Wow, I didn't think -anybody- used Safari (not even trying to mock Safari, I just seriously don't know anyone who uses it)

This means that you are a tool.

Safari 5.0 also has a javascript stack bug that specifically affects GWT apps.



Genocides are going to occur as long as we put profits before people.

use chrome, safari sucks.

This was the part that did it for me.

|||||||||
VVVVVVV

People willingly use Safari when they know there are alternatives?

Chrome beats Safari in every imaginable way, and still uses Webkit. Safari's UI is annoying, extension support is laughable, security is nil, features are mostly Apple-proprietary crap, and it's still not that fast.

I use Safari on my desktop (OSX), Firefox on my server (Linux) & Chrome on my laptop (Windows). I prefer using Safari (it's simple & it works great). I use several websites that use Flash & haven't had any issues. However, I only use reputable websites like Hulu or VBS.

I like things that are bad because they make me in a minority so then I can say "I use Safari, :smug:."
That sure didn't work out for you did it?

Mentat's opinion is irrelevant. He uses an iPad.

I'm just quoting this because it deserves it

Well, this turned out to be wishful thinking.

I actually use both Iron (Chrome) and Safari. And Opera and Firefox. I actually sometimes use three or all four at once. I'm not really sure why. Right now I use Chrome as my primary browser and sort of 'categorize' the other browsers (Opera for videos, Safari for news). I only use Firefox on my desktop.

I really want to like Safari on Windows but it is ridiculously buggy. It's fine on OSX for me, though.

Safari has earned my ire of late because of their dealings with third-party cookies. Our software is designed to be placed in an iframe (I didn't design that so don't chew me out for iframes). The iframe is considered a third-party. ALL cookies are blocked. This includes session cookies used by ASP.NET, PHP, etc. This forces us to make a hack in which a Safari use must click a link inside the iframe in order the session cookie to be allowed. I don't like Safari.

Is the iframe ACTUALLY a third party domain, or is it on the same domain and Safari is just being hurr? Cause if it's the former, can't blame Safari, that's an XSS vulnerability. But if it's the latter, that's hurr.

Nobody likes Safari. Nobody likes Internet Explorer. Platform vendors are terrible at developing web-based tech.

No. It's 100% third party. Hosting domain != iframe domain.

So it's actually bad design on our part? (legit ? )

Yes, that's actually bad design on your part. And in fact, I am kind of shocked other browsers work doing that...

The reason it's bad is, say, someone could post an iFrame on a forum (assuming the forum allowed html), and steal people's session cookies or other cookies for that forum, for example.

Edit: Depending on the security level necessary, you could simply feed the session ID via a GET var in the iframe URL, if you needed to keep the iframe.

HEY EVERYBODY, LET'S IGNORE THE THREAD TOPIC AND STROKE OUR EGOS.

I figured this would be the case. I don't like the use of iframes. However...I can't think of a way to introduce our software onto a website that we may or may not control. Trust me, I am open to suggestions on how to remove dependence on iframes.

I think I'm gonna hijack the thread a bit. Ok. Our **** does this. This is the application itself. Real estate agents would love to put this inside their overly graphical, poorly designed website. The only way we know how is the iframe.

Ego has nothing to do with it, except maybe yours it seems

Sorry SAJN, but i know very few people that use Safari. The best i could say is see if there are any updates for it or flashplayer.

So Massassi suggests you change browser to avoid the issue, you respond by calling everyone elitist.
Derp.

Welcome to the joy that is SAJN's personality.

Nice attempt at editing the thread title, by the way. Maybe it'd have worked better if you were using Chrome.

I did something very similiar, basically because my javascript skills are lacking (I think that would be the best way to go about it). I created a "kids deals search" widget using an iFrame and it really has been working great even if it's not the best way to approach it. The only reason I did it this way is because a competitor did the same thing. And actually lots of people use the iFrame/Widget method.

Chrome ftw.

Safari has its moments - I quite like the new Reader view for long articles (say Ars Technica), but it's otherwise not nearly as nippy as Chrome.

