Apple seeds Safari 1.3 Developer Preview 5 for Panther

Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
Work on Apple's Safari Web browser continues for Mac OS X 10.3 Panther.



Although Apple Computer is rapidly developing Safari 2.0 for inclusion in its next-generation Tiger operating system, the company is continuing with efforts to stabilize and improve a version of the Web browser for its current Panther operating system.



According to sources, Apple this week released Safari 1.3 Developer Preview 5 to its Apple Developer Connection (ADC) members. The first developer preview of the browser--Safari 1.3 build 148--was offered to ADC members in June, though successive seeds were made available only to employees and AppleSeed members.



Unlike the current version of Safari, which is based on Panther's underlying WebKit foundation, Safari 1.3 contains the same Web Kit functionality and site compatibility support delivered in Safari 2.0 for Mac OS X Tiger, sans the added user features.



Safari 1.3 also features new "JavaScriptGlue" framework code, a new JavaScript console window, and an updated developer Safari "Debug" menu that includes new options to toggle Safari's window transparency, shadow display, and background rendering.



However, sources say the "Web Archive" feature that appeared in the first developer preview of the browser has since been removed from the most recent release.



Both Safari 1.3 and Safari 2.0 are at build 168 in their respective development cycles.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 12
    Quote:

    Originally posted by AppleInsider



    However, sources say the "Web Archive" feature that appeared in the first developer preview of the browser has since been removed from the most recent release.




    Well, hopefully this feature will re-appear in Safari 2.0? It was the only reason I didn't trash the IE the very same second that Safari 1.0 came out...
  • Reply 2 of 12
    hobbeshobbes Posts: 1,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by durandal

    Well, hopefully this feature will re-appear in Safari 2.0? It was the only reason I didn't trash the IE the very same second that Safari 1.0 came out...



    Safari 1.3 is for Panther -- Apple (finally) realized it was a really stupid idea to fragment their already tiny share of the browser market with mutliple WebKit versions.



    Safari 2.0 will have all the new feaures -- RSS, web archive, parental controls, smarter "can't connect" messages, etc.
  • Reply 3 of 12
    zozo Posts: 3,115member
    ditto about the web archive feature and the possibility of keeping sites (e-commerce, e-tickets, passwords, favorites, etc) as storaged "bookmarks". That was a great feature.



    Although now we can save sites directly as PDFs. But, its somewhere "lost" in your documents folder and not a part of Safari.
  • Reply 4 of 12
    louzerlouzer Posts: 1,054member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ZO

    ditto about the web archive feature and the possibility of keeping sites (e-commerce, e-tickets, passwords, favorites, etc) as storaged "bookmarks". That was a great feature.



    Although now we can save sites directly as PDFs. But, its somewhere "lost" in your documents folder and not a part of Safari.




    I don't know, all my PDFs automatically generate in a PDF folder I have (linked through the Dock). Though I don't "Save" to PDF, I print to PDF using some hack I found (basically creating a "PDF Printer" driver, and just saying print, rather than the clunky "Preview->Save to PDF->Pick name and location" stuff.



    However, the whole point of pre-release builds is to work out feature ideas and the kinks. It may be that this release doesn't include this because (a) something went wrong recently, and didn't want to include something that would crash half the time, (b) they left it out of the build intentionally (i.e. its done, so no sense keep sending it out and having people continually testing it when it needs no more testing), (c) they've scrapped the feature because it was causing too many problems, or there were too many scenarios that can't be dealt with in the time frame (you know, the same reason all the cool features of LongHorn are being pulled), etc.



    The downside of (c) is that, since it was in there to begin with, people expect it to be there and so, when/if it gets pulled, then everyone is up in arms (hey, just like the 'minimize in place' feature, which turns out to have bugs in it, as people who've turned it on using tinkertool or the like have found).
  • Reply 5 of 12
    zozo Posts: 3,115member
    picky picky... yes I meant "print" to PDF.



    And let me sidetrack here a second because I never understood why the hell some print monkeys one day decided that you have to "print to file" (EPS, PDF. etc) instead of, logically, SAVING AS a file. I honestly HATE that and I don't see how any joe consumer will ever know or think of that. when you PRINT you print to a printer and, pop, out comes a dead-tree version. Printing TO a file makes no sense whatsoever. I've submitted that suggestion to apple a thousand times to directly add "Save to PDF" in the "File" menu. Christ, what the fuck does it take????? (sorry, venting years of frustration here)



    Back on track.



    If Internet Explorer from 5 years ago already had "save web archive" down to perfection, as well as "save offline copy" , I honestly don't see why the heck anyone else can't do it either.
  • Reply 6 of 12
    hobbeshobbes Posts: 1,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ZO

    And let me sidetrack here a second because I never understood why the hell some print monkeys one day decided that you have to "print to file" (EPS, PDF. etc) instead of, logically, SAVING AS a file. I honestly HATE that and I don't see how any joe consumer will ever know or think of that. when you PRINT you print to a printer and, pop, out comes a dead-tree version. Printing TO a file makes no sense whatsoever. I've submitted that suggestion to apple a thousand times to directly add "Save to PDF" in the "File" menu. Christ, what the **** does it take????? (sorry, venting years of frustration here)



    Quite agree. "Print to PDF" isn't at all intuitive.
  • Reply 7 of 12
    adamraoadamrao Posts: 175member
    Not being able to save web pages for later viewing is my biggest beef with Safari. I didn't even realize they were working to fix that in Safari 2.0! Great!



    Does anyone know of a solution in the mean-time? Third-party software perhaps? I don't want to use another browser other than Safari, and saving/printing to PDF isn't a very intuitive solution. Any ideas?
  • Reply 8 of 12
    zozo Posts: 3,115member
    Yup, you can download this



  • Reply 9 of 12
    What about the obvious - Firefox?



    I've abandoned Safari in favor of Firefox for various reasons. I don't often save web pages, but at least I can if I wanted to. Another reason for the Fox...



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=47989
  • Reply 10 of 12
    hobbeshobbes Posts: 1,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by adamrao

    Not being able to save web pages for later viewing is my biggest beef with Safari. I didn't even realize they were working to fix that in Safari 2.0! Great!



    Does anyone know of a solution in the mean-time? Third-party software perhaps? I don't want to use another browser other than Safari, and saving/printing to PDF isn't a very intuitive solution. Any ideas?




    What's wrong with printing to PDF, at least until Safari 2.0 comes out, with Tiger?



    I don't think the way it's implemented is particularly intuitive to new users, but on the whole it seems to me a pretty good solution.
  • Reply 11 of 12
    pbg4 dudepbg4 dude Posts: 1,611member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Hobbes

    What's wrong with printing to PDF, at least until Safari 2.0 comes out, with Tiger?



    I don't think the way it's implemented is particularly intuitive to new users, but on the whole it seems to me a pretty good solution.




    With a web archive, you can still click on the links, etc. With a .pdf version, all it does is look the same, it doesn't act like a web page because all the links and any functionality don't transfer into a .pdf file.
  • Reply 12 of 12
    hobbeshobbes Posts: 1,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by PBG4 Dude

    With a web archive, you can still click on the links, etc. With a .pdf version, all it does is look the same, it doesn't act like a web page because all the links and any functionality don't transfer into a .pdf file.



    Ah. Guess then I'd recommend something like SiteSucker or Firefox, until Safari 2.0 comes out.
Sign In or Register to comment.