Safari for Windows? (Who cares?)
Normally I don't keep up with Apple news, but living with an Apple fanboy at the moment, it just so happens that I heard about Safari 3 supporting Windows XP and Windows Vista. In case you didn't know, Safari is the official Apple browser for OSX, and it happens to be a port of Webkit, an open-source browser engine.
Now, I'm not about to make a long-winded discussion about this bit of news, but all I have to ask is, is anyone that uses Windows, aside from web developers who need to test their sites in Safari, actually interested in Safari? Mind you, this is the platform that already has IE, Firefox, Mozilla, Opera, Netscape, and Swift (the very first Webkit browser for Windows). Other than a brushed metal interface similar to all things Apple, I can't think of a single feature that Safari brings to the table of Windows web browser options. As far as I can tell, the only reason Safari has been successful on Macs has been because there was never a good alternative. I can't imagine that Steve Jobs and the rest of Apple would actually expect Safari to have similar success on Windows. My only guess is that maybe Steve thinks that some Windows users will give Safari a try, be hypnotized into an Apple-fandom trance, and immediately switch to a Mac. I'm not quite so sure that will happen.
Can anyone, anyone at all, give me a good reason why Windows users will benefit from the availability of Safari? No points for mentioning something that another browser already offers. Ready? Go!
Update 6-12 2:50pm: Congrats to josue who got 1 point for mentioning text shadows. Safari is the first browser for Windows to support text shadow effects with CSS.
2 Trackbacks/Pingbacks
- Pingback: links for 2007-06-13 : Greg Palmer on June 12, 2007
- Pingback: Alex around the world » Blog Archive » Safari 3 Beta on Windows XP on June 13, 2007
I installed it for the sake of testing/looking at something new/etc and it is just as dull, boring and familiarly irritating as Safari on the Mac. I use Firefox on 'my' Mac, and will continue to use Firefox on Windows.
I have my suspicion that it's little more than a branding exercise for MacOS, veiled as a vaguely useful aide to browser testing.
Yeah, and if they expect people to switch to Macs after trying the browser, they definitely shouldn't have put out a 'beta'. It's a royal pain to use - so many things I'm used to with Firefox (middle click to open/close tabs, being able to use my mouse's forward/back buttons to navigate) are no longer possible. The font smoothing is a little overdone and it sucks memory like there's no tomorrow.
Just sloppy. I'll be using it for site design testing and that's it. Unless Apple can give me some sort of differentiator compared to Firefox/IE.
Safari is a lot faster than IE or Firefox on either PC or Mac. It also adheres better to Web standards than IE (even 7 I believe).
Oh, and it's not a Microsoft product which has to make it better. Right?
Safari is supposedly more web-standards compliant than any other browser, being the first to complete the Acid2 test correctly. Still does, so I'd say that compliance to web standards is at least one good reason to use Safari.
Plus there's the speed thing, and then there's useless features like being able to resize any text box (like this one, wheee).
The way it renders text rapes my eyes and it takes a while longer to load up compared to my Firefox installation (which has a lot of plugins and extentions installed). I'm definately sticking with Firefox for now.
Spoken like a true techie conservative. Gates and Ballmer must love this kind of stuff. Who says the IT industry is innovative and anxious to try new things?
People will try it because it is faster. People will use it because they like the way it looks. Other people won't. Simple as that. Anyone who complains that it doesn't work exactly the same as the browser he's used to is engaging in pointless whining.
Presumably, Apple released the beta for the same reason anyone releases a public beta: To get feedback on an unfinished product.
Adding to the above comments, I installed it just to check out my homepage, etc. since I never felt like waiting around for Browsershots, etc.
btw: my homepage rendering via Safari was just like Opera's (meaning one small, visual annoyance)
I'll be using it for testing for sure. But I think the real reason for its release may be linked to another announcement made on the same day: if a web app works in Safari, then it will work on the iPhone.
Perhaps this is an attempt to encourage Windows developers to develop for the iPhone.
Patrick B: You get 0 points, because Safari's Web Standards compliance is only a result of using the Webkit engine, for which there is already another Windows browser, Swift, which is also faster than the Safari 3 beta.
billg: We are talking about Windows users here. This is the OS that caters to the majority of computer users… the ones that hardly ever try new software. A lot of them still use IE 6. Unless Apple manages to capitalize on their iPod advertising or packages it as a download with Quicktime and iTunes, they won't be getting it on the machines of many Windows users.
I think Stuart has the right idea here.
Mike: Good point!
Swift has always crashed on start up on Windows. The project should be killed off.
Also: Simplicity. How many people actually need all of those Firefox extensions? How many people need all those IE Toolbars that come standard with all that lovely spyware and adware?
Safari does what it needs to and does it fast. That's all I need in a browser and I'm glad that I can finally use it when I step up to a Windows machine.
Paul: 0 points, IE 7 is very fast, has very good spyware/adware protection (as well as a good phishing filter), and has the simplest UI of any browser available right now.
I just had a new idea, everyone. Maybe one of the reasons for Safari supporting Windows is for all the Mac users running Windows on their machines; if you are accustomed to using Safari on OSX, then you probably would like to use it on Windows too, when you have to run Windows on your Apple machine. That actually makes some sense
Jobs may be interested in retaining Mac users, but he's no saint (haha). I don't think it's logical that they would develop Safari for Windows so that Mac users can feel more at home on… Windows… even considering Bootcamp. It seems like the negatives (i.e., making people more comfortable using Windows) outweigh the positives for this particular argument.
By the way, nice job beating the bigwigs to this… http://www.lifehacker.com/software/web-browsers/-268054.php
I love Safari for Mac and I'm really happy to be able to use it in Windows too now!.
There aren't really any "benefits", it's just another option, great for designers stuck in Windows, great for Windows users because now they have another option (Not sure if Swift has it, but I believe text shadows support was non existent until now, in Windows).
kramtark: Great link. I think this point is spot on:
I won't argue that Webkit is a great engine, and more support for it can never hurt.
josue: congrats, you get 1 point. Safari is the first browser for Windows that has text shadows. I might start using it for that reason
Hence my assertion that the tech industry is essentially conservative. Those who've grown wealthy catering to the public learn to follow, not lead.
I think Apple probably has had Safari running on Windows for some time, and released it now to enable Windows development for the iPhone. That's the only reason that makes business sense. If they wree really intent on getting Windows users to switch from IE/Firefox, I doubt they would have released this beta. (In any case, the way Apple makes money from Windows users is when they buy Apple hardware. Safari on Windows isn't going to sell Mac's or iPods.)
i care you bone head
Sheesh, even Cringely did a piece on this:
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070614_002230.html