Road to Mac OS X Leopard: Safari 3.0

2456

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Cedric View Post


    Am I the only one thinking Safari 3 is slower than Safari 2 while browsing on the net? Maybe it's gonna change with Leopard, but for now I think it's slower...



    It's definitely faster on Leopard. I've noticed that as a whole Leopard generally feels faster throughout though so maybe it's something to do with wider performance enhancements.
  • Reply 22 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by syklee26 View Post


    is the beta version which can be downloaded right now essentially same as what will be included in Leopard?



    "Essentially?" Yes. Exactually? No.



    Safari 3 is beta. Expect final version included in launch of Leopard. Until then, the full features can't be enjoyed in its ultimate form.
  • Reply 23 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by syklee26 View Post


    is the beta version which can be downloaded right now essentially same as what will be included in Leopard?



    It is basically the same. However it doesn't have webclipping; timed purging of history; or full blown content searching of history and bookmarks.



    I'm looking forward to the content searching of history and bookmarks (I hate it when i've been to a website, moved on, decided i wanted to look at a past website which i haven't bookmarked, and then spend ages trying to track it down. I tried to avoid this by bookmarking lots, but now i have so many bookmarks they are almost useless. Even organizing my bookmarks wouldn't really help. Content search is a brilliant idea (not new, but definitely awesome).



    As for Safari 3 beta (3.0.3) being a RAM hog, I totally agree. I've only two tabs going, but Safari is using 270 MB of RAM. Luckily I upgraded my macbook pro to 2gb.



    I too use to hate safari. However, I haven't used anything else since Safari 3 beta came out. Although that has more to do with "Inquisitor" than anything. I hope before apple disables InputManagers permanently, they purchase Inquisitor and intergrate it into Safari. According to the wikipedia entry on Inquisitor, it does not work on the Safari 3 in leopard. However that my not be true, being based on the initial apprehension that apple had removed InputManagers (Currently they are still supported, but by default are not. Apparently though they will eventually be axed). If you haven't used it, you're missing out. Get it here: http://www.inquisitorx.com/safari/ (and no, I am not on the payroll).
  • Reply 24 of 111
    no. i want to be able to open a new tab with one mouse click or a double-click. right now i have four options: 1. FILE-> NEW TAB, 2. right click on tabbar, select "New Tab", 3. CMD+T, 4. Mouse Gesture



    a simple "PLUS"-symbol or the double-click ability would solve this problem. this is stubborn.
  • Reply 25 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Fotek2001 View Post


    Why does 'new tab' need a button...? Just hit cmd-t on the keyboard.



    Do I have to??? Why are we being forced to use keyboard shortcut? Just give people options. Let people choose!



    If you think that way, remove the buttons for Home, Back/Forward, Add a Bug. Force people to use shortcuts for everything!
  • Reply 26 of 111
    I'm liking the 3.0 beta. It may have issues with OS X sleeping and may have some memory leaks though. I rarely go a day without force quitting Safari, usually early in the morning and especially after watching a series of multimedia pages the day before. But, beta is as beta does.



    I'm grateful for 3.0's search, but with one gripe. The search field does not survive switching tabs. If I'm looking for something on more than one tabs I have to open the search field and type in my query for each tab.



    I still much prefer Firefox's Live Bookmarks over Safari's RSS reader but I'm gradually seeing its advantages.



    Anywho, my $0.02.





    PS, I'm one of those wack-jobs that really really really wants a go button.

    PSS, And ferchissakes, when clicking in the URL field, highlight the entire field! Don't make me click the tiny favicon.
  • Reply 27 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BlackPepper View Post


    Do I have to??? Why are we being forced to use keyboard shortcut? Just give people options. Let people choose!



    If you think that way, remove the buttons for Home, Back/Forward, Add a Bug. Force people to use shortcuts for everything!



    Yes, let's have buttons for copy, paste, cut, view source, change text encoding to shift-JIS too! OK seriously, I can see where you're coming from but what's with the hate for keyboard shortcuts? You surely use keyboard shortcuts for quit, close window, copy, paste etc?
  • Reply 28 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Fotek2001 View Post


    Yes, let's have buttons for copy, paste, cut, view source, change text encoding to shift-JIS too! OK seriously, I can see where you're coming from but what's with the hate for keyboard shortcuts? You surely use keyboard shortcuts for quit, close window, copy, paste etc?



    Options are good. Customizations are good. I'm fine with letting Apple set unusual defaults. I give them an honest try. But if they don't work for me, or if they don't work for me all the time, don't force me to conform.
  • Reply 29 of 111
    I'm a massive fan of "command + L" for selecting the URL field. If only macbook pro's came with that crazy little nob thingy on thinkpads, i'd never have to take my fingers off the keys again (actually, i hate that nob thingy).
  • Reply 30 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BlackPepper View Post


    Do I have to??? Why are we being forced to use keyboard shortcut? Just give people options. Let people choose!



    If you think that way, remove the buttons for Home, Back/Forward, Add a Bug. Force people to use shortcuts for everything!



    Hold down the control key and click a tab and you get more choices, click in a blank 'tab' area and you get one choice.



    As the adage goes, the more choices, the longer it takes to make a decision.



    For speed, simplicity and a cleaner interface, buttons are kept to a minimum. That's basic, good, application design.



    For sure, command-t, as well as, command-n, command-l and even command-o are significantly faster than any button could be, and thank heavens Safari isn't cluttered with them.
  • Reply 31 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jeremy Brown View Post


    I'm a massive fan of "command + L" for selecting the URL field. If only macbook pro's came with that crazy little nob thingy on thinkpads, i'd never have to take my fingers off the keys again (actually, i hate that nob thingy).



