Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 27th Mar 2008 20:32 UTC
Apple The web has been abuzz the past two days with the 'news' that it was supposedly illegal to run Safari for Windows on anything but an Apple-branded computer. It was obviously a mistake, so I decided to run no story on it. Now, however, it has specifically been fixed by Apple; Ars decided to phone Apple PR, and they fixed the issue. The WebKit guys also offer a fix for the 'fuzzy fonts' issue on Safari for Windows.
Thread beginning with comment 306944
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Fixed???
by robmv on Thu 27th Mar 2008 22:24 UTC in reply to "RE: Fixed???"
robmv
Member since:
2006-08-12

WebKit is only a portion of Safari (the more complex I know), Safari is an application with a lot of no open source code using WebKit. On Windows WebKit maybe a few DLLs, while Safari is more than those few files, things like the entire UI around the Web page area (or chrome) is proprietary code. I am not saying that is bad, only that I prefer a browser like Firefox that all the binary code they distribute is opensource based (with the exception of their need to link to the OS libraries it needs to work).

A lot of people confuse WebKit "opensourceness" with Safari, so I hope this clarifies that confussion

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE[3]: Fixed???
by macUser on Thu 27th Mar 2008 23:33 in reply to "RE[2]: Fixed???"
macUser Member since:
2006-12-15

WebKit is only a portion of Safari (the more complex I know), Safari is an application with a lot of no open source code using WebKit. On Windows WebKit maybe a few DLLs, while Safari is more than those few files, things like the entire UI around the Web page area (or chrome) is proprietary code. I am not saying that is bad, only that I prefer a browser like Firefox that all the binary code they distribute is opensource based (with the exception of their need to link to the OS libraries it needs to work).

A lot of people confuse WebKit "opensourceness" with Safari, so I hope this clarifies that confussion


The browser engine itself is open source, but the rest of the app is not. Okay, I can see your logic. So you would be open to using something like Swift on the PC?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Fixed???
by robmv on Fri 28th Mar 2008 00:37 in reply to "RE[3]: Fixed???"
robmv Member since:
2006-08-12

Thanks for the link, it is good to know about that project. And in my case I am a Linux user (that is the reason I made a reference to test Safari on a Windows VM, just for compatibility testing what i code). On Linux we have Epiphany that now can run with WebKit too (using a different compile time option), it is nice to have options.

WebKit still does not give me compelling reasons to move from Firefox (the same happened to me with Konqueror/KHTML and the Mozilla suite nos Seamonkey), the only place I will be happy using a WebKit based browser is on a mobile device, for example one based on Google Android, but I still think Gecko is in good track to be able to run on smaller devices. It is not only love for the browser, is love for the underlying technologies like XUL, XPCOM, Tamarin (the work in progress JIT oriented JavaScript VM)

This is what is nice about options, each one target different tastes; diversity is what made living entities great, the same happens with software

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Fixed???
by evangs on Fri 28th Mar 2008 07:18 in reply to "RE[2]: Fixed???"
evangs Member since:
2005-07-07

I personally take a pragmatic approach to Open Source. I'm not dogmatic about it's use and if a commercial and closed source program does the job better, I'm definitely going to be using it over the open source equivalent.

That said, while Safari isn't open source the WebKit rendering engine is and that's what is more important. What would you rather have? A bloated browser that suffers from performance problems but is crossplatform and thus performs just as poorly on all platforms? Or a browser that looks and feels native, while using a browsing engine that is widely available. See for example the difference between Firefox and Camino.

Having Safari on Linux would be a really stupid idea (IMHO of course). On the other hand, having Epiphany or Konqueror using the WebKit engine would be absolutely fantastic. I am glad that it is the latter that is happening and I can't wait for their release.

Reply Parent Score: 3