First Look: Safari 3 beta
#2
Posted 11 June 2007 - 06:17 PM
This was not originally my idea but I read a great reason why to port it for windows. Web compatability. There are a lot of sites that don't worry about checking their pages with Safari cause is Mac only. With such hate for IE I bet Safari can get at least 10% of the Windows browser share. That will get web site creators testing Safari.
#3
Posted 11 June 2007 - 06:18 PM
One note is that Safari on Windows XP appears to be a HUGE resource hog (even more so than Firefox, although I haven't done extensive tests with IE lately). After surfing 3 websites (Apple.com, MacRumors.com, and my personal website), my memory usage was up to 260 MB. My test machine only has 512MB...
#4
Posted 11 June 2007 - 06:19 PM
Quote:
In the View menu, to go along with pre-existing options for increasing and decreasing the size of text on the page, theres a new Make Text Normal Size optionuseful if youve been going crazy with the other resizing options and lost track of your starting point, I guess!
In the View menu, to go along with pre-existing options for increasing and decreasing the size of text on the page, theres a new Make Text Normal Size optionuseful if youve been going crazy with the other resizing options and lost track of your starting point, I guess!
Happens to me all the time (in some cases, it seems as if I can't get back to the un-munged size, short of quitting from Safari and starting again. (I can get close, but not there.)
This is most welcome.
#7
Posted 11 June 2007 - 06:44 PM
I was wondering if it would be as big of a hog as it as on a Mac. I haven't checked about it yet. But now as I Look down I can see the resizer thing. I wonder if it's in blogger? I can't wait for the final verison to come out. I don't think I could handle on of those Crashes that takes the whole program. I live on Safari.
#10
Posted 11 June 2007 - 07:02 PM
I have used Safari 3 beta on my Windows XP machine, don't want to install beta over Safari 2 on my Mac, and I have noticed that the URL field seems to auto complete URLs as you type. At first I thought it had somehow synced to my other browsers (IE7, Firefox 2, SeaMonkey 1.1.2) but it was showing sites that I have never browsed to. I even tried clearing the history and cache of each browser; no luck. I don't really like this "feature" although I can see why it would be beneficial.
Also the "ClearType" feature, I forget what Mac calls it, is WAY too intense. Even when preference is set to "Low" it bothers my eyes. But I think this is my personal preference because I have like "ClearType."
It does seem to be a performance hog, even more than Firefox 2; which I don't use anymore since Mozilla launched SeaMonkey, there new all-in-one Internet suite. Anyway, unless the performance issues are resolved in the actual release, I won't use Safari as my default browser. It isn't even the default on my Mac.
Overall, the beta seems to be successful.
Also the "ClearType" feature, I forget what Mac calls it, is WAY too intense. Even when preference is set to "Low" it bothers my eyes. But I think this is my personal preference because I have like "ClearType."
It does seem to be a performance hog, even more than Firefox 2; which I don't use anymore since Mozilla launched SeaMonkey, there new all-in-one Internet suite. Anyway, unless the performance issues are resolved in the actual release, I won't use Safari as my default browser. It isn't even the default on my Mac.
Overall, the beta seems to be successful.
#11
Posted 11 June 2007 - 07:04 PM
Yeah, it's a beta all right. The discussion boards are full of issues. I've been able to reproduce some of them. Pages that don't appear until you hit the reload button. Opening PDFs crashes the program. Dynamic HTML not working. And other unpleasant side effects. We'll probably see some updates fairly soon.
#12
Posted 11 June 2007 - 07:10 PM
Three features that I want to see:
1) Syntax coloring when using the View Source command.
2) Exceptions list for popup blocking. Right now, you have to set popup blocking to always on or always off.
3) Ability to choose specific javascript behaviors to block such as moving/resizing windows, hiding window elements (address bar, bookmark bar, status bar, etc). Currently, you either block all javascript or allow all javascript.
1) Syntax coloring when using the View Source command.
2) Exceptions list for popup blocking. Right now, you have to set popup blocking to always on or always off.
3) Ability to choose specific javascript behaviors to block such as moving/resizing windows, hiding window elements (address bar, bookmark bar, status bar, etc). Currently, you either block all javascript or allow all javascript.
#13
Posted 11 June 2007 - 07:10 PM
Quote:
I was wondering if it would be as big of a hog as it as on a Mac. I haven't checked about it yet. But now as I Look down I can see the resizer thing. I wonder if it's in blogger? I can't wait for the final verison to come out. I don't think I could handle on of those Crashes that takes the whole program. I live on Safari.
I was wondering if it would be as big of a hog as it as on a Mac. I haven't checked about it yet. But now as I Look down I can see the resizer thing. I wonder if it's in blogger? I can't wait for the final verison to come out. I don't think I could handle on of those Crashes that takes the whole program. I live on Safari.
On my Windows XP Pro (real PC, not virtual), Task Manager shows that Safari uses very little CPU (comparable to IE) but takes up 3-4 times the memory (~188,928K vs ~55,000K for IE). Page faults is about 20 times higher!
What I like most about Safari is that it has tabs so that I don't have to open several IE windows.
#14
Posted 11 June 2007 - 07:14 PM
Quote:
On my Windows XP Pro (real PC, not virtual), Task Manager shows that Safari uses very little CPU (comparable to IE) but takes up 3-4 times the memory (~188,928K vs ~55,000K for IE). Page faults is about 20 times higher!
What I like most about Safari is that it has tabs so that I don't have to open several IE windows.
On my Windows XP Pro (real PC, not virtual), Task Manager shows that Safari uses very little CPU (comparable to IE) but takes up 3-4 times the memory (~188,928K vs ~55,000K for IE). Page faults is about 20 times higher!
What I like most about Safari is that it has tabs so that I don't have to open several IE windows.
For IE are you using IE7 or IE6? If you have IE7 then you should have tabbed browsing.



Sign In
Register
Help


MultiQuote