Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Safari for Windows Downloaded Over 1 Million Times

CowboyNeal posted more than 6 years ago | from the popularity-contests dept.

Networking (Apple) 439

ClaraBow writes "Apple reports that it took Apple just two days to reach 1 million downloads of its newest Safari Web browser for Windows. If these downloads manifested into regular Safari users, then we just might have a third major browser on the Windows platform. If Safari can obtain a 10% market share on Windows, then it would further weaken IE's position and give standards-based browsers more leverage with developers."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


It makes me wonder... (5, Informative)

jZnat (793348) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532027)

These statistics make me wonder if Konqueror 4 [konqueror.org] will become another large competitor on Windows. Konqueror and Safari both share a very common core (KHTML [wikipedia.org]/WebKit [webkit.org]), so the renderring and page handling should be relatively the same. Web designers can get another speedy and a more native web browsers that tests their sites for the same purpose, and general users can get a lightweight, standards-compliant, open source web browser (without the OSS requirements, you can already get this with Opera [opera.com], of course) that won't try to enforce another platform's "look'n'feel" like Apple's apps all do.

For the interested, you can grab an alpha copy of KDE 4 [kde.org] (download qt-copy, kdelibs, and kdebase at the very least; you can use either GCC/Cygwin or MS Visual Studio to compile it). On OS X, there are precompiled universal binaries for everything, and Kubuntu and openSUSE users can get packages for it from their respective websites.

Re:It makes me wonder... (4, Insightful)

Gothic_Walrus (692125) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532099)

These statistics make me wonder if Konqueror 4 [konqueror.org] will become another large competitor on Windows.

It won't. The only reason Safari took off like this is because Apple is behind it.

Re:It makes me wonder... (5, Informative)

Allicorn (175921) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532423)

Took off?

Just because I downloaded the thing doesn't mean I'm going to switch to using it seriously.

Maybe I just wanted a giggle!

Re:It makes me wonder... (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532149)

As a developer I'm dropping IE completely because I don't see any reason why I should buy an OS license just to test in IE7 when I already test in Firefox, Konquerer, Lynx, Opera and Safari. I've made enough concessions to IE over the years, now it's time for Microsoft to fix their mess instead of relying on web developers to do it for them.

It may be even better than that. (4, Interesting)

Balinares (316703) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532175)

Actually, the KDE guys (in particular, the ever awesome Zack Rusin [blogspot.com]) are working with the WebKit people in order to make WebKit work on the same rendering canvas that KDE uses (namely Qt's QPainterDevice). So Konqueror 4 will most likely use WebKit itself, rather than KHTML, on all three platforms, Linux, Windows and Mac.

The reason why this is such great news is that this could possibly make WebKit, one of the most standard compliant engines out there, the number one option after IE (alongside with Gecko), which will hopefully prompt Web developers to, at last, respect the standards as the basics for any Web development.

... Just so long as WebKit doesn't end up deviating from the standards for whichever reason, anyway. Y'know. (Yeah, I've been in this industry too long to remain optimistic, I know.)

KDE 4 Konqueror KHTML (0, Troll)

twitter (104583) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532201)

These statistics make me wonder if Konqueror 4 will become another large competitor on Windows.

KDE 4 on Windoze would be a large competitor for every class of program. Konqueror, through kioslaves and kparts, is the amazing unified desktop environment that Bill Gates was dreaming about ten years ago but never delivered. All kinds of documents can be opened with ease in tabs and split panes. All kinds of connections, from file to sftp work seemlessly and fish figures it out for you. But all of that is also available in every other program from KDE and KDE has just about every kind of program. I'm not sure how they will port all of that onto something as ugly as Windoze, but that's one of their goals.

It all works better, of course, with free software. Xorg has network transparency, can run multiple instances, makes virtual desktops easier, and won't go thunk in the night when Bill Gates "upgrades" things to break your work. I'm not going to even think about the restriction laden world of Vista, except to note the evil direction and futility of porting to Windoze. As soon as you are there, those jerks have moved the gaolposts again.

Re:KDE 4 Konqueror KHTML (1)

Sensible Clod (771142) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532417)

"Gaol" posts? I thought you were misspelling something else, but then I realized "gaol" is an old spelling of "jail". Interesting.

Re:KDE 4 Konqueror KHTML (1)

Columcille (88542) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532477)

You do realize that the unified nature of Konqueror, for which you give it such high praise, would be present with IE had Microsoft not been accused of monopolistic practices for doing that sort of thing?

And referring to Windows as ugly while implying Linux isn't? At worst, XP was plain. Vista is quite nice looking. One of the big drawbacks of Linux is the frequently bulky/ugly interface. A lot of that is personal preference, but I daresay far more people would agree with me than with you.

