What is Digg?434 Comments
- M0b1u5, on 10/21/2007, -60/+334My thoughts exactly. Especially as the behaviours under windows is very reminiscent of Firefox 0.6 (or thereabouts) - it's a buggy, feature-poor, memory hog with a pretty skin - but she's all ugly underneath: very little customisation possible, lame tab behaviour, poor usability, crap bookmark importing... The list goes on.
But, if Apple keep coding for a solid 18 months or so, and take a leaf out of Firefox's play manual, then there is hope for this useless lump of bloated super-model yet.
Let's see what the next 18 months brings before we pass final judgement. - daleeburg, on 10/11/2007, -12/+237the only good reason to get it is if you are a web designer that cares about how the site looks on other browsers.
oh yeah, and that pron thing... - isewise, on 10/21/2007, -10/+224The word "Beta" has lost its meaning today. "Beta" is just as equal to "New" nowadays.
- LordMalak, on 10/11/2007, -29/+181As a web developer, this is a dream come true. Now I don't have to buy a Mac along with my PC.
- Obsession88, on 10/21/2007, -20/+140Maybe I just don't get it. It's a beta, but everyone is having a fit that it doesn't "work right." Isn't the point of a beta to fix what doesn't work right, make thinks better, ect?
- Raian, on 10/11/2007, -23/+135I really don't get why people hate Safari so much.
In the past, Safari has been more Standards Compliant than FireFox-- Safari is also pretty fast.
The interface is simple and sleek.
The only reason not to use Safari is it's lack of add-ons/extensions. I for one do not use any FF Extensions-- so using Safari is a no brainer.
And I want to say forget that damn Memory hog debate-- Safari uses memory when available-- just like FireFox does... It's a ridiculous debate, especially in the year 2007.
The browser flame wars have been re-ignited. - craftyshrew, on 10/11/2007, -24/+133I keep coming across forums talking about how all Mac users use Safari, then I open it up and see if I'm missing something by being an avid Firefox user. Seems to me the only thing I'm missing are shiny Cocoa buttons.
Safari and .Mac are the only Mac products I don't use as there are far better options out there. - JackBandit, on 10/11/2007, -35/+105wait...am i the only one that mainly uses Opera?
- joeroot1, on 10/11/2007, -13/+78based upon the nightly releases of webkit for mac, i would say that safari has a very bright future. webkit renders the web extremely well, and thus requires no hacks on the part of web designers, which will benefit the end user, and its open source, so has constant input from developers.
people are complaining about a lack of plug-ins in safari, which is a fair point, however as i've never really used plugins for firefox to any great extent i can;t really identify with that problem.
you should also remember this is beta, its by no means the finished product. give it a year or so, and i'm sure it will be running perfectly smoothly. - Taomyn, on 10/21/2007, -4/+65Traditionally beta is supposed mean the features are set in stone, leaving just the bugs to squash. These days most betas seem to be alpha versions with coders adding new features as well just to add to the problems.
- elvenseven, on 10/11/2007, -55/+110I'm one of them. Thanks to Apple I don't have to buy their overpriced PCs to test websites I develop.
- Taomyn, on 10/11/2007, -7/+62Why when you can run Firefox on Windows and then continue running it on OSX? Lame excuse.
- invader, on 10/21/2007, -7/+58I wish FF would render text as well as Safari. That's the only motivation I would have for switching.
However, I'm locked into FF because of the extensions I use regularly and have grown to rely on. - libertao, on 10/11/2007, -29/+76@vertov
If you don't want the bloat of FF, the next choice is Opera, not Safari or IE7 - TheCount, on 10/11/2007, -3/+48"I have already stopped using IE since yesterday. the time it saves me in rendering all thos pages is invaluable."
Well no crap you love Safari, you've been using IE! Let me ask you then, why would you wait for Safari to abandon IE, when Firefox and Opera have been out (and great) for so long. - takitus, on 10/11/2007, -20/+62you cant even resize the window from anywhere except the bottom right corner... who in their right mind wants that? i am still suprised that to this day mac hasnt addressed this major oversight.
- rudy23, on 10/11/2007, -74/+1111. Pages load much faster that IE or FF
2. The interface is way cooler, especially form fields with the blue highlights.
3. Privacy mode is amazing
4. its just a beta and bound to get better.
I have already stopped using IE since yesterday. the time it saves me in rendering all thos pages is invaluable. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -10/+45I used it for a while but i felt absolutely NAKED without adblock, noscript and cookiesafe running. I swear that when I don't use those ad-ons I feel like I'm having sex with a skanky prostitute without a condom.
