"While pundits have been lamenting the fact that Apple's 'software update' program on Windows is now pushing Safari 3.1 to users, we thought we'd check out Safari 3.1 to find out if Apple has made any real progress on the Windows version of this browser. After all, it's about the software, right? We put the Safari 3 beta on Windows through the wringer last summer, and we weren't too terribly impressed. The problems were significant, such that we'd have a hard time recommending the browser to any Windows user. As of last summer, Firefox was still the Windows browser of choice here at Ars. Have things improved for Safari? Wow, have they."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-05
Hi,
I like FF and I use it for a while (version 1.0 plus I've tried the milestone version too)
But for months now, I have to admit that it become what it claimed it didn't want to be, heavy and slow
It hangs when using gmail (cpu 100% after some manipulations) , use a lot of memory (Safari seems to use more memory that FF yet but no high cpu load)
Member since:2006-11-24
Member since:2005-07-11
FF3 hasn't been released yet. I don't run beta, alpha, pre-release, or release candidate software on my systems. I also tend to wait for the .1 or .0.1 or SP1 release before testing it.
I'll never understand the "try the latest -rc, it's the best thing ever" mentality. Unless it's a test system, it shouldn't run test software.
Member since:2005-07-06
If anything the FF3 beta seems to be more stable than FF2x for some users.
alpha/beta/etc releases in open source don't always correctly reflect the state of stability. I have run Debian Sid (unstable) for ages as a desktop and except for the incidental package conflicts it's more stable than my (final + SP1) Vista box.
Member since:2005-07-06
If the software works, and makes your life easier, why get caught up in a name? Why deny yourself a useful feature that will speed up your work just because it hasn't been named in a way you like?
It's all about balancing how much easier your life will be with the new features vs. the cost if the software crashes (and let's face it software crashes can also happen with version 4.1 SP2).
For example the IDE I'm currently using is beta and crashes on me maybe once a week (but getting better on a weekly basis). However the new features it adds saves me a lot of time and hassle every single day I use it. So the few minutes I lose when it crashes is more than made up with the time I save. That's why I run beta software on my main workstation.
Member since:
2008-03-25
Give FF3 a try and see. Firefox team claims FF3 has a much faster javascript engine.