I can think of only one. It is not the default shipping browser yet on new Macs. (it should be, beta or not) After that, then all is well. I have yet to have a single problem with it. (some others have though...) I use it as a non beta daily. It just works. Plain and simple...
1) Zoom box should switch between full-screen mode and a regular sized window. Right now I have to use the "Full Screen Safari" application enhancer which only somewhat works. If I click the zoom box, it gets small and in the corner, and if I click it again... it gets big again but not as wide. Why does the zoom box switch between two sizes I've never set the window to? It should remember my previous window size.
2) When removing the status bar from the bottom, or the tab bar from the top, the window shouldn't get any smaller. It should stay the same size, but just without the tab bar in the way. That way, when I have only one tab open, I get that much more vertical space. For now I have to always show the tab bar.
3) Ability to synchronize your Bookmark Menu with your various bookmark folders. I personally can't handle putting bookmarks in 2-3 different places (menu, bar, AND full window) because I have to copy one, put it in the right place, etc, whenever I add one.
I think that Safari is the only apple app without a "costomise toolbar" option. Personally, I would rather have my "home" widget between my "<" and ">" buttons. In Safari right now, you can't cmd-drag to rearange toolbar buttons.
I hope Safari remains a simple light-weight browser. I already think Apple went overboard by adding the tabbed-browsing concept.
Safari for the people that want a simple browser.
OmniWeb for the people that want a heavy-duty browser.
If Safari keeps piling features that only a select few would like to use, we'll end up with another heavy-duty browser and no more simple browsers will exist (until someone else decides to fill that gap using Webcore to ease the development.)
Assuming OmniWeb will eventually be on par with Safari in terms of rendering speed (when they start using the same Webcore), why have two similar browsers?
If you want customizable toolbars and other neat-o features, you might as well use OmniWeb. You won't be hurting Apple. And Apple won't feel like they've been abandoned. You're still using Webcore. And Safari is free so Apple isn't losing money or sleep over people not using it.
Do Omni a favor and get OmniWeb if you want super-features...and leave Safari alone as a cute little browser for people that don't want anything else.
Because tabbed browsing added an entire layer of complexity that added an additional 100k to the application and just confuses the hell out of everyone.
I don't see tabbed browsing as that. I see tabbed browsing as a feature a lot of people want and will use; if you don't use it, it doesn't mean only a few people will.
Because tabbed browsing added an entire layer of complexity that added an additional 100k to the application and just confuses the hell out of everyone.
I don't see tabbed browsing as that. I see tabbed browsing as a feature a lot of people want and will use; if you don't use it, it doesn't mean only a few people will.
Well it surely goes against the rumored 'piles' window management concept coming in Panther.
Either:
1) Piles aren't coming.
2) Piles are coming and there's no communication between the Safari team and the core Panther team.
And as result:
1) Would be disappointing if they didn't show up
2) Would be a terrible waste of time and ressources done by the Safari team if tabs become obsolete in favor of the system-wide window management
I'd rather see the 2nd scenario play out...but if it does play out, the Safari interface team could have spent time with their wives and kids instead of wasting so much time and money.
I hope Safari remains a simple light-weight browser. I already think Apple went overboard by adding the tabbed-browsing concept.
That's because you hate tabs. Not because it's a "heavyweight" feature.
Quote:
Safari for the people that want a simple browser.
OmniWeb for the people that want a heavy-duty browser.
If tabs are an "advanced" feature that bring the browser from light-weight to heavy-duty, why is the tabless OmniWeb a "heavy-duty" browser and Safari is a "simple" browser?
Quote:
If Safari keeps piling features that only a select few would like to use, we'll end up with another heavy-duty browser and no more simple browsers will exist (until someone else decides to fill that gap using Webcore to ease the development.)
