On 21 May 2008, at 08:19, Max Battcher wrote: > > Of course, I didn't realize that Jon was using Safari and I know > nothing > about Safari other than the opinion that I don't think that I like it.
It's based on Webkit and the Webkit and Firefox developers have a friendly rivalry about being fastest and most standards-compliant. Wikipedia says "WebKit is an open source application framework that provides a foundation upon which to build a web browser. WebKit was originally derived from the Konqueror browser's KHTML software library by Apple, Inc. for use as the engine of Mac OS X's Safari web browser, and has now been further developed by Apple, Nokia, Google and others. The framework is now included in Omniweb, Shiira, iCab, Adobe AIR, mobile phones (including the iPhone), Nokia's Series 60 browser, and Google's Android platform. Although WebKit is included with Trolltech's Qt 4.4, the underlying framework for KDE, the KDE project will use its original version of KHTML for the near future. It passes the Acid2 test, and as of March 2008, latest nightly builds of WebKit score 100/100 in the Acid3 test." > > > (I am not a Mac user... I liked Macintosh, some, pre-OS X, but never > felt like paying the price to buy one, but I think it's gone in > entirely > the wrong directions to hold my interests. I'd rather use Windows, > frankly. Right now I'm using a lot of Ubuntu. I've got Gnome's > Nautilus in Spatial Mode (!), which was one of the few things that I > admired about the Mac and that I missed from OS/2 (!)... OS X dropped > it why? Spatial/browser is one of those emotive topics about which I don't really care either way. I've used both spatial (Classic Mac OS, GEM) and navigational file managers (and "Commander-like" too for that matter) and as long as they get the job done I don't really mind which :-) [snip unsubstantiated opinions] > Blech. Maybe it is "computers for dummies", but > that doesn't seem to be the actual case, because you throw a rock out > your window and hit an urchin willing to buy you a turkey and fix your > Windows machine for a few pennies, even if you and/or they "hate > it"...) That's just the 90% market share. > > >> I did not find anything about IE that would help anybody, under any >> circumstances. As a Web developer, I believe that Microsoft should be >> fined many hundreds of billions of dollars for all the Web >> developers' >> and end-users' time that their turd-in-the-punch-bowl of a browser >> has >> wasted. > > Microsoft was fined billions of dollars for IE, if you think that most > of the anti-trust case revolved around IE (it sort of did). Not enough obviously. > > > Up until the Vimperator discovery I was (by choice) using IE8 more and > more often in Windows. I found that it was sometimes more responsive > than Firefox, at least on Windows, and it isn't all bad. I would > absolutely use IE8 before I ever touched Safari on Windows. With as > bad > as Quicktime and iTunes run on Windows I can't even imagine attempting > Safari. > > Supposedly IE9 will be standards-tastic and may offer some healthy > competition to the rest of the pack. The most standards-tastic thing Microsoft could do would be to stop developing their proprietary browser altogether and bundle Firefox or Safari with Windows instead. And don't get me started on Silverlight :-) Embrace, extend and extinguish Maru -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ And yes, OSX is marvelous. Its merest bootlace, Windows is not worthy to kiss. - David Brin _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
