February 24, 2009 11:30 AM PST

Safari 4 a big step up, but not as far as rivals

by Stephen Shankland
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 126 comments

With Safari 3, I admired Apple's chutzpah for bringing its browser to Windows. With the new Safari 4 beta, I'm actually starting to admire the browser, too.

A big user interface overhaul makes Safari look polished rather than clunky on Windows, builds in better search abilities, and makes good use of the fact that people often visit the same sites over and over.

However, the lack of something like the extensions architecture that Firefox pioneered still means Safari 4 (download for Windows and Mac OS X) is better only than Safari 3, not the competition.

Top Sites shows a 3D array of most-visited sites.

Top Sites shows a 3D array of a person's most-visited sites. (Click to enlarge.)

(Credit: screenshot by Stephen Shankland/CNET Networks)

The new software puts Safari 3's brushed-metal appearance on the scrap heap and bolts on a Windows-native appearance. I'm not one of those user interface conformists, but I found the brushed metal interface downright ugly on Windows, in part because of the blotchy font rendering.

Safari 4, though, generally looks slick. And I like its user interface, too, which through what appears to be a case of convergent evolution shares a lot with Google Chrome and some of Firefox's as well.

Safari 4's interface is similar to Google Chrome's including tabs on the top and these mini-menus.

Safari 4's interface is similar to Google Chrome's, including tabs on the top and these mini-menus.

(Credit: screenshot by Stephen Shankland/CNET Networks)

There's plenty of other new material, though, and Safari's snappy performance makes it a viable contender in the browser wars. Competition really is making the browser better, which is of immense importance as the computing industry moves to a cloud-computing future where applications run on the Web as well as on personal computers.

It's still curious that Apple thinks it's worthwhile to bring Safari to Windows. The company's high-end software, such as Aperture and Final Cut Pro, work only on Mac OS X. Very mainstream software such as iTunes and QuickTime work on Windows, too. iPhoto and other iLife programs in an intermediate realm only work on Mac OS X, though, indicating that Apple has limited appetite for the hassles of supporting a rival operating system.

I suspect that Apple concluded Safari for Windows could help the company tout its wares, possibly convincing Windows users that Apple has some software skills. And perhaps it's laying the groundwork for tighter integration with other Apple software, hardware, and Web services.

For a beta, the software is workable; I encountered one crash in a couple of hours' use.

User interface improvements
Like Chrome, Safari 4 puts all its tabs across the top of the screen, with no traditional title bar, with the address bar below and a row of bookmarks below that. Even the upper-right mini-menus are similar, with small icons for window management and tools. Also like Chrome, when a new tab or page is opened, Safari 4 will by default show an array of most frequently visited sites, a feature Apple calls Top Sites.

Pages in the Top Sites view can be moved, pinned, and deleted.

Pages in the Top Sites view can be moved, pinned, and deleted.

(Credit: screenshot by Stephen Shankland/CNET Networks)

Those differences compared to regular browsers are subtle, but I got used to them in Chrome and concluded I like them. Safari has some differences, though.

For one thing, I'm a keyboard shortcut user, and Safari grants me access to its menu items by hitting the Alt key, which is standard Windows protocol but which is missing from Chrome. For another, Top Sites is much more sophisticated, not just because it has a fancy 3D view, but because you can choose how many mini-pages to show, move them around, "pin" the ones you like to a fixed position, and delete ones you don't want showing.

The Top Sites view indicates pages that have been updated with a blue star.

The Top Sites view indicates pages that have been updated with a blue star.

(Credit: screenshot by Stephen Shankland/CNET Networks)

I like showing tabs at the top, which I think devotes proper prominence to the multiple browser views. But I have nits: the font is too dim, making it hard to see the tab text, and I don't care for how the tabs sprawl to claim as much real estate as possible, because for me it makes them actually harder to recognize as tabs. Perhaps I'll get used to that in time.

Happily, middle-clicking on a link opens the Web page in a new tab now rather than a new browser window, something that bugged me with Safari 3.

But Safari doesn't do something deeper with tabs that Google did with Chrome, isolate each into its own separate computing process. That isolation improves security and stability, though you pay a price in memory. Once Chrome offered it, I got annoyed when a problem that could have brought down a single misbehaving tab brought down my entire browser.

More eye candy
Another example besides Top Sites of Apple's polished user interface is the Cover Flow interface to browser history. I'm not a big user of history, so this looks cosmetic more than useful to me, but if you are going to use it, perhaps the visual images will help you find what you need more rapidly than scanning a list of text. A text search box also helps retrieve information.

