Doesn't really seem worthy of the 5.0 moniker to me, but then I don't visit very demanding websites.
At All Things D, Steve said HTML5 was on the way in and Flash on the way out. But maybe the whole WWW is on the way out.
I mean, just look how bad web pages look (and have always looked), compared to printed books. Awful layout, awful typography, widows and orphans everywhere. Things not lined up, gawdy ads, spelling mistakes. Amateur hour.
The whole web experience is crappy. Finally we have something better: iPad apps. So it's hard to get excited about a Safari release when I can't wait to close this ugly window and go back to an app.
Whenever you install new software and have to re boot everything seems to go faster and so it is with Safari 5. However, having used it for 30 mins and deliberately opened lots of other software its still going very fast, particularly with tabs.
Even though I run Mac Pro, Mini, white MacBook, MacBook Pro, G3 and G4 machines, Apple's mobile devices and hold Apple certifications... (Sorry, really hate bragging about my situation; I promise it was indeed really-really the last time I did that)
Safari's speed heavily depended on the size of its databases (top sites, bookmarks).
I had no time yet to test version 5.0 exhaustively enough, but at the first launch nothing told me they changed that somehow. The slowdown became apparent upon days and weeks of browsing.
I just noticed Apple didn't add the Full Page option to Safari 5, as rumoured. However, the Command+<click> option that was added to WebKit nightlies a couple months ago has been included.
This makes HTML5 video capable of going full screen, an issue that has been the Achille's heel of HTML5 video over Flash. Does anyone know if Firefox or IE9 is also including this feature or how it even works (presumably) in JS?
After I installed Safari 5, I lost the ability to view my "Watch Instantly" on Netflix! I had to switch to Chrome to watch my show last night! Thankfully Hulu still works! Netflix please fix your site!
You have to set your USer Agent to Safari 4.1 to trick Netflix.
It's the fastest release browser currently available. Not that it matters much. They are all so fast that your choice is best based on the features they offer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
Doesn't really seem worthy of the 5.0 moniker to me, but then I don't visit very demanding websites.
It add a reader, extensions, and adds pretty much every HTML5 tag available. I can see a couple reasons why it's more than just a point update. It's not like an OS that gets an entirely new look. The content is the webpage.
Quote:
I mean, just look how bad web pages look (and have always looked), compared to printed books. Awful layout, awful typography, widows and orphans everywhere. Things not lined up, gawdy ads, spelling mistakes. Amateur hour.
The whole web experience is crappy. Finally we have something better: iPad apps. So it's hard to get excited about a Safari release when I can't wait to close this ugly window and go back to an app.
What?! I spent the better part of yesterday looking at beautiful and clever layouts using HTML5, CSS and JS on Apple's site that are interactive and beautiful. Now look at some examples from 1996.
We've come a long, Baby! There are websites that mimic printed books, but that doesn't make sense. It's like every default OS calculator mimicking a physical calculator when that is less useful. It's pointless. The point is to enrich the experience, not try to mimic something else for no reason.
We are getting to a point that you won't be able to tell the difference between an iOS app and webcode expect for the speed of the transition. You can already save a webpage to your iPhone Home Page in v4.0 and it will not have the top or bottom top bars. Combine that with Apple's JS to replicate the look and feel of Xcode and you something that looks like Xcode, if not performs like it.
Using Safari 5 with Bing on trial! I don't use Chrome....
Reader is great if I might add! Just what I thought but sadly, ads are still running in the background!
I wonder how long it will be before someone makes a hack that simply opens the Reader when a article link is clicked? No background or just blackens it out completely?
That would be the simple solution, as trying to block the ads is a constant cat and mouse game.
Here's Safari 5 with today's nightlie (60820) on a newer MacPro.
--------------------------------------------
Total: 231.2ms +/- 0.6%
--------------------------------------------
[...]
Guys, these tests are impressive, but there are many variables outside of the browser to consider, which is why the test needs to be compared to other browsers. Hence the option in Sunspider to compare to results side-by-side. WIthout posting other browser results it's a pointless as your machine and internet connection can affect the tests.
Sunspider isn't the only test out there. SInce it's developed and maintained by WebKit, for the sake of being unbaised it's good to include other JS tests, too.
Here is an image showing the comparative results of browsers. Anyone want to run all the possible browsers on their Mac or Windows machine to see how things have changed?
