Hey, great news.

 

Safari has Beta available for windows users! Woo-Hoooo! Should make cross-browser compatibility a bit easier for those of us who are not as fortunate to own a Mac!

 

Try it out here: http://www.apple.com/safari/

 

not sure yet how useful it will be, will websites render 100% the same way as on a mac?

 

Wildo

surely it will make browser testing a more lengthy process as you'll have to test on the Mac version and also the PC version - the more browsers there are, the more testing you ahve to do.

It doesn't work on my computer Just get a weird browser windows and everything is scrambled.

Safari for windows rendering is havin probelms i think. but it is in a beta is it not.

 

Altho even tho i am a mac user i wouldn't use safari on my pc it i was still on it.

Hey, great news.

 

Safari has Beta available for windows users! Woo-Hoooo! Should make cross-browser compatibility a bit easier for those of us who are not as fortunate to own a Mac!

 

Try it out here: http://www.apple.com/safari/

 

 

Lol I got the beta v. before it this came out, I got it as soon as it was out!

Hey, great news.

 

Safari has Beta available for windows users! Woo-Hoooo! Should make cross-browser compatibility a bit easier for those of us who are not as fortunate to own a Mac!

 

Try it out here: http://www.apple.com/safari/

 

 

 

hehe. with that intro and your avatar I couldn't help imagining you as the Professor from Futurama.

Great news everybody!

 

You are going to deliver a Safari to the dangerous planet of Windows!

I'm wary that is may cause more headache for testing websites on, unless it renders it similar to other browsers. IE7 has it's problems but is much better nowadays than it's predacesors. Modern browsers are getting better.

 

Is there a set of rules browsers must conform to? It would be great if say a company like W3C brought out a set of rules which renders website perfectly (a bit like passing the Acid 2 test) - that all browsers must use. Would be nice in a perfect world.

 

I'm going to wait till the full release to see if it will cause much headache with website testing.

I'm wary that is may cause more headache for testing websites on, unless it renders it similar to other browsers. IE7 has it's problems but is much better nowadays than it's predacesors. Modern browsers are getting better.

 

Is there a set of rules browsers must conform to? It would be great if say a company like W3C brought out a set of rules which renders website perfectly (a bit like passing the Acid 2 test) - that all browsers must use. Would be nice in a perfect world.

 

I'm going to wait till the full release to see if it will cause much headache with website testing.

 

 

Safari generally renders nicely. At least from my experience with Safari 2 and 3.

 

The rules, is pretty much the W3C standard recommendation. However, they're not perfect and there's certain things which is open to interpretation. I think they're trying to avoid that in HTML5. The Acid test is basicly to test how well the browsers conform to the W3C standards.

Does anyone actually use Safari as their main browser with Windows? It could be good to test compatibility, but the browser seems pretty poor to me. Maybe its just a beta thing as mentioned.

Does anyone actually use Safari as their main browser with Windows? It could be good to test compatibility, but the browser seems pretty poor to me. Maybe its just a beta thing as mentioned.

 

 

I doubt anyone use the v3 beta on windows as their main browser. It's just too unstable. Most will be using it to test new technology. http://www.css3.info/ get allot of visit from Safari 3 because it supports quite a bit of experimental CSS3.

 

IMO Apple has done some silly things with porting the application to Windows. It tried to emulate the way things works on Mac, deviating from expected pattern and behaviour on Windows.

For instance, the window can only be resized in the bottom right corner, where as on window you can pull in any side of the window frame. And it uses it's own rendering technique to anti-alias text instead of using the OS's method. And I think that Window's ClearType is much better than whatever it is that Apple do.

Basicly it seems that they've tried to take everything from the Mac version into Windows without much consideration to whether it's better.

 

 

But in any case, very nice to preview CSS3. I've even played around a little on my own website with experimental CSS3 features.

I fail to see why windows needs safari. It's a good browser but opera and firefox are good enough for most so I don't see it being a big hit.

That's true. It's more like a gift to web developers that they can install Safari on PC.

I bought a used Mac Mini just so I could test my websites on the Mac platform for Mac only browsers.

That's true. It's more like a gift to web developers that they can install Safari on PC.

I bought a used Mac Mini just so I could test my websites on the Mac platform for Mac only browsers.

 

It's a gift only if safari for windows works and renders exactly like safari on mac. Otherwise it's a curse because it's yet another environment to test in.

That's true. It's more like a gift to web developers that they can install Safari on PC.

I bought a used Mac Mini just so I could test my websites on the Mac platform for Mac only browsers.

 

I believe the reason for the release was mainly due to allow windows developers to make applications for the iphone, as 3rd party apps all run within Safari.

I downloaded it - use it for a few days and never touched it again!

 

I only use it to test my builds in, and even then - that's occasionally.

It popped up on itunes for me so I installed it from there. No idea why they sent me it through itunes lol

Actually through iTunes? Or through the Apple Software Updater?