More helpful by far is the Smart Address Field, which like Firefox 3's Awesome Bar suggests Web addresses from your history and bookmarks when you start typing. It's a much more effective way of returning to earlier sites than scrolling through text history lists.

Safari 4 gets a Cover Flow interface to looking at browser history.

Safari 4 gets a Cover Flow interface for looking at browser history. (Click to enlarge.)

(Credit: screenshot by Stephen Shankland/CNET Networks)

Given Apple's user interface chops, it's interesting the company didn't go as far as Chrome by integrating Web search in the address field. Instead, Safari still has a separate search field to the right of the address bar. Now, though, it's got what Apple calls the Smart Search Field, which is a fancy brand name for using Google Suggest to show possible options when you start typing. Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft all like this feature on their search engines, and I like it this way too: it can save you a few keystrokes, and sometimes it can even help you find material when you don't know exactly how to spell it.

Smart Search Assist uses Google Suggest to streamline search.

Smart Search Assist uses Google Suggest to streamline search.

(Credit: screenshot by Stephen Shankland/CNET Networks)

Like rival browsers, Safari now can magnify or shrink the entire Web page--graphics and text--which is nice for those sites with microscopic type or for when you're showing a site to somebody farther away or dealing with a computer with super-tiny pixels. (Of course, such zooming also can reveal how inflexibly designed a Web page is.)

Skin deep?
User interface improvements aren't just superficial changes. People care about appearance, and making things faster and better adapted to actual humans is important. Kudos to Apple for making Safari look and often work better.

On a deeper level, it's good that the Safari 4 beta also offers better performance. Apple makes a variety of boasts with page-loading speed and, by virtue of its new Nitro engine previously known as Webkit's Squirrelfish, faster JavaScript execution. I can confirm the SunSpider JavaScript speed test runs in less than two thirds the time as on Safari 3, a big improvement, and performance likely will increase more once the final version is released. Check back for more coverage today on detailed performance results.

However, while the user interface improvements overall catch Safari up to the competition and in some cases surpass it, the fact that extensions are missing is an egregious oversight given how powerful Mozilla has shown them to be with Firefox. Not only do they improve the user experience and enable many new features, but they're an excellent way to attract developers and users to your browser. Unsupported options such as PimpMySafari aren't likely to match a real add-on ability.

Stephen Shankland writes about a wide range of technology and products, but has a particular focus on browsers and digital photography. He joined CNET News in 1998 and since then also has covered Google, Yahoo, servers, supercomputing, Linux and open-source software, and science. E-mail Stephen, or follow him on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/stshank.
Recent posts from Apple
Apple misses its mark on Windows 7 Boot Camp support
Report: Apple event to be held January 26
Apple wins appeal in earbud hearing-loss lawsuit
Aha! It's the iGuide, not iSlate--maybe
Nokia hits Apple with latest patent complaint
Analyst: Apps the secret to Apple's tablet success
AT&T resumes online iPhone sales in NY
App store downloads shine on Christmas
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 3 pages (126 Comments)
by Mr. Dee February 24, 2009 11:50 AM PST
Sorry, but your issues with this innovative update is very irrelevant. Use the browser and enjoy it. Some times I wish there were penalties for articles like this, like maybe transporting you back to 1993 for 10 years while you suffer through Mosaic.
Reply to this comment
by Cheetahjab February 24, 2009 11:55 AM PST
Oh stop nit picking articles you troll.. You seem just as apt to give your opinion as anyone else..
by Lamppost0 February 24, 2009 11:59 AM PST
I don't understand why you find any fault with this article. It's well-reasoned and delivers both pros and cons.
by SeizeCTRL February 24, 2009 12:28 PM PST
Lamp, you should know by now that some people consider it to be above blasphemy to say anything negative about Apple. So if an article lists pros & CONS, then Apple's trusty troll brigade come out swinging... Saying an Apple product has cons is like saying Jesus was a second rate carpenter who would have trouble with Ikea furniture.
by open-mind February 24, 2009 12:49 PM PST
I suspect Mr Dee is not so much complaining about the Safari cons that were listed, but rather with the condescending tone of some parts of the article. For example: "I suspect that Apple concluded Safari for Windows could help the company tout its wares, possibly convincing Windows users that Apple has some software skills."

