Apple testing Safari 4.0.5 with Flash plug-in crash protection

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
Apple is currently evaluating a handful of upcoming Mac software updates with the help of an elite group of testers, including Safari 4.0.5, QuickTime 7.66, and significant maintenance release for its pro applications.



Safari 4.0.5



People familiar with the seedings say one of the primary focuses of Safari 4.0.5 is to fix a regression in the browser's JavaScript engine that manifested with the release of Safari 4.0.4. The maintenance release will also reportedly see certain code blocks, like Move Code, transitioned from the Safari codebase to that of Webkit in order to improve cross platform support.



A short list of other enhancements planned for the Safari 4.0.5 include improved HTML5 Video Playback, quicker loading of the Top Sites panels, faster JavaScript performance, better performance loading YouTube, and an overall reduced memory footprint.



Additionally, the release should also sport a much improved Plug-in manager aimed at reducing the number of crashes caused by plug-ins, including Adobe Flash plug-in, people familiar with the current betas say. These advances will reportedly also improve load times for plug-ins.



Safari 4.0.5 is currently undergoing tests in four distinct distributions: a build for Windows, one for Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger, one for Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard, and another for Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard. Each are members of the 405Axx build train and weigh between 26 and 38 megabytes.



QuickTime 7.66



Meanwhile, Apple is also evaluating a maintenance, security and performance release for QuickTime 7 labeled QuickTime 7.66. It's expected to be one of the final updates to QuickTime 7 and is currently undergoing evaluation for Mac OS X Leopard and Windows. The current build is said to be build 23.



Pro Applications Update



Finally, the Mac maker is also wrapping up QA testing on a significant maintenance release to its Final Cut Studio and Pro applications labeled "Pro Applications Update." Those familiar with this release, code named "Iron Man," say it was originally scheduled to go live last week but has been pushed back a week or so for further evaluation.



AppleInsider correspondent Kyla helped contribute to this report.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 47
    allblueallblue Posts: 393member
    As a matter of interest, why are they still developing QT7? Wouldn't those resources be better deployed on QT X?
  • Reply 2 of 47
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    ... A short list of other enhancements planned for the Safari 4.0.5 include ... a much improved Plug-in manager aimed at reducing the number of crashes caused by plug-ins, including Adobe Flash plug-in, people familiar with the current betas say. T...



    I know this is probably just "developer speak" but you make it sound like Safari actually supports user plug-ins and has some kind of end user "management tool" for that purpose.



    Safari has no such tool and doesn't officially support plug-ins like FireFox and the others do AFAIK.



    Steve Jobs hates customisation dontcha know.
  • Reply 3 of 47
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Cool. Besides improved security and performance I hope they implement separate processes for each tab.



    I used the latest Google Chrome for several days. The opening and closing of the app as well the speed of the app itself was great. The only reason I moved back to Safari was for the much better history, including visual history. Other than that, I was sold.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by allblue View Post


    As a matter of interest, why are they still developing QT7? Wouldn't those resources be better deployed on QT X?



    That s coming along with Snow Leopard. QTX is very important to Apple it's part of iPhone OS and Macs. QuickTime 7 is still used on Windows. If they are updating QT7 for Mac it's not the major focus or attention that QTX will be getting, just some security and stability changes. I doubt there will be any noticable performance on QT7 on the Mac side.
  • Reply 4 of 47
    shubiduashubidua Posts: 157member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by allblue View Post


    As a matter of interest, why are they still developing QT7? Wouldn't those resources be better deployed on QT X?



    Just because a new version is released doesn't mean that the support for older versions drop, especially in this case where QT X is not a real replacement, but rather a new start, sort of.
  • Reply 5 of 47
    esummersesummers Posts: 953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    I know this is probably just "developer speak" but you make it sound like Safari actually supports user plug-ins and has some kind of end user "management tool" for that purpose.



    Safari has no such tool and doesn't officially support plug-ins like FireFox and the others do AFAIK.



    Steve Jobs hates customisation dontcha know.



    What are you talking about? I have written plugins for Safari. I have two third party plugins (1 Password and Click to Flash) that I have installed separately running in Safari. There is no management tool. You just put (or delete) the plugins in the "Internet Plugins" folder on your hard drive. There is lots of developer documentation on writing plugins at www.apple.com/developer and they are trivial to write.



