Safari 3.1 Final

[revvo]

I start up Safari and it's around 25MB. I start any webpage, lets say Google and it jumps to over 40MB. The following pages don't increase it that much though but then it hits 60's, and continues slowly.

I guess that's the price to pay for making it a quick browser? It does start almost instantly, faster than FF2 (cant say for FF3) or IE7 and rendering's also quick.

Of course, because of extensions and customizability, I won't see myself move away from Firefox.

[Rappy Veteran]

What I did was to download the webkit nightly then go to the safari folder and replace all dll's with the new webkit, works like a charm! (Y)

I tried to install the webkit following the guidelines and it crashed my browser so I won't be trying that again :laugh:

[what]

Well, it's about 40MB less than it used to be :p I can't say I really notice it though tbh. As you can see in that screenshot I still have a GB of RAM spare.

[Randolph]

Well, it's about 40MB less than it used to be :p I can't say I really notice it though tbh. As you can see in that screenshot I still have a GB of RAM spare.

LOL wow. It was using 300mb for me with 3 tabs (Myspace) open and ALOT of browsing was going on.

[Neoauld]

what an UGLY browser

i pity mac users

fonts look bad in it

and whats with the address bar not having a pulldown menu, i NEED that pulldown menu

[Randolph]

I really wish they would put this into Safari build sometime soon so I can switch from FF3! (Y)

Just waiting for them to hit that 100/100 on Acid 3 test. ;)

[Marcel T]

I'm sure it's been said more than once here, performance wise Safari's pretty kick ass but the UI is so awkward and it's quite feature-less otherwise. Firefox > Opera > Safari for me sorry, but I'll always have a Safari (as well as an Opera) install handy and definitely appreciate the rendering and performance from both Safari and Opera over Firefox, it's just the interface, usability and versatility in the end that puts Firefox on top.

[Guest]

Do I have to run webkit seperate from Safari, or is there a way to combine the two?

[crazzyyfool]

what an UGLY browser

i pity mac users

fonts look bad in it

and whats with the address bar not having a pulldown menu, i NEED that pulldown menu

Safari looks better on Mac. The rendering of fonts is personal choice. What looks bad to you may look great to someone else.

[Neoauld]

Safari looks better on Mac. The rendering of fonts is personal choice. What looks bad to you may look great to someone else.

i dont think it looks the same on PC as it does on mac

my bf has a mac, and his safari isnt as ugly

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

The only difference between the PC and Mac versions are the min/max/close buttons, on a mac they're on the other side of the window (and they're the round versions).

[Julius Caro]

Running the SunSpider Benchmark I get the following results:

• Safari 3.1 final: Total: 6403.8ms +/- 3.7%
  
• WebKit nightly: Total: 3558.6ms +/- 0.3%
  
• Firefox 3.0b5pre: Total: 3520.0ms +/- 0.5%
  

Benchmarked on iMac 20", 2.0 GHz Core2Duo, 2 GB RAM.

Safari for windows suddenly became something to keep an eye on!

[crazzyyfool]

The only difference between the PC and Mac versions are the min/max/close buttons, on a mac they're on the other side of the window (and they're the round versions).

The GUI feels faster on a Mac. Also on Mac you don't get the menu bar on the actual Safari window so it looks cleaner.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Yeah, that's because on OS X it's all pretty native, but on Windows it's all custom.

And I didn't mention the titlebar as that's pretty obvious (IMO)

[Beastage]

Running the SunSpider Benchmark I get the following results:

• Safari 3.1 final: Total: 6403.8ms +/- 3.7%
  
• WebKit nightly: Total: 3558.6ms +/- 0.3%
  
• Firefox 3.0b5pre: Total: 3520.0ms +/- 0.5%
  

Benchmarked on iMac 20", 2.0 GHz Core2Duo, 2 GB RAM.

PC, Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600

Safari 3.1 with latest WebKit-r31156 , ~2800ms

Firefox 3.0b5pre latest 19.3.2008 nightly , ~2500ms

[Scorbing]

Experience the web, Apple style, with Safari: the fastest, easiest-to-use web browser in the world. With its simple, elegant interface, Safari gets out of your way and lets you enjoy the web, up to 2 times faster than Internet Explorer. The fastest web browser on any platform, Safari loads pages up to 2 times faster than Internet Explorer 7 and up to 1.6 times faster than Firefox 2. And it executes JavaScript up to 2.8 times faster than Internet Explorer 7 and up to 1.6 times faster than Firefox 2. What does all that mean for you? Less time loading pages and more time enjoying them.

Download: Safari 3.1 Final | Windows XP/Vista ONLY (Freeware, 18.62MB)

Download: Safari - All Downloads (Thanks simmorya)

Download: Webkit - Nightly Builds (Open Source)

Link: Home Page | Acid3 Test

Notice how they don't say its faster than Opera. Nothing can beat Opera as far as rendering speed.

[DreadBoat89]

Notice how they don't say its faster than Opera. Nothing can beat Opera as far as rendering speed.

well thats a big possiblity i agree with you, but its also possible that apple intentionally ignores opera.

[crazzyyfool]

Or Apple just discounted Opera based on market share. As Opera's market share is smaller than Safari's they just went with the 3 top market leaders.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers

[Julius Caro]

what am I supposed to do with the webkit zip (on windows)? I ran the run-nightly-webkit thing and it did run it but I want something more permanent?

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Notice how they don't say its faster than Opera. Nothing can beat Opera as far as rendering speed.

If you look at the Safari page, they do include it in the bar graphs, but they don't mention it in the text.

[crazzyyfool]

They do mention Opera in the text on the graph page.

[tiagosilva29]

Yeah, that's because on OS X it's all pretty native, but on Windows it's all custom.

The Windows version is made with Visual Basic. At least that's what sometimes it says, when it crashes. (Haven't seen it yet, but someone told me.)

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

They do mention Opera in the text on the graph page.

...

Seems Apple serve up a different page for PC vs. Mac, on the PC page it's got IE7 in the graph, and no mention of Opera.

The Windows version is made with Visual Basic. At least that's what sometimes it says, when it crashes. (Haven't seen it yet, but someone told me.)

Odd, would have to be VB6 (since it doesn't need the .NET framework)

That's if it's actually true though.

[Julius Caro]

PC, Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600

Safari 3.1 with latest WebKit-r31156 , ~2800ms

Firefox 3.0b5pre latest 19.3.2008 nightly , ~2500ms

safari 3.1 without webkit ... 4682ms

safari 3.1 + webkit ... 4319 ms

opera 9.26.... 9452 ms

firefox 3.0b4 .... 4334 ms

firefox 3.0b5pre.... 3764.6

brb :p

why is your q6600 performing a lot faster than mine? lol

Edited March 20, 2008 by Julius Caro

[rdf8585]

I'd like to use it, but any browser that eats up 512 MB/1 GB of RAM after an hour (1-3 tabs) has serious flaws. RAM usage has always been Safari's problem.

Firefox 2 rarely tops 150 MB for me and FF 3 is supposed to manage RAM even better.