Uhm ... if the iPod, iPhone, and OS X have not yet convinced Windows users that Apple has "some software skills", then it seems unlikely to me that Safari is going to help them figure it out.
by amigosito February 24, 2009 2:05 PM PST
"Apple's trusty troll brigade" is about as condescending as it gets. You need to realize that Mac users have been putting up with this kind of crap from conformist-technocrat Windows users for years. After years of nothing-but-negative attention, some Mac users are understandably a little defensive, esp. since they knew all along that Windows was crap.

As a Mac user with a Christ complex, I personally think the core issue is that hardcore Windows users have an inferiority complex, and often project their feelings of inferiority on Apple products out of sheer jealousy. For example, they complain about the "Apple Updater" that gets installed with Safari, yet fail to notice the "Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool", which ironically could be classified as malicious software that is forcibly installed with Internet Explorer, without prior consent of the user. Classic case of denial.

Over the years, CNET was particularly negative in their coverage of Apple because that was the cool thing to do-- until Steve Jobs regained his cult-of-personality status. Now they bend over ass-backward to cover Apple. And yet, they still act as though Safari is only made for Windows. I have yet to read a comparison of Safari vs. Firefox et al on Mac OS X.
by Demolition February 24, 2009 3:08 PM PST
SeizeCTRL & amigosto,

I believe that your "Mac troll brigade" comments are misplaced. As far as I can tell, Mr. Dee isn't much of a Mac fan, at all. From comments that he's made in the past, it appears that he's a diehard Windows user who proclaims that he is much more productive using Windows rather than any other OS (including Mac OS X and various flavours of Linux). Perhaps most striking are his comments in which he stridently defends Vista. Check his posting history to see for yourself.

As for Mr. Dee's complaints about Stephen Shankland's article, I believe he's saying that any complaints about a modern browser are trivial when compared to the primitive browser technology from the "old days". So, he figures that everyone should just be thankful that Safari 4.0 is an overall improvement over its predecessor.
by Shankland February 24, 2009 3:46 PM PST
I was there in 1993 with Mosaic, and Safari 4 is indeed an improvement. Just not as much of an improvement as I might have hoped. I think comparing to alternatives available today is probably more relevant.
by sting7k February 25, 2009 6:02 AM PST
@ amigosito, wow, just wow.

First, IE is bundled with Windows, so there is no downloading it. Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool is also a part of Windows, it gets updated every Tuesday through Windows Update, and runs in the background to scan for exactly what it is named for. It isn't an application that has other uses, it protects me. The Apple Updater was never the issue, as it is already on gillions of Windows machines with iTunes. It was Safari being forced onto people's computer's through an iTunes update with the Apple Updater.

What does Safari do? It's a web browser, how does it protect my computer? I decide what applications and programs get installed on my computer. I do not enjoy it when I am using iTunes and all of a sudden Safari just shows up with an iTunes update, forcing a browser on me. That is not even close to WMSRT, because Safari has no other function that just being one of Apple's applications that they want people to use. If I wanted to use it I would download it. Apple seriously damaged Safari's reputation for me by forcing it on my computer, it will never be on my computer ever again for that reason. I know I am not alone in this, when I start getting messages from friends (who are not tech savy) asking me what the hell this Safari thing is that just "appeared" on their computer out of no where. To me, that is malicious software.
by thricedude72 February 25, 2009 8:16 AM PST
ha ha! Somebody called this guy a troll! That makes me laugh!
by pithenumber February 25, 2009 1:38 PM PST
@ amigosito
I feel sad for you
you are a Mac fanboy, you try to think that Macs are better, but they aren't accept it

many local Mac users have already switched to Win7 Beta, its awesome, maybe the only thing better than a good Linux Distro

I as a Win/Linux person do not feel any bit inferior, I feel sad for you since my $600 Gaming PC beat a top of the line iMac in every test and costs more than a thousand less. The difference between PC hardware and Mac hardware is NOTHING other than a chip that Apple uses to restrict the OS, stop going on about quality, if you take your mac apart, it uses the same components as my PC, and is of no better quality.
See more comment replies
by carguy622 February 24, 2009 11:54 AM PST
I just downloaded it this morning on my Mac, and so far, I like what I see. Moving the tabs to the top is a better idea, as is graphically being able to view your history. I also like the top sites 3-D view.