- breaker01, on 10/11/2007, -21/+52I gave it a try, and was not very impressed.
It wasn't horrible by any means, but not great either. - Rayfound, on 10/11/2007, -17/+48I really don't understand why one would use this either. Apple software for Windows sucks. It always runs slow and is a resource hog. Quicktime and iTunes are both crap. I mean, don't get me wrong, I use itunes because I think its a good UI for what it does, but its terribly slow, and uses a lot more resources than even WMP (which sucks for interface).
I just can't see a reason for this browser coming to windows... I am sure in a bout 36 hours after iphone launch, someone will write a FF extension for it. - chuckstep, on 10/11/2007, -18/+46Dell Inspiron e1405 14.1"
2GHz Core 2 Duo T7200
2GB 667 RAM
120GB HD
8x DVD Burner
3 Year Warranty
$1997.64
Apple MacBook 13.3"
2.16GHz Core 2 Duo T7400 (Unavailable on the Dell)
2GB 667 RAM
120GB HD
8x DVD Burner
3 Year Apple Care Warranty
$1723.00
I'm sick of all you idiots saying that Apple is more expensive. It is more than $200 cheaper and you get a faster processor. You sir, are an idiot. - loconet, on 10/21/2007, -4/+31Listen, that whole Jobs spill about him wanting Safari to gain market share is BS. Safari would need an incredible market share gain for Apple to see any benefit. It's just not realistic. The main reason Safari was released on Windows was to allow developers to test their web applications on it when developing for the IPhone. Big part of IPhone' success depends on applications being developed for it and Apple know it. They also know they don't want to open it up for non-web apps (yet?). So what do they need to do? Open up the platform, Safari, where these apps will be running to the biggest desktop market - Windows where the majority of developers play. Any gain in Safari market share is just a bonus.
- Taomyn, on 10/11/2007, -5/+30What OS are you using? On XP switching on ClearType causes FF to render like IE7 and under Vista, ClearType is on by default. However, what people forget to do is visit the Microsoft ClearType tuning page and fine tune it to their liking and display.
- kryx2, on 10/11/2007, -0/+25@michaelzhao
Wow that totally went over your head. - totallyAMAZING, on 10/11/2007, -12/+37They wouldn't, and they'd probably stop using Firefox too now that's it's also partying in Bloatville.
Opera is still the leanest and fastest browser around, not open source, but if you're considering Safari you don't care anyway. - djrtitan, on 10/11/2007, -4/+29The only worthwhile use I have of Safari is to test websites in it. Besides that it's useless to me.
- meshman, on 10/11/2007, -5/+30Aren't beta's supposed to be offered to a very limited audience prior to release? They used to be. These days, beta means 'release to the general public' for some reason. It used to be the former because if you're a responsible developer, you don't unleash an untested and buggy product to the general public because they'll think it sucks.
- DreKor, on 10/11/2007, -2/+24I think we have Google to thank for changing the public's perception of a beta. Most of their products are released as "betas" when they're really just ongoing projects where features are continually added, removed, or tweaked. So people have come to expect a dynamic finished product when they see something is listed as a beta.
- totorototoro, on 10/11/2007, -10/+30Dude, you are embarrassing yourself.
- detrate, on 10/11/2007, -0/+20web developers
- Charlotte_Web, on 10/11/2007, -7/+23Dropping IE for Safari (or any other browser, really) is a no-brainer. The security benefits, alone, are worth the switch.
Dropping Firefox for Safari is a little tougher, particularly if you're a power user. The extensibility of Firefox really sets it apart. I've got over a dozen add-ons installed, including Greasemonkey, Google Toolbar, Forecastfox, and Web Developer Toolbar.
Yeah, I'm pretty much locked in to Firefox. - MikeonTV, on 10/11/2007, -3/+19We already have a good reason for using Safari on a PC
http://digg.com/apple/Safari_Browser_The_Ultimate_Porn_Browser - imikedaman, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18Yes, the point of a beta is that it isn't completely bug-free, but for some reason Apple fans *slammed* the Internet Explorer 7 beta for being a bit buggy. It's actually comforting seeing people not have double standards on here.