Most browsers can be as simple as you want them to be. Compare Safari to, say, Mozilla/Netscape or IE. Mozilla and Netscape especially are huge, incorporating tons of features like a built in email client, instant messaging, a news reader, an HTML editor... you get the picture. I think that is what the definition of a "heavyweight" browser is - one that is less of a browser than a suite of integrated internet applications. Like AppleWorks for the internet. I personally don't like it. I see Safari (and OW, and Camino) as a lightweight browser. Some have features that others don't have. Tabs and autofill/keychain are just two nice features that Safari just got. That nice pop-out text box is a cool new OW feature. And Camino has always been sort of the pioneer of tabs on the Mac platform, even if Mozilla was out first.
Quote:
Assuming OmniWeb will eventually be on par with Safari in terms of rendering speed (when they start using the same Webcore), why have two similar browsers?
Because your browser is sometimes a very subjective and personal choice. No browser is "better" than another... well, usually not. I'd say most modern ones (yes, even IE 5) are approximately similar and the only reason one person chooses one over another is because of little features. I'd pick Safari over OmniWeb because of the tabs. Maybe once OW5 comes out, if it's really nice, I'll try that out and prefer it over Safari. Having choices is good. So when you ask, "why have two similar browsers?" I say, "why not?"
Quote:
If you want customizable toolbars and other neat-o features, you might as well use OmniWeb. You won't be hurting Apple. And Apple won't feel like they've been abandoned. You're still using Webcore. And Safari is free so Apple isn't losing money or sleep over people not using it.
I don't see customizable toolbars as a "neat-o feature." I think they should be part of any respectable OS X-native application that uses toolbars. Yeah, there are some things that should stay to more full-featured browsers, and some that can go ahead and go into the simple ones. I personally see tabs as a minor feature that don't overload you with complexity. After all, tabs in Safari are completely off by default (or at least I think so) and you have to go in and make a conscious effort to turn them on if you want to use them. That way, if you're confused by tabs or you just don't like them, you won't have to use them. In fact, you won't even be reminded of their presence, because you won't have to use complicated commands like "cmd-shift-click" to open a link in a new window instead of a new tab - it's cmd-click to open a new window OR a new tab depending on your preference. I know tabs vs. no tabs has been argued before but I have a hard time believing that you anti-tabbers are such good samaritans that you don't want ANYONE using tabs because of how evil they are... but nevermind that, I'll try not to argue too much about tabs vs. no tabs because it's been covered extensively to no avail.
Quote:
Do Omni a favor and get OmniWeb if you want super-features...and leave Safari alone as a cute little browser for people that don't want anything else.
I can't wait to see the next version of OW! I probably won't buy it unless it's really really awesome, but I'll at least try it out. It does take quite a browser to get people to pay for it, considering most are free.
1) Zoom box should switch between full-screen mode and a regular sized window. Right now I have to use the "Full Screen Safari" application enhancer which only somewhat works. If I click the zoom box, it gets small and in the corner, and if I click it again... it gets big again but not as wide. Why does the zoom box switch between two sizes I've never set the window to? It should remember my previous window size.
The zoom feature works just as it should. And the same way as in other Mac apps. This isn't windows. The zoom button isn't a maximize button. It resizes to fit the content in the document or back to your original size. What's the problem?
Okay, the REAL problem isn't that it does not maximize the window. The real problem is this: if I have my window set to size A, and I hit the zoom box to get it to size B, hitting the zoom box again brings it to size C instead of bringing it back to size A. Regardless of the size, shape and position of sizes A, B and C, it should switch between A and B instead of scrapping my old window size and then just switching between B and C.
I happen to like browsing with my browser at full screen. I don't like making everything full screen like in Windows, but for a browser, it's nice.
No it doesn't I want a fullscreen like IE in Windows, that's the only thing I like about Windows/IE. F11 = Full screen. In fact there should be an option to assign F11 Fullscreen in Safari that would make Windows switchers feel very at home.
Also Safari still is too buggy to ship default. I'm sure by next release it'll be 1.0 and start shipping. Who wants to bet it comes with Panther and/or the G5.
Tabs: if you don't like them don't use them. Shut up already. They're off by default.
Also Apple should ship the PDF plugin with Safari for in browser viewing or make their own, and goddamnit make the scroll wheel work. And search. The plugin I have can't search or copy text or scroll with the scrollwheel. But it's better than opening godawful Acrobat Reader!
