StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Monday, June 11 2007, 10 AM PST (UTC-8 )

Live feeds:

• MacDailyNews
• MaCNN
• Gizmondo
• Tech Digest
• Sitening
• Engadget
• MacRumours
• Apple Gazette
• SlashGear


Expected Announcements

• OS X Leopard
• iPhone
• Apple TV - YouTube integration


Rumours

• New iMac
• New Mac Mini
• New iLife/iWork apps

John Carmack on stage.

Apple got a Start button. How amusing.

I like the new Finder, it finally looks to incorporate some of XP/Vista's more advanced features. Bravo and it's about damn time.

Well well, Apple store is being updated. Who wants to be we have a product announcement forthcoming?

The Kernel wrote:I like the new Finder, it finally looks to incorporate some of XP/Vista's more advanced features. Bravo and it's about damn time.

Can we wait till page 2 before making joke posts?

Xisiqomelir wrote:

The Kernel wrote:I like the new Finder, it finally looks to incorporate some of XP/Vista's more advanced features. Bravo and it's about damn time.

Can we wait till page 2 before making joke posts?

Oh yes I forgot, the world's largest operating system manufacturer has no original ideas of their own. My mistake.

Safari for Windows, why?

The Mozilla foundation already does "better than IE".

WAP is their big third party dev support on the iPhone? What a bunch of horseshit.

So, can one of you intrepid adventurers download the Windows Safari and tell us how it is?

I, obviously, have no access to any platform for testing it.

EA into OSX gaming? Sounds good to me, might take down my barrier to changing platforms.

However, so far I agree with Kernel, they're finnaly taking some good ideas from Vista.

Dear OSX:

The PC gaming community hereby apologizes for the unrestricted exporting of EA-contaminated software and marketting materials to Apple territory. We extend our deepest condolences, along with an offer of recovery assistance and counseling.

Good luck,
PC Gamers.

Hah, I'm awaiting Rthurmont to come in and blab about how inconsistent OSX GUI is. Whee, new 'consistency'.

No but I will say that I'm literally laughing at the idea of Safari on Windows. Safari is arguably the most pathetic browser in existence by virtue of the fact that's just Konqueror, albeit broken so that it wastes system resources with impunity. The thought of it on Windows really cracks me up...as if Windows users didn't have enough to worry about.

Xisiqomelir wrote:So, can one of you intrepid adventurers download the Windows Safari and tell us how it is?

I, obviously, have no access to any platform for testing it.

It's pretty fast but is horribly inconsistent with the Windows UI paradigm. The font smoothing technique also throws me off since it's using its own engine.

RThurmont wrote:No but I will say that I'm literally laughing at the idea of Safari on Windows. Safari is arguably the most pathetic browser in existence by virtue of the fact that's just Konqueror, albeit broken so that it wastes system resources with impunity. The thought of it on Windows really cracks me up...as if Windows users didn't have enough to worry about.

phongn wrote: It's pretty fast but is horribly inconsistent with the Windows UI paradigm.

Yeah, but so is iTunes.

By my standards, This Safari beta is a piece of shit.

• Backspace doesn't go back, unlike every other browser.
• Middle mouse button doesn't do anything. Unlike Opera and Firefox, I can't open and close tabs with the middle button. No mouse gestures or auto-scrolling.
• RAM Usage. Jesus Christ, it's almost as bad as Firefox. However, this is a beta, hopefully it will be fixed in the final version.
• The font-smoothing that it uses makes the text look like ass.

With that said. Safari's HTML/CSS handling is fast as fuck-all, and it does work with Gmail and other web apps that don't play nice with Opera. The browser itself is decent, only the UI has lots of small little quirks that add up to being a collossal pain in the ass.

However, for the purposes of testing websites to see how they would look on a Mac, or iPhone, this Safari beta is perfect.

On OS X, Safari is worse than Firefox in terms of RAM usage. I really don't care, as I use Opera, which totally pwns Safari on any platform. I have zero intention of installing Safari on my Windows box...the use of it strikes me as the worst of both worlds.

The Kernel wrote:

phongn wrote: It's pretty fast but is horribly inconsistent with the Windows UI paradigm.

Yeah, but so is iTunes.

Some of us choose not to use iTunes.

The Kernel wrote:

phongn wrote: It's pretty fast but is horribly inconsistent with the Windows UI paradigm.

Yeah, but so is iTunes.

Yes, and that also annoys me ... but it works so well for me that I don't complain

RThurmont wrote:No but I will say that I'm literally laughing at the idea of Safari on Windows.