In a perfect world I'd prefer that people didn't slam either app for the same reasons you mentioned, but hey I'll take what I can get. - FearlessFreep, on 10/21/2007, -6/+22Buried as "idiot"
Safari is not for general purpose use; Apple is not trying to supplant IE or FF as the day to day browser for everyday use. The whole purpose for this is to support development on Windows of apps for the iPhone, since the iPhone uses Safari for apps. - awormus, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15side by side comparison
http://www.wormus.com/aaron/stories/2007/06/12/safari-text-rendering-on-windows.html
IE and FF look WAY better under Vista - Sultana, on 10/11/2007, -4/+17Been playing with Safari all morning at work. I need it because I have to test certain parts of our company's website, and also if someone calls in with a problem, I'll at least have an idea how it works.
But, I kind of like it. The fonts look beautiful in it, it seems quite snappy, I haven't run into any problems with it anywhere yet...the only annoying thing is being able to resize it only in the bottom right hand corner, and no extensions like Firefox. I won't be switching on a permanent basis anytime soon, thoughI love AdBlock, the ebay toolbar, and the google toolbar...can't live without 'em...and ForecastFox as well. - prammy, on 10/11/2007, -6/+18huh? I have used Cleartype and Safari on OS X and I still like cleartype better. Safari's text is a bit too blurry. The cleartype tuning page makes Windows's font smoothing much better based on your display.
- bmartin, on 10/11/2007, -14/+25"Can you think beyond a web browser? I believe Safari on PC is meant to be transitional."
Yeah, because now that many people use Firefox and Gaim, Linux has about 30% market share. - chris9902, on 10/11/2007, -12/+23IE7 is good. It's only taken 36mb of RAM at the moment. Firefox is taken 168mb and it's doing less. (safari is taken 115mb just being open?)
- kinesis8, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13@ takitus
I had to think about this for a moment, but you're right about it being an oversight. As someone who uses both PCs and Macs, I noticed that users of the two OSes place their windows on their desktops differently. When I use my PC, I tend to keep my application windows at the middle of the screen with free space all around. On a Mac, you're basically forced (for lack of a better term) to keep your window in contact with the top of the screen and adjacent to the menubar. As a long time PC user, it took me a awhile to get used to this, but I have come to prefer this method overall.
Basically for Mac users, it's perfectly fine to have the window resizing at the bottom right, but on a PC, it is a mistake. Apple should cater to how PC users handle their windows especially if it is their intention to grow their market share. - sagefool1975, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11People seem to be forgetting that this is a new version of Safari (not the old yawner that everyone tries to not use), if you have used the nightly builds at all in the past you would know it really is very fast. I'll give it another shot as firefox has taken to crapping on itself and either dying a slow death by memory leak or just killing itself ever day or so which is getting super frustrating.
- stoppedcode12, on 10/11/2007, -6/+163.) It's better at running flash (much faster than FF or IE)
4.) It loads digg pages much faster than anything else
5.) It has unique features like resizing text boxes, nice find feature, and the return to search results button - cronot, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12@M0b1u5 & the story submitter: Many others have pointed it out, but here it goes again...
One word: iPhone.
Do some research or at least think a little before posting/ranting. Safari for Windows was never meant to cater to the average user - it makes no business sense for Apple to allocate workforce to the development (however subpar it may be) of an application in an already well estabilished market. Safari is meant to be useful only to third-party iPhone developers on Windows, as a development/testing framework. - ScrabbyDoo, on 10/11/2007, -8/+18I'll use safari on windows. For 2 reasons:
1) It's awesome fast. Ram is a non-issue, it releases when needed.
2) Activity window tool. Very useful for doing dodgy things. - Herolint, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9@arbulus
It is when a programmer allocates memory in some piece of code and forgets to release it when that code has finished running. Every time that code is called, new memory is allocated in the system, but none is ever released, so the application takes up more and more memory the longer it runs. - TheSeraph, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9..however firefox is running 18 add-ons at 76,600k of memory, and safari has no add-ons and is using 47,340k.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -5/+13yeah ben, you're right.
you know, i find it really hard to justify spending 10 bucks on a 12-in-1 card reader....... - baalzebub, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9an even better question would be who would use windows to run safari ;p
- KyleGoetz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9evilTak is the only one who is not a failure in this subthread. The character typed is not, I repeat not, beta.
A beta has a longer tail: β, as in βετα ("beta").
The character typed is ß (esset), the German letter which is basically a double "s" sound as in weiß ("weiss", German for "white"). You can see that esset is wider than beta, and esset does not close up a full loop like a B or beta does.
So all of you modding him down are displaying one thing: you clearly don't know what the ***** beta looks like, but want to pretend you do. -
Show 51 - 100 of 430 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is