You sure? What has changed? I'm pretty sure they were using webkit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
Actually, Nokia were the first company to put WebKit on a cell phone and their roadmap hasn't changed as far as I know.
I never said they aren't using it now in the S60. I said that they are "going with FF." Nokia announced a couple weeks ago that will be working with Mozilla to port FF to the Qt Toolikit, which was developed by TrollTech, a company they acquired this year. Nokia wants to distance themselves from the Apple-funded WebKit and Mozilla wants to get in on the mobile browser front dominated by WebKit.
I like Safari, but just hate how it handles pages, rather than let you by default open pages in new tabs, it requires you do hold down cmd, or else it opens in a new window, and I don't like how it handles bookmarks.
The link in new tabs can be done by default with a simple editing of the safari Plist file. you have to be using v3.1 or later, but the preference is there, it's just hasn't been made into a GUI control yet.
The link in new tabs can be done by default with a simple editing of the safari Plist file. you have to be using v3.1 or later, but the preference is there, it's just hasn't been made into a GUI control yet.
The link in new tabs can be done by default with a simple editing of the safari Plist file. you have to be using v3.1 or later, but the preference is there, it's just hasn't been made into a GUI control yet.
That doesn't work with Safari 4 though, I've tried...I like Safari for the most part otherwise, and 4 seems more stable for me, but tabs is a major annoyance for me ATM, and somewhat defeats the purpose of having a tabbed browser IMO, that doesn't default to tabs. Every other browser I've used does that, but Safari does not, or at least has the option to change it in the preferences.
Edit: The middle click does work though, it's a easier workaround that cmd+click, but I still find it annoying that Apple doesn't give an easy option, like in the Preferences dialog - primarily their way or else you're installing plugins like Saft. \
However lately, I've been getting back into FF3, as the newest updates don't seem to crash as much, and there are some extensions that I really did miss, and I like being able to search for specific URLs in the address bar.
After reading the Google Chrome comic, I'm really excited about it, Webkit+fast JS+plugins and other features, Safari has always been so featureless and had a poor UI on Windows. I like Google's ultra simple/plain UI too.
I'd wager that the option is still in their, but has been renamed so that commend doesn't work any longer.
You can try going to ~/Library/Preferences/com.apple.Safari.plist and looking for the right option.
edit: Scratch that! It was apparently taken out of the developer build but was put back in as of the Aug 22nd release of the Safari 4 beta.
I'll have to update to the newer build then.
As far as Chrome goes, it's pretty nice so far - very minimalist UI, uses an older version of Webkit than Safari 4, the address bar is a cross of FF3's url search and Google search box, opens all links as tabs, and I like it's pop-up blocker.
So basically what you are saying is that the fact that all automobiles use steering wheels, instead of some using wheels and some using joysticks and some using head mounted displays is detrimental to the future of the auto industry. Sometimes standards are a good thing.
Your analogy is pretty flawed. Keeping with the car analogies, a steering wheel would be a standard part of any car. Regardless of which car you get in, you will have a steering wheel in front you. WebKit, Gecko, etc. are like the engines in a car. A Hummer's engine is vastly different than a Corvette's, but both accomplish the same basic function, which is to make the car go. No one would want to put a Hummer's engine in a Corvette (well, some might ) but no one can argue that they are both very good at what they do, and will give you the same end result, regardless of how it gets to that end. The differences between WebKit and Gecko, for example, are not in the fact that they try to do two separate things, but the fact that they do the same thing in two separate ways. While one may be better than the other, they both still have a steering wheel.
an effort to improve web applications by providing features missing in today's browsers, including a database engine and support for local storage and offline applications
I think Safari has an internal database in 3.1.2 and above. I saw a preference for clearing it and setting the size. Offline apps sound interesting and may be good for small but useful cross-platform apps. The equivalent of cross-platform widgets.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AI
the report depicts the new browser using a multi-process design that runs each browser tab as its own process
I can't believe it's taken this long to implement this. I am so sick of one tab hanging up my entire browser, having to force-quit and rely on Safari's flakey open all open windows from last session feature, which usually opens a whole load of blank tabs.
