It's not actually so much that Microsoft is failing, but that open source has succeeded.
IE8 is better than IE7 and faster etc. The problem is open source has found a way to leapfrog all those performance increases.
The core of any browser is the rendering engine, all those other "fast" browsers are using WebKit, whereas Microsoft is sticking to it's proprietary code (for now). A large part of the perceived speed of web page loading is javascript performance and again, open source tweaking of Javascript performance is now leaps and bounds ahead of Microsofts proprietary approach.
It's not that MS is 'failing," just that they have made only the same small incremental improvements that used to be common in browser iterations, whereas the rest of the pack is moving forward much faster.
Regarding your first sentence, I like that PoV.
(sent from my iPhone so editing the rest is a bitch)
Google Chrome has left beta status in December 2008. And it's already in version 2.0.156.1
I used Firefox, then Safari for windows came along, and there I went. I really enjoyed the design of Safari, it seemed leaps and bounds superior to Firefox. But when Chrome came along, I couldn't really look back. Every time I run Safari nowadays, it seems over-designed, ugly, dark and blurred. I have to agree with Daniel, Chrome is the best browser there is today. It's fast, streamlined, has a terrific design, simple, stylized and flexible, and yes, tabs are superior.
Congrats, Google, for making such an excellent browser
I also like "simple" which I gather you do from your comments, but IMO Chrome goes too far in that direction. I will take a look at it again if it ever comes out as a native Mac app, but from what I saw of the beta it seems over-simplified IMO. The concept of blending the search bar and the address bar was a bad idea when Microsoft first thought of it and remains so to this day IMO. On a personal note, I find the Chrome GUI just hideous so that might be colouring my remarks a bit. Perhaps the Mac version could be a bit nicer looking and drop the windows colouring and looks.
I find simpler is better and thus gravitate towards Safari, but my partner uses Firefox with all the associated extensions and ugliness that would drive me up the wall if I had to use it. I think Safari could use a few more options in the preferences dialogue though and be a bit more configurable. The extensibility provided by plug-ins are a good idea IMO and while Safari supports this, it's not "official," most people don't know about it, and the number of plug-ins is minimal indeed.
So, in the end different browsers for different preferences and for me, something simple and attractively elegant like Safari is best, but perhaps with a few more (well hidden) configuration options like Firefox.
I have been around since before there were web browsers though so I have had the pleasure of using them all from Mosaic on up and based on that I would argue that for the "average" user of the Internet, the more junk and features, the more they like the product. I would also argue that one of the main reasons Firefox is popular is because people can use plug-ins and themes to turn it into the browser equivalent of a MySpace page. This (unfortunately) is what the average joe or jane in the street actually likes.
I would think that Chrome would eventually be the browser of choice for a lot of people but only *after* plug-in craziness has ensured that every user is able to put a puffy cloud background on their Windows, Hello Kitty buttons on the button bar, and an assortment of moving, whirling gadgets that don't do much of anything.
The concept of blending the search bar and the address bar was a bad idea when Microsoft first thought of it and remains so to this day IMO.
You should look into it again. I really like it and today it just seems superfluous to me the existence of two bars.
Quote:
On a personal note, I find the Chrome GUI just hideous so that might be colouring my remarks a bit. Perhaps the Mac version could be a bit nicer looking and drop the windows colouring and looks
Come on, just because it's blue?!? Well, I really like the GUI design, specially the colors. But then again, it's designed to work on Windows, so of course it must blend with it (Safari in that respect is worse, in my opinion). Perhaps Chrome for mac will blend better with the mac os theme.
Quote:
So, in the end different browsers for different preferences and for me, something simple and attractively elegant like Safari is best, but perhaps with a few more (well hidden) configuration options like Firefox.
What is best in all these iterations is that unlike the previous browser wars where every browser tried to make its own standard, destroying the web experience, this time they are battling out on who gets to be in the front line in open standards. So they all converge and the only idiotic browser which makes no attempt at all on this is IE (another reason why I loathe it).
