Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 28th Feb 2009 11:47 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 351097
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.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-11-29
Well, it would be good if it were implemented wisely. The paradigm is a working one, and Chrome gets it working quite well. I like it, and I agree with it.
However, Safari 4's implementation in my opinion leaves a lot to be desired. I like Safari, I liked Safari 3 on Windows, and I hope that by the time this ships as a final version, they can iron out some of these problems.
I don't think the point of most people here is to say: Safari does this wrong, therefore it's terrible and no one should use it.
The attitude I take is, they did a lot right (It's really fast and does standards very well) but it could use some tweaking before it ships.
Edited 2009-02-28 16:49 UTC