Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 20th Jun 2007 09:26 UTC, submitted by TB
Internet & Networking "Apple's Safari is making its way to the Windows platform with the serious intention of making a dent in the market. As brilliant as the people are at Apple, I can't help but laugh at their, to put it politely, delusion. Before I ramble on too much, here are my five reasons why Safari will fail on the Windows platform." My take: Safari on Windows isn't here to take over the Windows browsing market. It's here for the iPhone.
Thread beginning with comment 249319
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by DigitalAxis on Wed 20th Jun 2007 16:55 UTC in reply to "RE"
Member since:

I think we're running into a problem with different meanings of 'beta'.

The pre-1.0 versions of Gaim were fairly stable; Filelight pre-1.0 was pretty stable, K3B was pretty stable and functional years before it hit 1.0; Firefox was... well, pretty usable... A lot of Google's projects (such as Gmail) are still 'beta', and are basically just sitting there probably because nobody wants to change the label. And then you have projects like Knoppix, where Klaus Knopper (at least used to) labelled every release as a 'beta' because the Linux kernel wasn't finished yet. Well, it'll never actually be 'finished'; it's an evolving project...

And then you have beta versions where things actually aren't working and have obvious bugs, like this Safari beta. And everyone gets up in arms about it being broken, because we've been spoiled by programs that work great even while labeled as beta or 0.x

I think this all boils down to what various people consider a beta release. Gmail probably ought to have been released as 1.0 by now; Safari apparently has a long road ahead of it.

Edited 2007-06-20 17:08

Reply Parent Score: 3