Why does Safari suck so much?

[dcsos]

Thats Safari 2.0.4 on a MAC that that "DOWNLOAD LINK " for Browser Timeline doesn't work

[SCDVD]

IF PC users liked the taste of Koolaid, they would already be one of Steve's cult members. It's a bit like a small child whose father is a hardened criminal. They don't see that; they don't understand that. They just love their daddy. I don't see any reason to play around with Safari. I don't need any magic spell out of Apple. I'll leave that stuff for the cult followers.

[kevs]

Hey guys, I was just asking about favicons for firefox. it does not have them or cannot have them like Safari. Believe or not, this is important to me!

[dcsos]

SCDCD:
we use macs when windows can't handle our video tasks
no other reason
if Stevie left, we wouldn't care, as we're just trying to get our work done, and we find MACS,
safari not included, are the way to go.

[Case]

Hey guys, I was just asking about favicons for firefox. it does not have them or cannot have them like Safari.

What are you talking about? They work just fine.

[SCDVD]

SCDCD:
we use macs when windows can't handle our video tasks
no other reason
i

I'm just curious; what tasks would those be?

[dcsos]

one I can think of off the top of my head

many times I've downloaded XVID material or Divx material off the internet
(public domain stuff of course)
When authors making these files encode them they use Variable Bit Rates in the Audio & Video domains.
A large variety of windows programs purport to handle transcoding of these files, but in practice, when you import the files to these whizbang transcoders, you only see audio, or video component..or worse still the windows program chokes (not responding)...

Easy fix, drag the file to IMovie, wait 5 or six hours, and you have an uncompressed DV stream with pic and sound (I am not saying macs are faster)..
The worst is when on windows Vegas, Premiere or VDub says its rendering and dissappoints you later with no output or a freeze doing renders..



The Mac may take longer but always completes the job

frustrated users migrate to macintosh..
another example. over 100 network, a twenty-four gig file will-take 4 hrs on windows some times, and 2 hours depending on where you copy it from -or to..
On my macs, the network 100 takes 48 minutes reliably to transfer 24 gigs from any location to
any other

but I'm losing sight of Safari topic

[Faustus]

Most Mac users seem to be using Firefox, at least all the ones I know.

I do but mainly because there is one addon I refuse to live without. OTherwise Safari is fine if a bit slow and I understand the latest beta solves most of that.

[lordsmurf]

dcsos, there are several idiot programs available for Windows too. Not sure about Linux. iMovie is an idiot program, no skill required, drag and drop and cross your fingers. Super and ConvertXDVD and others work too.

And they all suck.

[SCDVD]

dcsos. You said basically what I thought you would say - nothing meaningful. You frame your answer as if you are speaking factually but in fact, you're not. Perhaps a little training would help you to learn some of the basic fundamentals. Park that kindergarten iMovie and pick up Final Cut if you want to continue with your Mac hardware. As for your network comments, if those are the numbers you are seeing, perhaps your network administrator could use a little training as well. Maybe you can find a package deal somewhere so that all of you can get up to speed.

[kevs]

Ok case look:


I don't get any favicons in firefox

[dcsos]

Wow LORD SMURF and SCDVD no need to flame me!
We're just discussing VIDEO in a SAFARI column

I was just trying to explain why I use macs, I've used all those shitty freeware programs that convert from this to that and eventally have gotten results..BUT WHEN YOU have to do AUDIO in one program and VIDEO in another risking potential loss of synce ...I don't see a problem with a one click solution...Using Vidomi or TMPG ENC
or even Super (for LITTLE FILES) works fine if they can see both components..but seperate the AUDIO & VIDEO why..its useless unnecessary work, NO?


Macs are just better for video tasks as everyone agress--and because they don't choke on variable bitrate files, I will continue to use them everytime windows fails me!

And its not helpful to call me an idiot, as I used FINAL CUT HD to compress the resultant DV file from iMOVIE to make a DVD (as you correctly stated the rendering in iMOVIE is too simple)

Additionally, I don't like iDVD much and don't own DVD STUDIO PRO, so the MPG file from FINAL CUT will be imported as an asset to DVD ARCHITECT or TMPG AUTHOR

ps. I am the network administrator and those numbers are genuine!

[FulciLives]

Macs are just better for video tasks as everyone agress--and because they don't choke on variable bitrate files, I will continue to use them everytime windows fails me!

And its not helpful to call me an idiot ...

That's exactly why you are an idiot ... your statement about "everyone agrees" is BS and while MPEG-4 files with VBR MP3 audio can be problematic ... well that was an issue solved many eons ago LOL

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[lordsmurf]

BUT WHEN YOU have to do AUDIO in one program and VIDEO in another risking potential loss of synce ...

