[natmusak]

moonbuggy said:

UeliZino says: "we all know mac os x stands above windows - right?"

I honestly think it's more than people have been conditioned to think osx stands above windows. windows has had a few rough times here and there, but to say osx stands above it is a stretch. Pretty much every point I've seen made to say it's better is quickly shown to be hype. Now I do believe each os has it's strengths, but any more these days, with the newest releases, neither is far superior than the other. But I do see a disadvantage with going with a more expensive platform with fewer choices in hardware/software. That said, mac is a fine computer, but sometimes the attitude (mostly fueled by i'm a mac) stinks.

I don't really want to enter this off topic discussion, but saying Macs or Mac OS X are flatly "a more expensive platform" makes no sense. Windows Vista Ultimate is the only version of Windows within spitting distance of what Leopard offers, yet a retail copy costs as much as some PC desktops and only a couple hundred less than a Mac mini!

/off-topicness

[UeliZino]

i'm gonna tell you i was on windows or i have to say i'm still on windows on other machines (windows xp i downgraded from vista) you always have to figure out what your priorities are. i like the stability of mac os x. i can go for weeks without a crash. i don't even think i ever crashed with the mac. my vista laptop would crash 2 to 3 times a day. that's not only the fault of microsoft. it has something to do with the hardware and software not being made by the same company. for me, it is important that it works. and i'm happy to spend a couple more bucks on it. some people don't care much about stability or safety. i do a lot. i hate to loose tons of work. i have financial info on my computer etc. etc.. that's the other reason i use opera. very fast, stable and the winner in net security. i was all IE before i tried the opera for the first time many years ago. and i can not imagine using any of the other browser. it's worth a try. put the bicycle a side and get into the ferrari.

[jscottk]

I like it, though I have no use for cover flow and stopped using it in iTunes (I tried it for about 30 seconds in Leopard then promptly switched to a more use view). Tabs on top makes more sense to me as it is an extension of the concept of the title bar of a window (the old version repeats this information in an unnecessary tab strip that also waists screen real-estate). Obviously, this is a matter of personal taste.
What really is exciting is that Apple hasn't forgotten the millions of us who still use Tiger and PPC Macs!!! (What's the matter Google, that single check box to make universal binaries too hard to check? Or is all of your latest software really just Windoze/Intel ports running under emulation?)

[doglesby]

[quote name='natmusak']
>

kbradnam said:

>However, I now have to be much more careful when I click on the top of the window to move it. A stray click will now close a tab....

How is that different from Safari 3? The close button on tabs haven't changed (except cosmetically).

It's different because the tabs are on the title bar. It used to be that you could click the title bar to drag a window without worrying about switching/closing tabs which were in a completely different place.

Personally, I've always wanted the side buttons on the mighty mouse to manipulate windows rather than the elements in them. Then you could drag a window from anywhere inside it and this wouldn't be a concern. That would also be innovation rather than rearrangement. The problem with Chrome is that it is too minimalist, it isn't clear how to accomplish what I'm used to (I've figured it out, but the initial impression was wtf?). The problem with Safari 4 is that it rearranges the same old elements, that's not innovation. Don't put the reload button where the clear button goes (the button that clears search fields), don't put tabs on the title bar (which has specific functionality in all apps), and don't hide menus in the Windows version (I thought the Reopen All Windows from Last Session feature had been dropped at first).

[moonbuggy]

natmusak: "I don't really want to enter this off topic discussion, but saying Macs or Mac OS X are flatly "a more expensive platform" makes no sense. Windows Vista Ultimate is the only version of Windows within spitting distance of what Leopard offers, yet a retail copy costs as much as some PC desktops and only a couple hundred less than a Mac mini!"
























Well I don't want to get that off toic either, but I was simply pointing out what I've often found to be true in reference to what the other person said about windows.. But when I say platform, I was refering to hardware in conjunction with software. My pc is qq, running at 3.7ghz, has the same typical ram offered on mac, has a 1 TB HD (not 500MB) at the base cost is about $495. It's very fast, stable, nice and beats most macs that are $1800 in finishing tasks, including video rendering. It's also quicker than a lot of the $2500 macs. It's a bit quicker than my mac pro. Adding the comparble graphics card brings it up to about $675. And even if I put speed aside, cost is fairly different. So I don't really see anything wrong with what I said about it costing less money to set up. But I pointed out why I prefer the platform for my own reasons. As for windows, I don't see any need to run vista ultimate, unless what you like is flashy graphics on your icons etc. But if you do, that's fair. I'm more interested in what I can do with the computer and what it cost, and not how the interface looks. I mean the recycle bin could be translucent, golden sparklies. It wouldn't matter. It's still the same os.







and as for what [~114755] said about stability, I don't really seem to have a problem. I mean windows is very stable and I don't experience any real problems to talk about. I've seen some applications crash once in a while, but that's also true on a mac from what I've found. But I guess it depends on who you are, what you run and who made your sofware, sometimes. I have seen some setups with certain hardware that caused miserable crashes, but that wasn't windows fault. It was a hardware issue or some conflicting software. To say this doesn't happen on mac would be untrue. There may be more instances where people end up on something unstable, but if the machine is set up properly, windows is fine. I also can't see the bycycle / ferrari comparison either. Especially for a system that cost twice what a windows machine costs and isn't really majorly better. That's why I have several pc's. And it's not money either. I can certainly afford more macbooks than I have, but I was just saying, there has never been any amazing improvement for me on one system or the other. Just keeping it real.. But windows does get attacked more often, due to it's popularity. That's not windows fault.. I just make sure I'm up to date.

