Why do people always have such a beef with Safari? I think it is a fine browser. And lets face it, there aint much difference between modern browsers nowadays. Especially when comparing webkit driven ones.
They are both skankware. However, at least it was easy to survive without RealPlayer. A lot of sites are unusable without Flash; fortunately that is changing and folks like Scribd are helping make the Internet a better place.
Why do people always have such a beef with Safari? I think it is a fine browser. And lets face it, there aint much difference between modern browsers nowadays. Especially when comparing webkit driven ones.
Agreed. That's the reason for open standard based browsers so they look the same.
Back on topic, one more nail in the Flash coffin. Another 99 to go
the HTML5Test.com page does not seem to be very useful. It gives equal weigh to important and trivial features, and gives points for things that are not even part of the HTML5 spec, including Ogg Vobis support.
It just seems like a random list of features, some critically important and some trivial decoration.
Scoring really low indicates a browser hasn't many any effort to adopt HTML5 features, but scoring above 100 starts to enter meaningless territory.
Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...
I'm sure that statement is supposed to be somewhat (or downright) demeaning but honestly I've tried them all and I still find Safari preferable to any alternative I've used. So for me I've tried them and you're right I can't find better but you're wrong is saying I haven't looked.
Now what's become of all the screaming Adobe fanatics? You know, the ones who a few days ago were eviscerating Steve Jobs for doing the same thing, but bluntly and without all the corporatese?
"In the new experience we are taking the content out of the box."
Which is to say, "Flash sucked and we're dumping it."
Do we suppose they do pickup lines in technobabble? "Mr. Happy 2.0 has been developed to provide a revolutionary, paradigm-shifting application for users who demand a fully optimized solution." Oooh baby.
Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...
I don't think that is accurate at all. Why do people impose their feelings about a product as if it is the only natural and correct way to feel about it and all others are just wrong or lazy?
I intentionally use Safari over other browsers because I like it better. I prefer how Safari handles RSS feeds. I keep a folder in the bookmarks bar with all of my feeds in one folder. It is really nice with the badge (a number in parenthesis) showing the new feed count. To me it is much better than any other feed option out there.
There are many reasons why I prefer Safari and it has nothing to do with me not being bothered to find anything better.
The HTML 5 spec is actually completely silent on video codecs. Anyone can use any codec they want and still be compliant with HTML 5.
What will kill FireFox is the fickle nature of their fans and the existence of Chrome. Chrome eats FireFox's market share while hardly making a dent in Safari's.
Exactly!
The whole Mozilla Foundation is getting all religious about the video codec (which is not even a specified part of HTML5) while Chrome is eating them for lunch. They need to stop wasting their time fighting a battle which even if they win, they lose (even if Theora becomes the specified codec in HTML5, the limited mobile support, and the non-existent content will kill it.
Also, this whole religious battle form Mozilla's side is stupid. Lets get some facts:
Mozilla CAN afford the license. The license is 5 million / year at the MOST, but Mozilla earns about 70mn / year, the majority of which is straight up profits, with very little expenses. They already support proprietary non-free codecs. You need to look no further than MP3, JPEG, and GIF's, all of which Firefox supports (not sure about MP3 though) to find non-open, non-free formats that Mozilla already supports.
I honestly don't understand why the Mozilla Foundation is trying to fight this battle. It can, at best, be a pyrrhic victory for them. If Theora is indeed established as the go-to codec, all that is going to happen is all video on the internet will continue being delivered as H.264 through Flash (the majority of Flash video currently is encoded in H.264).
YouTube has a long way to go. Their HTML5 beta is very buggy, and I haven't seen any improvements since they first announced the public HTML5 beta. They make HTML5 look bad.
I like Safari's simplicity. And as long as I have the clickToFlash thing, I don't need a thousand add-ons. But I use Firefox once in a while and I root for them a bit.
Comments
Actually, Firefox and Safari are both basically holding steady while Chrome takes share from Explorer...
http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-w...-200904-201005
Firefox doesn't really compete with Chrome in my opinion.
Firefox is all about extensions and add-ons, while Chrome is focused more on being clean and minimalistic.
Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...
I just downloaded Chrome. I like it best already and 142/160. Wow!
Flash reminds me of RealPlayer.
Man you ARE old!
Now I remember, paying (if I remember correctly) $AU29.95 for my subscription. What a joke!
BTW guys how about laying off poor old Adobe, like c'mon guys, it's not like they deserve it, or anything?
Flash reminds me of RealPlayer.
Yes.
They are both skankware. However, at least it was easy to survive without RealPlayer. A lot of sites are unusable without Flash; fortunately that is changing and folks like Scribd are helping make the Internet a better place.