Quote:
I would also argue that one of the main reasons Firefox is popular is because people can use plug-ins and themes to turn it into the browser equivalent of a MySpace page. This (unfortunately) is what the average joe or jane in the street actually likes.
Yeah, I agree. Fortunately it's invisible from my own computer .
Makes you wonder if Microsoft is intentionally crippling JavaScript to push and promote SilverLight as a better development platform.
Actually I have seen quite a few Silverlight solutions that use Javascript. Silverlight really is just a much more transparent alternative to Adobe Flash. Its more searchable by search engines (without having to use hacks that go in the flash compiled files). I think its great to have an alternative to Flash that is easier to develop, is cross platform (Mac, Windows, Linux).
As for Browsers, I think obviously Chrome is the best and what other browsers should strive to copy and excel in certain areas. Though Firefox or IE are much more feature rich browsers.
One big thing for me moving from IE on Windows to Safari on Mac was #1) Lack of proper popup controls. In IE I can allow certain sites the privalege. With Safari its an all or nothing approach. I also find that IE tends to pull info and then render in much more smoothly than all other browsers (though Chrome does very well, though oddly not Safari with the same engine). Thats why I always hated Netscape and Mozilla, was it has always seemed a bit jerkey. Perhaps IE is slower because of this, IDK.
But when it comes time for non technical users to choose a browser, of course the one that is there is easy but it also comes with what they are familar. So I think Opera is foolish to think that if somehow IE is removed from Windows that tons of people won't download it. In addition it won't force IE6 users to upgrade (please upgrade). My mother in law had Firefox and IE installed on her computer. I guess her Job recommned Firefox, probably an anti-MS IT staff. Because, I asked her, "What do you prefer?" and guess what... IE.
So it does boil down to what people are familar with, how well they perceive the browser to deal with the sites they visit. And what features they use (and no they are not gonna search for plugins).
In that respect, IE8 may however be a Vista. Good for the future in breaking bad web design but might annoy IE8 users (unless the Compatibility mode is markted well). I think most users could care less about 'standards'. And while I think standards are great, the ones everyone makes a fuss about today in regards to IE 6 and somewhat IE 7 just didn't exist when IE6 was created. Thats another aspect of Opera's complaint with the EU which I find funny do the fact they more than anyone else created the new CSS standards, basically the 1% marketshare browser telling the large one what to do and oddly Opera is the worst at being a forgiving browser and will butcher sites not made to Opera's standards. Webkit does a much better job than Opera at being standards compliant but still working great with sites designed for IE6 and does so better than IE8.
So oddly, the marketing platform might be at those who view IE8 as a Vista or rendering sites badly and Webkit (via Safari or Chrome) could market that they are new but still do the old better than IE8.
Actually I have seen quite a few Silverlight solutions that use Javascript. Silverlight really is just a much more transparent alternative to Adobe Flash.
I have a doubt. I read someone here claiming that Silverlight has DRM attached to it. Is that true? If so, it undermines your point. Not that DRM is opaque, but transparent wouldn't be the proper word...
Quote:
In that respect, IE8 may however be a Vista. Good for the future in breaking bad web design but might annoy IE8 users (unless the Compatibility mode is markted well). I think most users could care less about 'standards'. And while I think standards are great, the ones everyone makes a fuss about today in regards to IE 6 and somewhat IE 7 just didn't exist when IE6 was created. Thats another aspect of Opera's complaint with the EU which I find funny do the fact they more than anyone else created the new CSS standards, basically the 1% marketshare browser telling the large one what to do and oddly Opera is the worst at being a forgiving browser and will butcher sites not made to Opera's standards. Webkit does a much better job than Opera at being standards compliant but still working great with sites designed for IE6 and does so better than IE8.
Interesting, but I can't agree with you on the non-importance of Open Standards. Clearly, if every browser out there has his own standard and has to deal with all the other standards, wouldn't we as consumers all pay for the extra R&D wasted, and the lack of speed of browsers? In my opinion, the only reason IE doesn't comply with standards is that they don't need to, every web designer will design a page considering IE and the other browsers better render those pages well, so that the end user isn't pissed off.