 

It's a great browser, though, especially with the new 3.1 release. I use it on the Mac, and I'm constantly impressed by the Windows version, although I still reckon they should use windows scroll bars, and not the mac ones. However much I love Apple design, it just looks weird on Windows.

Am I right in thinking it has different rendering engines built in, so you can emulate other browsers?

 

I'm not so reluctant to move away from Firefox nowadays as it's crashing more often and do find it's rather resource intensive. So if Safari develops some form of Web developer Toolbar & Firebug then I would change in an instant, saying that Opera is looking better with each update and it's fast.

 

Safari is nice, not as pretty in a windows enviroment though.

Am I right in thinking it has different rendering engines built in, so you can emulate other browsers?

 

I'm not so reluctant to move away from Firefox nowadays as it's crashing more often and do find it's rather resource intensive. So if Safari develops some form of Web developer Toolbar & Firebug then I would change in an instant, saying that Opera is looking better with each update and it's fast.

 

Safari is nice, not as pretty in a windows enviroment though.

 

It doesn't implement other rendering engines, it just allows you to pretend to be another browser by setting the user agent. So if your bank for example says they don't allow Safari, you can pretend you're using IE7.

 

They already have a web developer toolbar type tool, web inspector... It's lacking a few bits, but it is pretty good. Also headed towards Firebug with their "Drosera" tool, but that's not very good at all yet.

Actually through iTunes? Or through the Apple Software Updater?

 

It's a great browser, though, especially with the new 3.1 release. I use it on the Mac, and I'm constantly impressed by the Windows version, although I still reckon they should use windows scroll bars, and not the mac ones. However much I love Apple design, it just looks weird on Windows.

 

It comes through the Apple Software Update program that gets installed with iTunes/Quicktime. It's an optional install though.

I have the windows version for testing.

 

I don't like the mac look on Windows, it is uncomfortable and add to that the HORRIBLE way that Safari renders text and I see far too many reasons not to use it. My eyesight is bad enough without Safari blurring all the text!

I have the windows version for testing.

 

I don't like the mac look on Windows, it is uncomfortable and add to that the HORRIBLE way that Safari renders text and I see far too many reasons not to use it. My eyesight is bad enough without Safari blurring all the text!

 

They've just posted on the Webkit blog that the GDI-based font rendering is starting to shape up and is almost fully functional in the latest nightlies - So i'd expect that they'll be using Windows native font rendering in the next release.

It comes through the Apple Software Update program that gets installed with iTunes/Quicktime. It's an optional install though.

 

I knew that I just didn't want to accuse him outright of getting it wrong

They've just posted on the Webkit blog that the GDI-based font rendering is starting to shape up and is almost fully functional in the latest nightlies - So i'd expect that they'll be using Windows native font rendering in the next release.

 

Ah great news! ClearType is the best anti-aliasing engine so far.

I can't read "GDI" without thinking of Command and Conquer

 

I personally don't have much of an issue with the OS X anti-aliasing. But I would definitely welcome ClearType if it's implemented into Safari.

ClearType is only in the Windows version of Safari... and the only reason for that is so that it looks like the rest of Windows. OSX font rendering is actually far better than ClearType, it just doesn't look it when it's one app against a backdrop of different ones. ( For an example of that, try turning ClearType on and off a few times, letting your eyes adjust between changes... ClearType begins to look very blurry ).

ClearType is only in the Windows version of Safari... and the only reason for that is so that it looks like the rest of Windows. OSX font rendering is actually far better than ClearType, it just doesn't look it when it's one app against a backdrop of different ones. ( For an example of that, try turning ClearType on and off a few times, letting your eyes adjust between changes... ClearType begins to look very blurry ).

 

I disagree with that. I find ClearType much sharper. But I suppose it's a matter of opinion.

I actually saw some tests somewhere (don't ask me to find the link) on the different methods Windows and OS X use for anti-aliasing. It actually showed that ClearType was a lot sharper and easier to read than OS X. I tend to agree really, as sometimes OS X really does make the text go fuzzy around the edges, and tends to make it a tiny bit bolder than it should be.

 

OS X looks fine, though, if you don't look at it too closely.

surely it will make browser testing a more lengthy process as you'll have to test on the Mac version and also the PC version - the more browsers there are, the more testing you ahve to do.

 

 

old post, but.. is there really going to be a significant difference between a pc version and mac version of safari? Shouldn't they be designed the same way when it comes to how they act to code?

 

how frustrating.

surely it will make browser testing a more lengthy process as you'll have to test on the Mac version and also the PC version - the more browsers there are, the more testing you ahve to do.

 

though i test in many a browser across both mac and pc, i've not noticed a site differ in netscape, ffox, mozilla etc between op systems.

 

the css / x/html parsing ought to be the same across both? at least standards implementation and what css they understand?

 

ie would i'm sure if they had anything after version 5 on the mac!

Safari goes crazy when you have several large images open, it just starts to suck memory untill theres nothing left i don't know if anyone else esperienced this ?