|
|||||||
| Register | Members List | New Posts | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Kasper's Automated Slave
Join Date: Nov 1997
Posts: 6,158
|
Safari 3.1 sees improved form support in latest beta
Apple this month continues to plug away on a small but significant update to its fledgeling Safari web browser, most recently making improvements to the application's handling of web forms and faulty Javascripts.
The cross-platform browser update presently dubbed Safari 3.1 was first made available to the company's developer community last month. Since then, only one external revision has been spotted, arriving last week in the form of three distinct distributions. A public beta for versions of the Windows operating system carried build number 31A15 and weighed in at 18.5MB, while versions for Mac OS X Tiger and Leopard arrived as builds 8S3021 and 9B4021, weighing in at 48.6MB and 38.9MB, respectively. In a set of release notes reported to have accompanied the latest distributions, Apple advocated "significant performance, stability, and compatibility improvements" over the builds released just three weeks earlier. Specifically, the company said Safari 3.1 accepts large amounts of text pastes into forms much faster than its predecessor and that the browser now logs all nasty and unsafe Javascripts to a system log file for later review. In addition, a pesky bug that prevented earlier builds for uploading photos via web forms to online auction sites has also been fixed. The Mac maker offered no update on the browser's more compelling enhancements, which include support for downloadable web fonts, HTML5 video and audio tags, CSS transitions and animations, and a new SQL storage API. Improvements to Javascript performance are also a significant focus of the upcoming release, which uses an unreleased version of Apple's Webkit frame work that has proven to be up to 2.5 times as fast in Javascript operations than that of the current version included with the existing Safari 3.0.4 software. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,066
|
Yep, I really miss the stability of Safari 2. I hope they really fix the constant crashing issue when opening multiple tabs.
Nasser
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 19,612
|
What about rendering issues? I can't be the only one that has them in even Mac friendly sites such as Macworld, when firefox renders just fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 240
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 119
|
Just the Text. It can't be that hard.
What I wish is that Safari could just save text properly, by that I mean just the text and in that font the way IE does - yup, I keep and use IE for that one single purpose. Firefox/Camino does okay but takes away the fonts and colours, spacings, sizes etc.
Saving Text in Safari is an absolute mess, it won't just save just the text, it always takes half the web page with it requiring editing later - why bother - and when this is pasted into Text Edit it is often unreadable, turning a paragraph or a line into an immense column of single words stacked one to a line. UNREADABLE and UNUSABLE. I'll say it again, INTERNET EXPLORER is the only thing I use for saving Text off the internet, IT DOES THE NICEST JOB. And I'm using a Mac Pro, not something ancient. Last edited by Banalltv; 03-04-2008 at 06:38 PM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Planet Reno
Posts: 27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 222
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The OC
Posts: 181
|
It's the stability, stupid
Since moving to 3 from 2, browser crashes have become a regular feature for me. In fairness, they seem to have been reduced a bit after recent updates, but still . . .
Also, Excel spreadsheets saved as web pages and put on my site are faithfully reproduced under Firefox, and even the ancient final Mac version of Explorer, but are hideous when viewed in Safari. Hope that gets worked on too. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 222
|
Quote:
Ahh. If you're referring to the pull-down menus, my guess is that there's something wrong with the CSS or Javascript code, as I've seen plenty of other pull-down menus work fine in Safari. Just because a development team doesn't test its sites properly in every browser doesn't mean there's something wrong with the browser, necessarily. Sometimes certain browsers are more "forgiving" than others of bad code. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 271
|
Can't Wait!
I am truly looking forward to this release!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Van Isle, BC, Canada
Posts: 208
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 63
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Van Isle, BC, Canada
Posts: 208
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The OC
Posts: 181
|
Yeah, but . . .
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 261
|
No problems
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 240
|
Quote:
You seem to want it to copy only the text (sans images, tables, DIVs, etc.) while preserving the text formatting. Safari appears to copy all the actual formatting that takes place within the selected region; if it includes tables or images, those get copied as well. I prefer Safari's idea; it's more consistent and likely to yield expected results. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Planet Reno
Posts: 27
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 176
|
i'm surprised people are saying Safari 3 crashes more.