I have noticed one bug: closing a previous Tab while a new one is loading hangs Safari with a beachball.
I can't see any features now that IE has that Safari doesn't. However AIM Express still doesn't work. How many duplicate Safari threads do we need, I started one then 2 or 3 more popped up. IBL!
Also Apple should ship the PDF plugin with Safari for in browser viewing or make their own, and goddamnit make the scroll wheel work. And search. The plugin I have can't search or copy text or scroll with the scrollwheel.
Why should Apple make their own when Adobe is just about to release the official plug-in?
For ****'s sake...I'm not complaining about tabs, Luca. Shut up. I'm just saying that Safari should remain simple because there aren't any lightweight browsers anymore...everyone is trying to cram in their competitor's features plus a few unique features making every browser way too similar.
Safari should just be simple. Just like the iApps.
edit: I suppose you won't shut up so just to add fuel to the fire, tabs *are* a heavy-weight feature in the sense that 90% of Safari users won't be using it.
Forums skew perspectives because only hardcore users and nerds sit around and post in forums. We're the ones contemplating on Apple's future and future OS's, hardware and software.
Do you think all Mac users are like this? **** no. 90% of the Mac users are probably simple folks that don't know much about computers and they browse webpages one at a time in the same window. My whole family is like this. Hardly anyone I know will browse multiple websites simultaneously.
Heck...even I normally browse websites one at a time. I may open at most 2 other windows.
So you might say that I'm saying this because 'I hate tabs'...but I'm more inclined to say you're saying it because you love tabs.
People in general don't browse multiple websites simultaneously. Face it.
I suppose you're right that most people won't use tabs. Most people aren't going to use a lot of features that are part of OS X, even simple ones built into iApps. Take iTunes for example - I don't use many of the new features in version 3, like Smart Playlists or Ratings. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be included. Because it's entirely my option whether I use those features or not, it doesn't get in the way. Do I think those features should be removed from iTunes because I don't use them, and probably a number of people don't? No. I bet a few users, even very novice ones, have "discovered" smart playlists and actually used them to help organize their songs. And probably some novice users will discover tabs in Safari and use them and like them. Not a whole lot, but the reason OS X is so great is because there are so many little nice features to discover. Then look at it this way - shift-minimizing a window does it in slow motion, which is completely useless. How many people are going to discover shift-minimizing? Almost none. But they still took the time to code it, because it's kinda cool. There are tons of little things you can do with various combinations of the option, shift, control and command keys, all of which took time and effort to code yet they are useful to far less than 10% of the people who use OS X.
So I guess it's a question of whether the amount of time and effort put into making a new feature aren't made up for by the usefulness of the new feature. Admittedly, tabs aren't exactly as simple as Smart Playlists, Ratings, or the Shift-Minimize effect. But as long as they've already done the work, why not leave them in? As you said, browsers are all becoming similar, each with only minor differences from the next. Maybe in Safari 1.5 or 2.0, we'll see a really groundbreaking feature that will set Safari apart from the rest while keeping it simple and lightweight - until then, hopefully you'll be able to ignore the Tabs section of the Safari preferences. I think the addition of this single optional feature that must be willfully activated by the user doesn't exactly catapult Safari out of being a "lite" browser, although if they go farther then yes, it could get out of hand.
Sorry I was so confrontational - that was rude. I'll try to keep this mature, and hopefully I'll restrain myself when it comes to arguing about tabs!
Anyway, on to other subjects - a way to maximize the window would be nice, or at least have the zoom button behave like it should - switch between the current window size and another setting, instead of arbitrarily choosing two settings to switch between. I think I've basically gone over everything I'd like to see in Safari. Oh yeah, separate stop and reload buttons would be nice, so I don't accidentally reload a page when I actually want to stop it from loading. And maybe a "throbber" would be cool, instead of just the blue bar. But those are all so minor, it really doesn't matter. I'd be content with the current version anyway, so more stuff would just be icing on the cake.
