Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

thiagofll · Feb 13, 2006, 04:13 AM

I mean don't take me wrong. Safari has its advantages: it's fast, loads pages quickly, it crashes, it's easy to use, then again it crashes...

I am a G-mail user, and I just found out today that, the reason why I couldn't use the built in chats G-mail has, was because of Safari...It works perfectly with Firefox...
Safari does not let me print labels from the USPS website, then again, I gotta go with Firefox...
Safari is incompatible with some webpages... they don't even load...
The other day I was checking some stuff on this Government Website and I was also with a friend on the phone. She could see things on the page, that I could not...so how much am I missing by using Safari? And it has nothing to do with the Intel transition, it did the same thing on my old G5...

I just don't understand why doesn't Apple do something about it? Even Firefox that is free, is compatible with everything, why does Apple need to be exclusive?

Share your thoughts...

Chuckit · Feb 13, 2006, 04:56 AM

Your questions assume a lot of things that aren't true.

1. A large number of sites don't work in Safari that work in Firefox.
2. Everything works perfectly in Firefox. (Some things only work in Firefox, some things only work in Internet Explorer — heck, some things only work in Safari.)
3. Apple is not improving Safari. (Or, depending on how we take "Why doesn't Apple do something about it?", the false assumption might be that total compatibility with everything is an easy goal.)

I would be interested to see the page that had things that appeared in Firefox and not Safari. That's kind of odd.

thiagofll · Feb 13, 2006, 05:09 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Your questions assume a lot of things that aren't true.

1. A large number of sites don't work in Safari that work in Firefox.
2. Everything works perfectly in Firefox. (Some things only work in Firefox, some things only work in Internet Explorer — heck, some things only work in Safari.)
3. Apple is not improving Safari. (Or, depending on how we take "Why doesn't Apple do something about it?", the false assumption might be that total compatibility with everything is an easy goal.)

I would be interested to see the page that had things that appeared in Firefox and not Safari. That's kind of odd.

Hey...I will talk to my friend and ask for the Government Webpage..I will keep you guys updated...Now I have an example handy...G-mail for example...It does not show the chat buddylist when using Safari...You gotta use Firefox for that option and many other options such as add color,size, font type to your e-mails. Safari does not let you do all that when using G-mail...

I mean don't take me wrong Safari has everything to be a good browser, but it's not convenient at all...

Tsilou B. · Feb 13, 2006, 05:28 AM

When Google released the Gmail chat feature recently, they explicitly said that they had made it compatible with the two most widely used web browsers, Internet Explorer and Firefox, but they promised to add support for the third browser, Safari, soon.

The reason why Firefox is more compatible is simple. IE, Firefox and Safari all use different rendering engines and there will always be some things that get rendered differently. When webpage designers create web pages, they always test them in IE and Firefox, because they can be sure that people with these browsers will visit their site. They simply don't know about Safari or don't have a Mac where it would run. A few years ago most people only tested IE - now that Firefox has become so popular that has fortunately changed (that's good for Safari, too, because Safari and Firefox are much more compatible than Safari and IE).
And if you find pages where Safari doesn't display everything, you should always send the page to Apple (there's a command in the "Safari" menu - it allows you to send them a screenshot, too). It's easier for Apple to make Safari more compatible when they have sample sites Safari renders differently from Firefox.

allblue · Feb 13, 2006, 05:35 AM

My major gripe/confusion with Safari (1.3.2) is not being able to save mpgs. Go to a page with an embedded movie and it will play ok, but try to save it and all I get is the page and not the movie. Load the same page in Camino and the save dialogue box defaults to the mpg file, which will download flawlessly. I can't believe that an Apple app cannot deal with Quicktime - so are they doing it deliberately? Not good.

- - e r i k - - · Feb 13, 2006, 10:25 AM

Mpegs save just fine throgh quicktime here. You sure you've got QuickTime Pro?