No crashes so far.
Reply to this comment
by Shankland February 24, 2009 3:47 PM PST
I wonder how well it would work without a video card with 3D acceleration. Anybody have any opinions?
by carguy622 February 25, 2009 7:24 AM PST
Shankland: I've used it on both a MacMini with the 1.25 GHz G4, a 32 MB video card and 512 MB or RAM, and the 1st generation MacBook with a 2.0 GHz Core Duo, integrated graphics, and 2 GB of RAM. It runs very smoothly on the MacBook, and the MacMini runs well, if slowly, especially when using Top Sites.

All in all... It's certainly not a dramatic overhaul, but I like the new eye candy none the less.
by Seaspray0 February 27, 2009 11:25 AM PST
So why does the update try to install quicktime and itunes? What exactly does quicktime and itunes have to do with safari browsing the web? Nothing. Safari is nothing more than malware.
by karpenterskids February 24, 2009 11:59 AM PST
After having used the new Safari 4 (Mac version) for several hours, all I can say is this...it's GOOD!

The new 'Top Sites' feature is definitely the most noticeable, but after looking at Apple's 150 new features (http://www.apple.com/safari/features.html), I'm even more impressed...mainly with the stuff that doesn't pop out at first glance.
Reply to this comment
by Pishkado February 24, 2009 12:07 PM PST
It's not 150 new features. It's 150 total features. Only the ones with the little "NEW" box next to them weren't in Safari 3.
by karpenterskids February 24, 2009 1:07 PM PST
Sorry...you're right.
My bad.
by wesisw_ February 24, 2009 11:01 PM PST
149 total. Full-Page Zoom is listed under both UI and Accessibility. Nonetheless, definitely a significant update.
by rollcage February 24, 2009 11:59 AM PST
Another big plus with the tabs being on top is the space saved because you don't need another bar to show all the tabs. Took me a few to figure out where they put the refresh button (it's on the right side of the address bar!).

I don't really care too much about extensions, so that issue is moot for me. I have glimmerblocker installed, and that gets rid of ads on all browsers. I'm not sure if integrating the search bar into the address bar is a good idea; I kind of like being able to specify whether I'm doing a search or if I'm trying to get to a specific address (so I also hope FF keeps their bars separate).
Reply to this comment
by Art Dir February 24, 2009 1:44 PM PST
I use to use firefox a lot. But to tell you the truth, the extensions have become one reason I use Safari almost exclusively. It's good that the extensions are updated often, but I the extension update every time I open it is a pain. Plus, for some reason, Firefox saves the state of the last session, even when I tell it not too. I use multiple tabs during a session to compare products, cross reference info, etc. The ability to save the state is very useful sometimes, but it's rare I need it. It's faster and more useful for me to start the browser with a clean slate. Maybe this is a bug others don't experience, but honestly the lack of a gazillion extensions in Safari is not a drawback. Speed and functional UI matter most to me (although I occasionally find a few sites that don't function completely with safari, Washington Post comment section for one).
by Perry_Clease February 24, 2009 1:49 PM PST
"Took me a few to figure out where they put the refresh button (it's on the right side of the address bar!)"

Yes, I too was looking for it and couldn't find it in Customize Toolbar menu. So I started doing a Command-R to refresh until I noticed the icon to the right of RSS.

So far so good with it and I will probably adapt to the differences from Safari v3 soon enough.
by SteveW928 February 24, 2009 2:19 PM PST
I'm loving Safari 4 too... but also agree I'm not so sure about not having the refresh button. It is a but too un-obvious right now for good UI design (when it is quite an important thing). Maybe most users never refresh? Heh, I guess I've been involved in web design too long.
by blondepianist February 24, 2009 3:41 PM PST
I guess the purpose was to eliminate one more button floating around on the bar, for a cleaner look (and perhaps to match Mobile Safari). I'll probably get used to it.

And all the similarities to Chrome are fantastic for us Mac users, since Chrome beta doesn't come to OS X until June.
by iertry February 24, 2009 12:06 PM PST
I disagree with you saying that the lack of extensions make this update only better than safari 3 not the competition.