You lose a few more points by lamely saying "windoze" as if that somehow lends force to your argument. Call it by its name, or look like the teenager you probably are.

Re:KDE 4 Konqueror KHTML (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532521)

> One of the big drawbacks of Linux is the frequently bulky/ugly interface.

Linux doesn't have a GUI, what the hell are you talking about?

When KDE is ported to Windows, will Windows inhereit this supposed big drawback?

Re:KDE 4 Konqueror KHTML (5, Insightful)

Goaway (82658) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532537)

All your other blue-eyed optimism aside, this is particularly funny:

and won't go thunk in the night when Bill Gates "upgrades" things to break your work

You know, it's really open source software that's known for making arbitrary upgrades that break backwards compatibility (and keeping version numbers below 1 so they have an excuse - hey, it's just beta!), while Windows goes to great pains to preserve backwards compatibility at all costs, even at the detriment of the system as a whole.

Re:It makes me wonder... (1)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532211)

If you consider that the only version I've downloaded isn't even capable of displaying bold text, I'd say Safari on Windows may one day become the third browser, but we're nowhere close to that right now.

Re:It makes me wonder... (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532343)

Opera doesn't have a native look and feel on any platform. Firefox doesn't have a native look and feel on OS X.

Konqueror? Don't make me laugh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532357)

If it ain't by Apple, it sucks. Take your amateur written, crap software and shove it.

Fanboy orgasm?? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532545)

This number just proves that 1. There are only one million Mac fanboys who occasionally use windows 2. This number would not go up further, because all the McBoys have downloaded their share of the browser. But because its tied up with iTunes, a lot of dumb users (which, like, includes, like, all iTune users) would not even know if they have an option NOT to install safari on their windows box, I expect the number to keep increasing, but with no real market share. Now mod me down.

Dumb speculations (5, Funny)

Alphager (957739) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532037)

"If Safari can obtain a 10% market share on Windows, then it would further weaken IE's position and give standards-based browsers more leverage with developers."

If my aunt had balls, she would be my uncle.

Re:Dumb speculations (1)

thoughtlover (83833) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532297)

Here's a few more dumb speculations made about Apple... and not to be the fanboy, but c'mon...

  Apple should sell to Sun Computer because they are irrelevant and no one uses them anymore.

  There's no way that Apple is going to sell music and make a profit.

  No one is going to use iTunes on Windows.

Need I go on?

Re:Dumb speculations (3, Insightful)

Columcille (88542) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532561)

But Safari as a browser is basically no good. It might work well with standards, but its usability is quite weak. I'd place it far behind both Firefox and IE7. I'm one of the 1 million that downloaded it, but I have little plans of ever actually using it except to possibly check how a page renders under it. Its features are just too lacking.

Excellent news :-) (2, Informative)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532047)

That's almost as many downloads as firefox got in its first 24 hrs.

A new browser - that will target a different userbase to FF & divide the market up a little more, will make the web a better place for everyone.

Re:Excellent news :-) (4, Insightful)

thomas.galvin (551471) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532091)

A new browser - that will target a different userbase to FF & divide the market up a little more, will make the web a better place for everyone.

Absolutly, and I think that's the only market that will really go for Safari. I'm a Mac guy, but I use Camino at home and Firefox at work. Safari doesn't have anything great that will make me switch. But, if it's bundled with itunes, I can see a lot of people who use IE because it's the default making the switch.

Re:Excellent news :-) (1)

HairyCanary (688865) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532095)

Except Firefox was not new except in name, it had an established user base that wanted to try it immediately. I agree with your second comment. The more competition on Windows for IE, the better. Perhaps it will convince developers to quit releasing web applications which require ActiveX...

Re:Excellent news :-) (2, Insightful)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532259)

Except Firefox was not new except in name, it had an established user base that wanted to try it immediately

That's why I made the comparison. FF 1.0 went from 0 to a huge userbase very quickly. For Safari to get downloads in the same ballpark is fantastic. Imagine what's going to happen when they bundle it with itunes.

Re:Put into perspective :-) (1)

runningduck (810975) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532411)

There is one major difference, enthusiasts were interested in downloading FF1.0 because they wanted it for their primary browser whereas people are curious about Safari on Windows. You could forward an argument that the same initial million that downloaded FF1.0 are core technologists and wanted to take a peak at Safari. I am sure that many of the curious will continue to use Safari, but there is not the pent-up demand and anticipation for Safari that there was for FF. Now we will have to see how Apple translates this initial surge into a sustained user base.

Re:Excellent news :-) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532449)

Right, because Safari doesn't have an established user base...