Stradlater · Feb 13, 2006, 10:34 AM

Try the latest Safari build, download WebKit: http://nightly.webkit.org/builds/

I have better luck with it than Firefox.

NOTE: some builds are more stable than others.

allblue · 11:04 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

Mpegs save just fine throgh quicktime here. You sure you've got QuickTime Pro?

No, just plain old 7.01. But surely this is a Safari issue not a QT one. If there is a mpg on a web page the 'save' function just saves a 4 or 6k html file, which is just the page without the movie, whereas with Camino on the same page I save the mpg and not the html! SiteSucker will also download the mpg along with the html file. I don't save many mpgs, don't have too much to do with moving images at all really, and the ones I do have I tend to play with donationware MovieTime (which thanks to Flip4Mac now plays wmv files too.) I don't want to pay for the QT pro key because I don't have any need for the extra features.

Horsepoo!!! · Feb 13, 2006, 10:58 AM

Here's a piece of advice to the OP:

If you want people to answer in an intelligent manner or even help you at all, don't name your thread 'Why does Safari suck?'. You'll get little compassion.

It doesn't matter how good Safari is or can get. If someone builds a page for exclusive IE-use or Firefox-use, it just won't work in Safari.

allblue · Feb 13, 2006, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!

Here's a piece of advice to the OP:

If you want people to answer in an intelligent manner or even help you at all, don't name your thread 'Why does Safari suck?'. You'll get little compassion.

...but SiteSucker does suck, as advertised!

TETENAL · Feb 13, 2006, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by allblue

But surely this is a Safari issue not a QT one. If there is a mpg on a web page the 'save' function just saves a 4 or 6k html file, which is just the page without the movie, whereas with Camino on the same page I save the mpg and not the html!

If the movie file is embedded into a web page then Safari behaves correctly when saving the HTML file. I would say Camino is doing the wrong thing, but probably you are saving as "HTML complete" which will save all elements. If you want to save the MPEG only open the Activity window in Safari (Window->Activity) and double click the movie so that it opens without being embedded into a HTML file. then save it.

allblue · Feb 13, 2006, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by TETENAL

If the movie file is embedded into a web page then Safari behaves correctly when saving the HTML file. I would say Camino is doing the wrong thing, but probably you are saving as "HTML complete" which will save all elements. If you want to save the MPEG only open the Activity window in Safari (Window->Activity) and double click the movie so that it opens without being embedded into a HTML file. then save it.

That's not what's happening. I just went and found a small mpg to tryout after reading your post, and there was a slight variation, but with more-or-less the same result. In Safari I went to the page, the mpg loaded and played. When I went to save it the title appeared in the save dialogue box, but without the .mpg suffix. When I saved it to my desktop, it appeared as (title).mpeg (sic!) In the activity window the only entry for this action was (title).mpg - 0 bytes. The mpeg on my desktop is only 8k, and when I played it the progress bar at the bottom appeared for just a flash, with no image in sight. (On previous occasions it has always come down as a .html file, but of similar tiny size and definitely without any mpg - or anything else embedded).
I then went to the same page in Camino, it loaded and played. When the 'save' dialogue box opened, it had (title).mpg in the box (with suffix) and when I hit 'save' it appeared in the download window and was on my desktop as a 600k .mpg which played normally. I just do not understand this at all!
Just to try and cover all bases, I went back to the Safari page, saved again, this time adding the .mpg suffix myself - down it came as a .mpg file - but still only 8k and useless! On this occasion it didn't even appear in the activity window!
Look, its not really a biggy for me, because as I said I don't download that many mpgs, and I keep Camino in my dock solely as an easy enough workaround for just this! I have never managed to download an mpg in all the time I have used Safari - ever!
I think I'm going to have to go and lie down for five minutes!

TETENAL · Feb 13, 2006, 01:19 PM

Can you provide a link to an mpeg where this happens? I never had such a problem with Safari.

allblue · Feb 13, 2006, 01:24 PM

Sure.

http://teckilax.dream.free.fr/Menu/i...20On%20Dog.mpg

I appreciate your help by the way.