Apple says it is 30x faster than IE. In my opinion most browsers are better than IE.
For people who don't use Firefox extensions (most everyday users) it is faster than firefox.
I don't know about speed compared to chrome but it is very fast and IMO is better than chrome due to the better UI.
Reply to this comment
by rollcage February 24, 2009 12:18 PM PST
Is that 30x faster referring to the speed passing the Acid 3 test? ;) Honestly, I know all companies want to make their browser look better, but using benchmarks that favor their browser, or don't show real world speeds kind of annoys me. I would like to see a speed comparison between Safari and Chrome though!
by Shankland February 24, 2009 3:49 PM PST
I could have been more precise. It's better than IE, I agree, and that is indeed a relevant comparison. It's not just as good as the state of the art in some areas. Extensions can be pretty transforming.
by February 26, 2009 3:24 PM PST
Plugins/Extensions to me is like all those extra cool gadgetry features on all of the new cell phones. After the dust settles how good is the phone or in this case how good is the browser. I for one can't stand a slow browser. For those of you that have nothing but negative things to say, why don't you just TRY IT. It's undoubtly fast. It's faster than IE8, IE7, IE6, Firefox 3.0 - current beta, and CHROME. The Acid 3 test is for display compatibility and rendering speed based on current web standards. I'm a .NET developer at my job and have been a test my applications on both IE and Firefox. I love Firefox also for their extensions but if I'm looking for information on the web, speed is of an essence. I don't know who else out there does not agree with me on that note. The rest is all fluff. I want info and I want it now. And if I get my info fast and conforms to web standards for CSS, Javascript, HTML, XML more power to that browser. Download Safari and TRY IT! You can always uninstall it.
by ikramerica--2008 February 24, 2009 12:18 PM PST
Search and address should be in two boxes. Not one. So your nit pick is not really worthwhile.

Crashes that bring down the whole browser is a trade off, as you said, with the much more resource intensive option of having each tab be it's own process. The upside is that you can restore all windows from the previous session after a crash, so why is this such a big deal? You can also close the offending tab before it crashes the browser in most cases.

And while I don't use the middle click thing, I would assume that it is not that it couldn't open the link in a new tab instead of a new window, it's that you didn't set the preferences to do that. I could be wrong, but I don't think I am (my mouse has no middle button, so I can't test it). My guess is the only thing that changed is the default state of this option in Safari 4. ;)
Reply to this comment
by SeizeCTRL February 24, 2009 12:30 PM PST
Last I checked, Firefox only uses one process and can restore all tabs if in the odd instance it does crash. The only time I have problems with Firefox is certain sites when on my Ubuntu box. Other than that, it rarely, if ever crashes.
by Shankland February 24, 2009 3:52 PM PST
Maybe it's just me, but I haven't been able to shut down offending tabs before they brought down the browser. Unresponsive Web sites, yes, but when the browser is going down, one tab takes down the lot. Restoring all windows is only relevant in the era when you aren't using Web applications. Comments on a blog, blog postings, photos you're labeling or tagging, online documents--these things can vanish when the browser blows up.

@SeizeCTRL: yes, the single process space is a weakness of Firefox, too. I don't often have problems with browser crashes, but when I do, it's a pain. I spend a lot of time doing a lot of work in a browser.
by cpamax February 24, 2009 12:18 PM PST
I for one, don't like the tabs at the top. It doesn't define the webpage I'm looking at. My vision is drawn to the toolbar instead of the tabs. Are we really worried about saving vertical space when we're all running high resolutions? I don't think the 1cm saving is worth it.

Everything is good though! I'd like to see the Top Sites icon view integrated with the bookmarks bar as I don't find Top Sites all that useful in itself. Speed...good! Dynamic searching....good! Safari 4....goooood!
Reply to this comment
by amestramgram February 24, 2009 12:48 PM PST
Safari is *a lot* faster than the competition. Try running Firefox on an older PPC mac, like 1.5GHz, seems barely usable to me, while Safari works just fine. Speed is all that matters.
Reply to this comment
by twolf2919 February 24, 2009 1:42 PM PST
I use Linux, so I wasn't even aware that there was a Firefox for MacOS. But if you're going to make that statement, are you at least comparing the latest Firefox (3.1 beta 2) with this beta of Safari? Firefox 3.1 is certainly further along in its beta than is Safari.

So, please, do tell what you're comparing.
by gerbache February 24, 2009 3:45 PM PST
I'm also using an older 1.5 GHz PPC laptop and was frustrated by the tradeoff of the high memory usage of Safari 3 versus the incredibly high processor usage of FF 3. So far, Safari 4 looks like it's doing well on both counts, with my processor usage sitting at <10% when idle compared with the 30-40% that Firefox would regularly hit. It's still a bit too early to tell if Safari's memory usage will blow up like it used to, but so far, so good.
by lordeagle February 24, 2009 12:50 PM PST
Loool "not as far as rivals". Sure I'll keep using Firefox, because I like the extensions.