Re:Excellent news :-) (0)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532187)

Well if you go back a bit they reached this number more than twice as quickly as Firefox did with their Fahrenheit 1 million campaign. Presumable they will also see the same high percentage of users download it, have a quick look and then forget about it as Firefox does [spreadfirefox.com].

Re:Excellent news :-) (3, Informative)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532241)

If, of course, people keep using it.

I've downloaded Safari for Windows (twice, in fact: home and work), and while I'm keeping it around for testing (like I keep Opera around) I have no intention of using it as my primary browser.

There are a number of reasons for this, but the most basic reason is that Safari doesn't fit in with Windows that well. I'm not talking about the "look," Aqua under Windows is fine, I'm talking about the "feel." The biggest example for me is that the back/forward buttons on my mouse don't work in Safari. They do work in Firefox. Plus Safari doesn't use standard Windows shortcuts (Ctrl-Shift-] for next tab versus Ctrl-Tab, for example).

Other things like extensions also keep me using Firefox over Safari. I like AdBlock Plus and NoScript, and those just aren't available for Safari.

Re:Excellent news :-) (1)

profplump (309017) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532425)

Actually there are several AdBlock-like extensions available for Safari. I don't know that the extension structue is availabe on Windows, or that the extensions would work there anyway, but it's possible. I personally use Saft [apple.com], there are also alternatives that don't cost $12. I haven't found anything that works like NoScript (or the extension I really want -- FoxyProxy [mozdev.org]) but ad-blocking at least is available.

Re:Excellent news :-) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532523)

There are a number of reasons for this, but the most basic reason is that Safari doesn't fit in with Windows that well.

It's stable? It actually works? It renders faster? It's designed by people who know how to design user interfaces, not people who just stick as many damn features into a window as possible?

Saying it doesn't fit in well with Windows is about the highest praise anyone can give it. That's a good thing.

Plus Safari doesn't use standard Windows shortcuts (Ctrl-Shift-] for next tab versus Ctrl-Tab, for example).

Oh, my, God. You might be forced to learn something new! How terrible.

Other things like extensions also keep me using Firefox over Safari.

As has already been pointed out, there are extensions available for Safari. They may not have been ported to Safari for Windows quite yet, but that may be because the Windows port has been out for less than a week.

Proudly posted using Safari for Windows. (Although I'd be even more happy if it were posted using just Safari, but when you're forced to use Windows, you make do.)

What ever happened to IE 7? (0, Troll)

twitter (104583) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532265)

A new browser - that will target a different userbase to FF & divide the market up a little more, will make the web a better place for everyone.

I agree, but the IE 7 story shows that you don't have to worry much anymore. Despite being a forced upgrade on most Windoze platforms, IE 7 still has less than 20% market share even for tech markets [w3schools.com]. Design to real standards and everyone wins.

The only stuff that still sucks is video, but the average windoze user can't see it either. Patented and restricted junk works that way and will be ignored by the vast majority of people for the duration.

Re:Excellent news :-) (4, Informative)

RalphBNumbers (655475) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532401)

That's almost as many downloads as firefox got in its first 24 hrs.

That kind of depends on which release of Firefox you're talking about.

The first "preview release" of Firefox took about 100 hours to break 1 million downloads.
Then Firefox 1.0 hit 1 million downloads in about 24 hours.
And Firefox 1.5 hit 1.5 million downloads in the first 24 hours.
And Firefox 2 hit a bit over 2 million downloads in the first 24 hours.

I'd say the first public beta of Safari for Windows is most equivalent to Firefox's first preview release, so in those terms it's doing pretty damn well, especially considering it was just mentioned at WWDC and then immediately posted on Apple's website, whereas Firefox had been publicly developed and hyped for a long time before it's preview release. But then again, it's still well below the rate of download of the most current release of Firefox.

A new browser - that will target a different userbase to FF & divide the market up a little more, will make the web a better place for everyone.

Well, everyone except microsoft and mozilla, who could lose market share and search revenue...

I really hope that Apple does carve itself a good chunk of windows browser market share, because that would provide a lot of support for a more standards based and platform/browser independent web. But I'm not sure Apple is really betting anything on their ability to do so; if they just make it easier for more web developers to target and test for Webkit/Safari/iPhone/etc, I think they'll consider Safari for windows a success and take any market share gains as a nice bonus.

Re:Excellent news :-) (1)

AnonymousCactus (810364) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532501)

What about another browser that will target a similar userbase as FF and divide up its market share?
Just saying, there's a large group of people that won't use anything other than IE. Then there's people who will. A lot of those people are using FF now and seem more likely to switch to Safari. I mean, the true Mac fans have Macs, right?

Apple downloads (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532055)

"Apple reports that it took Apple just two days to reach 1 million downloads of its newest Safari Web browser for Windows."

