MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

"'A lot of Web-based software engineers love programming on Safari,' he said."

Shouldn't that be "programming for Safari"? Big difference.

Mar 25, 08 - 08:54 am Comment from: GizmoDan

"decision to tightly tie its music and video software for the first time with its Safari Web browser."

This is definitely a stretch. If people are too oblivious to realize that they are accidently downloading Safari, then they likely won't know they have it, and won't use it. It will just take up space on their hard drive. Who knows what else they have on there.

Mar 25, 08 - 08:57 am Comment from: tmsruge

Too bad Safari and FF can't thrive on IE's leftovers. I think Mozilla is just pining for attention here. Competition is a good thing. They just didn't expect Apple to give it to'em this quickly...

http://tmsruge.com

Let's not forget that Safari also runs on the iPhone and iPod touch. This could end up being huge.

Mar 25, 08 - 09:06 am Comment from: Macromancer

". Users can simply uncheck a box and not download Safari if they so desire — and if they are semi-cognizant. "

Maybe you mean semi-conscious.

" . . . Safari also runs on the iPhone and iPod touch."

And the soon to be released widescreen iPad handheld.

Mar 25, 08 - 09:26 am Comment from: tmsruge

@ Tantric Oligarchy,

Really? You spoke to Steve himself and he said you could say that out loud or is this wishful thinking.

What purpose would such a devise serve that the iPhone/Touch doesn't serve already?

http://tmsruge.com

Mar 25, 08 - 09:27 am Comment from: Woody

What's really cool is that I'm working on a web app right now, and I'm just making sure it works on Safari. Funny thing is, when you develop and test using a standards-compliant browser, your web app "just works" when you access it from another compliant browser like Firefox. And it don't look half-bad in IE. That's why programmers love it.

IMO, any issues in there are when using IE are simply because of sub-par browser compliance/performance, and users aren't tied to any single browser when using my apps. They're free to upgrade from IE to Safari or Firefox.

For many users, it won't matter. I have IE, Firefox, and Safari on my Windows computer, but I mainly use FF because of all the great plugins it supports, which neither IE nor Safari support. I expect this is true for many others. When I'm at home with both computers in front of me, my preference for browsing (when not for OS-specific things), in order, is Firebox on Windows, Safari on OS X, Firefox on OS X, IE on Windows.

Mar 25, 08 - 09:38 am Comment from: HMCIV

@Tantric Oligarchy
"'A lot of Web-based software engineers love programming on Safari,' he said." Shouldn't that be "programming for Safari"?

I don't know Tantric. Some days I code a lot better if just grab Teddy Roosevelt hat, my Land Cruiser and an Elephant Gun and go for a ride.

Mar 25, 08 - 09:38 am Comment from: jocknerd

I agree with Military Police. I'm a web application developer. I use Firefox for all development because of all the plugins like Firebug. Safari is used only for checking the apps to make sure everything is working.

I know that it's largely what you get used to when you're talking FireFox vs Safari but I really prefer Firefox to Safari. FireFox has add-ons that aren't available or don't work as well on Safari such as Stumble, FireFTP, and Forecastfox.

>Maybe you mean semi-conscious.
See mw's definition of cognizant

@HMCIV:
LOL! And what that elephant was doing in your pajamas, we'll never know.

Mar 25, 08 - 09:59 am Comment from: shen

a lot of people seem to prefer FF for plugins. I have yet to see a plugin that was worth the download time. YMMV.

The Important point is the iPhone and touch link. It is an important piece of the puzzle for being the next generation of computing.

This is simply good, affordable, and targetable marketing using other software that Apple has created WITH, allthewhile giving the option either to do or not to do. They are just saying 'give Safari a try'. Mozilla can run a less targetable, more expensive TV add if don't haven't created any other resources to hold banners for their own stuff.

Mar 25, 08 - 10:04 am Comment from: aToMac

Maybe you guys should have look at Drosera and the Web Inspector. You can enable "Develop" menu in the preferences window.

Steve Jobs grand scheme is finally coming to fruition. Selling boatloads of iPods was great, but that wasn't the true story. Selling boatloads of iPods allowed Apple to set the standards for digital media AND gave Apple a back door into Windoze PCs.
MDN idea of lots of Mac "How-To" movies on the Windows/iTunes store is a great one. Maybe a demo of Filemaker, too.

Mozilla has a new astro-turf campaign up and running with the goal of talking down Safari and promoting Firefox by focusing on plug-ins.

