Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

gorickey · May 9, 2004, 04:21 PM

No need for a poll; however, do you guys think/hope that Apple includes an all-new version of Safari (v2.0) with 10.4 "Tiger" with many new features? Do you expect it? I guess WWDC will tell us more, but I'm hoping for some new goodies indeed...

voodoo · May 9, 2004, 04:25 PM

Hum. Safari development isn't bound to the OS as such but I'd definitely expect some Safari update with Tiger. WebCore is bound to be updated in Tiger and a new Safari to complement it isn't a far out idea.

Krypton · May 9, 2004, 04:34 PM

If it's faster I'll be happy

ryju · May 9, 2004, 04:38 PM

If it doesn't crash as much on my machine I'll be happy.

Developer · May 9, 2004, 05:27 PM

I don't think there will be a major Safari update.

RevEvs · May 9, 2004, 05:39 PM

All I would like is a search field in the bookmarks/history... ala OmniWeb

zachs · May 9, 2004, 10:16 PM

My prediction is that Apple will announce/release Safari 1.5 at the WWDC, with 10.4 being required.

osxisfun · May 9, 2004, 10:38 PM

I would bet they call it 2.0.

But i am just guessing.

typoon · May 10, 2004, 09:28 AM

Originally posted by zachs:
My prediction is that Apple will announce/release Safari 1.5 at the WWDC, with 10.4 being required.

Maybe they will release Safari 1.5 at WWDC with a preview of 2.0 in Tiger.

mitchell_pgh · May 10, 2004, 09:43 AM

Originally posted by typoon:
Maybe they will release Safari 1.5 at WWDC with a preview of 2.0 in Tiger.

That sounds logical... I just see Safari as a major launching pad. Apple can really do whatever they want to do with it... I would increase the eye candy while improving the underlying foundation...

legacyb4 · May 10, 2004, 09:58 AM

I assume you mean to find something in your list of bookmarks? Why not just hit command-F and search for what you need?

Doesn't give you a nice summary list of results, but it does highlight each bookmark/history with the appropriate search term entered.

Cheers.

Originally posted by RevEvs:
All I would like is a search field in the bookmarks/history... ala OmniWeb

iNeusch · May 10, 2004, 10:48 AM

I think they will want to catch up with OmniWeb...

Gankdawg · May 10, 2004, 05:24 PM

It will be integrated in the OS and be one of the "over 150 new features".

Grrr · May 11, 2004, 08:31 AM

Originally posted by voodoo:
Hum. Safari development isn't bound to the OS as such.......

I rather got the impression it is bound to the OS. Hence why 10.2 users are still restricted to somewhat older versions of Safari, with very little chance of an update.
Seems to me like it could easily happen again? With only 10.4 users being able to run the latest versions of Safari.

ntsc · May 11, 2004, 09:08 AM

oh for the last time! its because they are using technologies (available to all developers) which are only in 10.3 which make 10.3 a requirement.

Safari is no more bound to the OS than any other app, however its just that Apple has chosen to use technologies which are not available in previous OS revisions. any other developer could do this but it wouldn't be advantageous to since they'd be restricting an already small user base.

this will happen again if apple chooses to use something new in 10.4 which isn't available in 10.3, this is like complaining that Maya won't run on OS 9 and since it requires OS 10 it must be bound to the OS. which in a sense is true but not in the way you are inferring.

Grrr · May 11, 2004, 09:22 AM

Originally posted by ntsc:
oh for the last time! its because they are using technologies (available to all developers) which are only in 10.3 which make 10.3 a requirement.

Safari is no more bound to the OS than any other app, however its just that Apple has chosen to use technologies which are not available in previous OS revisions. any other developer could do this but it wouldn't be advantageous to since they'd be restricting an already small user base.

this will happen again if apple chooses to use something new in 10.4 which isn't available in 10.3, this is like complaining that Maya won't run on OS 9 and since it requires OS 10 it must be bound to the OS. which in a sense is true but not in the way you are inferring.

Talk about stating the obvious. Oh well, let us all be grateful it was for the last time eh

My point was that Safari 1.2 wont run in Jag. So who's to say safari V2.8b3whatever will run in Panther? If that doesnt make it bound to the OS, then I don't know what does. Not unlike Apple would intentionally do something like that to encourage people to pay up and upgrade now is it? Oh, but wait a minute... They DO!

HOMBRESINIESTRO · May 11, 2004, 12:29 PM

There will definately a new JavaScript Core for Safari soon. AppleInsider reported on this and the Javascript engine needs a big overhaul. It cannot render pages properly with more or less simple Javascript.

I would love to see more Internet Explorer compatibility. I know many of you will cry: "They should support w3c standards" But I say: "They should support standards". You may like it or hate it, but Internet Explorer sets standards.
A hint to this is that they included marquee support...