Wow, they must have a fast LAN to download that many copies to themselves. Have any end-users downloaded it yet?

I downloaded it... (-1, Offtopic)

Anml4ixoye (264762) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532061)

but I won't be using it anytime soon [cornetdesign.com].

Re:I downloaded it... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532115)

nobody gives a shit about you, your opinion, or your blog. please die in a fire.

Yes we know.... (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532353)

You are used ot ineriour font rendering, and prefer things that way - it was good enouh for Grandpa dammit!

Enjoy your burry text... (1)

Blahbooboo3 (874492) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532535)

Maybe some of us working on LCD computer screens don't like blurry text? I am not a "printer" so I could care less if my fonts are sharper than printed. The lack of font on-screen sharpness is one of the reasons I still haven't switched to macs.

Competition (5, Insightful)

desenz (687520) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532085)

I might be way off, but it seems more likely to me that Safari will be grabbing its marketshare from firefox, not IE.

Re:Competition (2, Interesting)

kanweg (771128) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532129)

Well, in the sense that PC users who are adventurous enough to try Firefox might also give Safari a try and perhaps stick with it, yes. But Apple has something Firefox doesn't: iTunes. Apple can reach millions of PC users who may never have heard of Firefox, but may give Safari a try because they like iTunes.

I don't cry any tears over a little loss of marketshare for Firefox. Let's rejoice the fact that the marketshare of standards-compliant browsers goes up. THAT's why it is important to eat away at IE's marketshare.


Re:Competition (1)

master0ne (655374) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532183)

i was just about to post the same thought... when going up aganst a de-facto standard such as IE, introducing competors into the market doesnt decrease IE's marketshare (as the users switching from IE, they do so because there unhappy with IE... not just to support OSS, as such the number of users switching is independent of the number of alternitives (solong as there IS a alternitive that functions as expected) and more dependent on the users determinitation to goto sompthing better...) as such, adding safari, knoqueror etc to the windows platform will only serve to fragment the "competing" market and not impact the "dominate product" in any noticable way... however, i for one, welcome out KHTML coding overlords.....

Re:Competition (1)

efence (927813) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532249)

Can Apple push Safari via iTunes the same way as iTunes and iPod firmware updates? Not an unlikely scenario if it is to feature iTMS integration in the future.

Backwards (3, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532307)

It seems more likley to me, that a casual user who is just roaming along using IE today and blissfully unaware of Firefox would be more likley to stuble upon or otherwise install Safari - especially if it's installed as part of the iPhone setup, but even just normal Apple marketing may reach them. Firefx users might rty it but are less likley to switch since it offers less over what they already have.

Re:Competition (4, Interesting)

Doctor Crumb (737936) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532373)

I'd be willing to bet that a large part of that 1 million downloads is neither IE users nor FF users; rather it would be those people who run multiple browsers already for various reasons (cross-platform web development being one). We'll see what the browser market share numbers do, but I predict that there will be minimal switching going on.

Re:Competition (2, Interesting)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532567)

yeah, now those people don't need a mac to test on, so this'll reduce the number of macs sold.

Why wouldn't it? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532515)

Once again, open source is easily killed off as a sub-par technology with little more than hype backing it up. The only reason firefox ever did so well was because Apple hadn't decided to enter the market. With Apple here (and obviously kicking some serious open sores ass, 1 million users in NO TIME), Firefox will soon hopefully die the painful death it deserves, and lets hope it also takes Lin-sux and every other crappy piece of open sores software with it.

Unlike open sores developers, Apple developers are well paid american professional engineers, who know how to do usability and design and are obviously very successful at it.

Think different. Think better. Think Apple!

Oh come on (4, Insightful)

bcmm (768152) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532101)

If these downloads manifested into regular Safari users...
I think a very large number of people, including myself, downloaded it just to see what it was like and have no intention of actually using it.

Let's see you do something a million people are in (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532323)

Of course not all those million people are going to keep using it, but just like Firefox download counts it shows a certain level of interest that is impressive (in the case of Safari an impressive number for something that was only mentioned at a keynote at a developer confernce).

Who knows if Safai will stick with many people, but Apple did a good job of getting the word out it is there.

Re:Oh come on (4, Insightful)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532347)

Yeah. I almost downloaded it just because I was curious of how Safari would look on Windows. (I stopped the download when I started reading about how this was a real Beta and not a release candidate build that we (as of late) have called Beta.)

Perhaps Apple will make Safari an optional download when people download quicktime or iTunes. If so, they will likely get a lot of IE converts.

While a couple years ago I would have said that they would not get a lot of Firefox users. But since Firefox is now mainstream, they will likely get a lot of converts from people that think the Firefox icon is for the internet and have no idea what an application really is.