IMO, this is all nonsensical. If every browser tried to comply with standards, then every browser would majorly compete for speed, flexibility, GUI and usability. This way, we have MS rigging the game once again. And if there's something I'd like to disappear in Windows, it was probably IE.
While IE still is the worse browser of all, MS has made great progress especially when it comes to web standard compliance and security. So because IE8 will become an important automatic update for IE users (=hundreds of millions), this all is good news for the whole web.
IE8 development wasn't focused on performance, BTW. I think they try to make the rendering engine first more compatible with common web standards and then later improve the performance.
I also don't use IE anymore but after testing IE8 I have to say that it really is a good browser for most users. It offers some great deal of features you would have to manually install on Firefox or aren't available for Chrome and Safari.
While Chrome feels fresh and is fast, it also lacks some important features, IMO. Firefox on the other hand needs the knowledge of the user what extension is helpful (not a big deal but still).
You should look into it again. I really like it and today it just seems superfluous to me the existence of two bars.
It always struck me that this feature was for dummies in that it only really works if you never need to type in a URL. I will take another look at Chromes implementation (if they ever get a mac version out the door), but in MSIE, this was agony to someone like me who likes to type in the URL. If you know you want to go to "apppleinsider.com" and you type that in the bar and all you get is a page of search results for the term, you're already one click behind and that assumes you can find something in the results that will take you to the site in question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuisDias
Come on, just because it's blue?!? Well, I really like the GUI design, specially the colors. But then again, it's designed to work on Windows, so of course it must blend with it (Safari in that respect is worse, in my opinion). Perhaps Chrome for mac will blend better with the mac os theme.
That particular shade of blue is so associated with Windows that I do find it a bit repulsive, but no it's not just the colour.
I'm an artist that also used to be a practising designer for some years. I have two degrees and a lot of experience in that regard even though I don't do so much of it now. I just find the UI to be ugly and poorly designed as minimal as it is. The tabs in particular are hideous, they are either the wrong way up or bounded by a box for no apparent reason, and too large in general.
These probably sound like picky things to you and perhaps they are, but every time I see it I can't resist a tiny shudder. It's just so obvious that no one with any design experience has gone over this product.
Google Chrome is the best browser out there; pure and simple. It's fast, the design is simple yet effective and it has some nice functionalities such as making an application shortcut or flexibility of moving tabs anywhere. It also uses separate processes for each tab so it is also very stable (IE8 is using this approach as well). It also has its own task manager which can be very handy
Firefox is okay. I always found it to be a memory hog both on PC and Mac. What saves firefox is the extensions available
Opera is okay. It's light and fast, but the UI sucks and I dont like how the window/tab works in firefox
IE7 is simply garbage
Safari is also a piece of garbage (cant wait for Chrome on Mac)
IE8 is okay. It feels faster than IE7, but the UI is very cluttered and it feels bloated compare to Chrome
Firefox is the best browser because it's the most mature (longest history), cross-platform, supports the most extensions, and most importantly, has the best features.
IE could have been a more mature browser, but IE decided to let it rot for several years.
Obviously, the Windows version of Firefox is the best, because it's the most used, tested, and developed version. The Linux version used GTK+, which is not ideal, but gets the job done. The Mac version was originally developed with Carbon, but is now moving rapidly to Cocoa, as much of the rendering engine (Gecko) is now written in Cocoa.
Once Firefox is fully Cocoa, it will develop much more quickly and leave Safari even further behind. The biggest advantage Safari has right now is its superior integration into OS X.
As for Chrome, well, at present it's only available on Windows and doesn't yet have enough features or extensions to make it usable.
Once Firefox is fully Cocoa, it will develop much more quickly and leave Safari even further behind. The biggest advantage Safari has right now is its superior integration into OS X.
The one thing Safari really needs is to integrate WebKit updates more frequently. You could download a WebKit nightly that passed Acid 3 all the way back in March of '08. Ten months later and the current shipping Safari still gets only 75, last I heard. The cynic in me says that even when Safari 4 ships, it will be at least six months behind the WebKit nightly.