Well, that and admin/mod access. You can't edit the thread title without it

I just can't get over this. If one choice is clearly better, why use the inferior option?

I mean, isn't this like saying: Sure, that Volkswagen Jetta diesel gets better fuel economy, is more environmentally friendly and is cheaper to operate than this Toyota Prius, but I still drive the Prius!

Maybe not the best analogy but you see what I'm getting at. It doesn't even have anything to do with Apple... there are many legitimate reasons to use Apple products (mainly that most of them are very good), and I have nothing against that. But in this case, the winner seems pretty clear cut...

Have you ever met SAJN before? Perhaps you knew him as Rod-Nog, or Victor Van Dort.

holding scissors in my right hand will make me faster and more accurate, and I can cut thicker stuff, and it'll get me laid, but instead I hold scissors in my left hand. **** ALL OF YOU, you're such egotists for questioning my trivially corrected decisions based on complete ignorance.

Sure Safari is 'easy to use,' but I'm also bothered by Apples "HTML 5 Tests"

http://www.apple.com/html5/



HTML5! It just works (tm)

Hah... web standards, but you NEED SAFARI. I get that they are pushing their browser, but it still contradicts what they say on that very same page.

The difference in speed between Chrome, Safari, and Firefox is nothing major from what I've noticed in use, and if it is- I don't notice it. If anything, I downloaded Firefox when I first got my Mac and it was painfully slow. That's when I switched to Safari. I have all three installed on my computer, and I almost never use the other ones. I use Safari because I prefer the way it handles tabbing, I like the website "cover flow", the built in spell checker, and I'm just used to it's overall design by now. It's amazing how after so many years so many of you just CAN'T grow up.

Seriously Jon, what the hell? Of everyone who has posted, you're being the most juvenile.

It has nothing to do with maturity. Safari has legitimately good features but you never mentioned any of them, which left us very confused. If you want us to KNOW what you're talking about you need to EXPLAIN IT.

Or maybe you did, I can't tell anymore!

If you don't explain things, humans naturally try to fill in the explanation with assumptions. Imagine these statements and the impressions people could get from them:

1. Chrome and Firefox might be WAY BETTER, but I use Safari anyway.
This sounds like "NA NA NA I CANT HEAR YOU I LIKE SAFARI MORE IM A FANBOY"

2. Chrome and Firefox might be WAY BETTER, but I use Safari because it has specific redeeming features that I really like.
This sounds like "I have effectively evaluated these applications for my needs and chose the one that fits me the best."

The impressions people get are influenced by the tone and attitude of how you speak (or write) as well as past behaviors and prejudices. My assumption, with the explanation that you gave was, "He's a fanboy" or "He's a tool." If I made a similarly bad post I would hope someone calls me out on it.

Firefox IS slow on Mac, that's probably why no one recommended it here.

Safari's "cover flow" is a ripoff of Chrome's new tab feature. It works similarly, except Chrome's is more accurate (read: doesn't suck).

Safari's tab UI is similar to Chrome (again, ripped off). I don't know what other behavior you'd be referring to.

Chrome has a built in spell checker.

To be fair, there is nothing wrong with "ripping off" features. Everyone does it in every industry. Mac OS and Windows influence each other, like any good competitors should. Further, it doesn't matter who does it first, it matters who does it best. This is generally why Apple products sell so well. They wait a long time for everything about a feature to be fit and finish before releasing it to the public.

I understand that, which is why I was careful to add that their ripped off feature sucked

There was no need to explain anything. The thread was asking people if they had similar problems in Safari- that was the topic. Why I use Safari has nothing to do with the original topic aside from "I'm having problems with Safari"

The purpose of telling people "I USE SAFARI BECAUSE I WANT TO." was to avoid this thread turning into "dude, your having problems with Safari because it sucks- use Chrome (and or Firefox)" but that backfired horribly because people just can't stay on thread when theirs such a great opportunity to have a nerdtastic circle jerk over their amazing browser knowledge.