As for the extensions, meh. Can't really see me having any real need for them.
You should give Firefox a download and cruise the themes, personas and extensions just for the heck of it.
I used to think I didn't have a use for them, until I started messing around, now I can't see how one can't live without them. It just breathes new life in your browser.
Here's some good add-ons to save yourself trouble.
1-Click YouTube Video Downloader
Ad Blocker Plus (can whitelist your favorite sites)
BetterPrivacy (deletes Flash cookies used to track, Safari doesn't)
Clipple (extended clipboard)
Colorful Tabs (useful for a lot of open tabs)
CoolIris (wow!)
Download Status Bar
FastestFox (all Google results on one long page)
Fission (Safari style address bar status)
Flagfox (shows the country of the site your visiting)
Ghostery (blocks web bugs trackers)
Lazarus (form recovery)
Low Quality Flash
Morning Coffee (one click loads your favorite sites for the day)
NoScript (your web cop, malicious behavior and scripts firewall)
NoSquint (remembers your zoom level per site)
OptimizeGoogle
RequestPolicy (control cross-site requests)
SmoothWheel (smoothscrolling)
SplitBrowser (compare two or more sites easily and quickly)
TrackMeNot (randomizes searches to thwart data miners)
Safari 5 is not performing for me any faster than Safari 4. I am still with Leopard until 10.7 shows up. Don't care for anything in SL and don't use it.
Guys, these tests are impressive, but there are many variables outside of the browser to consider, which is why the test needs to be compared to other browsers. Hence the option in Sunspider to compare to results side-by-side. WIthout posting other browser results it's a pointless as your machine and internet connection can affect the tests.
Sunspider isn't the only test out there. SInce it's developed and maintained by WebKit, for the sake of being unbaised it's good to include other JS tests, too.
Here is an image showing the comparative results of browsers. Anyone want to run all the possible browsers on their Mac or Windows machine to see how things have changed?
I have to question Google's V8 test. The other browser makers seem to use SunSpider, even MS when testing IE, and the V8 tests always makes Nitro in WebKit seem excessively slow. I have to wonder if their test is fair.
I have to question Google's V8 test. The other browser makers seem to use SunSpider, even MS when testing IE, and the V8 tests always makes Nitro in WebKit seem excessively slow. I have to wonder if their test is fair.
it's a test. browser vendors can tweak to only one test, or they can look at a broad range of tests. What would give you the best real world results? One test, or many? Googles tests exist for a reason.
In my sunspider tests, safari ran 20ms slower than chrome but that's so fast that it's pointless to even compare. you'd never in a million years be able to tell a 20ms difference in a page load. You'd have to load the whole test 100 times over on the same page to make it even noticeable.
it's a test. browser vendors can tweak to only one test, or they can look at a broad range of tests. What would give you the best real world results? One test, or many? Googles tests exist for a reason.
I agree that more tests are better, as I noted in an earlier post, but I still have to wonder if Google's is slanted in a way that doesn't favour the real world, but instead their JS engine.
Quote:
In my sunspider tests, safari ran 20ms slower than chrome but that's so fast that it's pointless to even compare. you'd never in a million years be able to tell a 20ms difference in a page load. You'd have to load the whole test 100 times over on the same page to make it even noticeable.
Even with Firefox trailing behind so far (right now) I still say the best browser is the one you prefer. It's more than just a slight edge on a JS engine. There are other engines and the app speed itself, along with its features that need to be considered.
For Mac I use Safari. For Windows I use IE with the Chrome Frame plug-in set to default. This gives me the best of both worlds, IMO, as I prefer the interconnectedness of the native browser app to the OS and the increased battery time when using a notebook.
I agree that more tests are better, as I noted in an earlier post, but I still have to wonder if Google's is slanted in a way that doesn't favour the real world, but instead their JS engine. ...
Any test produced by a browser vendor should be automatically eliminated from consideration.
Now it's taking over two minutes to load AppleInsider's front page with Safari 5. WTF is going on!? Should I run the Java update installer again? Flash Plug-in?
Now it's taking over two minutes to load AppleInsider's front page with Safari 5. WTF is going on!? Should I run the Java update installer again? Flash Plug-in?
Firefox loads in an instant
Suffice it to say it does not take two minutes to load AppleInsider's front page for most users including me. In fact, it is faster than ever for me. As for Flash, I recommend the most recent version of the plug-in if you don't have it already. However, I don't think Flash is the source of your problems. It is also extremely unlikely that Java has suddenly gone awry. The most likely source of Safari problems is user-installed haxies. Disable any that you have installed. See how it goes.