What the hell are you carrying on about? If you want to work separately with audio and video, and let a program think for you, then something like Womble MPEG Video Wizard would be right up your alley. If you don't have MPEG input, then you can import elementary streams into any number of programs. Use the right tool for the right task. It's not that hard.

Mac has far less video abilities than Windows. It's basically only good for DV work, and now HDV work.

Your network information is truly screwed up. I call user error.

[dcsos]

Hey this is a thread about Safari!
I think its wrong to call people idiots in forums as its not helpful

I'm just stating the obvious about Macintosh Computers being better at VIDEO (not faster even the intel macs are slower ..albeit surer)

If you want to see browsers that work properly, try the flawed Safari on mac.
It has plenty of features that regular windows users will envy.

Try entering SONY..just hitting enter on the KEYBOARD enters www and dot com automatically, something requiring extra keystroke in I>E

also for example, when you use outlook or outlook express on windows, when you click on a link,
I.E and FIREFOX (Whichever is your default) will commandeer the current window to open your desired page.
On a MAC, both Safari and Firefox have the courtesy to open a new browser window without grabbing the window you may have wanted to leave open!!!


Safari even has 7 or 8 other small touches that make the equivalent windows products annoying in use (resetting or malware toolbars, microsoft alphabetizing your favorites,
homepage hijack I could go on....)

My network is what it is, a method of interlinking computers.
using a router and switch to connect computers and
I've been timing the results between machine transfers. On Windows, It depends what external harddrive and what folder you copy the file from-to---and you get varying results.
I'm not saying its supposed to behave this way, but in practice if you have a number of WINXP machine on a network, you've experienced what I'm talking about (unless your using SERVER PRODUCTS and managed switches)
No matter where the file is on a Macintosh network, the speed of transfer (once all your machine and switches run 100) is depenendent on file size alone.

[lordsmurf]

I'm just stating the obvious about Macintosh Computers being better at VIDEO ...... If you want to see browsers that work properly, try the flawed Safari on mac. It has plenty of features that regular windows users will envy.

This is nothing more than a double-shot of Mac fanboy bullshit.

Safari is a flawed-quality browser (based on the known-flawed Konquerer) on a computer system used by less than 2% of the world. The system as a whole is good at very targeted tasks, but the same tasks can be performed on other equipment (namely Windows PCs) with the same amount of effort. Mac just does it with a prettier interface.

This site adheres to science and common sense, not the cult of Jobs.

[dcsos]

Once again you are resorting to NAME calling
I resent that SMURF

I didn't SAY anything but observe that the product works better than its windows equivalent


at least you'll agree in respect to malware infestation common to windows browser environments.
I have no extra buttons or links I don't want on my mac!
Although I control my windows environment and don't suffer from these infestations, personally, I know many good windows users whose spyware protection or malware monitor fell asleep at the wheel!
Even the best of Windows users know the pain of removing REAL PLAYER,RHAPSODY, MUSIC MATCH and partnered company links that we must removed often from our PENTIUMS!

In this respect we must admit SAFARI is better
as I cannot respond to allegation of "FLAWED PRODUCT" because you just say its known that
its flawed..known by what characteristic?

[lordsmurf]

at least you'll agree in respect to malware infestation common to windows browser environments.

Nope. That's solely an older-version Internet Explorer problem, not a Windows problem. You can use Firefox, Mozilla, Opera ... even Safari! ... and avoid it. Not an issue. Even IE6 SP2 and IE7 has largely solved some of it.

Even the best of Windows users know the pain of removing REAL PLAYER,RHAPSODY, MUSIC MATCH and partnered company links that we must removed often from our PENTIUMS!

Don't install it to begin with, problem solved. Installing crap is not Windows native, I could screw up Mac OS X in about 5 minutes by installing some of the garbage out there. The only difference is Mac has less crap available (and simply less software in general). That is user error. As far as software that is a pain to remove, include iTunes on that list of obnoxious media software that tries to octopus into the OS. Quicktime is a real pest too, on both OS.

In this respect we must admit SAFARI is betteras I cannot respond to allegation of "FLAWED PRODUCT" because you just say its known that its flawed..known by what characteristic?

You're a network admin and you've never run across Konqueror/Safari problems? It must be a tiny network that nobody visits with nothing of importance on the site (or basic HTML only).

