Safari 4 (beta)

Discussion in 'Apple' started by Warren Oates, Feb 24, 2009.

  1. Warren Oates

    Heli Guest

    Well, let's hope SL is all about improving the system. But what about
    They are adding MBs.
    So how can they improve performance and decrease the size without
    removing some useful stuff?
    Heli, Feb 26, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  2. Warren Oates

    Heli Guest

    Well, I've been very busy sending bug reports and crash reports to
    Apple about iWeb3. I won't bother about Safari, I removed it and I
    don't use it very often.
    Heli, Feb 26, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  3. Warren Oates

    TaliesinSoft Guest

    The above worked great for me! I now have my Top Sites panel configured just
    the way I want.


    Many, many, many thanks!
    TaliesinSoft, Feb 26, 2009
  4. Warren Oates

    Heli Guest

    Well, I want my fun too, don't you know. I tried it, I didn't like it,
    I removed it. So you'll have to put up with my ramblings. It's the
    least Apple owes me, a bit of fun. Actually, I am getting back at Apple
    for their sloppy coding of iWeb3. I don't mind Safari so much. I could
    install it, or I could leave it. I mainly use Firefox.
    Heli, Feb 26, 2009
  5. How so?
    Many of them, simply because it's what they're used to. I switched back
    to the old tabs, and then reverted to the new ones; they're much more
    useful. The best thing about Safari 4 is how much faster it is than
    Safari 3, and that alone makes it worth upgrading for me.
    That is plainly not true. They certainly listened to customers' wishes
    about the Dock after Leopard came out, and put in functionality that
    users demanded in 10.5.1 or 10.5.2.
    No, it means that they will not use Snow Leopard. They removed support
    for some old hardware with Tiger and with newer old hardware with
    Leopard. Big deal.
    Faces is very useful; it is much more than bling. If you don't want to
    use it (or places), then don't.
    It sounds to me that you want less from Apple, as in you don't want them
    to change a thing.
    Michelle Steiner, Feb 26, 2009
  6. Actually, Safari is more important as iWeb because more people browse
    the web than create web sites.
    First of all, that update is for Leopard; it has nothing to do with Snow
    Leopard. Secondly, the size of the update file has little to nothing to
    do with the size of the file after it is updated.
    Gee, the Windows version of Safari 4 looks like a Windows application.
    That's what it is supposed to do, and what Apple should have done much

    A for the other two cites, *Yawn!*
    Michelle Steiner, Feb 26, 2009
  7. I wonder how many of the whine just for the sake of whining.
    Michelle Steiner, Feb 26, 2009
  8. You keep saying that it is buggy, but you haven't offered any examples.
    As for them doing nothing, how do you know? It takes time to 1) verify
    the bug, 2) research it, 3) fix it, 4) test the fix, 5) ensure that the
    fix didn't introduce new bugs, and if it did, repeat the process, and
    then 6) release the update.
    Michelle Steiner, Feb 26, 2009
  9. Bling does not mean stuff that you don't want or don't like, no matter
    how much you wish that it does.
    Michelle Steiner, Feb 26, 2009
  10. Why not go back to Safari 2, or even Safari 1?
    Michelle Steiner, Feb 26, 2009
  11. That is an update to Leopard, and has no relevance to Snow Leopard.
    Further, the size of the update file has no bearing on any possible
    changes to the size of the files being updated. It can actually make
    them smaller in some cases.
    Michelle Steiner, Feb 26, 2009
  12. I'm sure that Apple did; I can't because I don't have Tiger running on
    my Macintosh.
    Michelle Steiner, Feb 26, 2009
  13. Michelle Steiner, Feb 26, 2009
  14. De nada.

    But I can't take credit for it; I found it on the web.
    Michelle Steiner, Feb 26, 2009
  15. He's already posted about his iWeb3 issues, right after iLife '09
    came out.[/QUOTE]

    I don't recall that. Sorry.
    Michelle Steiner, Feb 26, 2009
  16. Warren Oates

    Heli Guest

    Have a look at the iWeb forum discussions.
    That's why I installed it at first too. But then when I loaded Apple
    pages they took ever so long. May have been the changes they were
    making in MobileMe.
    What I want from Apple is apps that don't crash, that don't put your
    images in blog posts in the wrong posts in the rss feed, etc. In short
    apps that work smoothly.
    Heli, Feb 26, 2009
  17. Warren Oates

    Heli Guest

    Well, get used to it. We don't live in a totalitarian society where
    every form of criticism is forbidden. Get real. Complaining means that
    at least one is alive and kicking. Those Apple groupies are even worse
    than windows users.
    Heli, Feb 26, 2009
  18. Warren Oates

    Heli Guest

    Bling is unnecessary stuff. The Top Sites is something I already have
    for years, it's a menu bar with my favourites, 35 of them all in one
    line. No need to click several times, only once. Et voilà.
    Heli, Feb 26, 2009
  19. Warren Oates

    Heli Guest

    Safari is not the best browser at all. Even now it isn't, when we grant
    it faster speed. I prefer Firefox. Has very useful add-ons, which
    Safari never will have.
    Heli, Feb 26, 2009
  20. Warren Oates

    Daniel Cohen Guest

    Bling includes the Time Machine interface, especially the dispay flying
    around as one moves to a specific date(*not* Time Machine itself, which
    is really useful).

    Compare with Back-in-Time, which I am rather taken by. Perhaps it costs
    too much, but the demo is free and quite useful. I feel the Back-in-Time
    GUI is what Time Machine should have.
    Daniel Cohen, Feb 26, 2009
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.