Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 12th Jan 2007 19:03 UTC
A few days ago, Adam explained on his blog why it would make sense for Apple to port Safari to Windows: "Maybe it's making a leap of faith, and yes, the browser market is one where making a noticeable entrance will be challenging, but the less of a jump into the deep end buying a Mac is, the easier it is to make your Apple brand accessble, available, and not scary. The best way to start? Safari on Windows." Yesterday, Mary Jo Foley dug up from deep within Mozilla's Wiki the following prediction by the Mozilla Foundation: "Apple may have Safari on Windows with likely ties to iTunes and .Mac." This line has now been changed into a more general statement ("WebKit may be ported to Windows" - which already happened) but point remains: does it make sense for Apple to port Safari to Windows?
Thread beginning with comment 201186
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:
2005-06-29
Safari is usually on the list of things to support right after firefox. I think it actually has a higher percentage than Opera... It gets supported as it is by most quality web software.
But I agree, a Windows version of Safari might bring apple some extra media and could make users more comfortable with switching later.
However, I'd argue that for Apple their application suites are enough to get people to switch and they shouldn't be ported (iTunes was ported to sell iPods). If they port iLife it might adversely affect them, besides a lot of Windows machines probably lack the balls to run the graphics.
I don't think Safari is a real attraction to OS X at this point.