Apple's Safari 3.1 to support downloadable web fonts, more

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 79
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,435member
    Firefox is not faster on my computer. It "is" more flexible though.



    I welcome further advancements for Safari. Since Leopard I've been relatively happy with it.
  • Reply 22 of 79
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Buck View Post


    Talk to the webmasters so they can have their websites fixed. 95% of the time that happens because they don't want/know how to follow the web standards. If nobody acts on that nothing will ever change.



    Are you serious? Then why do they work on Firefox, etal? That's like asking the water company to slow down their pressure in order to fix your leaking faucet.
  • Reply 23 of 79
    For you Firefox users, Mozilla released a second beta version of Firefox 3.0 with a Mac-like theme. The beta can be downloaded here ?> http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all-beta.html. The theme can be found here ?> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/6050.
  • Reply 24 of 79
    I won't say Opera never crashes or that all websites display fine with it, but mostly I notice that if I identify as any other browser they do work, and if not than use unicode UTF-8 and bang. I've been using Opera for years, since win2k, through Linux and now OS X, admitedly side by side with IE, Mozilla and now Safari. But seriously, if you get used to tabs, which they've had long before Safari, Firefox or IE, mouse gestures, and pretty speedy rendering, how can you switch back?



    here, my first 2 € cents...
  • Reply 25 of 79
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bluedalmatian View Post


    Possibly because Apple has never got the hang of putting network transmission & UI updating under the control of separate threads.



    As another example...try using Finder to connect to a file server which is down or on a slow network....Finder hangs for several minutes until the network connection times out.



    You've not upgraded to Leopard yet?





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    So what do you use? I find Safari hangs on some sites forever especially one's with imageing whereas Firefox just snaps. I still use Safari as my default because I prefer the interface but it does has issues.



    Firefox is far from snappy by comparison to Safari v3. If anything is a bit slow it seems to be Adobe's Flash plugin lately. v9 seems to be slower than v8 for me causing occasional beachballs.







    Quote:
    Originally Posted by abilstein View Post


    I also disagree that developers won't use the HTML5 features for years. I'll begin using them immediately in cases where they will offer a better user experience under the principles of progressive enhancement. Downloadable fonts come immediately to mind.



    Exactly. It's why I've been using text-shadow and other Safari only CSS features for years. CSS transforms and animations are also a nice one to use since Safari users will get the nice effects whereas other users will get plain old CSS until they upgrade to a better browser.



    Client side SQL is a harder one though as that's not just a presentation layer thing.
  • Reply 26 of 79
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    So what do you use? I find Safari hangs on some sites forever especially one's with imageing whereas Firefox just snaps. I still use Safari as my default because I prefer the interface but it does has issues.



    I've been using Firefox despite its problems eventually locking up on my, then I force quit and start again.



    I just started using Flock when someone mentioned it here, it's working pretty well so far.
  • Reply 27 of 79
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    Are you serious? Then why do they work on Firefox, etal? That's like asking the water company to slow down their pressure in order to fix your leaking faucet.



    It's quite possible to code a site to work on IE and Firefox and not on Safari or Opera by ignoring web standards or just sticking in stupid browser sniffers that only know about IE or Firefox.



    Both IE and Firefox also have their proprietary crap too like ActiveX components and XUL which aren't available in other browsers.
  • Reply 28 of 79
    Does anyone know of a mac web browser that supports Single File Web Pages. I know IE 7 displays them but I was looking for something I could use on my mac.
  • Reply 29 of 79
    I wish Safari 3.1 was at least as stable as Safari 2. S3 failed to impress me so far.
  • Reply 30 of 79
    eaieai Posts: 417member
    You can try out Safari 3.1's nightly builds at http://nightly.webkit.org/
  • Reply 31 of 79
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post


    Both IE and Firefox also have their proprietary crap too like ActiveX components and XUL which aren't available in other browsers.



    XUL isn't proprietary, and I've not seen a web page that demands loading one in order to use the site. I've not even seen a site request that I do. XUL works on Flock too, and I count four other browsers that support XUL to some extent.



    As far as I've seen, there is no comparable architecture for Safari, Safari requires the use of unsupported back doors to allow the same type extensions that are available to the Gecko engine.
  • Reply 32 of 79
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    Why does Firefox still work better & faster than Safari?



    Why do you ask? Safari runs rings around Firefox on my system. And is more compatible too. I haven't launched Firefox in months. Have no need to.



    Looking forward to the Safari update.
  • Reply 33 of 79
    I think the engineers are taking time for their fantasies... Although these are "great" enhancements, if the other browsers don't support them also, they will be useless since not many websites will implement to make use of these features.



    They should try working on making Safari a better browser. Firefox is way more advanced and flexible comparing the Safari, and it is way more compatible with web sites than Safari. I can't use Safari for a lot of web sites. You have to accept to fact that you have a very marginal market share, and you can't just force your own standards, but you you have to comply with others'.