TETENAL · Feb 13, 2006, 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by allblue

http://teckilax.dream.free.fr/Menu/i...20On%20Dog.mpg

OK, I can reproduce the problem in Safari 2.0.3 for Tiger. This is the first time I see this though and I don't know what it is causing this. It's definitely a bug in Safari. I would use the "Send problem to Apple..." command in the Safari menu to let Apple know about it.

A workaround for me was to copy the URL of the movie and paste it into the Downloads window (Window->Downloads than press ⌘V). That downloaded the complete movie to my desktop. I hope that helps for the time being.

allblue · Feb 13, 2006, 02:15 PM

Ok - thank you!

Chuckit · Feb 13, 2006, 02:22 PM

How strange, that movie does download wrong. That's never happened to me before. You must have a knack for finding weird sites.

allblue · Feb 13, 2006, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

How strange, that movie does download wrong. That's never happened to me before. You must have a knack for finding weird sites.

It is weird, because as I mentioned above I have never been able to download an mpg via Safari, right from 1.0 through to 1.3.2 where I am today. It's a good job I'm not paranoid isn't it!

hickey · Feb 13, 2006, 03:43 PM

how are you trying to download it? The little carrot on the end of the clip where you have about 4 or 5 options for things to do?

TETENAL · Feb 13, 2006, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by hickey

how are you trying to download it? The little carrot on the end of the clip where you have about 4 or 5 options for things to do?

He said he doesn't have QuickTime Pro, so the save option from the QuickTime plug-in is not available to him. He is using the File->Save command in the Safari menubar.

allblue · Feb 13, 2006, 04:12 PM

Originally Posted by TETENAL

He said he doesn't have QuickTime Pro, so the save option from the QuickTime plug-in is not available to him. He is using the File->Save command in the Safari menubar.

Correct, nothing at all on right-click either.

hickey · Feb 13, 2006, 04:19 PM

ah, that makes sense now. I guess I missed that part.

thiagofll · Feb 13, 2006, 04:30 PM

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!

Here's a piece of advice to the OP:

If you want people to answer in an intelligent manner or even help you at all, don't name your thread 'Why does Safari suck?'. You'll get little compassion.

It doesn't matter how good Safari is or can get. If someone builds a page for exclusive IE-use or Firefox-use, it just won't work in Safari.

Well if the way I put it bothers you, then don't answer the thread. I mean what other words could I use for something that does not work as promised besides its bad and it sucks? (don't get all literal with me)

Brian McHale · Feb 13, 2006, 10:56 PM

Well if the way I put it bothers you, then don't answer the thread. I mean what other words could I use for something that does not work as promised besides its bad and it sucks? (don't get all literal with me)

Well, if you want intelligent, thoughtful people to give you reasoned answers, you might try some thing like: "How come Safari has these problems?"

Just because a piece of software isn't perfect doesn't mean it sucks; it just means it could be better.

And not only do we have a right to post to a thread that "bothers" us, but you're actually begging for people who get annoyed to refute your statements.

The flaws in your Title have already been pointed out, so I'll provide a simple answer to your question: It doesn't.

- - e r i k - - · Feb 13, 2006, 11:32 PM

Originally Posted by TETENAL

He said he doesn't have QuickTime Pro, so the save option from the QuickTime plug-in is not available to him. He is using the File->Save command in the Safari menubar.

Which correctly saves the webpage it is on, not the movie. How hard is this to understand?

Here's a tip: In a webpage with a movie, check the html-source and check for embed. Copy the actual URL of the movie and paste it into the address bar. Hold alt and press enter. Voila! It downloads.

thiagofll · Feb 14, 2006, 01:45 AM

Originally Posted by Brian McHale

Well, if you want intelligent, thoughtful people to give you reasoned answers, you might try some thing like: "How come Safari has these problems?"

Just because a piece of software isn't perfect doesn't mean it sucks; it just means it could be better.