Safari does have keychain support, even the password stuff that's embedded in the html! That's one down...
Hm, I would say more options for the search widget -- more than just Google. I imagine it might be an exclusive deal to use Google as the search engine in the toolbar, they might find other aspects of Googe to search (images, directories, news) plus some alternative search items, or better yet, a simple way for advanced users to add their own web engines.
Also, a simple menu item (and contextual menu item) to search or look up using Sherlock would be good. Of course, that should be an application service anyway.
I suppose they could keep adding kewl new bookmark features?
I think that you should be able to search google images from the Safari search field, via some little pull-down menu. I use image search a lot. And being able to search C|Net from that little field would also be nice.
-Ability to disable specific javascript commands such as resize window and move window (hate it when web pages do that, like taking the entire frickin screen, I'm not on windoze!)
-Predefined window sizes, so when I want a new window it's always at that predefined size
-A 'mute' ability, because I *hate* embedded midis and sounds in flash when they are not appropriate and such (and when I'm listening to something in iTunes).
And what's up with separating Safari from Omniweb? I mean, WTF? They are competitors, Apple does not have to keep their browser weaker so people can go use another one. I want a powerful free browser and so far Apple is giving that to me. If Omni wants me to use their browser, well, they're going to have to convince me, but not through intended cripplitation on Apple's behalf. And lightweight browsers? Why even bother, most of us have computers that can handle bloated browsers just fine (not that Safari is one)...
Comments
2) When removing the status bar from the bottom, or the tab bar from the top, the window shouldn't get any smaller. It should stay the same size, but just without the tab bar in the way. That way, when I have only one tab open, I get that much more vertical space. For now I have to always show the tab bar.
3) Ability to synchronize your Bookmark Menu with your various bookmark folders. I personally can't handle putting bookmarks in 2-3 different places (menu, bar, AND full window) because I have to copy one, put it in the right place, etc, whenever I add one.
Safari for the people that want a simple browser.
OmniWeb for the people that want a heavy-duty browser.
If Safari keeps piling features that only a select few would like to use, we'll end up with another heavy-duty browser and no more simple browsers will exist (until someone else decides to fill that gap using Webcore to ease the development.)
Assuming OmniWeb will eventually be on par with Safari in terms of rendering speed (when they start using the same Webcore), why have two similar browsers?
If you want customizable toolbars and other neat-o features, you might as well use OmniWeb. You won't be hurting Apple. And Apple won't feel like they've been abandoned. You're still using Webcore. And Safari is free so Apple isn't losing money or sleep over people not using it.
Do Omni a favor and get OmniWeb if you want super-features...and leave Safari alone as a cute little browser for people that don't want anything else.
I don't see tabbed browsing as that. I see tabbed browsing as a feature a lot of people want and will use; if you don't use it, it doesn't mean only a few people will.
Originally posted by M3D Jack
Because tabbed browsing added an entire layer of complexity that added an additional 100k to the application and just confuses the hell out of everyone.
I don't see tabbed browsing as that. I see tabbed browsing as a feature a lot of people want and will use; if you don't use it, it doesn't mean only a few people will.
Well it surely goes against the rumored 'piles' window management concept coming in Panther.
Either:
1) Piles aren't coming.
2) Piles are coming and there's no communication between the Safari team and the core Panther team.
And as result:
1) Would be disappointing if they didn't show up
2) Would be a terrible waste of time and ressources done by the Safari team if tabs become obsolete in favor of the system-wide window management
I'd rather see the 2nd scenario play out...but if it does play out, the Safari interface team could have spent time with their wives and kids instead of wasting so much time and money.
I hope Safari remains a simple light-weight browser. I already think Apple went overboard by adding the tabbed-browsing concept.
That's because you hate tabs. Not because it's a "heavyweight" feature.
Safari for the people that want a simple browser.
OmniWeb for the people that want a heavy-duty browser.
If tabs are an "advanced" feature that bring the browser from light-weight to heavy-duty, why is the tabless OmniWeb a "heavy-duty" browser and Safari is a "simple" browser?
