PDA

View Full Version : Safari Beta on Windows

Arwin
13-Jun-2007, 08:39
Supposedly the fastest browser, but all it did fastest so far was crash. How about you guys, tried it yet?
Skrying
13-Jun-2007, 08:50
Why should I? I think there was a Mac spoof that was along the line of Mac's have boot camp because their users want Windows programs, but Windows users could care less about Mac programs. From what I've read its not very positive, crashing, first day security issues (with a claim of safe from day one no less), etc. Opera or Firefox... there's a reason a lot of Mac users themselves don't use Safari.
AlexV
13-Jun-2007, 09:00
It`s horrible. Couldn`t get it to work under Vista X64, some interface problems or something. It feels like it`s a pre-alpha. And it has a number of security vulnerabilities from what I`ve read.
[maven]
13-Jun-2007, 09:56
It's alpha software at the most (on Windows that is). The Mac beta deserves the actual beta moniker. Steer well clear for now...
There's an interesting post about the different approaches to font rendering (http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/06/12.html) that Microsoft and Apple employ.

That said, I still prefer Safari (with Saft) on Mac OS to the alternatives (Firefox, Camino, OmniWeb, Opera); on Windows I'll stick to Firefox for the foreseeable future.
Richard
13-Jun-2007, 10:48
The installation crashes for me with an error complaining about corrupt installation files. Downloaded from four separate websites, same problem. :roll:
Arwin
13-Jun-2007, 11:24
The installation crashes for me with an error complaining about corrupt installation files. Downloaded from four separate websites, same problem. :roll:

I at least got as far as seeing this forum, but then while I was logging in it crashed.

The font rendering, yeah, that's the first thing I noticed. It could be good (i.e. like Adobe), but right now the fonts looked a bit too thick. Opera stays my favorite for now - fastest and has all the features I need out of the box.
archie4oz
13-Jun-2007, 15:19
Worked like a charm for me on XP, no crashes, no install problems, nothing. Snappy and fast as well. Ironically I've had more issues with it on OS X than I have on Windows (mainly with other apps that leverage webkit)...
archie4oz
13-Jun-2007, 15:20
I at least got as far as seeing this forum, but then while I was logging in it crashed.

The font rendering, yeah, that's the first thing I noticed. It could be good (i.e. like Adobe), but right now the fonts looked a bit too thick. Opera stays my favorite for now - fastest and has all the features I need out of the box.

You need to set the font-smoothing down a notch, then it'll be fine, at least on a CRT...
DemoCoder
20-Jun-2007, 12:05
the JavaScript/CSS handling is way faster than Firefox and IE, and the WebKit renderer is the closest you'll get to W3C standards, beating Firefox on the ACID2 test for example (IE is a joke, so no relevent. If CSS2 is DirectX9, then WebKit's a R300, Firefox is an NV3x, and IE is a Intel gfx chipset)
Arwin
20-Jun-2007, 12:50
Well, I always welcome more browsers (especially so long as I don't have to build websites for them ;) - I stick with .NET / Mono for now for a reason :D). But first it has to stop crashing, then I'll be able to appreciate it more.