Same deal with Javascript and translating to native code. It's great the engine will be available for others to use.
I don't trust Google though. They make money from targeted advertising. All they have to do is put in some code that reports your usage back to them and they make money from your stats.
Plus, Safari still has really nice developer tools like the element inspector and now the network stats.
I think Safari has an internal database in 3.1.2 and above. I saw a preference for clearing it and setting the size. Offline apps sound interesting and may be good for small but useful cross-platform apps. The equivalent of cross-platform widgets.
I can't believe it's taken this long to implement this. I am so sick of one tab hanging up my entire browser, having to force-quit and rely on Safari's flakey open all open windows from last session feature, which usually opens a whole load of blank tabs.
Same deal with Javascript and translating to native code. It's great the engine will be available for others to use.
I don't trust Google though. They make money from targeted advertising. All they have to do is put in some code that reports your usage back to them and they make money from your stats.
Plus, Safari still has really nice developer tools like the element inspector and now the network stats.
If you want to inspect an element in Chrome, just right-click select the web inspector:
So far, I find it a better browser than Safari, but still not as refined as FF3 or Opera. I just think how Apple utilizes Webkit is holding it back.
Edit: I've installed it on my Vista laptop now, and I find it no different that Safari in terms of speed, although it is incredibly sensitive at scrolling, and the spell check feature leaves much to be desired (it will mark a misspelled word as being incorrect, but offers very little choices, and your incorrect spelling has to close to correct in order for it's dictionary to pick up a possible correct choice (and only one choice from what I've seen).
For being a browser that I knew nothing about the other day, and being a 0.2 beta, I like what I see so far.
I'm not sure if this means that Google is using an older version of webKit than Safari 3.1.2, has gone into Webkit and removed some code (perhaps from new, unused rendering options that slow down the engine tremendously), or simply because it's a bug, but there seems to be some evidence to suggest that it's not as good in some regards as Safari for Windows.
I've been playing with it this morning. I don't really like it
It's very buggy on my system - tabs are crashing all of the time. Trying to bookmark anything crashes the whole app. The crashed tab error is also a bit snarky for my liking:
"Aw. Snap! Something when wrong when displaying this webpage." Complete with a tab that looks like an old world ROM unhappy Mac. Just seems like they're trying to appeal to internet geeks rather than regular people. Plus, it stops being funny pretty quickly when it happens all the time.
I'm not keen on the UI either:
1) The bookmarks bar is hidden by default.
2) You can't double-click to create a new tab.
3) It uses non-standard widgets for close/maximize/minimize and so on.
4) Closing all tabs quits the app.
5) There's no menu bar, and unlike IE7 you can't bring it back.
6) The Google logo is plastered all over the place like some kind of advert.
7) Incognito mode opens a new window rather than a new tab.
On the plus side, it does feel quite nice and lightweight. Firefox and IE feel 'clunky' by comparison. And it *is* fast. When it's not crashing anyway...
Not that it is completely google's fault. Microsoft ruined the menu bar and rather than fixing their problems, scrapped menu bars entirely. Other companies are following in their wake.
Unfortunately, no standards have arisen in this post-menu-bar wasteland. It is almost like the entire industry has forgotten what using a computer was like prior to menu bar standardization. Computer use involved a bunch of stumbling around until eventually happening upon what you're looking for. Those days are back again.
[posted from chrome on WinXP]
Edit: I'll try to stop by later to post a rant about other interface elements in chrome that google has managed to un-standardize.
Not that it is completely google's fault. Microsoft ruined the menu bar and rather than fixing their problems, scrapped menu bars entirely. Other companies are following in their wake.
This is a worrying trend.