Here are the facts:
99% of Firefox's plug-ins are amateurish shit and the remaining 1% mostly try (and fail) to replicate what Safari already offers.A few of Firefox's plug-ins are unique, but they hardly offer enough to deny myself the speed and elegance of Safari.

Great - the iTunes, Quicktime and Safari combo on Windows leaves Microsoft providing just the dodgy OS and Office. All the important bits being done by Apple!

Bit of a turnaround.

Mar 25, 08 - 10:35 am Comment from: Zeke

"FireFox has add-ons that aren't available or don't work as well on Safari such as Stumble, FireFTP, and Forecastfox."

Why would I use a browser based FTP client when I can use FUGU or Fetch? As for Stumble, does the world really need a web based utility for finding 2500 web sites that people MIGHT be interested in? Forecastfox is just another weather radar site, one of many. This information is easily available on OS X widgets, BTW. I'm reminded of the early website that you could visit that was a graphic of a ticking clock with the correct time for your time zone. As we all know, it quickly replaced all those clocks on the wall, and clockmakers everywhere are now out of business, right?

Mar 25, 08 - 10:42 am Comment from: MrScrith

@shen and steve

I don't bother with FF plugins for non-developer stuff so for random browsing I'm good with safari, but Derosia etc can't compete with Firebug, Web Developer and Lori for building websites.

For web development, debugging Javascript/CSS, etc Firefox wins, for speedy browsing Safari 3.1 rocks, even on windows.

Mar 25, 08 - 10:51 am Comment from: DogGone

It's more likely that Safari will cut into IEs share because the update will offer an alternative browser to many people that didn't even realize an option existed.

No one is forcing anyone to install the software. Apple are just making it very easy for those who have iTunes for Windows to gain access to Safari. Excellent marketing ploy and Mozilla would do that if they had the choice.

Now if Safari is better than FF then Mozilla could lose market share because of this.

I use both browsers on my PC at work since FF is a bit more reliable (or was) for sites I use for business.

Mar 25, 08 - 10:55 am Comment from: Cubert

I sent out a mass email to my Windoze suffering friends yesterday. At least one has downloaded it and switched away from IE.

ABIE (Anything But IE)

Steve said
"Here are the facts:
99% of Firefox's plug-ins are valuable and unique and the remaining 1% successfully replicate what Safari already offers.A few of Firefox's plug-ins are useful enough to deny myself the speed and elegance of Safari."

I fixed your statement for accuracy.

Seriously, all Apple needs to do is set up a plugin store like Mozilla.

Steve said:
"I'm paranoid and take things way too seriously and think Mozilla has a new astro-turf campaign up and running with the goal of talking down Safari and promoting Firefox by focusing on plug-ins, because one person disagrees with me. For some reason I'm not going after Internet Explorer, which has still has the greatest browser market share and coincidentally is the worst thing to ever happen to the internet."

I fixed your statement for accuracy again.

Mar 25, 08 - 11:14 am Comment from: DLMeyer

The fact is that the sales of iPods led to the adoption of iTunes which is (finally) leading to the installation of Safari. Just because it is installed does not mean it will be used - a great many of those who download it will not understand what just happened or what the new icon is on their desktop, and many will be frightened or annoyed. Still, if one in four (PC users) do the install intentionally and one in four (of those) end up as regular Safari users, there will be close to twice as many Safari/Windows users as there are Mac users.
This would be a good thing, by itself, even if it didn't lead to more switchers.
Dave

Mar 25, 08 - 11:55 am Comment from: s

'I don't think Safari is going to become the number one or number two browser for PCs in the next year, but I think over the next couple of years they may be able to surpass Firefox,'

Safari will never become number two browser for Windows PC.

Before that happens, Safari for Windows users will switch to Mac.

Mar 25, 08 - 12:15 pm Comment from: alansky

I have never been particularly impressed by Firefox despite its obvious popularity. For one thing, it has always done a very mediocre job of rendering web pages on my Macs (lots of blue question marks and misplaced text all over the place on many sites).

Mozilla's CEO is pissed because the best way to push his browser is to discourage comparisons with other (possibly better) browsers like Safari. Until now, Safari wasn't one of the options on the PC. Now it is.

"Why would I use a browser based FTP client when I can use FUGU or Fetch? As for Stumble, does the world really need a web based utility for finding 2500 web sites that people MIGHT be interested in? Forecastfox is just another weather radar site, one of many. This information is easily available on OS X widgets, "

I was wearing a Window's hat in my statement as I have to use Windows at work and this article was ignighted by the Windows release of Safari. As such, OSX widgets really are not an option. I think it's facile to dismiss specific add-on's based upon personal opinion. As I prefaced my statement before, it's largely what you get used to and I really do like having these options which aren't available in Safari for Windows.

