Safari 3
iaian7 » blog John Einselen, 13.06.07As betas go, it’s not as bad as it could have been… I guess. So far I’ve seen random symbols added while editing (like this blog post), a couple crashes, and a few less-than desirable interface changes (though that’s still up for debate). Safari 3 is a lot like Safari 2… just with more FireFox mixed in.
Similarities might make sense, given the common Mozilla codebase for both Safari and FireFox, but some of the more noticeable changes are certainly taken from FireFox or Internet Explorer:
- Forms and buttons are now skinned “correctly” for some websites, much like FF and IE. Depending on your viewpoint this can be seen as trying to catch up with the other players, or just really ugly. Save for basic colour changes, I hold to the latter viewpoint. I’ve always hated FireFox’s interface design, and especially how it renders forms and buttons. Button skinning is a failure of earlier Safari versions, for sure, but a failure I’ve very knowingly enjoyed. I’ve always viewed it like a pop-up blocker. Thankfully, the radio buttons and other elements are still much easier on the eyes than FF’s poor excuse for graphics.
- Search is now inline with the page, instead of a floating window. It’s at the top, as opposed to the bottom, but I didn’t like it in FF… and I don’t like it much in Safari either. Guess I just have to get used to it.
- It now resizes forms. I’ve already used this while editing code online, and it’s pretty darn useful. I’m not actually sure this was stolen from FireFox, but I seem to remember a plugin that added this functionality.
- Tabs can now be rearranged. This has been sorely lacking, and has been one of my biggest complaints about previous versions of Safari. It’s well past due, but Apple has done it nicely; tabs smoothly re-arrange as you drag them around (again, this easily trumps the hideous GUI employed by FF in OS X).
It shouldn’t come as a surprise, I guess, that the Windows version of Safari 3 uses Apple’s subpixel display techniques. Photoshop users might recognize it as font antialiasing, but any other Windows user is going to be in for a shock. It’s going to look blurry. Really blurry.
Joel Spolsky has written an excellent article comparing differences between the Apple and Microsoft approaches to subpixel smoothing. He brings up an interesting point; anything you’re used to is going to be very hard to change. It’s one of many reasons Mac and Windows fans so easily (and so vehemently) clash. Whether one solution is better or the other doesn’t matter so much, whatever you’re used to is going to feel far superior. To my eye (and on an LCD), Window’s subpixel rendering is obviously inaccurate, and while it’s much crisper, typography is completely and entirely sacrificed (even the most basic kerning is messed up). On the flip side, if you’re using a CRT, you should enjoy your sharper Windows rendering; it’s probably a lot easier to read.
Overall, I’ll be interested in seeing what people think. Unfortunately, even in the private betas I’ve been a part of, no one really grasps the term “Beta”. I’m sure there will be plenty of mudslinging going on over the horrible states of stability, security, and other major issues. And they’ll be right, at least till updates are released. Apple isn’t known for making good Windows software, and they probably won’t be making huge strides with their release of Safari 3. Hopefully it can make it past the Beta and survive to a full version, where it might be able to stand in the Windows world, however tenuously.
For now I’ll be content using it myself. It’s the fastest OS X browser by a long shot, it’s extensible, handles most media better, and operates just like a mac app should – beautifully (yeah, I’m referring to previous Safari versions, not the beta). The biggest reason I’ve used Safari for so long is the dedication to design. It is clean, and much like the rest of OS X, it’s been built with the highest levels of aesthetics in mind. There’s a reason most artists use Macs, and I suggest you check it out. Just… beware. It’s a beta, for goodness sake.
And blurry. 
mediaboxAdvanced
Yes, beta. Even I was tending to forget the beta-ness when I first tried Safari 3 on Windows. I think that is because 1) there’s been very little Apple software for Windows, and 2) there’s been even less beta software from Apple, period. I have to say the bug button featured so prominently is genius.
As far as the blurriness goes, I like the Apple anti-aliasing—on a Mac. It took a little getting used to, but I like it now. On Windows, however, my theory is that it is conflicting with ClearType. I’m going to try disabling ClearType to see if that makes Safari look good, although I wouldn’t leave ClearType disabled, so I’d like to be able to disable the font smoothing in Safari, not just turn it down.