Re:Oh come on (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532387)

Same here. I'm a browser junkie, so I had to download it. I was not impressed! I mean, I play with nightly builds of Firefox and SeaMonkey that are in better shape than the builds of Safari we've seen so far.

The only reason anyone is taking Safari seriously is because Apple is behind it. If this were just another open source project, people would have just laughed at it and forgot about it.

Even though Apple is behind it, I don't think it's a serious contender. It lacks the majority of the features which caused IE users to switch to Firefox in the first place. Why on Earth would they want to use Safari? Heck, Safari isn't even the best browser on the Mac. When I'm using a Mac, I find Camino to be a far more capable browser.

It will be nice for web developers who only have Windows boxes, and that's probably the true target user base of Safari on Windows when you think about it. I doubt Apple really thinks Safari is going to take Windows by storm. In fact, the release of the flaky beta builds (which aren't even of beta quality) should be enough proof of that. Apple is about perfection and everything working the first time, with the Safari builds I've seen so far, it's nowhere near that. I personally know of people who have had issues even getting it installed on their systems. So the articles pointing out the problems Safari on Windows has are really telling it straight. If Apple were serious about Safari on Windows, it would have just worked. That's what Apple is all about.

That's a pretty big "if" (1)

dave420 (699308) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532109)

Seeing as many of those downloads will be from web developers and plain ol' interested folks wanting to see what all the fuss is about. If all those FireFox downloads were actual FireFox users, FireFox would be the most-used browser on the market, or at least have a larger-than-25%-or-whatever share. Downloads!=users, especially for software as buggy as Safari.

(And I'm not flaming anyone or anything here, just pointing out the fact that 1m of anything only equates to 1m of exactly that, and nothing else)

I believe it (2, Interesting)

Azureflare (645778) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532117)

I downloaded Safari when it was announced, and it's a really slick browser in windows. It's got a little quirks that are reminiscent of mac os x features that might be confusing to PC users, but honestly it's great being able to test safari, firefox, opera and IE all in windows now. It makes my job much easier as a web dev.

I'm really glad that apple released this, and I hope it does well at establishing a good sized customer base. Competition is _always_ good, even if it draws market share from firefox.

No competition for IE (2, Insightful)

Krommenaas (726204) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532119)

Safari is no competition for Internet Explorer, since noone who is able and willing to download and install another browser is still using IE. It's main competitor is Firefox, but I can't imagine many FF users switching to Safari as it confirms every prejudice I as a Windows user have about Mac software: it looks grey and it works against me (e.g. no ctrl-enter, can't resize it easily).

Re:No competition for IE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532271)

Try just hitting enter -- on the Mac version of Safari it has the same effect as ctrl-enter on Windows (auto-completes). Agree on the resize though.

Re:No competition for IE (1)

kanweg (771128) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532329)

Part of FF marketshare comes from Macinosh users who at work are condemned to using a PC.

I sometimes use Firefox on my Macs when a site doesn't display properly, but I usually use Safari. Firefox doesn't look very pretty (I do like its icon, though). Similarly, the web app I work a lot with looks much worse than with Firefox (can we say ugly buttons and ugly menu's?)


Canabalizing FF? (2, Insightful)

HockeyPuck (141947) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532121)

It's safe to assume that a certain percentage of windows users will never download a different browser b/c a) they don't know about alternative browsers b) IE is good enough c) don't care. How many of those users that don't fall into the above catagories downloaded firefox and then in the past couple of days downloaded Safari? Could sarfari be canabalizing FF users? Are we just seeing 'churn' here whereby people go from FF to safari and back again?

I highly doubt these 1million were users that have never used a third party browser.

Unfortunately... (3, Insightful)

Dan East (318230) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532133)

Unfortunately, the type of computer user that would download and evaluate different web browsers are the type of users that have likely already switched to Firefox. So if these people stick with Safari then it will be mostly at the expense of Firefox.

The majority of people I know that use Firefox do so because I either told them to download it, or I downloaded and installed it for them. They will use whatever program gives them internet access that has a convenient shortcut on their desktop or quick launch menu, and as long as webpages and stuff appear when they click on things then that's what they will use until they replace their computer.

Dan East

Flawed assumption (3, Insightful)

OpenSourced (323149) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532141)

If Safari can obtain a 10% market share on Windows, then it would further weaken IE's position and give standards-based browsers more leverage with developers.

That is, supposing it gets the 10% market share from IE, and not from Firefox, for example.

For how long...? (2, Interesting)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532143)

The interest seem to have been pretty high, but I wonder if anyone there could use it for more than a straight full hour.