IE and Chrome's solution is to create a bunch of extra toolbar buttons that act like drop down menus. This is similar to the "Action" menu we have in the Finder toolbar now. The problem is that these icons are completely inconsistent. Apple and Microsoft use a 'gears' icon, Google has a 'spanner' icon.
Now I have to guess where things like copy and paste might be lurking, rather than just heading into the 'Edit' menu like every other application.
The other problem is that you start breaking Fitt's law once you start replacing a menu on the top of the screen with little vague toolbar icons.
Speaking of toolbars, another annoyance: you can't make any configurations or modifications to the toolbar in Chrome. You can't even choose to display text with the icons.
IE and Chrome's solution is to create a bunch of extra toolbar buttons that act like drop down menus. This is similar to the "Action" menu we have in the Finder toolbar now. The problem is that these icons are completely inconsistent. Apple and Microsoft use a 'gears' icon, Google has a 'spanner' icon.
Now I have to guess where things like copy and paste might be lurking, rather than just heading into the 'Edit' menu like every other application.
Precisely!
And the list of GUI inconsistencies is pretty long...
The popup menu blocked message that scrolls up from the bottom of the window.
The page load status overlayed on the lower left corner of the window.
Scrollbars not being the topmost window elements
Window title in wierd location in title bar
The title bar isn't actually a title bar. (good luck figuring out page titles)
Response to clicks in the title/url/bookmark bars
Buttons in the "tool" bars, some are outlined, some aren't
Font size of address bar inconsistent with rest of OS
Use of ellipses is inconsistent. Example: "Options" should be "Options..."
Browse... dialog box inconsistent with OS
Window dressing inconsistent with OS
But mostly... the lack of a menu bar means that every single command which used to have a standardized location, is now in some random place different from every other app.
Not that it is completely google's fault. Microsoft ruined the menu bar and rather than fixing their problems, scrapped menu bars entirely. Other companies are following in their wake.
.
++++
I was beginning to fell like a luddite for because of my attachment to a menu bar. Like you I don't like the trend away from this UI paradigm. While this move away from the menu bar is most noticeable with IE7 and Office 2007, have you noticed how apple got away from it with Time Machine?
I was beginning to fell like a luddite for because of my attachment to a menu bar. Like you I don't like the trend away from this UI paradigm. While this move away from the menu bar is most noticeable with IE7 and Office 2007, have you noticed how apple got away from it with Time Machine?
I'm not fond of it either, but I think Google is doing it to prepare us for an OS independent dumb terminal that uses its browser as the lone access to anything and everything you needed to do. I could very well be wrong, but this was the idea that was floating around years ago.
I'm not fond of it either, but I think Google is doing it to prepare us for an OS independent dumb terminal that uses its browser as the lone access to anything and everything you needed to do. I could very well be wrong, but this was the idea that was floating around years ago.
This is precisely what google is doing. It is also the exact reason why MS used it's monopoly power to destroy Netscape's business model.
But please also note that an OS-agnotist, web-terminal paradigm doesn't preclude the use of standardized menus.
I'm not fond of it either, but I think Google is doing it to prepare us for an OS independent dumb terminal that uses its browser as the lone access to anything and everything you needed to do. I could very well be wrong, but this was the idea that was floating around years ago.
That's what that idiot Ellison was trying to sell years ago--after 30 years of putting ever more and more powerful computers on peoples' desks (and now on their laps!), he wanted to go back to time-sharing in one fell swoop! The only retrograde step that would be left is to type BASIC programs onto paper tape on war-surplus teletype machines. Just like the Good Old Days.
Google is obviously, as you say, trying the same thing now. I predict it will go over like a lead balloon this time as well, but I've been wrong before.
P.S. The term "dumb terminal" is not politically correct: you're supposed to call them "thin clients" now!
Comments
You sure? What has changed? I'm pretty sure they were using webkit.