I stopped using Safari 2 because it was so unstable and just used Firefox as my main browser. When Safari 3 came out... I switched back. Since using it including Beta, and ever since I've been on Leopard (first day of release), I've had about 2 or 3 crashes that affected me, cant really recall, hasn't happened in a long time. I often have multiple windows open sometimes with 10+ tabs each, using it every day. I've had times where i was opening through many things and had like 50+ tabs open... The only crashes i see regularly on safari 3 is occasionally when i try to close safari, it hangs up and crashes.. which only bothers me slightly since i was trying to close it anyways. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 | |||||
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Ansible
Posts: 11,822
|
Quote:
IE does it by default because it's not robust enough. Unfortunately, i don't think there is a way you can make that the default in OS X. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 853
|
Safari or Flip4Mac?
Not sure if the problem is Safari or Flip4Mac, but ever since upgrading to Safari 3 whenever the Flip4Mac plug-in loads (because there is a .wmv video on the page) the CPU pegs to 100% and stays there, even after closing all Safari windows and putting it in the background. The only rememdy is to quit Safari. A few posts I read put the blame on a change made in v3 in how Safari manages resources with regards to plug-ins. But that doesn't rule out that Flip4Mac was maybe doing something odd with their plug-in, and it just wasn't apparent until Safari 3.
Seems we have a couple of folks knowledgable about Safari here. Anyone know if this is a Safari problem that might be getting fixed in v3.1 (I'm on PPC, not Intel, if that matters)? |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 930
|
I hope they fix one bug that is giving me problems. The SVG support is not working that well. I have some basic scripting in SVG files which work perfectly in all other browsers, but not with Safari. SVG never really caught on even though it is very useful in certain circumstances. Even Adobe is abandoning support for the plug-in because they say SVG is now supported natively by almost all browsers. I wonder which one is the 'almost'.
m |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 39
|
Quote:
i think the problems are based on poor coding, not safari: http://validator.w3.org/ http://tinyurl.com/yweguq (the results) http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/ http://tinyurl.com/2cftdg (the results) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 472
|
I hope Safari finally passes Firefox in render speed. On my Cube, my PowerBook, and my friend's 2nd generation MacBook Pro, Firefox is noticeably faster than Safari - on every site.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Seattle WA
Posts: 55
|
I guess I'm good at avoiding non standards-compliant websites, as I've had no problems at all in this area. A few will say "for a better experience" I might want to try Firefox. Since I don't want a freakin' "experience," I just want to check my e-mail or whatever, Safari works fine. The only problem I've ever had is on Flash pages like MacWorld, or nasa.gov seems to be the worst: about one time out of five, when you hit the back button, Safari will beachball until you force quit it. I don't blame Safari for this in any way, shape, or form...the culprit is Adobe. Flash is pure crap! Avoid it like the plague it is!
I see a few people claiming Firefox renders faster on their setup than Safari. For the life of me I don't know how that's possible. Firefox takes ten times as long to do anything for me, except load: that takes thirty times as long! I guess machines and installations are different, but I still say Safari is Much, MUCH, faster. |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 312
|
Quote:
One of the reasons why Safari runs so quickly is because it doesn't bog itself down trying to cypher through all sorts of bad code. It looks for a number of expected errors and offers corrections, but when the site offers a DOCTYPE, Safari holds it to task. That could also be the problem here. Intellicast uses a transitional XHTML DOCTYPE which tells browsers to assume a certain level of competence and leaves them expecting certain things from the code. As you can see in the validation results above, they don't deliver on this promise. All we can hope for is the gradual decline of Internet Explorer's market share and the gradual advancement of standards-based design and awareness of other browsers (and thus, other business). Fortunately these changes have been taking place in full swing for years now. That's pretty interesting, actually. I used to use Firefox on my G4 Power Mac but since I moved to the Intel platform (first with a Mac Mini and now with a 3.2 GHz Mac Pro), especially under Leopard, I have found Safari to be much faster. Furthermore, the Webkit nightly builds are much faster than the stable 3.x build of Safari.
“The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.”
—Samuel Johnson |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#26 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5
|
Anti-Phishing features?
It would be really nice if Apple added some anti-phishing technology in Safari so that they no longer get dinged in the press for being the only major browser without it.