Comments
At All Things D, Steve said HTML5 was on the way in and Flash on the way out. But maybe the whole WWW is on the way out.
I mean, just look how bad web pages look (and have always looked), compared to printed books. Awful layout, awful typography, widows and orphans everywhere. Things not lined up, gawdy ads, spelling mistakes. Amateur hour.
The whole web experience is crappy. Finally we have something better: iPad apps. So it's hard to get excited about a Safari release when I can't wait to close this ugly window and go back to an app.
What does all that mean to humans, in English?
Here's Safari 5 with today's nightlie (60820) on a newer MacPro.
============================================
RESULTS (means and 95% confidence intervals)
--------------------------------------------
Total: 231.2ms +/- 0.6%
--------------------------------------------
3d: 31.1ms +/- 1.7%
cube: 11.8ms +/- 2.6%
morph: 9.0ms +/- 0.0%
raytrace: 10.3ms +/- 3.4%
access: 29.0ms +/- 1.6%
binary-trees: 3.2ms +/- 9.4%
fannkuch: 13.3ms +/- 2.6%
nbody: 7.8ms +/- 3.9%
nsieve: 4.7ms +/- 7.3%
bitops: 17.7ms +/- 3.3%
3bit-bits-in-byte: 2.1ms +/- 10.8%
bits-in-byte: 6.0ms +/- 0.0%
bitwise-and: 3.5ms +/- 10.8%
nsieve-bits: 6.1ms +/- 3.7%
controlflow: 2.3ms +/- 15.0%
recursive: 2.3ms +/- 15.0%
crypto: 14.6ms +/- 4.1%
aes: 8.4ms +/- 4.4%
md5: 3.4ms +/- 10.9%
sha1: 2.8ms +/- 10.8%
date: 27.3ms +/- 1.3%
format-tofte: 15.4ms +/- 2.4%
format-xparb: 11.9ms +/- 1.9%
math: 23.1ms +/- 1.8%
cordic: 6.8ms +/- 4.4%
partial-sums: 11.5ms +/- 3.3%
spectral-norm: 4.8ms +/- 6.3%
regexp: 11.9ms +/- 1.9%
dna: 11.9ms +/- 1.9%
string: 74.2ms +/- 1.0%
base64: 7.3ms +/- 4.7%
fasta: 12.4ms +/- 3.0%
tagcloud: 16.1ms +/- 1.4%
unpack-code: 26.3ms +/- 1.3%
validate-input: 12.1ms +/- 1.9%
Safari's speed heavily depended on the size of its databases (top sites, bookmarks).
I had no time yet to test version 5.0 exhaustively enough, but at the first launch nothing told me they changed that somehow. The slowdown became apparent upon days and weeks of browsing.
This makes HTML5 video capable of going full screen, an issue that has been the Achille's heel of HTML5 video over Flash. Does anyone know if Firefox or IE9 is also including this feature or how it even works (presumably) in JS?
You can test it here » http://jilion.com/sublime/video
After I installed Safari 5, I lost the ability to view my "Watch Instantly" on Netflix! I had to switch to Chrome to watch my show last night! Thankfully Hulu still works! Netflix please fix your site!
You have to set your USer Agent to Safari 4.1 to trick Netflix.
What does all that mean to humans, in English?
It's the fastest release browser currently available. Not that it matters much. They are all so fast that your choice is best based on the features they offer.
Doesn't really seem worthy of the 5.0 moniker to me, but then I don't visit very demanding websites.
It add a reader, extensions, and adds pretty much every HTML5 tag available. I can see a couple reasons why it's more than just a point update. It's not like an OS that gets an entirely new look. The content is the webpage.
I mean, just look how bad web pages look (and have always looked), compared to printed books. Awful layout, awful typography, widows and orphans everywhere. Things not lined up, gawdy ads, spelling mistakes. Amateur hour.
The whole web experience is crappy. Finally we have something better: iPad apps. So it's hard to get excited about a Safari release when I can't wait to close this ugly window and go back to an app.