Actually, Nokia were the first company to put WebKit on a cell phone and their roadmap hasn't changed as far as I know.
I never said they aren't using it now in the S60. I said that they are "going with FF." Nokia announced a couple weeks ago that will be working with Mozilla to port FF to the Qt Toolikit, which was developed by TrollTech, a company they acquired this year. Nokia wants to distance themselves from the Apple-funded WebKit and Mozilla wants to get in on the mobile browser front dominated by WebKit.
I like Safari, but just hate how it handles pages, rather than let you by default open pages in new tabs, it requires you do hold down cmd, or else it opens in a new window, and I don't like how it handles bookmarks.
The link in new tabs can be done by default with a simple editing of the safari Plist file. you have to be using v3.1 or later, but the preference is there, it's just hasn't been made into a GUI control yet.
The link in new tabs can be done by default with a simple editing of the safari Plist file. you have to be using v3.1 or later, but the preference is there, it's just hasn't been made into a GUI control yet.
I'll try that.
Middle click does it too. Press the scroll wheel like a button instead of scroll and that's a middle click.
The link in new tabs can be done by default with a simple editing of the safari Plist file. you have to be using v3.1 or later, but the preference is there, it's just hasn't been made into a GUI control yet.
That doesn't work with Safari 4 though, I've tried...I like Safari for the most part otherwise, and 4 seems more stable for me, but tabs is a major annoyance for me ATM, and somewhat defeats the purpose of having a tabbed browser IMO, that doesn't default to tabs. Every other browser I've used does that, but Safari does not, or at least has the option to change it in the preferences.
Edit: The middle click does work though, it's a easier workaround that cmd+click, but I still find it annoying that Apple doesn't give an easy option, like in the Preferences dialog - primarily their way or else you're installing plugins like Saft.
However lately, I've been getting back into FF3, as the newest updates don't seem to crash as much, and there are some extensions that I really did miss, and I like being able to search for specific URLs in the address bar.
After reading the Google Chrome comic, I'm really excited about it, Webkit+fast JS+plugins and other features, Safari has always been so featureless and had a poor UI on Windows. I like Google's ultra simple/plain UI too.
That doesn't work with Safari 4 though, I've tried...
I'd wager that the option is still in their, but has been renamed so that commend doesn't work any longer.
You can try going to ~/Library/Preferences/com.apple.Safari.plist and looking for the right option.
edit: Scratch that! It was apparently taken out of the developer build but was put back in as of the Aug 22nd release of the Safari 4 beta.
I'd wager that the option is still in their, but has been renamed so that commend doesn't work any longer.
You can try going to ~/Library/Preferences/com.apple.Safari.plist and looking for the right option.
edit: Scratch that! It was apparently taken out of the developer build but was put back in as of the Aug 22nd release of the Safari 4 beta.
I'll have to update to the newer build then.
As far as Chrome goes, it's pretty nice so far - very minimalist UI, uses an older version of Webkit than Safari 4, the address bar is a cross of FF3's url search and Google search box, opens all links as tabs, and I like it's pop-up blocker.
A little slow at rendering ATM however.
So basically what you are saying is that the fact that all automobiles use steering wheels, instead of some using wheels and some using joysticks and some using head mounted displays is detrimental to the future of the auto industry. Sometimes standards are a good thing.
Your analogy is pretty flawed. Keeping with the car analogies, a steering wheel would be a standard part of any car. Regardless of which car you get in, you will have a steering wheel in front you. WebKit, Gecko, etc. are like the engines in a car. A Hummer's engine is vastly different than a Corvette's, but both accomplish the same basic function, which is to make the car go. No one would want to put a Hummer's engine in a Corvette (well, some might
...I have been entirely enchanted by the second illustration's browser address...
It's just cracking me up...