And not only do we have a right to post to a thread that "bothers" us, but you're actually begging for people who get annoyed to refute your statements.

The flaws in your Title have already been pointed out, so I'll provide a simple answer to your question: It doesn't.

You are the only one who got pissy about it...Jeez man, sorry I hurt your feelings...

mduell · Feb 14, 2006, 02:07 AM

C'mon man, Safari can pass the Acid2 test! That's all that really matters in a web browser, right?

King Bob On The Cob · Feb 14, 2006, 02:25 AM

Mmmm... OmniWeb++...
Now if only they'd release 5.5 or whatever they're working on.

thiagofll · Feb 14, 2006, 02:38 AM

You need a Dictionary just to talk to that guy....it's funny how people like to nitpick...

TETENAL · Feb 14, 2006, 02:40 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

Which correctly saves the webpage it is on, not the movie. How hard is this to understand?

It's not hard to understand. That particular movie however is not on a web page but by it self. File->Save saves the first few bytes of the movie, which is quite obviously a bug.

Brian McHale · Feb 14, 2006, 11:36 AM

You are the only one who got pissy about it...Jeez man, sorry I hurt your feelings...

Uh, no, I was the second one.

Look, there's a lot of knowledge out there, but a lot of people who might help get turned off on these forums due to the rude and overreactive nature of so many posters. "Something isn't perfect? It SUCKS!"

A great deal of people will respond better to a reasonable complaint. Getting peeved because a few pages don't load properly and then overreacting justs comes off as uninformed whining. After all, it's pretty common knowledge that some webpages won't load properly on all browsers; that's why most of us have other browsers available just in case.

I quit using Firefox as my primary browser when I realized it was crashing too often. Maybe I should have started a thread called "Why Does Firefox Suck?"

zro · Feb 14, 2006, 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by TETENAL

It's not hard to understand. That particular movie however is not on a web page but by it self. File->Save saves the first few bytes of the movie, which is quite obviously a bug.

It's not a bug. One of the incentives of QT Pro is that you can save movies/media that are handled by the QT browser plug-in. That paid feature would become a free feature were "Save As" allowed on files handled by it.

thiagofll · Feb 14, 2006, 04:36 PM

Originally Posted by Brian McHale

Uh, no, I was the second one.

Look, there's a lot of knowledge out there, but a lot of people who might help get turned off on these forums due to the rude and overreactive nature of so many posters. "Something isn't perfect? It SUCKS!"

A great deal of people will respond better to a reasonable complaint. Getting peeved because a few pages don't load properly and then overreacting justs comes off as uninformed whining. After all, it's pretty common knowledge that some webpages won't load properly on all browsers; that's why most of us have other browsers available just in case.

I quit using Firefox as my primary browser when I realized it was crashing too often. Maybe I should have started a thread called "Why Does Firefox Suck?"

LOL...Right...Okay!

pliny · Feb 14, 2006, 05:25 PM

I am very disappointed in Safari. It started out quite fast and bug free but since 2.0, has been uneven. Pages don't load properly and there are always delays in loading. Cookie management is poor. Popups designed to be printed, experience delays in loading. I don't use it much anymore. If I'm not using Omniweb I'm using Camino.

Pages that screw up in Safari work fine in Omniweb iirc. Since both use WebKit I don't think that "page not rendered for Safari" is a valid explanation.

allblue · Feb 14, 2006, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by zro

It's not a bug. One of the incentives of QT Pro is that you can save movies/media that are handled by the QT browser plug-in. That paid feature would become a free feature were "Save As" allowed on files handled by it.

I did ponder in my first post in this thread if this was deliberate, and you are saying it is. If so I think that's outrageous by Apple! Camino doesn't have any paid-for plug-in to download QT, and WMVs come down automatically - surely it is a basic function of a browser to be able to acquire media from the web. In other words, if you are correct Apple have deliberately crippled Safari to try and force people to buy QT Pro - so at this point I would rather go with Tetenal's 'bug' theory because otherwise it would mean Apple have adopted MS-like tactics on this.