What?! I spent the better part of yesterday looking at beautiful and clever layouts using HTML5, CSS and JS on Apple's site that are interactive and beautiful. Now look at some examples from 1996.We've come a long, Baby! There are websites that mimic printed books, but that doesn't make sense. It's like every default OS calculator mimicking a physical calculator when that is less useful. It's pointless. The point is to enrich the experience, not try to mimic something else for no reason.
We are getting to a point that you won't be able to tell the difference between an iOS app and webcode expect for the speed of the transition. You can already save a webpage to your iPhone Home Page in v4.0 and it will not have the top or bottom top bars. Combine that with Apple's JS to replicate the look and feel of Xcode and you something that looks like Xcode, if not performs like it.
Using Safari 5 with Bing on trial! I don't use Chrome....
Reader is great if I might add! Just what I thought but sadly, ads are still running in the background!
I wonder how long it will be before someone makes a hack that simply opens the Reader when a article link is clicked? No background or just blackens it out completely?
That would be the simple solution, as trying to block the ads is a constant cat and mouse game.
Sunspider test
Total: 372.2ms +/- 0.6%
--------------------------------------------
[...]
Here's Safari 5 with today's nightlie (60820) on a newer MacPro.
--------------------------------------------
Total: 231.2ms +/- 0.6%
--------------------------------------------
[...]
Guys, these tests are impressive, but there are many variables outside of the browser to consider, which is why the test needs to be compared to other browsers. Hence the option in Sunspider to compare to results side-by-side. WIthout posting other browser results it's a pointless as your machine and internet connection can affect the tests.
Sunspider isn't the only test out there. SInce it's developed and maintained by WebKit, for the sake of being unbaised it's good to include other JS tests, too.Here is an image showing the comparative results of browsers. Anyone want to run all the possible browsers on their Mac or Windows machine to see how things have changed?Check out mrpiddy's post from Page 2 of this thread as an example.
Sunspider on 10.6 if anyone is interested:
Safari 5: 295.8ms +/- 0.8%
Chrome 5: 337.8ms +/- 2.6%
No WebGL even though it has been in webkit for a while.
As for the extensions, meh. Can't really see me having any real need for them.
You should give Firefox a download and cruise the themes, personas and extensions just for the heck of it.
I used to think I didn't have a use for them, until I started messing around, now I can't see how one can't live without them. It just breathes new life in your browser.
Here's some good add-ons to save yourself trouble.
1-Click YouTube Video Downloader
Ad Blocker Plus (can whitelist your favorite sites)
BetterPrivacy (deletes Flash cookies used to track, Safari doesn't)
Clipple (extended clipboard)
Colorful Tabs (useful for a lot of open tabs)
CoolIris (wow!)
Download Status Bar
FastestFox (all Google results on one long page)
Fission (Safari style address bar status)
Flagfox (shows the country of the site your visiting)
Ghostery (blocks web bugs trackers)
Lazarus (form recovery)
Low Quality Flash
Morning Coffee (one click loads your favorite sites for the day)
NoScript (your web cop, malicious behavior and scripts firewall)
NoSquint (remembers your zoom level per site)
OptimizeGoogle
RequestPolicy (control cross-site requests)
SmoothWheel (smoothscrolling)
SplitBrowser (compare two or more sites easily and quickly)
TrackMeNot (randomizes searches to thwart data miners)
TV-Fox
WOT (community based trust alerts of sites)
Thousands of more depending upon your needs.
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/personal.html
http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/
Safari 5 is not performing for me any faster than Safari 4. I am still with Leopard until 10.7 shows up. Don't care for anything in SL and don't use it.
Guys, these tests are impressive, but there are many variables outside of the browser to consider, which is why the test needs to be compared to other browsers. Hence the option in Sunspider to compare to results side-by-side. WIthout posting other browser results it's a pointless as your machine and internet connection can affect the tests.
Sunspider isn't the only test out there. SInce it's developed and maintained by WebKit, for the sake of being unbaised it's good to include other JS tests, too.Here is an image showing the comparative results of browsers. Anyone want to run all the possible browsers on their Mac or Windows machine to see how things have changed?Check out mrpiddy's post from Page 2 of this thread as an example.
I'm a bit bored, so
On a MacBook from early 2008, with 2,4GHz Penryn processor and 4GB RAM:
V8 test (bigger is better):
Safari 5: 2591
Google Chrome 5.0.375.55: 4910
Firefox 3.6.3: 399
Latest Webkit Nightly: 2801
Sunspider test (smaller is better):
Safari 5: 372.6ms +/- 6.0%
Google Chrome 5.0.375.55: 406.0ms +/- 6.3%
Firefox 3.6.3: 961.6ms +/- 1.7%
Latest Webkit Nightly: 395.8ms +/- 8.3% (and it didn't show the text while running...)