Re:For how long...? (1)

Ghandalfar (918924) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532281)

I'm using it as my new default. Switched from Camino back to Safari 3. I love every minute of it.

Re:For how long...? (2, Insightful)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532317)

I'm assuming you're referring to using it on the Mac. The article title is about "Safari for Windows" so I'd assume the OP is referring to using it under Windows, and not on the Mac.

That being said, I've yet to use Safari for Windows for more than, say, five minutes in one stretch. Firefox works better under Windows than Safari. Yes, Safari is faster, but it doesn't fit in with Windows quite right.

Mac users frequently complain about direct-to-Mac ports of Windows software, and how they don't fit in and don't use the right keyboard shortcuts and the like. Well, Safari for Windows is the same - just in the other direction.

Re:For how long...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532569)

For a straight full over? Jeez dude! I could tolerate it for 3 minutes, just to see how it looks then uninstalled it immediately right after.

Over a million in total so far? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532171)

There's lots of nosy/curious people about!

Of those downloads how many were from previous downloaders to get updates as the broken nature of Safati4Windoze was reported?

I'll be more impressed when the usage figure from server logs become available. Some typical stats I have seen concerning browser usage (for an intensively used server) show browsers identifying themselves as follows:

MS Internet Explorer 64.3 %
Firefox 28.9 %
Netscape 1.9 %
Safari 1.8 %
Mozilla 1.0 %
Opera 0.8 %
others 1.3 %

We'll have to see how Safari for Windows changes figures like these in the next few months, eh?

Re:Over a million in total so far? (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532441)

obviously skewed statistics from a popular site I know of:

firefox: 61%
IE: 20%
unknown: 7%
safari: 5%
mozilla: 3%
opera: 2%
konquorer: .5%
netscape/galeon/camino: ~0%

And by OS:

Windows: 64%
Macintosh: 15%
Linux: 12%
Unknown: 8%
Solaris: 1%

Wouldn't the number be only half as much? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532173)

Surely Apple isn't counting the number of times the first insecure version was downloaded by people who then turned around and downloaded the fixed second version when it became available 2 days later? I think Apple should just count the number of times the second version is downloaded to be more accurate.

I downloaded it... (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532191)

I'll also will be using it only very rarely.

Why? 1) I was curious, and 2) I thought that maybe I could use it for those very rare pages I visit that don't work well with Firefox, rather than use IE. Although, I have to have a very good reason to visit pages that don't work with Firefox -- usually I just boycott that site, probably forever...

Honestly, I probably would use Safari more, because it is faster, were it not for one simple fact:

No Flashblock. No Adblock. No Use.

Just that simple. You will have to pull these extensions from my cold dead mouse hand. (And yes, being also a Mac user I do know you can get add-ons for Safari, but they do not work well, not at all).

Safari & XP64 not in love ? (2, Informative)

Chatterton (228704) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532219)

I have just downloaded it when I saw this story, but safari doesn't seems to work very well with slashdot or other more simples web page on my XP 64 box :(

See by yourself: Screen shot [cabuzel.net]

Safari : not just for iPhone? (2, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532221)

I hate to admit it, but john Dvorak had an interesting theory[1]. Google pays the mozilla foundation $50 million/year or so for redirecting searches their way. I believe Google also had a deal with Opera (the latest version of Opera seems to default to yahoo, though). Is google paying Apple for Safari searches? If so, a windows port could bring in $10 million/year easily, enough to pay for the port and subsidize continued development.

  1. Actually, he had one interesting sentence, which I'm expanding on. The rest was lunacy.

Safari Really Annoys Me (1)

JamesRose (1062530) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532225)

Apple is being deliberately obtuse, their GUI doesn't fit, lots of interface works differently, and it renders some pages wrong. Stop building programs that are meant to train people into using your operating system- it's a stupid idea cos you just end up with a program that seems not to work properly. Whereas maybe if they went and built a really good program, and program that looks good and acts as you think it should, they may actually sell you the idea to change to their operating system as you give them confidence in Apple's ability to code good programs.

With this deliberate attempt to convert people to the church of Steve there's no way Safari will be a good contender, that's not what its built to be.

As a separate point, 1million downloads I'd bet quite a large chunk is the firefox users who want to just check it out (don't want to use it). They say it could take a chunk out of IE, no it wont because the people who were going to change did, they went to firefox cos its better. Safari isn't better, and its not hte only alternative, so IE cant lose the market share that doesn't use third party browsers, and wont loose the market share that doees, cos if they were going to move, they'd have gone to ff.

