Safari

  By Shamus   Jun 25, 2007   16 comments

Safari, the Mac browser, is now available on Windows. This is great news. I test this site on IE, Firefox, and Opera, but until now I’ve never had any way to test and see how this site would look for Mac users.

It turns out the site looks pretty wonky on Safari. The individual post headers are not arranged properly. Is this the fault of Safari or my wacky CSS “skills”? It’s hard to tell. Still, it would be nice if the site was presentable for everyone.

1624 comments. (That's 10 in Hexadecimal.)


  1. Henebry says:

    Yes it does indeed look wonky on Safari.

    I figured it was a browser thing, though. I’ve had a similar problem for years with little websites I create for courses I teach. For the most part, I don’t worry about it – but it’s a funny thing, since I’ll labor for hours to make something look decent on my own browser.

  2. Alex says:

    It looks fine on Mac Safari, though.

  3. Stranger says:

    I second it looks fine on my Mac Mini here, with some small troubles now and then seeing the comic sometimes.

    I mentioned that before though :P

  4. Eric Meyer says:

    Remember: the current versions of Safari for Windows are betas. Don’t go reworking your CSS based on the behavior of Windows Safari; at least, not yet. Apple really does mean the software is “beta” in the traditional sense, not the Web 2.0 sense.

    I’m a regular visitor in Mac Safari and the site has always looked fine to me.

  5. andy says:

    Looks the same in Safari 3.02 beta for mac as it does on firefox mac for me. same in opera and flock, too. Seems like a bug in the windows version of safari.

  6. Galaxian says:

    Yeah, a couple of lines are out of alignment, but nothing to agonize over.

    Personally, I’m astounded Safari has arrived for Windows. Seemed like Apple had everybody including the janitor obsessing about the iPhone project. Safari on my PC is welcome, but my Mac is getting bored waiting for Leopard. (yes both, on the same desk – there’s not even an antimatter explosion or anything)

  7. Stargazer says:

    Mac Safari and Firefox both show the site beautifully. Must be a bug in the Windows version.

  8. Ian says:

    I’ve got a good question: how could Apple manage to screw up the rendering engine with the Windows version?

    I mean, honestly, all they basically did was take and extend KHTML. Konqueror certainly doesn’t have a problem dealing with a large variety of architectures and a number of different platforms so why should something based on its engine?

    That’d be sort of like if two Gecko-based browsers rendered pages completely differently (or rendered things very differently on two different operating systems), it just doesn’t make any sense.

  9. Lee From Sheboygan says:

    Yeah, I don’t know, but I wouldn’t worry about it too much. Until Safari gets high enough market penetration (giggity), there really isn’t a reason to agonize over it.

  10. Stein says:

    Does not look that wonky on one of the later webkit builds. Can be downloaded from:

    http://nightly.webkit.org/builds/win/1

    This was written using it…

  11. Stein says:

    And it is the only browser I’ve seen to pass the acid2-test on the windows platform (I’ve used Mozilla, Firefox, IE).

  12. Rustybadger says:

    I cannot for the ever-loving life of me figure out the hype over Safari. It’s really not a great browser – we install Firefox on all our Mac laptops (500+) because a lot of the online apps that our teachers want their students to use simply don’t work in Safari (even the Mac version). I am guessing a bunch of Windows-users will try it out and then go back to Firefox, since it offers less of a positive browsing experience (and with IE7 (blegh) having tabbed browsing, Safari has even less of an edge up on Microsoft’s browser. A bit (tiny bit) more secure (maybe), but that’s it, really.

    If you want to see what your site looks like in different browsers (even on different OSs), try out Browsershots.org. There are others out there too, such as Anybrowser.com, that will render your page and give you a screenshot so you know if something’s breaking. And for the love of all that is holy, stick with Firefox! *grin*

  13. Johan says:

    The Safari beta has speed – it boots faster, renders faster, etc. But at the moment that seems to be all it has going for it.

    Though to be fair, that means it at least has some advantages now – the current mac version really has none as it’s not much faster than the alternatives.

  14. Ian says:

    @Rustybadger: Yeah, I don’t understand the hype either. I’ve used Safari on my Mac and I really don’t find it to be particularly friendly. The fact that Apple seems to hate giving people fine control over their software doesn’t help.

    @Stein: I’m using Gran Paradiso v3.0a4 (essentially Firefox 3) and it renders Acid2 perfectly fine. My copy of Opera 9 also renders it without a hitch. Safari might have been the first browser to pass the test but by now it’s certainly not the only one. Also, according to the Acid2 page, the Safari 3 beta for Windows (and possibly the Mac version) no longer properly renders the test.

    @Johan: How does its speed compare to Opera?

  15. AndyF says:

    The way i’ve heard it, safari for windows was as much to put it out there for hackers to attack as anything else.

    see, the biggest vulnerability left open on the iPhone is going to be web based apps, running in Safari. If you’re apple, you’re thinking that the iPhone will be instantly attacked, so, you dump the new version of safari on the world, making it available to everyone see what problems you they find, and fix them before they become a problem on the phone.

    Just a theory I read somewhere, but it makes a whole lot of sense to me.

  16. Vertie Lonie says:

    Distracted driving was the cause of more than 3,000 deaths in 2010. So lets put down the phones while driving!

Leave a Reply

Comments are moderated and may not be posted immediately. Required fields are marked *

*
*

Thanks for joining the discussion. Be nice, don't post angry, and enjoy yourself. This is supposed to be fun.

You can enclose spoilers in <strike> tags like so:
<strike>Darth Vader is Luke's father!</strike>

You can make things italics like this:
Can you imagine having Darth Vader as your <i>father</i>?

You can make things bold like this:
I'm <b>very</b> glad Darth Vader isn't my father.

You can make links like this:
I'm reading about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darth_Vader">Darth Vader</a> on Wikipedia!