"The ecosystem should expect the final candidate to behave like the release candidate," said IE General Manager Dean Hachamovitch.
That is such Micro-speak it is funny. "The ecosystem," indeed!
I worked at MSFT back in the mid-nineties. At the time, the company was a pretty cool place, certainly less corporate. In fact, they saw themselves as having a very different and more vibrant culture than the corporate old-guard like IBM. Funny how much they have become that for which what they once professed disdain.
Google Chrome has left beta status in December 2008. And it's already in version 2.0.156.1
I used Firefox, then Safari for windows came along, and there I went. I really enjoyed the design of Safari, it seemed leaps and bounds superior to Firefox. But when Chrome came along, I couldn't really look back. Every time I run Safari nowadays, it seems over-designed, ugly, dark and blurred. I have to agree with Daniel, Chrome is the best browser there is today. It's fast, streamlined, has a terrific design, simple, stylized and flexible, and yes, tabs are superior.
Congrats, Google, for making such an excellent browser
and what version of Chrome do you have? latest version is 1.0.154.43
I like Chrome a lot, however, when opening more than four tabs or so and when you want to close a tab it just sits there like locked up for the next 2 minutes and then closes it. Doesn't happen all the time, but enough to annoy. It's also, not compatible with very large PDF files.
The problem with Google is they take way too long to update their products... I still have to stick with Firefox especially due to it's extensions. I like having Ad Blocker and Flash blocker. Maybe it's not worth to some, but I get tired of all those ads and flash screens in my face all the time. That makes FF hands down the winner for me, for now.
I want to know why Firefox 3.1b1 is being used for the benchmarking. 3.1b2 has been out for at least a month now, so there really isn't much excuse. I'm not sure where this article was stolen from, or the graphs, but this was NOT a fair comparison.
B2 I believe also has JIT turned on by default, so its MUCH faster now
Does AppleInsider always use out of date browsers to make comparisons? I'd assume that Apple's browser is the only one on that list which is up to date (and maybe ie).
Comments
That is all.
BWAAAHAAAHAAAHAAA!!!
That is all.
That reminds me dearly of Black & White... strange.
It's not actually so much that Microsoft is failing, but that open source has succeeded.
IE8 is better than IE7 and faster etc. The problem is open source has found a way to leapfrog all those performance increases.
The core of any browser is the rendering engine, all those other "fast" browsers are using WebKit, whereas Microsoft is sticking to it's proprietary code (for now). A large part of the perceived speed of web page loading is javascript performance and again, open source tweaking of Javascript performance is now leaps and bounds ahead of Microsofts proprietary approach.
It's not that MS is 'failing," just that they have made only the same small incremental improvements that used to be common in browser iterations, whereas the rest of the pack is moving forward much faster.
Regarding your first sentence, I like that PoV.
(sent from my iPhone so editing the rest is a bitch)
Google Chrome has left beta status in December 2008. And it's already in version 2.0.156.1
I used Firefox, then Safari for windows came along, and there I went. I really enjoyed the design of Safari, it seemed leaps and bounds superior to Firefox. But when Chrome came along, I couldn't really look back. Every time I run Safari nowadays, it seems over-designed, ugly, dark and blurred. I have to agree with Daniel, Chrome is the best browser there is today. It's fast, streamlined, has a terrific design, simple, stylized and flexible, and yes, tabs are superior.
Congrats, Google, for making such an excellent browser
I also like "simple" which I gather you do from your comments, but IMO Chrome goes too far in that direction. I will take a look at it again if it ever comes out as a native Mac app, but from what I saw of the beta it seems over-simplified IMO. The concept of blending the search bar and the address bar was a bad idea when Microsoft first thought of it and remains so to this day IMO. On a personal note, I find the Chrome GUI just hideous so that might be colouring my remarks a bit. Perhaps the Mac version could be a bit nicer looking and drop the windows colouring and looks.