Re:Safari Really Annoys Me (1)

astrosmash (3561) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532361)

Safari/Win32 serves two purposes:
  1. It allows web developers to verify that their web sites work with Safari, which is important to both the OS X and iPhone platforms since most developers don't have an extra Mac kicking around for testing. It's clear that Safari/Win32 was designed to render as close as possible to the native OS X version as possible, right down to the font rendering.
  2. It allows people who are curious about OS X to try out a fundamental OS X application, and in that sense you'd want that experience to be as authentic as possible. If Apple was serious about challenging IE and Firefox on Windows they would've developed a Windows web browser, but obviously not what they're trying to do. It's simply about increasing OS X exposure to those who are curious.

1M downloads != 1M users (4, Insightful)

brundlefly (189430) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532237)

Nobody can know for sure, but many suspect that this isn't one million accountants and ebayers downloading Safari. It's more likely a combination of curious iPhone developers, eager Apple fanboys, and a bunch of your average browser-tier developers.

No story here.

Apples extra spice ... (3, Interesting)

SplatMan_DK (1035528) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532251)

The reason Safari for Windows might actually be a serious competitor on the browser market, is because Apple has something many others have not: Talented GUI oriented developers who can add that extra "spice" that will make ordinary people actually switch IE7 with something else.

Think about it. People with technical insight choose FF/Opera over IE because it offers them features that IE doesn't have. People without technical insight just don't care about these features - they don't use plug-ins, skins, or strange shortcut keys.

If I were to convince "regular non-technical users" like my mother, aunt, neighbour, etc. to switch to a non-IE browser, I would need something that appealed to them. Fancy plug-ins ad strange/smart hotkeys is not what they are looking for - they want a sleek, graphically appealing and (for them) intuitive user experience.

Apple is in the business of delivering that EXACT experience! Not too many fancy settings and details, just the sleek and appealing interface that common people understand.

If Apple play their cards right, they could be a serious challenge.

Personally I'll stick with FF (on all 3 platforms I use) but I can certainly understand why the less technical "common users" would fall for the "Apple experience". They are really good at adding that extra GUI spice ...

Windows version crashes (1)

zymano (581466) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532253)

When trying to use passwords Safari will crash.

Their site says the fastest browser but i really doubt that.

Re:Windows version crashes (1)

SplatMan_DK (1035528) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532303)

Lets wait with the "it crashes when I use function XYZ" panic until it is officially released. An unreleased product is bound to have lots of errors.

Downloads aren't users (4, Insightful)

caseih (160668) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532261)

I downloaded Safari right away just because it was there. I ran it, thought, oh that's nice. Maybe good for testing browser compatibility some day. Then went back to Firefox. Same thing with everyone I know who downloaded it. Certainly Safari on windows will never be anyone's primary browser. But it will certainly find uses. Testing web pages, iphone development, and of course embedding the engine in iTunes (did it use IE up til now?). Jobs claimed Safari was the best web browser on all platforms. I call BS. Even almost all mac users I know use firefox or camino because they need features and capabilities that safari just doesn't have. As far as features go, Safari is at the very back of the pack (worst). Even IE 7 is much better in terms of extensions, core feature set. Safari for Windows is the Steve Jobs reality distortion field at its finest.

I do love how Safari for windows uses the nicer Cocoa font rendering. Really makes Windows' native font rendering look blocky and horrible. Does anyone know how to tweak freetype on linux to render the fonts closer to OS X? I already have hinting turned off and that helps, but the contrast of the fonts still isn't right (OS X fonts render a bit heavier, which I like on the screen).

I also personally don't mind the cocoa widgets either. Cocoa looks nice and is highly functional. That's all I care about. Although it definitely would look very out of place on Vista. But on XP, I think it's fine.

Re:Downloads aren't users (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532429)

I guess I'm a little different than most, I have firefox on my mac, but i only rarly use it if i can not view a page in Safari. I prefer the clean interface over the fancy gadgets. If I need a gadget I can always pull it up, but seriously, If i just need to browse the web I would rather have a faster/cleaner browser without all the extra baggage. The same reason I ran Firefox under windows, but now i have a better choice. not everyone wants gadgets in there web browsers, some people just want there web browser well, to browse web pages!

and in other news, 999,990 of those... (1)

dAzED1 (33635) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532267)

and in other news, 999,990 of those were mac users installing Safari on the Windows PCs they're forced to use as desktops as work. The other 10 people were simply bored, and slightly curious.

Oh great... (1)

popo (107611) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532273)

Yet another platform to test my CSS / javascript / DHTML / Ajax on...


Re:Oh great... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532539)

I agree, there are enough quirks already. Unless Safari for Windows renders exactly the same as Safari for OS X, which I doubt...