    You may also want to check out this Safari Plugin site:

    http://pimpmysafari.com/
  • Reply 6 of 47
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    Safari has no such tool and doesn't officially support plug-ins like FireFox and the others do AFAIK.



    I don't know, Gaz, I'd say that Safari officially supports plug-ins.
    Menu Bar » Help » Installed Plug-ins
  • Reply 7 of 47
    jensonbjensonb Posts: 530member
    Hey Apple, how about some update love for us Final Cut Express customers? It's the least you could do since you left us out in the cold after shipping a major upgrade to Final Cut Pro, then pointedly ignoring Express like you forgot it exists.
  • Reply 8 of 47
    rockawrockaw Posts: 18member
    Apple released ProKit 5.1 update yesterday. It was specifically for the apps you mentioned.
  • Reply 9 of 47
    esummersesummers Posts: 953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jensonb View Post


    Hey Apple, how about some update love for us Final Cut Express customers? It's the least you could do since you left us out in the cold after shipping a major upgrade to Final Cut Pro, then pointedly ignoring Express like you forgot it exists.



    They dropped the price of Final Cut Pro instead.
  • Reply 10 of 47
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    I know this is probably just "developer speak" but you make it sound like Safari actually supports user plug-ins



    a quick glance at Macintosh HD/Library/Internet Plug-Ins yields the following:

    ClickToFlash.plugin

    DirectorShockwave.plugin

    DivXBrowserPlugin.plugin

    Flash Player.plugin

    Flip4Mac WMV Plugin.plugin

    iPhotoPhotocast.plugin

    QuickTime Plugin.plugin

    Silverlight.plugin



    so yes, Safari actually does support user plug-ins.



    Quote:

    and has some kind of end user "management tool" for that purpose.



    The management tool you use to maintain the plugins is known as "Finder". Open the above folder and trash any plugins you no longer wish to have.
  • Reply 11 of 47
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,451member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rockaw View Post


    Apple released ProKit 5.1 update yesterday. It was specifically for the apps you mentioned.



    Yes that was my thought ... is this over and beyond 5.1 or a timing error on the reporting? Perhaps this is an update to the actually apps up from FCPro 7.0.1?



    64 bit maybe?
  • Reply 12 of 47
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    QTX is very important to Apple it's part of iPhone OS and Macs. QuickTime 7 is still used on Windows.



    QT7 is still in use on Macs to. in fact I can't stand QTX. It lacks so many features that QT7 Pro has and yet there is no Pro version. Not only that but the UI has problems too. It's pretty, but manually having to roll over the player an then roll out in order to get the control bar to go away annoys me to no end. It should just be off by default and appear on roll over.



    Although to be fair, I don't use QTX at in part because if I just want to watch a video I use spotlight, which is an awesome feature that behaves like I expect it and I'm sure it uses the QTX engine.
  • Reply 13 of 47
    cvaldes1831cvaldes1831 Posts: 1,832member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jensonb View Post


    Hey Apple, how about some update love for us Final Cut Express customers? It's the least you could do since you left us out in the cold after shipping a major upgrade to Final Cut Pro, then pointedly ignoring Express like you forgot it exists.



    My guess is that we have seen the end of active Final Cut Express development.



    Apple laid off about forty Final Cut engineers a couple of months ago. While they did not specify which group(s) were affected, my guess is that they killed the Express product.
  • Reply 14 of 47
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by alkrantz View Post


    QT7 is still in use on Macs to. in fact I can't stand QTX. It lacks so many features that QT7 Pro has and yet there is no Pro version. Not only that but the UI has problems too. It's pretty, but manually having to roll over the player an then roll out in order to get the control bar to go away annoys me to no end. It should just be off by default and appear on roll over.



    Although to be fair, I don't use QTX at in part because if I just want to watch a video I use spotlight, which is an awesome feature that behaves like I expect it and I'm sure it uses the QTX engine.



    No arguments here. Doing a sceenshot in QTX with a paused video will include the controller even if the mouse isn't over the window. I like a lotvof what QTX has to offer but QT7 has so many great features in the Pro version that just aren't as easy to use in other apps.



    I'm sure QTX will evolve. Remember, QT was quite old with a lot of code so a rewrite from the ground up will take time. I think this is what is taking iTunes and othe apps so long to transition as they'll have to get these right out of the gate, especially iTunes as it's a hub to all their iDevices. I expect to see iTunes X arrive this fall with the next iPod event.