I didn't see that at first www.wtf??.com
an effort to improve web applications by providing features missing in today's browsers, including a database engine and support for local storage and offline applications
I think Safari has an internal database in 3.1.2 and above. I saw a preference for clearing it and setting the size. Offline apps sound interesting and may be good for small but useful cross-platform apps. The equivalent of cross-platform widgets.
the report depicts the new browser using a multi-process design that runs each browser tab as its own process
I can't believe it's taken this long to implement this. I am so sick of one tab hanging up my entire browser, having to force-quit and rely on Safari's flakey open all open windows from last session feature, which usually opens a whole load of blank tabs.
Same deal with Javascript and translating to native code. It's great the engine will be available for others to use.
I don't trust Google though. They make money from targeted advertising. All they have to do is put in some code that reports your usage back to them and they make money from your stats.
Plus, Safari still has really nice developer tools like the element inspector and now the network stats.
I didn't see that at first www.wtf??.com
I think Safari has an internal database in 3.1.2 and above. I saw a preference for clearing it and setting the size. Offline apps sound interesting and may be good for small but useful cross-platform apps. The equivalent of cross-platform widgets.
I can't believe it's taken this long to implement this. I am so sick of one tab hanging up my entire browser, having to force-quit and rely on Safari's flakey open all open windows from last session feature, which usually opens a whole load of blank tabs.
Same deal with Javascript and translating to native code. It's great the engine will be available for others to use.
I don't trust Google though. They make money from targeted advertising. All they have to do is put in some code that reports your usage back to them and they make money from your stats.
Plus, Safari still has really nice developer tools like the element inspector and now the network stats.
If you want to inspect an element in Chrome, just right-click select the web inspector:
http://gears.google.com/chrome/intl/...tml#testrender
So far, I find it a better browser than Safari, but still not as refined as FF3 or Opera. I just think how Apple utilizes Webkit is holding it back.
Edit: I've installed it on my Vista laptop now, and I find it no different that Safari in terms of speed, although it is incredibly sensitive at scrolling, and the spell check feature leaves much to be desired (it will mark a misspelled word as being incorrect, but offers very little choices, and your incorrect spelling has to close to correct in order for it's dictionary to pick up a possible correct choice (and only one choice from what I've seen).
For being a browser that I knew nothing about the other day, and being a 0.2 beta, I like what I see so far.
It's very buggy on my system - tabs are crashing all of the time. Trying to bookmark anything crashes the whole app. The crashed tab error is also a bit snarky for my liking:
"Aw. Snap! Something when wrong when displaying this webpage." Complete with a tab that looks like an old world ROM unhappy Mac. Just seems like they're trying to appeal to internet geeks rather than regular people. Plus, it stops being funny pretty quickly when it happens all the time.
I'm not keen on the UI either:
1) The bookmarks bar is hidden by default.
2) You can't double-click to create a new tab.
3) It uses non-standard widgets for close/maximize/minimize and so on.
4) Closing all tabs quits the app.
5) There's no menu bar, and unlike IE7 you can't bring it back.
6) The Google logo is plastered all over the place like some kind of advert.
7) Incognito mode opens a new window rather than a new tab.
On the plus side, it does feel quite nice and lightweight. Firefox and IE feel 'clunky' by comparison. And it *is* fast. When it's not crashing anyway...
Nice technical design but a usability nightmare.
Not that it is completely google's fault. Microsoft ruined the menu bar and rather than fixing their problems, scrapped menu bars entirely. Other companies are following in their wake.
Unfortunately, no standards have arisen in this post-menu-bar wasteland. It is almost like the entire industry has forgotten what using a computer was like prior to menu bar standardization. Computer use involved a bunch of stumbling around until eventually happening upon what you're looking for. Those days are back again.
[posted from chrome on WinXP]
Edit: I'll try to stop by later to post a rant about other interface elements in chrome that google has managed to un-standardize.
Not that it is completely google's fault. Microsoft ruined the menu bar and rather than fixing their problems, scrapped menu bars entirely. Other companies are following in their wake.