I find simpler is better and thus gravitate towards Safari, but my partner uses Firefox with all the associated extensions and ugliness that would drive me up the wall if I had to use it. I think Safari could use a few more options in the preferences dialogue though and be a bit more configurable. The extensibility provided by plug-ins are a good idea IMO and while Safari supports this, it's not "official," most people don't know about it, and the number of plug-ins is minimal indeed.
So, in the end different browsers for different preferences and for me, something simple and attractively elegant like Safari is best, but perhaps with a few more (well hidden) configuration options like Firefox.
I have been around since before there were web browsers though so I have had the pleasure of using them all from Mosaic on up and based on that I would argue that for the "average" user of the Internet, the more junk and features, the more they like the product. I would also argue that one of the main reasons Firefox is popular is because people can use plug-ins and themes to turn it into the browser equivalent of a MySpace page. This (unfortunately) is what the average joe or jane in the street actually likes.
I would think that Chrome would eventually be the browser of choice for a lot of people but only *after* plug-in craziness has ensured that every user is able to put a puffy cloud background on their Windows, Hello Kitty buttons on the button bar, and an assortment of moving, whirling gadgets that don't do much of anything.
I suspect/fully expect MS to update Sharepoint to use some IE8 only features and thus drive mass upgrades of back end and desktop machines.
- Jasen.
microsoft dont seem to get it...its not what you put in its what you leave out.
The concept of blending the search bar and the address bar was a bad idea when Microsoft first thought of it and remains so to this day IMO.
You should look into it again. I really like it and today it just seems superfluous to me the existence of two bars.
On a personal note, I find the Chrome GUI just hideous so that might be colouring my remarks a bit. Perhaps the Mac version could be a bit nicer looking and drop the windows colouring and looks
Come on, just because it's blue?!? Well, I really like the GUI design, specially the colors. But then again, it's designed to work on Windows, so of course it must blend with it (Safari in that respect is worse, in my opinion). Perhaps Chrome for mac will blend better with the mac os theme.
So, in the end different browsers for different preferences and for me, something simple and attractively elegant like Safari is best, but perhaps with a few more (well hidden) configuration options like Firefox.
What is best in all these iterations is that unlike the previous browser wars where every browser tried to make its own standard, destroying the web experience, this time they are battling out on who gets to be in the front line in open standards. So they all converge and the only idiotic browser which makes no attempt at all on this is IE (another reason why I loathe it).
I would also argue that one of the main reasons Firefox is popular is because people can use plug-ins and themes to turn it into the browser equivalent of a MySpace page. This (unfortunately) is what the average joe or jane in the street actually likes.
Yeah, I agree. Fortunately it's invisible from my own computer
Makes you wonder if Microsoft is intentionally crippling JavaScript to push and promote SilverLight as a better development platform.
Actually I have seen quite a few Silverlight solutions that use Javascript. Silverlight really is just a much more transparent alternative to Adobe Flash. Its more searchable by search engines (without having to use hacks that go in the flash compiled files). I think its great to have an alternative to Flash that is easier to develop, is cross platform (Mac, Windows, Linux).
As for Browsers, I think obviously Chrome is the best and what other browsers should strive to copy and excel in certain areas. Though Firefox or IE are much more feature rich browsers.
One big thing for me moving from IE on Windows to Safari on Mac was #1) Lack of proper popup controls. In IE I can allow certain sites the privalege. With Safari its an all or nothing approach. I also find that IE tends to pull info and then render in much more smoothly than all other browsers (though Chrome does very well, though oddly not Safari with the same engine). Thats why I always hated Netscape and Mozilla, was it has always seemed a bit jerkey. Perhaps IE is slower because of this, IDK.
But when it comes time for non technical users to choose a browser, of course the one that is there is easy but it also comes with what they are familar. So I think Opera is foolish to think that if somehow IE is removed from Windows that tons of people won't download it. In addition it won't force IE6 users to upgrade (please upgrade). My mother in law had Firefox and IE installed on her computer. I guess her Job recommned Firefox, probably an anti-MS IT staff. Because, I asked her, "What do you prefer?" and guess what... IE.