    Check out Movist. Essentially, it's the versatility of VLC with the look and feel of Mac app. I find myself using it more often for non-MP4 files.
  • Reply 15 of 47
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    Leopard is still on the majority of Macs, therefore so is QT7, and it needs a lot more work than QTX.



    Any improvements to Top Sites speed and javascript are wholly welcome.



    I thought for a minute the article said Flash blocker, but I guess it was my imagination

    Click2Flash works brilliantly anyhow.
  • Reply 16 of 47
    Flash? What's that, abandonware?! ;-) Didn't Adobe abandon it years ago and relegate it to crashing and poor performance for many years?! Now they raise it from the grave?
  • Reply 17 of 47
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,451member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pmz View Post


    Leopard is still on the majority of Macs, therefore so is QT7, and it needs a lot more work than QTX.



    Any improvements to Top Sites speed and javascript are wholly welcome.



    I thought for a minute the article said Flash blocker, but I guess it was my imagination

    Click2Flash works brilliantly anyhow.



    Apple should have a link to CliktoFlash on the Apple home page.
  • Reply 18 of 47
    alkrantzalkrantz Posts: 89member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    No arguments here. Doing a sceenshot in QTX with a paused video will include the controller even if the mouse isn't over the window. I like a lotvof what QTX has to offer but QT7 has so many great features in the Pro version that just aren't as easy to use in other apps.



    I'm sure QTX will evolve. Remember, QT was quite old with a lot of code so a rewrite from the ground up will take time. I think this is what is taking iTunes and othe apps so long to transition as they'll have to get these right out of the gate, especially iTunes as it's a hub to all their iDevices. I expect to see iTunes X arrive this fall with the next iPod event.



    Check out Movist. Essentially, it's the versatility of VLC with the look and feel of Mac app. I find myself using it more often for non-MP4 files.



    Agreed. I do like the direction of the QTX UI overall though, I'm hoping the rumors about the UI refresh system wide are true because I am sort of tired of the current look, Aqua and Brushed metal both seem so dated. Particularly when compared to Windows 7 which sad to say, actually has a better UI than OSX right now in my opinion. But if the whole OSX system look were brought more in line with either Apples pro apps or the QTX look that would be very slick.



    Thanks for the tip I'll give Movist a spin, I use VLC all the time, as well as MPEG StreamClip, Perian, and Flip4Mac, lately I have also been using the Adobe Air player. Unfortunately none of them do everything. They all have either some UI or functionality gap.
  • Reply 19 of 47
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by esummers View Post


    What are you talking about? I have written plugins for Safari. I have two third party plugins (1 Password and Click to Flash) that I have installed separately running in Safari. There is no management tool. You just put (or delete) the plugins in the "Internet Plugins" folder on your hard drive. There is lots of developer documentation on writing plugins at www.apple.com/developer and they are trivial to write.



    You may also want to check out this Safari Plugin site:

    http://pimpmysafari.com/



    Okay, everyone noticed this and I explained myself poorly there. What I was differentiating between was developer support for plugins versus user support for plugins.



    Yes Safari runs plug-ins.

    Yes developers know all about it.

    Yes Apple provides (minimal) support docs for writing them.



    but ...



    No, the fact is not advertised nor mentioned outside of developer circles hardly at all.

    and

    No, the average user has no idea that this is possible.



    I do a lot of tech support work and I have yet to find any user (other than the aforementioned power users, techs, etc.), that knows they can get an adblocker plug-in or click to flash or any of the rest. I get people all the time telling me the main reason they use Firefox is because it supports plug-ins even though Safari supports their version of all the important ones.



    There is literally nothing in Safari's UI that would let a user know that plug-in support is possible AFAIK and there was nothing on Apple's website either until a very small blurb was added recently after the release of Safari 4. While most of us here know about the plug-in directory and how to use it, the average user just isn't going to do it or know how to and until the day they stumble across an advertisement for a Safari plug-in, most are unaware that it's even possible. Especially given the history of Apple not even supporting it unofficially for years and years.



    Sorry for the confusion in my remarks.
  • Reply 20 of 47
    knightlieknightlie Posts: 282member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    I know this is probably just "developer speak" but you make it sound like Safari actually supports user plug-ins and has some kind of end user "management tool" for that purpose.



    Safari has no such tool and doesn't officially support plug-ins like FireFox and the others do AFAIK.



    Steve Jobs hates customisation dontcha know.



    You're thinking of add-ons, not plugins. The two are different beasts.
Sign In or Register to comment.