But what other browser has HTML 5 and CSS 3 implemented? Not Firefox! And definitely not IE (whoops I just puked a little in my mouth thinking about that browser). The web will be better once all the major browser supports those technologies!

It's because of HTML 5 that offline Gmail on the iPhone is easily feasible!! The IE team needs to do what Ballmer suggested a while back: use Webkit as its rendering engine!!
Reply to this comment
by rwgs811 February 24, 2009 4:19 PM PST
What others browsers have CSS 3 and HTML 5, ooo, not sure about that...

How about erm. Firefox 3.1 Beta which has been out for a while now....
by pcfish February 25, 2009 3:03 PM PST
@rwgs811

The fact is, a lot of the CSS 3 standard is still in development, see "http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work#table". So, neither Safari or Firefox or anything can claim 100% support.
by jz33040 February 24, 2009 12:51 PM PST
That's nice, but what it means is that all along FireFox Javascript has been faster than safari. And quicker on a pc for obvious reasons. This is probably why apple needed to revamp the code. And there is nothing wrong with that, but now how long will it take ifans to start with the "they made it faster first" b.s., lol. But they probably wouldn't dare because it would be met with a lot of criticism since many other things were faster on pc's first and so on.

Don't get me wrong. It's very cool to make the javascript engine more efficient, but it is what it is. It's not like the rest of the browser features got the boost and things do tend to be limited by bandwidth on most things. In other words what I'm getting at is that yes, it's cool, BUT apple will make a bigger deal out of this than it is. It's not like everything is faster, or youtube will be quicker with the video part. But they will hail it as the fastest browser. And the javascript portion is rightfully so for NOW, but it wasn't months back and it probably won't be 6 months from now. I do expect firefox to do an update eventually. As for ie7, that's pretty much ancient with ie8 and Windows 7 around the corner which was released before this as a beta. Point being that everything is quickly changing as it always does and no one company stays ahead for long.
Reply to this comment
by thofts February 24, 2009 12:57 PM PST
The very strange thing is if you do a search on Safari 4 for "Steve Jobs", it returns a message saying "Dead Link". I wonder........????
Reply to this comment
by ewelch February 24, 2009 12:59 PM PST
Do you have Google Suggestions on? Because that's not what I got. That's either the difference, or you are one sick puppy.
by ewelch February 24, 2009 12:58 PM PST
Safari also loses your 1Password button on the Mac side. There's a manual hack to fix it until the 1Password people update their software. Took me about 30 seconds to notice ti was gone. Almost dumped Safari 4 because of it, but thank goodness, someone figured ti out.

You can also fix the tabs so they work like the last version. (But give it a week. It might grow on you.)

Type this into terminal:

defaults write com.apple.Safari DebugSafari4TabBarIsOnTop -bool NO

If you want to go back to tabs on tip, change NO to YES.
Reply to this comment
by karpenterskids February 24, 2009 1:09 PM PST
Very helpful!
It's good to know I can change that if I ever feel the need to.
by sciontcya February 24, 2009 2:11 PM PST
1) They released a beta today to handle.
2) You can take a chance and edit the plist to allow it to work.

Control-click on a closed copy of the 1P app.
/Applications/1Password.app/Contents/Resources/SupportedBrowsers.plist
Open the SupportedBrowsers.plist.

See:
</dict>
<key>Safari</key>
<dict>
<key>ClassName</key>
<string>OPWebKitPlugin</string>
<key>InternetPlugin</key>
<true/>
<key>MaxBundleVersion</key>
<string>5529</string>
<key>MinBundleVersion</key>
<string>412</string>
<key>PluginName</key>
<string>WebKitExtension</string>
<key>BundleIdentifier</key>
<string>com.apple.Safari</string>
<key>Extension</key>
<dict>

Edit the "maxbundleversio" number. I just put in 9999 'cause I live on the edge.
This number above is the number for new Safari 4b.

Scott
by silverk1 February 24, 2009 3:58 PM PST
1Password already has an update that fixes that.
by jafco_99 February 24, 2009 10:28 PM PST
And you have to restart Safari to make the changes go into effect.

Thanks for the answer on how to go back to default!
by shadylady88 February 27, 2009 10:30 AM PST
Hi! I'm a new Mac user and I did notice 1Password is gone! I had it all set up in Firefox 3! How do I get it back (please give answer with explicit instructions!).