    They didn't even put a 'New Tab' button on Safari 3. Safari is the only browser missing that "essential" button. They are just being stubborn, forcing you to use cmd-T, as always. That's what I don't like about Apple in general, and Safari in particular.
  • Reply 34 of 79
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 2,681member
    Every browser has problems, so your experiences may vary. Safari works fine on my system. Yeah it crashes from time to time, but so does Firefox. They are both just as quick at loading pages. So far I haven't had any issues with any specific sites as far not being able to render them. They both adhere to web standards.



    The main reason I prefer Safari over Firefox is, rendered pages in Safari are much more beautiful to look at, especially form controls and fonts. Firefox is just butt-ugly. Maybe the new version will fix that?



    Anyway, I guess we all have our opinions... can't wait for Safari 3.1
  • Reply 35 of 79
    I am a long time satisfied Safari user, but after upgrading to Leopard a couple of weeks ago Safari has become very crash-prone. It usually happens as I dig down into a website by following links. Then, this morning, a couple of long time bookmarks failed to work. Had to do a reset of Safari (including loss of all my cookies, auto fill, passwords, etc.) which was a major pain. Even that didn't work immediately, but after waiting a few minutes, it "took" and I could once again access the two websites which previously Safari told me it couldn't find the server. My PowerBook running Tiger found them just fine, so it wasn't the sites' fault. I don't think I am the only one having these kind of problems. Hope 3.1 will address them.
  • Reply 36 of 79
    nasseraenasserae Posts: 3,167member
    Does that mean that I will be able to read complex fonts such as Hebrew and Arabic on my iPhone Safari?
  • Reply 37 of 79
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 2,681member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BlackPepper View Post


    you can't just force your own standards, but you you have to comply with others'.



    These features aren't Apple's standards, these are upcoming web standards; CSS3, HTML5... And speaking of "having" to comply with standards... uh, no you don't, it's just better if you do.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BlackPepper View Post


    They didn't even put a 'New Tab' button on Safari 3. Safari is the only browser missing that "essential" button.



    I'd hardly call that an "essential" button, but you're always free to make suggestions to Apple about it.
  • Reply 38 of 79
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,435member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BlackPepper View Post


    I think the engineers are taking time for their fantasies... Although these are "great" enhancements, if the other browsers don't support them also, they will be useless since not many websites will implement to make use of these features.



    They should try working on making Safari a better browser. Firefox is way more advanced and flexible comparing the Safari, and it is way more compatible with web sites than Safari. I can't use Safari for a lot of web sites. You have to accept to fact that you have a very marginal market share, and you can't just force your own standards, but you you have to comply with others'.



    They didn't even put a 'New Tab' button on Safari 3. Safari is the only browser missing that "essential" button. They are just being stubborn, forcing you to use cmd-T, as always. That's what I don't like about Apple in general, and Safari in particular.



    Your post is a bit illogical. The Engineers are not adding fantasies they're adding support for features that are open and standard. Adding more functionality to CSS and Java is certainly not a fantasy endeavor. Preparing for HTML5 is not a fantasty feature either.



    You cannot expect web authors to utilize features until the Browsers can support such features. While some may say Apple is jumping the gun here in reality they are not.



    http://www.whatwg.org/



    Quote:

    What is the WHATWG?



    The WHATWG is a growing community of people interested in evolving the Web. It focuses primarily on the development of HTML and APIs needed for Web applications.



    The WHATWG was founded by individuals of Apple, the Mozilla Foundation, and Opera Software in 2004, after a W3C workshop. Apple, Mozilla and Opera were becoming increasingly concerned about the W3C?s direction with XHTML, lack of interest in HTML and apparent disregard for the needs of real-world authors. So, in response, these organisations set out with a mission to address these concerns and the Web Hypertext Application Technology Working Group was born.



    Note Mozilla and Opera. Assuming that nextgen feature will not be supported in other browsers is folly. Assuming that improvements to browsers and adding new features is somehow mutually exclusive is short sighted IMO.



    I think you probably need to work a bit harder at understanding who and what are the evolving web standards before you launch into assumptive misinformation. Apple is not forcing any standards that Mozilla, Opera and plenty of other web companies don't have access to.
  • Reply 39 of 79
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BlackPepper View Post


    I think the engineers are taking time for their fantasies... Although these are "great" enhancements, if the other browsers don't support them also, they will be useless since not many websites will implement to make use of these features.



    They should try working on making Safari a better browser. Firefox is way more advanced and flexible comparing the Safari, and it is way more compatible with web sites than Safari. I can't use Safari for a lot of web sites. You have to accept to fact that you have a very marginal market share, and you can't just force your own standards, but you you have to comply with others'.



    They didn't even put a 'New Tab' button on Safari 3. Safari is the only browser missing that "essential" button. They are just being stubborn, forcing you to use cmd-T, as always. That's what I don't like about Apple in general, and Safari in particular.



    I would just like to reiterate what mjtomlin stated about following standards. Safari follows more open standards than Firefox or IE.



    Also, there is no GUI button for a new tab but the simple Command+T will create a new tab.
  • Reply 40 of 79
    foo2foo2 Posts: 1,077member
    With the new advanced features not being heavily used for a long time to come, I'd be concerned that S3.1 will introduce a new slough of security holes that no one but the criminals will know about.
Sign In or Register to comment.