So it does boil down to what people are familar with, how well they perceive the browser to deal with the sites they visit. And what features they use (and no they are not gonna search for plugins).
In that respect, IE8 may however be a Vista. Good for the future in breaking bad web design but might annoy IE8 users (unless the Compatibility mode is markted well). I think most users could care less about 'standards'. And while I think standards are great, the ones everyone makes a fuss about today in regards to IE 6 and somewhat IE 7 just didn't exist when IE6 was created. Thats another aspect of Opera's complaint with the EU which I find funny do the fact they more than anyone else created the new CSS standards, basically the 1% marketshare browser telling the large one what to do and oddly Opera is the worst at being a forgiving browser and will butcher sites not made to Opera's standards. Webkit does a much better job than Opera at being standards compliant but still working great with sites designed for IE6 and does so better than IE8.
So oddly, the marketing platform might be at those who view IE8 as a Vista or rendering sites badly and Webkit (via Safari or Chrome) could market that they are new but still do the old better than IE8.
Actually I have seen quite a few Silverlight solutions that use Javascript. Silverlight really is just a much more transparent alternative to Adobe Flash.
I have a doubt. I read someone here claiming that Silverlight has DRM attached to it. Is that true? If so, it undermines your point. Not that DRM is opaque, but transparent wouldn't be the proper word...
In that respect, IE8 may however be a Vista. Good for the future in breaking bad web design but might annoy IE8 users (unless the Compatibility mode is markted well). I think most users could care less about 'standards'. And while I think standards are great, the ones everyone makes a fuss about today in regards to IE 6 and somewhat IE 7 just didn't exist when IE6 was created. Thats another aspect of Opera's complaint with the EU which I find funny do the fact they more than anyone else created the new CSS standards, basically the 1% marketshare browser telling the large one what to do and oddly Opera is the worst at being a forgiving browser and will butcher sites not made to Opera's standards. Webkit does a much better job than Opera at being standards compliant but still working great with sites designed for IE6 and does so better than IE8.
Interesting, but I can't agree with you on the non-importance of Open Standards. Clearly, if every browser out there has his own standard and has to deal with all the other standards, wouldn't we as consumers all pay for the extra R&D wasted, and the lack of speed of browsers? In my opinion, the only reason IE doesn't comply with standards is that they don't need to, every web designer will design a page considering IE and the other browsers better render those pages well, so that the end user isn't pissed off.
IMO, this is all nonsensical. If every browser tried to comply with standards, then every browser would majorly compete for speed, flexibility, GUI and usability. This way, we have MS rigging the game once again. And if there's something I'd like to disappear in Windows, it was probably IE.
IE8 development wasn't focused on performance, BTW. I think they try to make the rendering engine first more compatible with common web standards and then later improve the performance.
I also don't use IE anymore but after testing IE8 I have to say that it really is a good browser for most users. It offers some great deal of features you would have to manually install on Firefox or aren't available for Chrome and Safari.
While Chrome feels fresh and is fast, it also lacks some important features, IMO. Firefox on the other hand needs the knowledge of the user what extension is helpful (not a big deal but still).
You should look into it again. I really like it and today it just seems superfluous to me the existence of two bars.
It always struck me that this feature was for dummies in that it only really works if you never need to type in a URL. I will take another look at Chromes implementation (if they ever get a mac version out the door), but in MSIE, this was agony to someone like me who likes to type in the URL. If you know you want to go to "apppleinsider.com" and you type that in the bar and all you get is a page of search results for the term, you're already one click behind and that assumes you can find something in the results that will take you to the site in question.
Come on, just because it's blue?!? Well, I really like the GUI design, specially the colors. But then again, it's designed to work on Windows, so of course it must blend with it (Safari in that respect is worse, in my opinion). Perhaps Chrome for mac will blend better with the mac os theme.
That particular shade of blue is so associated with Windows that I do find it a bit repulsive, but no it's not just the colour.