    Crazy little nob thingy, AKA the Nubbin, AKA the, well, it's a little risque so it's best left to the reader's imagination. LOL



    Again, the whole keyboard shortcut versus mouse stuff (buttons or click actions) is really about choice. If my hand is on the mouse don't force me to go to the keyboard. Maybe I'm lounging with my feet up on the desk, maybe I'm drinking coffee. Don't force me turn around, put down the mug of caffeinated goodness, just because there's no button.



    Sure, hide the button by default or turn off actions by default. I don't mind. Make the interface as clean and simple as possible. Great.



    But I like choices as much as I like options, which is just as much as I like customizations.
  • Reply 32 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lookingglass View Post


    Crazy little nob thingy, AKA the Nubbin, AKA the, well, it's a little risque so it's best left to the reader's imagination. LOL



    Again, the whole keyboard shortcut versus mouse stuff (buttons or click actions) is really about choice. If my hand is on the mouse don't force me to go to the keyboard. Maybe I'm lounging with my feet up on the desk, maybe I'm drinking coffee. Don't force me turn around, put down the mug of caffeinated goodness, just because there's no button.



    Sure, hide the button by default or turn off actions by default. I don't mind. Make the interface as clean and simple as possible. Great.



    But I like choices as much as I like options, which is just as much as I like customizations.



    Yeah, your right.



    I actually also wouldn't mind having the option to split the stop refresh button in two. Although i;m not sure the use of this would justify the added complexity.
  • Reply 33 of 111
    I find it's six and one half dozen the other. Depending on what you have open in each browser, RAM usage becomes an issue.



    For example, right now I'm at:

    Safari - 536.50 MB of RAM

    Firefox - 398.65 MB of RAM



    However, the real issue is:

    Safari - 12% CPU

    Firefox - 50% CPU



    Firefox in this state is basically unusable. Bit of a pain, for sure. Safari still snappy.

    Of course, this is all Flash's fault, as near as I can tell. Would be nice to turn Flash off in Firefox ala Camino.
  • Reply 34 of 111
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Wasn't Safari 3 Suppose to have Built-In Anti-Phlishing Technology? And wasn't Apple working with Google on this?



    The feature is not in the beta is it? Its not listed as one of Safari 3 features.



    Was it dropped due to privacy concerns (i.e., people were unconfortable with the idea of sending every URL they click on to Google for a check).



    Dave
  • Reply 35 of 111
    Here's a simple test to demonstrate one of the memory leaks in Safari:
    • Quit Safari completely and restart. Don't browse anywhere.

    • Next, start Activity Monitor and sort by name, scroll down to see Safari. It'll be using about 30MB of memory.

    • Now, in Safari, just press the Bookmarks icon to show the bookmarks and then close it again

    • You'll see the memory usage increase, fall back a little, and finish higher than when you started

    • Now, click on and off the Bookmarks icon until you get bored, and you'll see the memory use Safari grow and grow

    That's just one example of a leak - it's probably proportional to the number of bookmarks you have, if you don't have many, you might not notice it. I haven't tested that.



    I tested that on Safari 3.0.3 under 10.4.10 on an Intel iMac.



    Time for Apple to sort this out. That's just bad programming.



    Paul
  • Reply 36 of 111
    tbagginstbaggins Posts: 2,306member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sandau View Post


    i'm running 3.0.3 and its pretty snappy! i love how fast it loads. which is unlike FF 2.0, which takes like 19 bounces on initial load before it starts pinwheeling. everytime i run firefox I ask myself, 'why?' I used to love FF, but its just too slow on my macbook pro (core duo).



    I don't see any memory issues here.





    Safari 3.0.3 beta was great for me too.... at first. Then it just kept seizing more and more memory, and wouldn't release it, even if I quit the app. I eventually had to start doing restarts. But lately, Safari grinds along very slowly no matter WHAT I do, especially at launch.



    Out of morbid curiousity, I just now launched Safari, and timed how long it took from me clicking on the Safari icon in the dock to it finishing loading my default home page (Yahoo). Result? 1 minute, 38 seconds. And I'm on a cable modem, NOT on dial-up.



    This is unacceptable, obviously. So I'll wait for the 'real deal' Safari and hope the problems are fixed. 'til then, its Firefox 2.0.



    .
  • Reply 37 of 111
    Memory leak example #2:
    • Quit Safari and restart

    • Open Activity Monitor and find Safari

    • Browse to www.appleinsider.com and then do nothing

    • Watch the memory usage slowly creep up (and marvel at the CPU utilisation playing those annoying flash ads)

  • Reply 38 of 111
    markw10markw10 Posts: 356member
    The changes sound great but one thing I don't like with the current Safari is you can only select whether or not to allow popups for all pages. Many browsers have a option where you can just allow popups from certain pages and not others. Is this going to be in the new Safari?
  • Reply 39 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    For sure, command-t, as well as, command-n, command-l and even command-o are significantly faster than any button could be, and thank heavens Safari isn't cluttered with them.



    Well, I really don't care about the milliseconds I will save by using the keyboard shortcuts. I want to be able to do browsing without using keyboard. A mouse must be enough, when using the bookmarks. BUT, the thing is, no matter who is right, that doesn't matter, because it's up to a choice, and Safari doesn't give that choice.



    The button I am talking about is not an unusual one. Every browser except Safari has it, and it's one of the main and most used buttons.



    Anyway, I will probably continue with Firefox, although I would prefer using a native browser.
  • Reply 40 of 111
    Seriously, caring about having a button to click when needing to open a new tab is silly. You only use one hand to browse using the mouse, the other hand can quickly smack a cmd-t in there when needed. It's not that hard to do, people.
Sign In or Register to comment.