Veteran]

Safari is pointless on Windows until they fix the damn memory usage. My system has 2gb of ram under Windows XP, after Safari has been open for 10 minutes its using 10% of my memory alone. It can use up to 500mb on its own, which is ridiculous. Not a problem, unless you're like many people that have a web browser open in the background while they do other stuff.

Its just not usable, no matter how fast it is.

The other night I noticed for the first time my Firefox was at 200mb but that was open for like 6 hours so not bad.

[JohnBfromMemphis]

Skip 3.04 and try out the latest webkit. Fastest browser ever.

http://nightly.webkit.org/

How are you even supposed to even get the safari nightly builds to run? I was expecting a full safari build in there. Do I need to install Safari first? This is weird. Thanks.

<edit> Yeah had to install Safari first..figured it out.</edit>