A Happy Macbook user after 20 years of PC Windows!!!
by crisdecuba23 February 24, 2009 1:37 PM PST
Chrome is still faster for me, and I prefer their tab implementation (versus Safari's uber-wide tabs).
Reply to this comment
by amigosito February 24, 2009 1:53 PM PST
I wish you'd give some airtime to Safari on its native platform...Safari on Mac blows away everything else in terms of performance.
Reply to this comment
by trd1282 February 24, 2009 1:55 PM PST
Yes, it is quite good on Mac side.
by Shankland February 24, 2009 3:55 PM PST
Yes, sorry, I didn't have a Mac available for testing today. I wouldn't be surprised if its performance is better given how much I'd imagine Apple has refined its software build environment compared to what it has for Windows.

On the other hand, Safari 4 for Mac is pretty much a no-brainer for Mac users (I'm guessing it'll be part of Snow Leopard). It's the Windows folks who need convincing that it might be interesting.
by random truth February 24, 2009 5:09 PM PST
No doubt. Apple cant program nearly as well for windows as it can for their own os.
by t8 February 24, 2009 2:02 PM PST
It is great to see some competition in the browser market again. I loathe the days that IE had over 90% share and did no work on IE for 6 years. Hopefully people are more aware and realise they have choices, but I suspect that unless the EU or someone else mandates a level playing field for browser competition, most will stick with IE making it hard for web site creators having to write to 2 platforms, 1 - Web standards 2 - IE.

Had the US Justice done it properly, the browser market could be 5 years ahead today.
Reply to this comment
by pcfish February 25, 2009 3:09 PM PST
"most will stick with IE" not true. At least according to www.w3schools.com, IE6,7,8 has a total of 44.8% market while the market leader is Firefox at 45.5%.
by pithenumber February 26, 2009 1:38 PM PST
@pcfish
what hacker broke into w3schools?
by Seaspray0 February 27, 2009 11:11 AM PST
@pcfish. w3schools statistics do not match what everyone else shows. The following website does...

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=0

It currently shows IE at 68%
by SteveW928 February 24, 2009 2:13 PM PST
I'm not sure I agree... I still think Safari 3 is ahead of the competition for most things. I admit I use Firefox for a few sites or purposes (Zotero for example), but I vastly prefer using Safari in general. It's page rendering (for look) can't be beat.... Apple-style in-line spell checking.... clean compact UI. (I'm on Mac platform BTW... so I can't speak to the Win version). Basically, I only use other browsers when Safari doesn't do something as well... which is probably 5% or less of my browsing. Do I wish it did all these things too? Sure. But, I think when making a statement about how browsers compare, you can't just look at some feature list.
Reply to this comment
by cmicaro February 24, 2009 2:32 PM PST
Faster, yes, even than Chrome sometimes. I think is the better looking of all (minimalistic and very very 'shiny') But, I know is too early to say it, I'll only use it to test websites (I'm a web developer - so I have installed IE6, IE7, Chrome, FF, Opera, Safari...).

I use firefox a lot for that (with web-development add-ons obviously) but Chrome is the winner to me when is about casual browsing. Mostly because of my habits include to recover my last session when I re-open the browser or search directly in the address bar for instance - I can't find those options on Safari 4 beta.

I know, I can go to the History menu to reopen all windows from last session, but why so many clicks when I have it instantly on firefox or chrome? And I know that when I start typing on the Safari address bar, some logical options will appear on a drop-down list but is not the same as 'searching'.

Anyway, this is going to be bad news for slower browsers (ejem...IE) and very good for us, customers and web developers.
Reply to this comment
by numbingpain February 26, 2009 4:06 AM PST
History ---> Reopen All Windows From Last Session
by sanenazok February 24, 2009 2:41 PM PST
Still up to the same product placement crp. After I download Safari, it installs Apple "Update" which tells me I desperately need Quicktime and iTunes updates even though I have neither program on my computer. I ran it through the websites that I use and there's no way it's faster than FF3.1. The 3D view of websites I visit is the definition of a gimmick.
Reply to this comment
by Shankland February 24, 2009 3:58 PM PST
Presenting frequently-visited Web sites I find is a significant feature, not just a gimimick. Presenting them in 3D is mere eye candy, but some people really groove on eye candy. I'm not generally one of them, but even then visual cues can be important in establishing what software you're using so your brain can understand what mode it should be using.
by pcfish February 25, 2009 3:14 PM PST
"no way it's faster than FF3.1"