[SCDVD]

Hey this is a thread about Safari!
I think its wrong to call people idiots in forums as its not helpful

This is a video forum where a great deal of experienced help is available. When someone starts blowing blue smoke, they will get called on it. This isn't a Koolaid tasting party for a bunch of bleating Macasites.

I'm just stating the obvious about Macintosh Computers being better at VIDEO (not faster even the intel macs are slower ..albeit surer)

You have a way of making a sweeping comment that is devoid of any fact as if an empty statement like "I'm just stating the obvious", will be accepted. The only thing that is obvious is your profound lack of knowledge about the wide selection of video tools that are available for the PC.

If you want to see browsers that work properly, try the flawed Safari on mac.
It has plenty of features that regular windows users will envy.

I am seeing a browser that works properly - right now; it's called Firefox. I don't want to see a "flawed Safari" on any platform.

Try entering SONY..just hitting enter on the KEYBOARD enters www and dot com automatically, something requiring extra keystroke in I>E

IE and Mozilla (Netscape) used to do this and they got rid of it for a reason. It was a pain in the ass for the browser to assume every domain was a .com. I still remember that "feature". I hated it.

also for example, when you use outlook or outlook express on windows, when you click on a link,
I.E and FIREFOX (Whichever is your default) will commandeer the current window to open your desired page.
On a MAC, both Safari and Firefox have the courtesy to open a new browser window without grabbing the window you may have wanted to leave open!!!

What a crock! My marvelous Windows PC is operating in the manner that you describe on your Holy Mac. You can set this behavior any way you want in options - new tab, new browser session, preemptive page ...etc.


Safari even has 7 or 8 other small touches that make the equivalent windows products annoying in use (resetting or malware toolbars, microsoft alphabetizing your favorites,
homepage hijack I could go on....)

My network is what it is, a method of interlinking computers.
using a router and switch to connect computers and
I've been timing the results between machine transfers. On Windows, It depends what external harddrive and what folder you copy the file from-to---and you get varying results.
I'm not saying its supposed to behave this way, but in practice if you have a number of WINXP machine on a network, you've experienced what I'm talking about (unless your using SERVER PRODUCTS and managed switches)
No matter where the file is on a Macintosh network, the speed of transfer (once all your machine and switches run 100) is depenendent on file size alone.

Flat wrong. You wouldn't be ROF by any chance are you?

[dcsos]

Again SMURF theres no reason to insult me by suggesting that what I do is
"nothing of importance"

I am a NETWORK ADMINSTRATOR of 7 computers on my home network
and there is no website or vistors to my network (hopefully) other than myself
or a few friens who visit!
thats why the network statistic don't lie, cause theres no packet loss expected and no collisions with one user and 7 machines

[dcsos]

rof whats that?

[SCDVD]

rof whats that?

ROF was an obnoxious member who got banned because he was so irritating. Your style and flawed logic are very similar to his.

[Case]

I don't get any favicons in firefox

Time for some system maintenance, because the functionality should work in Firefox.

[lordsmurf]

I am a NETWORK ADMINSTRATOR of 7 computers on my home network
and there is no website or vistors to my network (hopefully) other than myself
or a few friens who visit!

You're yanking our chain, right? Seriously, seven home computers and you're calling yourself a network admin? And there is no Web site, and you're proclaiming expertise in browsers and networking?

I've not heard anything this funny in a while.

It sounds like it came straight out of a George Carlin book! And the garbage man is a sanitation engineer. And a postal clerk is an import/export specialist. The guy who assembles a taco at Taco Bell is a chef.

Very good.

[MacDSL]

Safari is by far the best browser out there. I've got just about 1000 machines under me and 6 people I manage, and the only ones using FireFox are the 40 or so XP-Based machines and the Macs that only run Windows..

Yes, just about 1000 machines, all but about 40-60 are Macs, and only about 2 Mac Users use Firefox as the default browser. FireFox is installed on all the machines, but nobody really uses it. Firefox is the "backup" for those times a site does not work with Safari. Why would a site EVER not work with Safari? because it's coded incorrectly, plain and simple. or it requires ActiveX Controls.

I can have my guys create websites poorly coded that don't work in any browser, big deal. That does not mean the browser sucks. The only meacure of a web browser sucking would be if it failed on a properly coded page. It's very, very rare that a properly coded page fails in Safari. Sure, once in a while a broswer will get stuck on a bad cache file and choke on a page, but that applies to all browsers, not any one.....

[dcsos]

Seriously, seven home computers and you're calling yourself a network admin?

SMURF you are misguided.. You're the one above that first called me a network administrator
just cause I have more than one machine! So I adopted the aphorism
HA- HA - HA!