This is a worrying trend.
IE and Chrome's solution is to create a bunch of extra toolbar buttons that act like drop down menus. This is similar to the "Action" menu we have in the Finder toolbar now. The problem is that these icons are completely inconsistent. Apple and Microsoft use a 'gears' icon, Google has a 'spanner' icon.
Now I have to guess where things like copy and paste might be lurking, rather than just heading into the 'Edit' menu like every other application.
The other problem is that you start breaking Fitt's law once you start replacing a menu on the top of the screen with little vague toolbar icons.
Speaking of toolbars, another annoyance: you can't make any configurations or modifications to the toolbar in Chrome. You can't even choose to display text with the icons.
This is a worrying trend.
IE and Chrome's solution is to create a bunch of extra toolbar buttons that act like drop down menus. This is similar to the "Action" menu we have in the Finder toolbar now. The problem is that these icons are completely inconsistent. Apple and Microsoft use a 'gears' icon, Google has a 'spanner' icon.
Now I have to guess where things like copy and paste might be lurking, rather than just heading into the 'Edit' menu like every other application.
Precisely!
And the list of GUI inconsistencies is pretty long...
The popup menu blocked message that scrolls up from the bottom of the window.
The page load status overlayed on the lower left corner of the window.
Scrollbars not being the topmost window elements
Window title in wierd location in title bar
The title bar isn't actually a title bar. (good luck figuring out page titles)
Response to clicks in the title/url/bookmark bars
Buttons in the "tool" bars, some are outlined, some aren't
Font size of address bar inconsistent with rest of OS
Use of ellipses is inconsistent. Example: "Options" should be "Options..."
Browse... dialog box inconsistent with OS
Window dressing inconsistent with OS
But mostly... the lack of a menu bar means that every single command which used to have a standardized location, is now in some random place different from every other app.
My take on chrome...
Not that it is completely google's fault. Microsoft ruined the menu bar and rather than fixing their problems, scrapped menu bars entirely. Other companies are following in their wake.
.
++++
I was beginning to fell like a luddite for because of my attachment to a menu bar. Like you I don't like the trend away from this UI paradigm. While this move away from the menu bar is most noticeable with IE7 and Office 2007, have you noticed how apple got away from it with Time Machine?
I was beginning to fell like a luddite for because of my attachment to a menu bar. Like you I don't like the trend away from this UI paradigm. While this move away from the menu bar is most noticeable with IE7 and Office 2007, have you noticed how apple got away from it with Time Machine?
I'm not fond of it either, but I think Google is doing it to prepare us for an OS independent dumb terminal that uses its browser as the lone access to anything and everything you needed to do. I could very well be wrong, but this was the idea that was floating around years ago.
I'm not fond of it either, but I think Google is doing it to prepare us for an OS independent dumb terminal that uses its browser as the lone access to anything and everything you needed to do. I could very well be wrong, but this was the idea that was floating around years ago.
This is precisely what google is doing. It is also the exact reason why MS used it's monopoly power to destroy Netscape's business model.
But please also note that an OS-agnotist, web-terminal paradigm doesn't preclude the use of standardized menus.
I'm not fond of it either, but I think Google is doing it to prepare us for an OS independent dumb terminal that uses its browser as the lone access to anything and everything you needed to do. I could very well be wrong, but this was the idea that was floating around years ago.
That's what that idiot Ellison was trying to sell years ago--after 30 years of putting ever more and more powerful computers on peoples' desks (and now on their laps!), he wanted to go back to time-sharing in one fell swoop! The only retrograde step that would be left is to type BASIC programs onto paper tape on war-surplus teletype machines. Just like the Good Old Days.
Google is obviously, as you say, trying the same thing now. I predict it will go over like a lead balloon this time as well, but I've been wrong before.
P.S. The term "dumb terminal" is not politically correct: you're supposed to call them "thin clients" now!