Really? Because it's a pretty remarkable achievement. I just learned about Windows Safari today, but I'm betting that a significant portion of the CoreFoundation and Objective-C runtimes came over to Windows to get it working. It's not YellowBox, but between Safari and iTunes, they're getting pretty damn close.

Safari is arguably the most pathetic browser in existence by virtue of the fact that's just Konqueror, albeit broken so that it wastes system resources with impunity.

Incredibly enough, you've actually managed to voice a legitimate complaint, rather than your usual, uninformed crap.

Download the new Safari beta and try it. I've been using it for two months now, and it's a gigantic improvement over the current release, especially with respect to memory management. (Then again, since on Windows, it has to bring in an entire runtime, it might still be a hog relative to other applications.) Once you post to forums with resizable text boxes, you'll wonder how you lived without them.

And no, Safari is not "just Konqueror" any more than Firefox is "just Mozilla". WebKit is an Objective-C wrapper around KHTML that eliminates some Qt dependencies. Safari is a Cocoa application that uses WebKit to display web pages. And the KHTML people are pretty happy with the WebKit team's contributions back to their codebase.

By the way, you can change the font smoothing technique in the Appearance preference, or so I've been told. I don't know why they ported over the CoreGraphics stuff responsible for Quartz smoothing, but I'm betting it has to do with keeping consistent behavior with respect to font spacing and kerning. And of course, the most obvious reason is for iPhone "development".

Download the new Safari beta and try it

No thanks, I think I'll pass. If I wanted to open up a lot of security vulnerabilities and massively degrade system performance on one of my Windows boxes, I'd just download Kazaa or some other random bit of malware instead-the same result, accomplished with greater efficiency.

To be fair, Safari is beta, but still, my opinion of it remains the same.

RThurmont wrote:

Download the new Safari beta and try it

No thanks, I think I'll pass. If I wanted to open up a lot of security vulnerabilities and massively degrade system performance on one of my Windows boxes, I'd just download Kazaa or some other random bit of malware instead-the same result, accomplished with greater efficiency.

To be fair, Safari is beta, but still, my opinion of it remains the same.

So David Maynor, the disgraced researcher who couldn't demonstrate a vulnerability he made untold amounts of noise about, is now getting more press by claiming he's found six new vulnerabilities in Safari through "idle fuzzing". And conveniently, he doesn't report these vulnerabilities to Apple.

Maynor is a hack publicity whore with zero credibility.

To give an example of Safari's memory usage, I have opera open right now with 5 tabs running using 44 MB of memory. Safari has only one tab open to xkcd and is using 56 MB of RAM on this machine.

Another small annoyance with Safari is the fact that it doesn't seem to display alt or title text.

i don't think that Safari is a bad browser, just that it's not the browser that best fits my needs.

Edit: I'm not surprised that a public beta has bugs in it, to be honest. Also that vulnerablity you posted requires Firefox to be installed as well as Safari. So forgive me if I don't see that as an exclusively Safari problem.

I'm a bit disappointed. While the Web 2.0 + Ajax stuff is better than nothing, it's not much better than nothing. I want apps I can use OFFLINE PLEASE. I want commercially distributable apps, and that's not going to happen when anyone can type in a URL and pull it up. I want apps that fully utilize the hardware. I want multitouch GAMES. I want multitouch art programs.

Ugh.

As for Leopard; everything they showed was ridiculously awesome. Why disappointment? 7 out of the 10 new features are things they showed last year! What happened to top secret features? Oh, the new Finder?

Xisiqomelir wrote:Safari for Windows, why?

The Mozilla foundation already does "better than IE".

It'll make it easier for devs to test websites for multiple browsers without buying additional hardware, at least.

RThurmont; I don't know what you're talking about, as on my machine Safari launches faster, and RAM usage is much better than FireFox. I'm not sure which loads pages faster.

I prefer FireFox due to consistency between my computers, though. And Middle-click autoscrolling, which Safari lacks. And extensions simply rule.

Middle mouse button doesn't do anything. Unlike Opera and Firefox, I can't open and close tabs with the middle button. No mouse gestures or auto-scrolling.

I've installed the Windows version of Safari 3 Beta in a VM. It sucks terribly, every third page or so gives me an error and I have to hit refresh. It lacks the autoscrolling, but it DOES allow me to open and close tabs with the middle button.

I prefer how Safari handles RSS compared to FireFox and I prefer how fast Safari is, but overall FireFox still wins. Still, if Safari becomes MUCH more stable after the beta, it has a chance to retake my support. But it'll have to be ridiculously awesome.


The Windows version of Safari currently sucks, but it is a beta. I'll install the Mac version next.