How do you guys like Safari 3 for Windows?

[ddadmin]

For those who have downloaded it already, how do you like Safari 3 for Windows? It does seem faster in terms of rendering, but honestly, I think it's still a generation or more behind Firefox. I hate how you can't open a new tab just by double clicking the gray bar, or how the font looks slightly blurry etc. Just not as solid and intuitive as Firefox.

Good for testing purposes though.

[jscheuer1]

I just grabbed it and will let you know, but if this browser renders like Safari on a Mac, it's worth its weight in gold.

Thanks for the heads up!

[ddadmin]

Just be careful of the numerous security holes already found one day after it's been released: http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9728500-7.html

[Twey]

Judging purely by the list of features on the site, it doesn't seem to have anything Firefox, Konqueror and IE7 (at least) don't.

[boogyman]

is Konqueror Linux's general browser of choice? or just with certain Linux distributions?

[jscheuer1]

is Konqueror Linux's general browser of choice? or just with certain Linux distributions?

It's Twey's browser of choice.

[djr33]

Hmm... that's interesting. I'll need to play with it. It's great for testing, certainly.
I wouldn't see any reason that it should replace FF, etc. I use FF on my mac mostly, anyway.
But having the page compatible with safari is important, so that will be a help to designers.

[jscheuer1]

I'd want to hear from a few Mac OSX users who've used it on sites that look bad on their machines in it and found the same rendering problems with the Windows version before I felt really confident using it to test pages.

With the security issues mentioned, it sounds as though it isn't that much different than IE 6, in that regard. I was somewhat surprised to find that Apple's OSX apparently has many more security problems than Vista though.

[Twey]

is Konqueror Linux's general browser of choice? or just with certain Linux distributions?

It comes with KDE by default. It doubles as a file manager, like IE, and like IE, one of its functions is pants (IMO). Luckily for me, that's not the browser part in Konq's case. It uses KHTML, a modified version of which is the core of Safari, and it's my current browser of choice due to speed and adherence to standards at least until Fx3 is stable, since that looks set to finally beat Konqueror on the speed front. That will, by the way, officially make Firefox the fastest browser I've ever used.

But having the page compatible with safari is important, so that will be a help to designers.

Which is, I'd suspect, the reason Apple released it. Having it available for testing on Windows means more people will test their sites in it, which means more Safari-compatible sites.

I'd want to hear from a few Mac OSX users who've used it on sites that look bad on their machines in it and found the same rendering problems with the Windows version before I felt really confident using it to test pages.

There won't be any differences, I shouldn't think. It will almost certainly just be a new interface on KHTML/WebKit. To actually modify the engine for the Windows release would be considerably more effort for the Apple team, as well as defeating the point: there's no reason for them to do so. If any bugfixes were made to the codebase before releasing the Windows version, I expect those changes will be merged back into Safari/Mac at the first available opportunity.

I was somewhat surprised to find that Apple's OSX apparently has many more security problems than Vista though.

Me too, since BSD (the operating system on which Apple bases its OS) is renowned for its security. It seems they simply didn't turn the security features on -- the (Open)BSD kernel has all the extensions that blogger was saying OSX lacked, for example.

[tech_support]

Safari still uses as much RAM as Firefox.

I also don't like how it hides my start menu.