Die Flash, die!
Actually, Firefox and Safari are both basically holding steady while Chrome takes share from Explorer...
http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-w...-200904-201005
Firefox doesn't really compete with Chrome in my opinion.
Firefox is all about extensions and add-ons, while Chrome is focused more on being clean and minimalistic.
Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...
Damn, your right, hate to admit it myself, I just use Safari cause I'm lazy, damn you
and your logic!
EDIT: hey, no I'm not! - I don't trust/like/care-for GOOG as a purveyor of all things on TEH NET, any longer.
The damn is breaking.
I'm pretty sure you meant "dam"... but I still got it.
Why do people always have such a beef with Safari? I think it is a fine browser. And lets face it, there aint much difference between modern browsers nowadays. Especially when comparing webkit driven ones.
Agreed. That's the reason for open standard based browsers so they look the same.
Back on topic, one more nail in the Flash coffin. Another 99 to go
Firefox 3.6.3 scores 101 out of 160 on the following test: http://www.html5test.com/
the HTML5Test.com page does not seem to be very useful. It gives equal weigh to important and trivial features, and gives points for things that are not even part of the HTML5 spec, including Ogg Vobis support.
It just seems like a random list of features, some critically important and some trivial decoration.
Scoring really low indicates a browser hasn't many any effort to adopt HTML5 features, but scoring above 100 starts to enter meaningless territory.
Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...
I'm sure that statement is supposed to be somewhat (or downright) demeaning but honestly I've tried them all and I still find Safari preferable to any alternative I've used. So for me I've tried them and you're right I can't find better but you're wrong is saying I haven't looked.
"In the new experience we are taking the content out of the box."
Which is to say, "Flash sucked and we're dumping it."
Do we suppose they do pickup lines in technobabble? "Mr. Happy 2.0 has been developed to provide a revolutionary, paradigm-shifting application for users who demand a fully optimized solution." Oooh baby.
Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...
I don't think that is accurate at all. Why do people impose their feelings about a product as if it is the only natural and correct way to feel about it and all others are just wrong or lazy?
I intentionally use Safari over other browsers because I like it better. I prefer how Safari handles RSS feeds. I keep a folder in the bookmarks bar with all of my feeds in one folder. It is really nice with the badge (a number in parenthesis) showing the new feed count. To me it is much better than any other feed option out there.
There are many reasons why I prefer Safari and it has nothing to do with me not being bothered to find anything better.
The HTML 5 spec is actually completely silent on video codecs. Anyone can use any codec they want and still be compliant with HTML 5.
What will kill FireFox is the fickle nature of their fans and the existence of Chrome. Chrome eats FireFox's market share while hardly making a dent in Safari's.
Exactly!
The whole Mozilla Foundation is getting all religious about the video codec (which is not even a specified part of HTML5) while Chrome is eating them for lunch. They need to stop wasting their time fighting a battle which even if they win, they lose (even if Theora becomes the specified codec in HTML5, the limited mobile support, and the non-existent content will kill it.
Also, this whole religious battle form Mozilla's side is stupid. Lets get some facts:
Mozilla CAN afford the license. The license is 5 million / year at the MOST, but Mozilla earns about 70mn / year, the majority of which is straight up profits, with very little expenses. They already support proprietary non-free codecs. You need to look no further than MP3, JPEG, and GIF's, all of which Firefox supports (not sure about MP3 though) to find non-open, non-free formats that Mozilla already supports.
I honestly don't understand why the Mozilla Foundation is trying to fight this battle. It can, at best, be a pyrrhic victory for them. If Theora is indeed established as the go-to codec, all that is going to happen is all video on the internet will continue being delivered as H.264 through Flash (the majority of Flash video currently is encoded in H.264).
Actually, Firefox and Safari are both basically holding steady while Chrome takes share from Explorer...
http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-w...-200904-201005
Firefox doesn't really compete with Chrome in my opinion.
Firefox is all about extensions and add-ons, while Chrome is focused more on being clean and minimalistic.
Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...
why are you so right?
Ditching Flash for HTML5, like YouTube...
YouTube has a long way to go. Their HTML5 beta is very buggy, and I haven't seen any improvements since they first announced the public HTML5 beta. They make HTML5 look bad.
Wow! Great comment!
Me too, "real" player has been relegated to the dustbin of history, and so will flash, very soon....
Firefox 3.6.3 scores 101 out of 160 on the following test: http://www.html5test.com/
Edit: That's on both Windows 7 and Leopard.
Interesting page. Here's what I get for various browsers :
Updated version using a more recent version of the same test :