If Safari keeps piling features that only a select few would like to use, we'll end up with another heavy-duty browser and no more simple browsers will exist (until someone else decides to fill that gap using Webcore to ease the development.)
Most browsers can be as simple as you want them to be. Compare Safari to, say, Mozilla/Netscape or IE. Mozilla and Netscape especially are huge, incorporating tons of features like a built in email client, instant messaging, a news reader, an HTML editor... you get the picture. I think that is what the definition of a "heavyweight" browser is - one that is less of a browser than a suite of integrated internet applications. Like AppleWorks for the internet. I personally don't like it. I see Safari (and OW, and Camino) as a lightweight browser. Some have features that others don't have. Tabs and autofill/keychain are just two nice features that Safari just got. That nice pop-out text box is a cool new OW feature. And Camino has always been sort of the pioneer of tabs on the Mac platform, even if Mozilla was out first.
Assuming OmniWeb will eventually be on par with Safari in terms of rendering speed (when they start using the same Webcore), why have two similar browsers?
Because your browser is sometimes a very subjective and personal choice. No browser is "better" than another... well, usually not. I'd say most modern ones (yes, even IE 5) are approximately similar and the only reason one person chooses one over another is because of little features. I'd pick Safari over OmniWeb because of the tabs. Maybe once OW5 comes out, if it's really nice, I'll try that out and prefer it over Safari. Having choices is good. So when you ask, "why have two similar browsers?" I say, "why not?"
If you want customizable toolbars and other neat-o features, you might as well use OmniWeb. You won't be hurting Apple. And Apple won't feel like they've been abandoned. You're still using Webcore. And Safari is free so Apple isn't losing money or sleep over people not using it.
I don't see customizable toolbars as a "neat-o feature." I think they should be part of any respectable OS X-native application that uses toolbars. Yeah, there are some things that should stay to more full-featured browsers, and some that can go ahead and go into the simple ones. I personally see tabs as a minor feature that don't overload you with complexity. After all, tabs in Safari are completely off by default (or at least I think so) and you have to go in and make a conscious effort to turn them on if you want to use them. That way, if you're confused by tabs or you just don't like them, you won't have to use them. In fact, you won't even be reminded of their presence, because you won't have to use complicated commands like "cmd-shift-click" to open a link in a new window instead of a new tab - it's cmd-click to open a new window OR a new tab depending on your preference. I know tabs vs. no tabs has been argued before but I have a hard time believing that you anti-tabbers are such good samaritans that you don't want ANYONE using tabs because of how evil they are... but nevermind that, I'll try not to argue too much about tabs vs. no tabs because it's been covered extensively to no avail.
Do Omni a favor and get OmniWeb if you want super-features...and leave Safari alone as a cute little browser for people that don't want anything else.
I can't wait to see the next version of OW! I probably won't buy it unless it's really really awesome, but I'll at least try it out. It does take quite a browser to get people to pay for it, considering most are free.
Originally posted by Luca Rescigno
1) Zoom box should switch between full-screen mode and a regular sized window. Right now I have to use the "Full Screen Safari" application enhancer which only somewhat works. If I click the zoom box, it gets small and in the corner, and if I click it again... it gets big again but not as wide. Why does the zoom box switch between two sizes I've never set the window to? It should remember my previous window size.
The zoom feature works just as it should. And the same way as in other Mac apps. This isn't windows. The zoom button isn't a maximize button. It resizes to fit the content in the document or back to your original size. What's the problem?
I happen to like browsing with my browser at full screen. I don't like making everything full screen like in Windows, but for a browser, it's nice.
Also Safari still is too buggy to ship default. I'm sure by next release it'll be 1.0 and start shipping. Who wants to bet it comes with Panther and/or the G5.
Tabs: if you don't like them don't use them. Shut up already. They're off by default.
Also Apple should ship the PDF plugin with Safari for in browser viewing or make their own, and goddamnit make the scroll wheel work. And search. The plugin I have can't search or copy text or scroll with the scrollwheel. But it's better than opening godawful Acrobat Reader!