[kubomon17]

ive been using the new safari today and frankly i hated some of the new features at first, but honestly you get used to it in less than five minutes. i went back to safari 3 for a bit today and that just made me appreciate the new safari more. people complain about the tabs and this and that but it really isnt bad, its quite productive imo.
i do miss the blue status bar but thats certainly not a deal breaker. pages load super fast and the new top pages feature and coverflow for the history is great. i love how you can customize the toolbar to suit your personal needs (go to view if you dont know what im talking about).
to those that dont like the new tabs or the new progress bar or anything else - you can change it very easily! just run the appropriate scripts using terminal (the scripts are in a diff article) and you can configure it any way you want.
last i wanna say that everyone needs to stop hating on other browsers and others' browser choices. we all like something different. i like safari because of its integration and overall awesome usability. i personally dont like chrome (not that its even available for mac yet) or opera but i dont see the point of bashing those browsers. some people like em so whats the big deal?

[fletc3her]

Where can I download Chrome for Mac? Oh, it doesn't exist.

[chromos]

I can't be sure, but has Safari 4 finally given us a taste of resolution-independence that has been so long promised? The new full-page zoom feature appears to correctly zoom UI elements like buttons and drop-downs without getting all pixelated...

[Speed_Racer]

All this UI tuning is nice, but what I really want to know is whether Apple has finally plugged the notorious memory leak Safari has always had. I start Safari and half an hour and 10 sites later, it's gobbling close to 700MB of RAM. For a stinking browser???

[natmusak]

Ok, I've got a quibble here. If Safari 4's tabs started at the same size of Safari 3's default tab size, it would save time mousing over to the new + tab button (because Safari 3's separate tab bar could be double-clicked anywhere to create a new tab). But then it would look like a mix between Opera, IE8, and Chrome.

Here's the best compromise I can think of:

After clicking the tab button for the first time, all tabs shrink to around the size of Safari 3's default tab size. That would inadvertently create space between the tab button and the tabs, which could then be doubled-clicked to produce new tabs without having to mouse all the way over to the tab button. Or they could make the tab button move to the edge of each new tab if they didn't want people to double-click on said inadvertent space (because it would essentially eliminate the distance between tabs and the + tab button).

This would also look better, especially when two or three tabs are open at once because right now, they look comically long. Not a huge deal as I spend most of my time in NetNewsWire or on sites I already have in my Bookmarks Bar, and I use keyboard shortcuts 99% of the times.

But if IE8 and (especially) Chrome can so shamelessly mimic Opera's tab system, why not Apple? :D

On an unrelated note, I think the maker of Inquisitor is eating his hat right now. 



EDIT

While trying to think as though I were Apple - or at least the team working on Safari - I have an idea why they decided to put the + tab button all the way over on the right-hand corner.

1. Kind of obvious, but it does mean no matter what, you always know where the tab button is. This is in contrast to IE8, Chrome, and Opera (which the former two obviously were obviously inspired by), which move their new tab buttons depending on how many tabs are open. Does that mean Safari 4's tab button placement increases usability? That's debatable. Sure, you know where the + tab button is no matter what, but it's all the way over on the right-hand corner.



2. This one took some thought. If Safari's default tab size were the same as Safari 3's and they put the tab button right next to the edge (a la Opera, IE8, Chrome), it could have led to confusion between that and the new placement of the Bookmark button! This could very well be the main reason for the seemingly distant placement of the + tab button.



Neither Opera, nor IE8, nor Chrome have this conundrum because they either have no bookmark button at all (Opera) or use different images for their bookmark button icons (IE8 has Favorites and doesn't even have an image on its new tab button; Chrome has a star).

[George76]

Speed_Racer said:

All this UI tuning is nice, but what I really want to know is whether Apple has finally plugged the notorious memory leak Safari has always had. I start Safari and half an hour and 10 sites later, it's gobbling close to 700MB of RAM. For a stinking browser???

I would love to know the answer to that as well. I had always wondered why my Mac would sometimes grind to a near halt after a while. I was notorious for never shutting down Safari. One of the comments in an article mentioned Safari's memory leak issues (I'm fairly new to Macs so it was news to me) and I went to Activity Monitor and sure enough, Safari's memory usage was insane. I've since trained myself to use Firefox full time and haven't seen my Mac drop back into tortoise mode since.

I sure wish Apple would spend less time trying to shave another millimeter off the size of the iMac and Macbook Air and concentrate on fixing the known (and serious) issues with its core software.

[Rhywun]

OK, I notice a couple things right off the bat. One, it's MUCH faster than Safari 3. Two, finally it does some sort of caching so you can go backwards and forwards without doing a complete page load (like Firefox has had for years now). And three, Glims and/or Safari AdBlock don't work anymore :(

[UeliZino]

don't need adblock in opera. it's built in i never get an add it's just plain what ever i wanna see. you start by right click and block content and then click on what you wanna have blocked and it will block all adds coming from that ad agency. after a week you have em all blocked... or you can download a full list. ... and you got the safest and fastest browser ... with the functions others will have in 3 years.

[sporks]

Tabs as title bar is a horrible interface idea. I'm embarrassed for Apple in having a "New Coke" moment because of the upstart kid on the block.

By eliminating the Windows titlebar, you've broken the Window paradigm. Is the window a container? Minimize it and yes. Grab and drag a tab, and yes, they all move like they belong to the same window. Click the window "title" to bring it to the front? No. The tab you select comes to the front at the same time as the window, so now they are separate. It turns the 25 year old human interface concept of the window into some nightmare chimera.

It's something a Windows developer would come up with: throw more crap and complexity in the interface to show how powerful and flexible you are and Fitz' law be damned.