I'm a bit bored, so
On a MacBook from early 2008, with 2,4GHz Penryn processor and 4GB RAM:
V8 test (bigger is better):
Safari 5: 2591
Google Chrome 5.0.375.55: 4910
Firefox 3.6.3: 399
Latest Webkit Nightly: 2801
Sunspider test (smaller is better):
Safari 5: 372.6ms +/- 6.0%
Google Chrome 5.0.375.55: 406.0ms +/- 6.3%
Firefox 3.6.3: 961.6ms +/- 1.7%
Latest Webkit Nightly: 395.8ms +/- 8.3% (and it didn't show the text while running...)
MacPro 4,1 8GB RAM. All four apps were open on the SunSpider page at the the same time.
============================================
Safari 5.0 (Webkit) 60820
226.6ms +/- 0.7%
============================================
Chrome 5.0.375.55
264.9ms +/- 0.8%
============================================
Opera 10.53. 8343
317.5ms +/- 0.9%
============================================
Firefox 3.6.4
743.6ms +/- 4.1%
V8 test (bigger is better):
Safari 5: 2591
Google Chrome 5.0.375.55: 4910
Firefox 3.6.3: 399
Latest Webkit Nightly: 2801
I have to question Google's V8 test. The other browser makers seem to use SunSpider, even MS when testing IE, and the V8 tests always makes Nitro in WebKit seem excessively slow. I have to wonder if their test is fair.
I have to question Google's V8 test. The other browser makers seem to use SunSpider, even MS when testing IE, and the V8 tests always makes Nitro in WebKit seem excessively slow. I have to wonder if their test is fair.
it's a test. browser vendors can tweak to only one test, or they can look at a broad range of tests. What would give you the best real world results? One test, or many? Googles tests exist for a reason.
In my sunspider tests, safari ran 20ms slower than chrome but that's so fast that it's pointless to even compare. you'd never in a million years be able to tell a 20ms difference in a page load. You'd have to load the whole test 100 times over on the same page to make it even noticeable.
it's a test. browser vendors can tweak to only one test, or they can look at a broad range of tests. What would give you the best real world results? One test, or many? Googles tests exist for a reason.
I agree that more tests are better, as I noted in an earlier post, but I still have to wonder if Google's is slanted in a way that doesn't favour the real world, but instead their JS engine.
In my sunspider tests, safari ran 20ms slower than chrome but that's so fast that it's pointless to even compare. you'd never in a million years be able to tell a 20ms difference in a page load. You'd have to load the whole test 100 times over on the same page to make it even noticeable.
Even with Firefox trailing behind so far (right now) I still say the best browser is the one you prefer. It's more than just a slight edge on a JS engine. There are other engines and the app speed itself, along with its features that need to be considered.
For Mac I use Safari. For Windows I use IE with the Chrome Frame plug-in set to default. This gives me the best of both worlds, IMO, as I prefer the interconnectedness of the native browser app to the OS and the increased battery time when using a notebook.
Dial up was faster?
Where are the pics?
Spinning spinning spinning.
And it took hours to get to the download?
CLOGGED LIKE A TOILET
I agree that more tests are better, as I noted in an earlier post, but I still have to wonder if Google's is slanted in a way that doesn't favour the real world, but instead their JS engine. ...
Any test produced by a browser vendor should be automatically eliminated from consideration.
There're 2 (two) embedded videos in the article body.
``
Where's your momma gone
Where's your momma gone
Far far away
Where's your poppa gone
Where's your poppa gone
Little baby bird
' '
Firefox loads in an instant
Now it's taking over two minutes to load AppleInsider's front page with Safari 5. WTF is going on!? Should I run the Java update installer again? Flash Plug-in?
Firefox loads in an instant
Suffice it to say it does not take two minutes to load AppleInsider's front page for most users including me. In fact, it is faster than ever for me. As for Flash, I recommend the most recent version of the plug-in if you don't have it already. However, I don't think Flash is the source of your problems. It is also extremely unlikely that Java has suddenly gone awry. The most likely source of Safari problems is user-installed haxies. Disable any that you have installed. See how it goes.