I have noticed one bug: closing a previous Tab while a new one is loading hangs Safari with a beachball.
I can't see any features now that IE has that Safari doesn't. However AIM Express still doesn't work. How many duplicate Safari threads do we need, I started one then 2 or 3 more popped up. IBL!
Originally posted by Aquatic
Also Apple should ship the PDF plugin with Safari for in browser viewing or make their own, and goddamnit make the scroll wheel work. And search. The plugin I have can't search or copy text or scroll with the scrollwheel.
Why should Apple make their own when Adobe is just about to release the official plug-in?
Safari should just be simple. Just like the iApps.
edit: I suppose you won't shut up so just to add fuel to the fire, tabs *are* a heavy-weight feature in the sense that 90% of Safari users won't be using it.
Forums skew perspectives because only hardcore users and nerds sit around and post in forums. We're the ones contemplating on Apple's future and future OS's, hardware and software.
Do you think all Mac users are like this? **** no. 90% of the Mac users are probably simple folks that don't know much about computers and they browse webpages one at a time in the same window. My whole family is like this. Hardly anyone I know will browse multiple websites simultaneously.
Heck...even I normally browse websites one at a time. I may open at most 2 other windows.
So you might say that I'm saying this because 'I hate tabs'...but I'm more inclined to say you're saying it because you love tabs.
People in general don't browse multiple websites simultaneously. Face it.
So I guess it's a question of whether the amount of time and effort put into making a new feature aren't made up for by the usefulness of the new feature. Admittedly, tabs aren't exactly as simple as Smart Playlists, Ratings, or the Shift-Minimize effect. But as long as they've already done the work, why not leave them in? As you said, browsers are all becoming similar, each with only minor differences from the next. Maybe in Safari 1.5 or 2.0, we'll see a really groundbreaking feature that will set Safari apart from the rest while keeping it simple and lightweight - until then, hopefully you'll be able to ignore the Tabs section of the Safari preferences. I think the addition of this single optional feature that must be willfully activated by the user doesn't exactly catapult Safari out of being a "lite" browser, although if they go farther then yes, it could get out of hand.
Sorry I was so confrontational - that was rude. I'll try to keep this mature, and hopefully I'll restrain myself when it comes to arguing about tabs!
Anyway, on to other subjects - a way to maximize the window would be nice, or at least have the zoom button behave like it should - switch between the current window size and another setting, instead of arbitrarily choosing two settings to switch between. I think I've basically gone over everything I'd like to see in Safari. Oh yeah, separate stop and reload buttons would be nice, so I don't accidentally reload a page when I actually want to stop it from loading. And maybe a "throbber" would be cool, instead of just the blue bar. But those are all so minor, it really doesn't matter. I'd be content with the current version anyway, so more stuff would just be icing on the cake.
? Edit toolbar
? keychain Support
? Better contextual Menus (ie forward/back etc)
But other than that, it's getting very close to Camino.
Hm, I would say more options for the search widget -- more than just Google. I imagine it might be an exclusive deal to use Google as the search engine in the toolbar, they might find other aspects of Googe to search (images, directories, news) plus some alternative search items, or better yet, a simple way for advanced users to add their own web engines.
Also, a simple menu item (and contextual menu item) to search or look up using Sherlock would be good. Of course, that should be an application service anyway.
I suppose they could keep adding kewl new bookmark features?
And the difference is obvious if one is using dial-up like me. But luckily it never got too bad.
-Predefined window sizes, so when I want a new window it's always at that predefined size
-A 'mute' ability, because I *hate* embedded midis and sounds in flash when they are not appropriate and such (and when I'm listening to something in iTunes).
And what's up with separating Safari from Omniweb? I mean, WTF? They are competitors, Apple does not have to keep their browser weaker so people can go use another one. I want a powerful free browser and so far Apple is giving that to me. If Omni wants me to use their browser, well, they're going to have to convince me, but not through intended cripplitation on Apple's behalf. And lightweight browsers? Why even bother, most of us have computers that can handle bloated browsers just fine (not that Safari is one)...
Amen. That is the #1 thing in my book.