Mozilla Foundation and the Mozilla Corporation is Different.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation

In August 2006, Microsoft posted a letter on Mozilla newsgroups and offered to open up a new open-source facility at its headquarters in Redmond, Wash., to Mozilla software engineers. Mozilla responded by accepting the offer.

MICROSOFT has their HANDS up FIREFOX
so... dump it off your MACS!!!!!

>MDN wrote: ...and if they are semi-cognizant. We know, for the Windows-only users, chances of that are poor...

I wonder if these MDN editors are this pompous and annoying in real life. They seem like the types of guys you can just barely stand... and for short periods

Most of my PC using clients are SHOCKED when they see their web site I build for them rendered by Safari. It only takes one look for them to see the big difference and advantages it brings to the PC. 90% of them have downloaded it and use it.

Font rendering and display is totally different in Safari for PC than in Firefox or IE. That in and of itself is a great reason for most PC users to switch to it for most of their normal surfing.

Then add in the Safari-only feature of Expandable Textfields and the value only grows.

Apple should just build Safari right into iTunes.

SAY GOODBYE said

"MICROSOFT has their HANDS up FIREFOX
so... dump it off your MACS!!!!!"

Firefox is open source. The source code is available for anyone to download. No one is going to be to slip anything devious into firefox.

The only big negative about Safari for WIndows is that if you have cleartype on, Safari's rendering looks like CRAP.

Mar 25, 08 - 04:58 pm Comment from: ken1w

Wrong... Anything that reduces the number of default Internet Explorer users is a good thing for Mozilla. If a Windows user is already using Mozilla's FireFox and likes it, that user will probably keep using FireFox, even if Safari is offered to them. Safari will have a bigger impact on reducing the number of Internet Explorer users who never considered trying another browser, and that's good for everyone (except Microsoft).

Mar 25, 08 - 05:06 pm Comment from: BiZarRo BaLlmEr

Can't wait to see the next market research info for browser market share.

Mar 25, 08 - 05:30 pm Comment from: ragarcia

Printing for the iPhone

When will I be able to print boarding passes from my Mobile Safari in my iPhone?

to the day that Apple gets sued to let IE/Firefox run on the iPhone.

Mar 25, 08 - 06:07 pm Comment from: AppleMacMan

With the coming release of Firefox 3.0 which is awesome on both a Mac and PC, I highly double Safari will ever over take Firefox's market share.

While I love Safari 3.1 on my Mac and it is my default browser, Firefox 3.0 is the wave of the future. It just has way too many advantages including everybody's favorite: extensions. That's just my humble opinion.

I believe that it isn't unrealistic to see the IE market share at less than 50% in the near future if both Firefox and Safari continue to wow both consumers and businesses. 

Mar 25, 08 - 06:12 pm Comment from: HolyMackerel

I think it should have been 'opt-in' rather than 'opt-out' - have Safari there unchecked.

Also, I find it ironic that MS invented the 'free app' in IE in the age when all large company software had a charge. They did it to kill Netscape. Now Google, FF, Apple are using this strategy against MS!

"tightly tie"

Ummm.... those Firefox lovers shouldn't be giving Apple any ideas. There is nothing stopping Apple from bundling Safari with iTunes + QuickTime, and iTunes has, so that when you can't get one without the other, the way you can't get QT and iTunes separately.

With all the stink made about putting it in as an option in Software update, one wonders why they just didn't go all the way.

Would that be the right thing to do? No. But bundling things that don't need to go together is the STANDARD for browser competition, right?

In fact if Apple wanted to compete in the "standard" way, it would make iTunes and Safari dependent on each other, then call Safari "part of iTunes".

But Safari usage (though not just installation) is likely to cost Mozilla money. Ummm... welcome to business.

Safari is going to hurt FireFox as much as Opera becoming free did, that is not at all.

Lets face it, Opera always was a smaller and more streamlined browser than firefox. FireFox has always been the one with the plugins.

I love love love the way Safari handles PDFs. FireFox does nothing with PDFs on the Mac unless you use *groan* Adobe's plugin. I tried to switch over to Safari purely because of this (and 2.0 was sluggish). I managed to find an adblocker for Safari so I thought I'd be set.

But I missed all my other plugins. Better Google Reader, Down Them All, etc, etc. Sorry Safari, not going to happen.