I'm an artist that also used to be a practising designer for some years. I have two degrees and a lot of experience in that regard even though I don't do so much of it now. I just find the UI to be ugly and poorly designed as minimal as it is. The tabs in particular are hideous, they are either the wrong way up or bounded by a box for no apparent reason, and too large in general.
These probably sound like picky things to you and perhaps they are, but every time I see it I can't resist a tiny shudder. It's just so obvious that no one with any design experience has gone over this product.
IE still sucks, or does it blow?
http://dougitdesign.com/blog_1_21_09.html
Firefox is okay. I always found it to be a memory hog both on PC and Mac. What saves firefox is the extensions available
Opera is okay. It's light and fast, but the UI sucks and I dont like how the window/tab works in firefox
IE7 is simply garbage
Safari is also a piece of garbage (cant wait for Chrome on Mac)
IE8 is okay. It feels faster than IE7, but the UI is very cluttered and it feels bloated compare to Chrome
IE could have been a more mature browser, but IE decided to let it rot for several years.
Obviously, the Windows version of Firefox is the best, because it's the most used, tested, and developed version. The Linux version used GTK+, which is not ideal, but gets the job done. The Mac version was originally developed with Carbon, but is now moving rapidly to Cocoa, as much of the rendering engine (Gecko) is now written in Cocoa.
Once Firefox is fully Cocoa, it will develop much more quickly and leave Safari even further behind. The biggest advantage Safari has right now is its superior integration into OS X.
As for Chrome, well, at present it's only available on Windows and doesn't yet have enough features or extensions to make it usable.
Once Firefox is fully Cocoa, it will develop much more quickly and leave Safari even further behind. The biggest advantage Safari has right now is its superior integration into OS X.
The one thing Safari really needs is to integrate WebKit updates more frequently. You could download a WebKit nightly that passed Acid 3 all the way back in March of '08. Ten months later and the current shipping Safari still gets only 75, last I heard. The cynic in me says that even when Safari 4 ships, it will be at least six months behind the WebKit nightly.
"The ecosystem should expect the final candidate to behave like the release candidate," said IE General Manager Dean Hachamovitch.
I worked at MSFT back in the mid-nineties. At the time, the company was a pretty cool place, certainly less corporate. In fact, they saw themselves as having a very different and more vibrant culture than the corporate old-guard like IBM. Funny how much they have become that for which what they once professed disdain.
"The ecosystem should expect the final candidate to behave like the release candidate," said IE General Manager Dean Hachamovitch.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
That is precisely the problem with all microsoft software. every final release is and behaves like a release candidate. bet they backed Bush too.
Google Chrome has left beta status in December 2008. And it's already in version 2.0.156.1
I used Firefox, then Safari for windows came along, and there I went. I really enjoyed the design of Safari, it seemed leaps and bounds superior to Firefox. But when Chrome came along, I couldn't really look back. Every time I run Safari nowadays, it seems over-designed, ugly, dark and blurred. I have to agree with Daniel, Chrome is the best browser there is today. It's fast, streamlined, has a terrific design, simple, stylized and flexible, and yes, tabs are superior.
Congrats, Google, for making such an excellent browser
and what version of Chrome do you have? latest version is 1.0.154.43
I like Chrome a lot, however, when opening more than four tabs or so and when you want to close a tab it just sits there like locked up for the next 2 minutes and then closes it. Doesn't happen all the time, but enough to annoy. It's also, not compatible with very large PDF files.
The problem with Google is they take way too long to update their products... I still have to stick with Firefox especially due to it's extensions. I like having Ad Blocker and Flash blocker. Maybe it's not worth to some, but I get tired of all those ads and flash screens in my face all the time. That makes FF hands down the winner for me, for now.
Safari is also a piece of garbage
I know! I hate aesthetics, integration, and simplicity!
I also find that Wakashizuma is a piece of garbage.
(Wait, what? You want me to back that up?)
B2 I believe also has JIT turned on by default, so its MUCH faster now
Does AppleInsider always use out of date browsers to make comparisons? I'd assume that Apple's browser is the only one on that list which is up to date (and maybe ie).