I just shared my experience with networks from my home computers!

on the matter of SAFARI:
since you refuse to acknowledge its superiority over I.E.,
I'll add another thing that safari does that internet explorer can't finesse!
REMEMBERING PASSWORDS!

I.E. 6 cannot even show you the passwords its partially remembered

[mats.hogberg]

Well, I can only say for the Windows version of Safari - It's not to be taken seriously. OK, they call it a beta (I'd say that's stretching it quite a bit - Not even MS has put ut a beta in that stage) so some things may be forgiven, but it sure doesn't even render plain std HTML OK. Not to mention the keyboard shortcuts all Windows users have been accustomed to - Even if that's really not saying "The Windows way is better" - just that if Safari is trying to conquer the Windows browser market, it really has to adopt some Windowsisms, like it or not.

/Mats

[lordsmurf]

I'll add another thing that safari does that internet explorer can't finesse!
REMEMBERING PASSWORDS!

WTF are you talking about? IE can remember passwords. I think that feature goes back to at least IE6 SP1, but definitely SP2 and IE7. So does Firefox.

If you want to bash IE, I'll be glad to join you. It's a real piece of crap. It deserves most of it's negative comments. It's a real bitch to design for, because it does not always respect the WWW standards as it should.

Opera and Konqueror/Safari have major issues too, on loading pages, especially dynamic content pages. The one thing really obnoxious about Safari is how it alters page fonts with it's implementation of ClearType. Some fonts it has trouble with period.

Firefox, however, does properly adhere to WWW specs and is generally less of a problem than others. This is why it has grown to about 30% market share, eating into the Windows share (now about 60%). All your other browsers fight over that last 10%, be it MSN Explorer, AOL Browser, WebTV, Opera, Safari and others.

Maybe you're only looking at IE5 on Mac? It's years outdated. I don't remember that far back, 7-8 years ago, as to whether IE5 had password support.

You're living in a Jobs-induced technology coma.

I test with Safari. It generally butchers content pretty well. I did it on Mac when I found time. Now that's it in Windows, I can do it a bit more often.

[SCDVD]

You're living in a Jobs-induced technology coma.

Well said. The thing that is a mystery to me is how apparently grown adults can become so controlled by this cult mentality. It reminds me of some sort of SciFi movie where people are possessed by alien beings that take over and control them. Some of the posts such as the one by MacDSL are so over the top that they don't even warrant an answer. I suspect the other one is a teenager trying to act like a grownup big shot. The funniest thing of all is that these Macacites don't have any idea how transparent they are.

[oldandinthe way]

The amount of technology ignorance among PC users of all ilks, even so called "power-users" is vast.

You don't have to own a Mac to be incapable of assessing technology.

Ever since the earliest days of the PC users have asserted that products they prefer were technically superior without the context or judgment to evaluate the alternatives.

All branches of the PC industry have contributed to this way of thinking.

The earliest "operating systems" for PCs be they CP/M, MS-Dos, or AppleDos were not operating systems at all when compared to mainframe or mini-computer operating systems of their day and were not when compared to PC operating systems of today.

The MAC adaptation of the Xerox Star Graphic user interface had great appeal to a certain segment of users. Mac Users claimed a superior operating system, even when their "operating system" was a subroutine library all of the programs had to be compiled against and linked to.

Only software professionals argued it wasn't an operating system. The MAC and PC user communities were quite willing to accept as a given it was an O/S.

Not only could the MAC users argue that they had a system they can use but the graphic user interface became the norm, with Microsoft Windows further enhancing their beliefs. This was at a time when a large segment of the Intel based PC industry believed that GUIs were inefficient and unnnecessary. We see how major software players with that atttude fared. There is no independant Word Perfect or Lotus.

The people who placed high value on the Mac were and are a minority, but a minority who feel they have found PC nirvana.

There are people who cannot see any good in the MAC and Mac-derived software. I ceased using Photoshop which I have always loathed when fast, easy to use, reliable, low cost graphics for the PC became available which met my needs. I stopped using Pagemaker when Microsoft Word was enhanced enough to meet my document forwatting requirements. Like many PC users I value the ability to perform the tasks I need done in a cost-effective manner.

Historically, if you were graphic designer, or were attempting to build websites with a graphic designers vision, or were creating high end DV the MAC was your tool. Since I don't do those things, I'm quite happy with "good enough" to meet my needs,

But pity those people who prefer the MAC, they are constantly faced with higher prices, limited choices, and a differing world vision. In that position, I too might attempt to claim superiority. Especially when my garage contained my previous MAC systems which could not be upgraded to the latest software or maintained.