Chuckit · Feb 14, 2006, 05:59 PM

Can someone with QuickTime Pro try and see if saving from the File menu works on that file? I'm betting it doesn't, which would prove it's a bug.

TETENAL · Feb 14, 2006, 07:57 PM

Saving from the QuickTime plug-in saves the movie correctly. Saving with File->Save doesn't. Looks like a Safari bug.

allblue · Feb 14, 2006, 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by TETENAL

Saving from the QuickTime plug-in saves the movie correctly. Saving with File->Save doesn't. Looks like a Safari bug.

OK so the next step if is someone without QT Pro tries to download a QT movie through Safari - in other words reproduce my situation - and see if they get the same (non) result.

zro · Feb 14, 2006, 09:30 PM

Huh. I just figured since I didn't buy QT Pro 7 saving was disabled. Made sense to me, since I'm sure I've saved mp3's while having Pro 6. I didn't like using the plug-in Save as source since it applied QT as the file creator/default.

If all else fails, drag the URL or link to the download window.

tavilach · Feb 15, 2006, 07:19 AM

Originally Posted by thiagofll

LOL...Right...Okay!

As Brian McHale has been saying, and as you clearly demonstrate in this thread and specifically this remark, your comments are not exactly mature. You're taking his constructive criticism and throwing it back at him as if you've been personally insulted. "I'm sorry I hurt your feelings..." when that's completely irrelevant? Just grow up a little, dude.

thiagofll · Feb 15, 2006, 02:48 PM

Originally Posted by tavilach

As Brian McHale has been saying, and as you clearly demonstrate in this thread and specifically this remark, your comments are not exactly mature. You're taking his constructive criticism and throwing it back at him as if you've been personally insulted. "I'm sorry I hurt your feelings..." when that's completely irrelevant? Just grow up a little, dude.

Why? To become boring like you? No thank you I'll pass that...Constructive? Or picking on me type of criticism, more like it? Please " dude" everytime someone posts something on this thread that God forbid talks bad about anything that is manufactured by Apple, they get rocks thrown at them...Do you think that's right? No. Do I have the right to state my opinion? Yes. Does Safari suck in my opinion? Yes. Can I state it whatever way I want to? Most certainly..

Horsepoo!!! · Feb 15, 2006, 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by thiagofll

Why? To become boring like you? No thank you I'll pass that...Constructive? Or picking on me type of criticism, more like it? Please " dude" everytime someone posts something on this thread that God forbid talks bad about anything that is manufactured by Apple, they get rocks thrown at them...Do you think that's right? No. Do I have the right to state my opinion? Yes. Does Safari suck in my opinion? Yes. Can I state it whatever way I want to? Most certainly..

Tell us how you *really* feel.

allblue · Feb 15, 2006, 05:51 PM

APPEAL TO THE MODS:
You may have noticed that this thread started legitimately with the OP's gripes about Safari - fair enough - and I jumped in with my Safari problem. This was picked up by Tetenal and others and we have been working through the options to try and pin down either a bug or perhaps a bit of sharp practice by Apple. As you can see things have degenerated into a squabble and as a result an issue of substance is in danger of being lost amongst the rancour. We are still looking for a non QT Pro person to replicate my actions to try and help pin this thing down. Is there any way for you to extract the substantive thread out and post it anew - perhaps with the title 'Safari QT download problem' or somesuch?

Cadaver · Feb 15, 2006, 10:43 PM

Originally Posted by thiagofll

Why? To become boring like you? No thank you I'll pass that...Constructive? Or picking on me type of criticism, more like it? Please " dude" everytime someone posts something on this thread that God forbid talks bad about anything that is manufactured by Apple, they get rocks thrown at them...Do you think that's right? No. Do I have the right to state my opinion? Yes. Does Safari suck in my opinion? Yes. Can I state it whatever way I want to? Most certainly..

