Safari For Windows? My Safari on Windows opinion and review

[Sten 0]

Some sites dont display all that brilliant in it.I like the firefox rendering engine.being apple, wouldnt they call it iHTML or something? lol, just a thought

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

It's called KHTML because they actually took the KDE web engine and then added a Cocoa interface and underpinnings so it doesn't require QT and called it WebCore. Then they added a completely new GUI and called it Safari.xboxrulz

[foolakadugie 0]

I suppose that I might download it for furture jobs, because in the past I have made websites that dislayed quite a bit differently in safari and needed to be changed.It is a little annoying to recode something for a little 2 percent of web surfers.

[Alegis 0]

I don't think it's suiting as browser at all. Like all apple for windows software it is hardly stable (doubt the removal of the beta tag will help) and in features limiting to say, Firefox. Their graphs on their main site indicating browser usage in pie charts have been made by very delusional minds.But I guess that wasn't their goal at all, but to introduce Safari as platform for their iPhone. Devs will have to make shite compatible with Safari to make it work on iPhone now they have been deprived of any SDK. I feel sorry for those who wish to buy the gadget and make full use of it.

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

iTunes and Quicktime are quite stable on Windows. It's just bulkier and slower on Windows than MacOS X that's for sure.xboxrulz

[Unregistered 0111405241546 0]

By looking on the apple web page, it had a chart saying it loads faster pages than firefox.. So I downloaded that, and I checked it out, and for me at least it doesn't.. So safari dosen't load faster pages than firefox on my windows and mac machine. And for some reason all the text on sarfai looks all blurry on my screen, and I can change it in the settings but it doesn't get much clearer like in firefox, or IE..

[FirefoxRocks 0]

I have downloaded Safari for Windows and found it a little bit disappointing, but I do hope they get fixed more and more as more versions are released. My bookmarks from other browsers weren't automatically imported on first run, which was quite unusual for a browser like this. Also, I cannot figure out how to install gadgets or whatever they are called. This is a good browser for web developers though, more features are still needed. I like the Private Browsing feature.

By looking on the apple web page, it had a chart saying it loads faster pages than firefox.. So I downloaded that, and I checked it out, and for me at least it doesn't.. So safari dosen't load faster pages than firefox on my windows and mac machine. And for some reason all the text on sarfai looks all blurry on my screen, and I can change it in the settings but it doesn't get much clearer like in firefox, or IE..

The charts on the Apple page for HTML performance and JavaScript performance are only based on the system they tested, the memory they used, the programs that were running, the network connection they used, etc, etc... If your system differs from the tested one, the results differ also.

[unimatrix 0]

The reason for porting to windows was for developers as a SDK for the iPhone, not to compete with IE, FF, or any other browser. This is because Safari is the same core technology for devoping content for the iPhone and most of the world's developers are not on Macs, but like the iPod Apple is looking to get as many people hooked on their latest gaget. As far as the PPC vs. Intel move, which is really for another forum, while RISC is a better architecture, the move has been a smart one. At least for those of us in the Video side of the house. Most of today's 3D rendering engines are optimized for the x86 platform whether it be on Windows or Linux and now Mac. My Dad's Intel Core 2 Duo iMac beats my Dualcore 2Ghz G5 Powermac in most non-audio rendering tasts, even with FCP 5. So while we can argue theory on chip design, the reality of the situation is that it was a good move on their part. But releasing Safari on Windows was a move purely for the iPhone.

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

The reason for porting to windows was for developers as a SDK for the iPhone, not to compete with IE, FF, or any other browser. This is because Safari is the same core technology for devoping content for the iPhone and most of the world's developers are not on Macs, but like the iPod Apple is looking to get as many people hooked on their latest gaget.
As far as the PPC vs. Intel move, which is really for another forum, while RISC is a better architecture, the move has been a smart one. At least for those of us in the Video side of the house. Most of today's 3D rendering engines are optimized for the x86 platform whether it be on Windows or Linux and now Mac. My Dad's Intel Core 2 Duo iMac beats my Dualcore 2Ghz G5 Powermac in most non-audio rendering tasts, even with FCP 5.

So while we can argue theory on chip design, the reality of the situation is that it was a good move on their part.

But releasing Safari on Windows was a move purely for the iPhone.

True... but as for the PPC debate, for me, I just need optimization to get the math calculations done fast for the games and such and to get my Folding@Home pumping as many FLOPS as possible.

xboxrulz

[unimatrix 0]

End of the story though, is if you look at those of us that purchase high end macs, most of us are in the video industry. And rendering 3D CGI on Macs became a problem a few years back when a lot of the top packages stopped support for the PPC all together. Also IBM et. al. were running into fabercation problems and it really looked like they had hit a wall in development. Their 90nm process had all sorts of flaws (ironically AMD was having the same production troubles at the time). Intel may have pulled some stunts in the past, like stealing ALPHA's architecture, but they are really sticking it to AMD. And now Apple doesn't have to worry about being stuck at 1.25Ghz for two years while the X86 crowd doubled their clock speeds and processing power. Especially in laptops.

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

I was pretty sure the PowerMac had speeds up to 2.5GHz on the PPC970MP and clock speed isn't everything if your architecture is better btw . A G4 1.25 GHz iBook is better than a Centrino 1.8GHz notebook with the same amount of RAM. Also, even if IBM couldn't handle it, PA Semi supposingly had a deal with Apple. 7W dual-core (2.0 GHz each core, memory and gigabit controller integrated) system for the notebooks and desktops. 7 watts! However, Apple HAD to go Intel.xboxrulz

[Quatrux 4]

Well, personally, I also wasn't to happy about Safari for Windows, in fact I don't like most software for windows from apple, mainly for their GUI, secondly for speed, but I don't find it bad that it exists, people can check and try apple software, they might decide to get a Mac and use their OS.. or people who use Macs, when somewhere away, they can use macos software on Windows and etc. even though, if you would browse google, you would find some hate for apple software on windows by windows users and even by mac users, there are plenty people who hate Quick Time. :PBut anyway, as I had said in other topic about Safari, I would like to see Webkit rendering engine for windows not in a beta stage, but a very fast stable version, and not a browser using .NET like Swift, not even the GTK, but a browser with QT, which looks good for Windows and is very fast for browsing, full of features, that would be something.. In fact, I would like that somehow Opera could switch between two rendering engines, their own Presto and Webkit which is continued to be ported and is open-source, why not?

[Cyril 0]

safari is personally my favorite web browser for windows i have no problems and it is very good