Wasn't Safari 3.0 originally supposed to have anti-phishing per AppleInsider? What happened to that feature? http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._3_builds.html |
|
|
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 930
|
IE 8 is supposed to be a bit better at standards compliance but by deciding to adopt the standards MS is going to break a lot of pages that right now are using workarounds to avoid IE's odd behaviors or in the case of MS centric sites, using the undocumented non-compliant features supported by the current IE version to deploy special functionality. In either case there will be a lot of work to do once they release it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#28 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 312
|
Quote:
Instead they've introduced a new way to version target which they are actually supporting. It is not an ideal solution, but at least it is something. What we really need is standards support on par with those offered by Gecko, Webkit and Opera.
“The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.”
—Samuel Johnson |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 19,612
|
Macworld renders incorrectly. I put two examples on Flikr.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/24380667@N03/show/ |
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,143
|
Does anyone know why FLAVR (browser app to capture video i,e, youtube) does not work on the new Safari? It worked great on Tiger's. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#31 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Ansible
Posts: 11,822
|
Quote:
I can duplicate your Macworld.com mainpage issue when I use a text size that is one above normal, but this doesn't carry over to the benchmarks page. Are you using a style sheet? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Ansible
Posts: 11,822
|
Quote:
• http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/32110 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 | |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 19,612
|
Quote:
The mainpage issue shouldn't occur either, and doesn't, with Firefox, no matter how I change the font sizes. I have similar problems with other sites, including the weather site posted. As Macworld is a Mac site, you would think that there would be no problems with Safari, either theirs, or Safari's. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 66
|
I can say from the latest builds of webkit Safari is SMOKING FAST!
WebKit 8881.0ms FireFox 3 (b3) 17562.2ms Safari 3.04 19501.4ms FireFox 2.0.12 33711.4ms This was from running this javascript test here It runs each test 5 times to get a good average, I can totally feel the difference going from FireFox 2 to the webkit, night and day and that is on a 3Mb/s internet connection and a 2ghz G5 iMac. (I also ran the G5 optimized builds of FF, and that only improved the scores by ~3%) |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Ansible
Posts: 11,822
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#36 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 66
|
Quote:
I don't have that with WebKit at all, I thought that was removed from Safari but I am not sure. It's really an easy fix though. If that is not it I don't know what you are referring to. WebKit is clearly the fastest browser just from me using it, MAYBE when FireFox 3 is released that will be usable to me again, but going back to FF2 is just painful. I recommend every just try it out for themselves, it's an amazing browser. http://nightly.webkit.org/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#37 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Ansible
Posts: 11,822
|
Quote:
I'm not saying it's a bad browser. In fact, I'm a longtime user of WebKit nightlies. It does what it's made to do well, but there is a large part of the internet not even considered WebKit or compliance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#38 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 368
|
Quote:
If I increase the font size in Firefox it starts to break also. Some sites are designed to scale up the fonts well, clearly Macworld is not. To check if you're running a custom stylesheet, go to Preferences-->Advanced-->Style sheet: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 119
|
Hi Solipsism and Nevenmrgan, Ta for the tip, it doesn't give me the result I want though.
Here's a quick illustration of what I get using last week's Circuits newsletter e-mail from NYT, it's the best example I have to hand ( and sorry about the depressing subject matter therein ): Link to last week's newsletter from NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/indexes/2008/...ail/index.html What I get saving the text: http://img526.imageshack.us/my.php?i...icture2nc8.jpg 1: How the e-mail looks in Safari. 2: Pasting directly into TextEdit, I'm not crushing it, this is how it appears and requires much messing about to make it nice and keepable. 3: Paste And Match Style, same boring result from all four browsers and same as Paste from Firefox and Camino. 4: Pasting from Explorer, just right, minimal fiddling about for keeping. This doesn't save the links and I have to be careful about that, but it's not a problem. This is no good for saving Tables either, but again, not often an issue for me. It often looks much worse than this, this is just the best example I have to hand. Last edited by Banalltv; 03-04-2008 at 06:35 PM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Ansible
Posts: 11,822
|
Quote:
I can't thing of a single way to make Safari copy the styles, but not the formatting. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|