Tim2 at Omni · May 11, 2004, 01:51 PM

Originally posted by ntsc:
oh for the last time! its because they are using technologies (available to all developers) which are only in 10.3 which make 10.3 a requirement.

Safari is no more bound to the OS than any other app, however its just that Apple has chosen to use technologies which are not available in previous OS revisions. any other developer could do this but it wouldn't be advantageous to since they'd be restricting an already small user base.

this will happen again if apple chooses to use something new in 10.4 which isn't available in 10.3, this is like complaining that Maya won't run on OS 9 and since it requires OS 10 it must be bound to the OS. which in a sense is true but not in the way you are inferring.

I'd like to chime in here and say that there is absolutely no technical reason whatsoever that Safari 1.2 could not run on Jaguar. During my work on the upcoming OmniWeb 5.1 update, I backported WebCore v125 (the version Safari 1.2 uses) to run on Jaguar and it was extremely trivial -- it only took about a day's worth of work.

Granted, Panther-specific features like transparency layers and shadowed text do not work on Jaguar, but at least our users are going to have all the tasty rendering fixes and speedups from the new WebCore.

However, everyone here got what they paid for: if you bought Jaguar, you're stuck with the old Safari because Apple has no obligation to upgrade your software. If you feel like it's worth it to upgrade to the latest OSX to run the latest Apple software, then that's up to you and I think Apple is counting on it.

My two cents,

Eug Wanker · May 11, 2004, 02:14 PM

Originally posted by Tim2 at Omni:
I'd like to chime in here and say that there is absolutely no technical reason whatsoever that Safari 1.2 could not run on Jaguar. During my work on the upcoming OmniWeb 5.1 update, I backported WebCore v125 (the version Safari 1.2 uses) to run on Jaguar and it was extremely trivial -- it only took about a day's worth of work.

Granted, Panther-specific features like transparency layers and shadowed text do not work on Jaguar, but at least our users are going to have all the tasty rendering fixes and speedups from the new WebCore.

However, everyone here got what they paid for: if you bought Jaguar, you're stuck with the old Safari because Apple has no obligation to upgrade your software. If you feel like it's worth it to upgrade to the latest OSX to run the latest Apple software, then that's up to you and I think Apple is counting on it.

Kudos to Omni for this.

Quite frankly, I think it's poor that Safari 1.2 doesn't support Jag. Safari 1.2 still has bugs, but Safari 1.0 on Jag is even more buggy and needs to be updated.

I use Panther myself, but I don't think people should be forced to upgrade the OS to get bug fixes in a web browser. It just leaves a bad taste in people's mouths. OTOH, more might be inclined to buy Omni 5 because of this.

ntsc · May 11, 2004, 03:27 PM

i was under the impression that Safari used some new rendering stuff for the CSS implementation which was actually new at an OS level and so it was not just a case of porting webcore itself but a lot of the new stuff that they had thrown in for Panther. So by back porting they would have partially devalued Panther an upgrade.

maybe i'm wrong but i basically i thot that more was required than just a port of Webcore.

Tim2 at Omni · May 11, 2004, 03:55 PM

Originally posted by ntsc:
i was under the impression that Safari used some new rendering stuff for the CSS implementation which was actually new at an OS level and so it was not just a case of porting webcore itself but a lot of the new stuff that they had thrown in for Panther. So by back porting they would have partially devalued Panther an upgrade.

maybe i'm wrong but i basically i thot that more was required than just a port of Webcore.

I'm actually posting this from OmniWeb 5.1 on Jaguar. The only rendering features missing while running on Jaguar are text shadows and layer transparency.

There are some minor implementation details which we had to rework for Jaguar, but it's nothing Apple couldn't have done in a day.

Cadaver · May 11, 2004, 10:08 PM

Originally posted by Tim2 at Omni:
I'm actually posting this from OmniWeb 5.1 on Jaguar.

Oooo! Me want! (OW 5.1, not Jaguar)

Graymalkin · May 11, 2004, 11:50 PM

Tim's very correct in saying you got what you paid for. If you're unhappy with Safari there are other browsers available. Personally I find bitching about Safari's features to be a little silly. It's a free browser that ships with Macs. It doesn't require a contract with Microsoft to come in the box with the OS. Both OmniWeb and Camino are excellent browsers and provide quite a bit more functionality than Safari. Just because they don't ship with the OS doesn't mean you can't download them or grab their installers off a Mac magazine demo disc. If Tiger doesn't entice me to upgrade from Panther despite Safari 8.7 shipping with it I'll either keep using the version of Safari I've got or find another browser.

gorickey · May 16, 2004, 09:54 PM

This sounds good...