When you say something like that, please show us the data. May be 1 second is longer than 2 seconds in your little world, just saying.
by brian.lee February 24, 2009 2:44 PM PST
I'm not to concerned with the pluggins extension... Apple is all about getting the basics right first instead of trying to do everything on the first releaes. Granted this is the third release, the features that Apple has added/improved are the ones the majority of users are looking for. This release caters to the "I just want to surf the web crowd" you're a power user, you want your grease monkey, firebug etc... most don't use either of those.
Reply to this comment
by monkeyfun14 February 24, 2009 2:46 PM PST
This just screams Chrome rip off

But of course since Apple did it they hear nothing

If MS did this you fanboys wouldn't let them hear the end of it.
Reply to this comment
by rollcage February 24, 2009 3:21 PM PST
Didn't Google say they WANTED people to take their ideas when they released the browser? That it was the company's way of spurring change?
by t8 February 24, 2009 3:44 PM PST
Probably because Microsoft rips off Apple all the time and Apple rips off some or less of the time.
by Synthmeister February 24, 2009 4:12 PM PST
Chrome rip off? Are you forgetting that Chrome, Palm Pre and Nokia are all using the Safari Webkit rendering engine which Apple developed from the Konqueror browser?

Apple is simply using open standards here, like HTML 5, CSS, Javascript, H.264, etc.

So why do we need Flash and Silverlight and IE?
by random truth February 24, 2009 5:12 PM PST
You can also point out that chrome is using Apples rendering engine.
by monkeyfun14 February 24, 2009 6:04 PM PST
@t8

Show me something MS ripped off of Apple that Apple didn't take from someone else?
by seven7dust February 24, 2009 6:53 PM PST
@monkeyfun14
how about the app store MS recently announced
sure you an say that it's a common sense feature
but Apple did it first and MS is ripping them off !
Sometimes the greatest innovations r also the simplest !

another example is the whole Zune platform and zune store idea !

there's many more examples but that'll do for now !
by DrtyDogg February 25, 2009 3:13 AM PST
He said, " that Apple didn't take from someone else?"

I know many cell phone carriers that had app stores prior to the iPhone.

the list goes on, but that will do for now.
by seven7dust February 25, 2009 4:09 AM PST
@drtdogg plzz do list a few ?
Nokia,Samsung,Microsft RIM and many others r starting their
own application stores !
So if they had them before why r they doing it now all of a sudden ?

If you need more examples, here's a few !
how about web slices in IE, then there's safari's RSS integration and interface !
Vista's calendar was a bloated rip-off of ICal with a different color scheme
the places feature in windows explorer, another big rip-off of finder !
Screenshoting in windows 7 again a Feature OSX has had for many years !
even the Vista chess game was a copy ! Lol !
the list goes on and on !!! and all this is only on the O.S side of things !

MS copying Apple is obviously a good thing for everyone involved
Cause more people use Windows than OSX ,it therefore benefits more people !
plus now it'll be easier for people to switch cause
the interfaces r becoming more and more similar as time goes by !

if you need futher proof of MS's Apple complex
they r even following them into retail ,
I know it's sad to see MS become a directionless sheep company, but it's true !
by Mark_Anderson February 25, 2009 4:49 AM PST
Err, 7dust....

Nokia had Download! and N-Gage way before Apple's app store. Trouble was they suck in comparison which is why Nokia have had to launch the Ovi store. The App store isn't an innovation, it's an improvement.

As for screenshotting, am I missing something or has this been in every version of Windows from day one?
by seven7dust February 26, 2009 12:04 AM PST
@mark
yes screenshoting has been there in windows for a long time
but the new implementation is a lot like OSX, where you can select a certain part of the screen
I know it's as stupid comparison, but still OSX had it first !

I agree that there's no point playing the copying game in software,
everyone copies after all... even Apple and Google do it !

but MS just seems to do it more than others and
seems to have lost the ability to create new ideas and technologies !
MS is suffering from the "Ballmer effect" . Hopefully he leaves soon !
See more comment replies
Showing 1 of 3 pages (126 Comments)
advertisement

15 sites that went kaput in 2009

Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.

Top 10 news stories of the decade

Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.

About Apple

At the start of the 21st century, there's no tech outfit more influential than Apple. CNET News' Erica Ogg and other reporters will attempt to make sense of the rumors, hype, products, and people that will shape the future of the company. But Apple's not the only game in town, as the established cell phone companies and others strike back against the iPhone. E-mail Erica at erica.ogg@cnet.com.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Apple topics

advertisement
Click Here
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right