As has been stated before, Apple's software team can't really do anything when a specific website has been purposefully designed to work either only with WINternet Exploder or Firefox. Google's gmail is a good example. Instead of using standards-based coding, the authors are using browser-specific code. One version for IE and one for Mozilla/Gecko. Its like saying "The Mac sucks because it wont run an application written for the Timex Sinclair 1000!!" Google has stated that they will be adding Safari support in the near future.

Personally, I have very, very little trouble with Safari. For me, its been no less stable than Firefox (actually, probably a little better). Actually, the only Mac program I have that crashes on any kind of predictable basis is Unison. Everything else for me is rock-solid.

And on occasion when I come across a site that doesn't cooperate, I keep Firefox on hand for that. I prefer the integration Safari offers with Mac OS X (i.e., Keychain, .mac bookmark syncing, Address Book URL field support, integrated spell checker, etc.) than the 10% better compatibility that Firefox brings. And my machine fortunately is fast enough that I don't really perceive much of a difference between the two browsers.

Actually, if I had my choice, I'd use OmniWeb full time (love the feature set - best by far anywhere... but that's currently WAY too crash prone and has website compatibility issues all its own.

But, if you prefer Firefox, then by all means, use it and support it. Really. Its a good program no doubt about that, and Mozilla.org's continued support of the Mac platform can only be good. And on my PC, I ONLY use Firefox. Except of course when I need to hit Microsoft's Windows Update site. Gee... Firefox sucks because I can't use Windows Update with it...

Hi I'm Ben · Feb 16, 2006, 02:29 AM

Originally Posted by thiagofll

Why? To become boring like you? No thank you I'll pass that...Constructive? Or picking on me type of criticism, more like it? Please " dude" everytime someone posts something on this thread that God forbid talks bad about anything that is manufactured by Apple, they get rocks thrown at them...Do you think that's right? No. Do I have the right to state my opinion? Yes. Does Safari suck in my opinion? Yes. Can I state it whatever way I want to? Most certainly..

I've said plenty of negative things about apple here without any rocks thrown at me. I think it's when you come off as a total stroke that the fires get started.

When stating your super cool opinions it's best not to completely trash on something without seeing the positive lights to it, or even suggesting reasonable improvements that could be made. But can you act like a jerk whenever you want? Most certainly.. I suppose.

palane · Feb 18, 2006, 01:38 PM

Hi,

Like many others, I was delighted when Safari was announced and immediately relegated IE to "as needed" status only. [My credit union won't work with Safari.] When Firefox Mac came out, IE went to the dustbin.

I have gradually become disenchanted with Safari, staying with it due to some misplaced loyalty to Apple and lack of desire to try to migrate my bookmarks. My main problem: Apple has tied Safari updates directly to recent versions of OS X. I'm a happy Jaguar user (on a Cube, no less). Apple's treatment of Safari is very reminescent of Microsoft and Explorer (i.e., tied it to the OS). This is not the case with iTunes, which is regularly updated.

I plan to buy one of the new Intel Macs (probably a MacBook) once a few critical apps go universal (Kaleidagraph, Canvas). So, I could probably limp along for six months or so and jump to 2.0. I think the main reason for me to shift completely to Firefox is that I won't have to go through the same scenario once Apple decides to sunset whatever version of the OS that I'll be using at that time.

palane · 01:43 PM

Sorry for the duplicate post. Ironically, this occurred because I got a message from Safari that the page couldn't be loaded. :-)

Hi,

Like many others...

Cadaver · Feb 19, 2006, 09:41 PM

Originally Posted by palane

Sorry for the duplicate post. Ironically, this occurred because I got a message from Safari that the page couldn't be loaded. :-)

Hi,

Like many others...

Not Safari's fault... its the amazin' MacNN database server. Truly the best technology 1983 has to offer!

mindwaves · Feb 20, 2006, 12:43 AM

Keep on topic. Thanks.