The other people downloading Safari 3.0 for Win... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532283)

The other people downloading Safari 3.0 for Win are the techs that provide support that have tried to get the user to switch to FireFox, and met resistance... Safari is another example that can be used to reinforce the "Listen, seriously, Explorer isn't the only Web Browser you can use.. Your computer won't go boom if you use something other than IE... See?" message I and others like me try to give our clients..

Options are good, we like to have options..

Downloads =! users (0, Redundant)

Coopjust (872796) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532285)

Downloads DOESN'T equal active users. Just because you download a browser, doesn't mean you're going to use it regularly, or even past the first time.

I myself grabbed it for some light web development. And while I've used Safari on the Mac (blazing fast), the Windows version was extremely slow. Within a few minutes (5 tabs, same as the ones in Firefox), it hit 300MB. And the Firefox was up to 140MB (a bloat by any standard), but it had been open over a day.

It may be a beta (and therefore has bugs), but I'm not using Safari actively, even though I downloaded it. I don't think it has enough compelling features to steal marketshare from IE yet.

A developers opinion (1)

wynler (678277) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532327)

As a web (among others) developer, having Safari on my machine is great.  I'll never use it except for testing my sites to make sure they'll look and function the same on a Mac.

It'll save me from having to pester friends with Macs to send me screenshots of the website and trying to fix it.  I now have access to all the major browsers on the same box.

Downloaded 3.0 and 3.0.1.  Safari will never be used as my browser, but I'm glad it's available on Windows as a development tool.

IF (-1, Redundant)

kaffiene (38781) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532331)

"If these downloads manifested into regular Safari users, then we just might have a third major browser on the Windows platform."

Yeah, and if your auntie had balls, she'd be your uncle.

Tough to count the curious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532337)

Downloaded Safari out of curiosity to my laptop. Used it or a couple of hours. It sucked. Removed it from my system. Better qestion is how many people are actually using the thig after 3 or 4 months.

A million? Doubtful (0)

Ided (978291) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532355)

Lets not forget that 5 minutes after it's initial release all the bugs that were found. Those were just people going back trying to download Safari again and hope it fixed the disastrous browsing experience they just had.

Not if it takes it from FF (1)

PlainBlack (594355) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532415)

The summary seems to automatically assume that the the people downloading and converting to safari are Internet Exploder users. It's more likely that they are alternative browser users like Firefox and Opera. The 75% that IE has left isn't likely to leave anytime soon simply because they either don't know that other browsers exist, what a browser is (the difference between IE and Outlook for example), or are too lazy to care.

iTunes bundle? (1)

charliehamsandwich (1116319) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532437)

One million downloads of Safari for Windows? My bet is that these were mostly curious users and that after the initial torrent, Safari downloads will taper off.

My guess is that Safari for Windows will mature as a beta and than become a part of the iTunes download bundle. I remember back a handful of years ago when I refused to put Quicktime on my system because it seemed lame/apple-y-obtrusive on my pristine Win2k box. Fast forward a few years, I've got an iPod, and iTunes, and along comes Quicktime with every iTunes download/update.

If Apple does the same thing with Safari as they did with Quicktime (i.e bundle it with iTunes), we could see a really large installed user base for WinSafari. And all the delicious Google ad search revenue that comes with it.

don't count my download (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19532489)

I've downloaded Safari, because as a web developer I find it convenient to see how my work renders on a mac without having to boot up a mac.

I'm all for Safari competing with FF and IE, but only if it respects the windows interface. It's a good browser interface for OSX, but on Windows it stands out, it's completely inconsistent with the rest of the windows interface and the only good reason for a design decision like that is to make mac users moving to windows a little more comfortable during the transition, or vice versa.

Apple's smug-arrogant attitude is funny when it manifests as a humourous TV spot or cinema ad, but when they let themselves start breaking unity of design then they need a spell on the naughty step.

Safari v. Firefox downloads comparison? (1)

cenonce (597067) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532503)

How long did it take the first version of Firefox to get to 1 million downloads as compared to Safari?

That may say something about how the general public feels about open source offerings v. closed source offerings outside of Microsoft. Note: I am not making any comparisons about the quality of Firefox v. Safari (I use both, I like both), so don't blast me off Slashdot...

I am just wondering what it says, if anything, about the general public's perspective.

Buggy As Hell...Sorry (2, Insightful)

blueZhift (652272) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532519)

Over a million downloads of Safari for Windows probably means a whole lot of disappointed people at this point. I personally have had nothing but trouble with Safari, textless menus and lockups. I finally gave up and uninstalled the thing. I know that betas are test versions, but honestly, Safari for Windows feels more like alpha class software right now. The general public should not be using this right now. I think they rushed this out in this bad condition because Steve Jobs wanted to talk about it and Safari as the host for 3rd party apps on the iPhone. It's always a bad thing when software is released to the public too soon in order to satisfy some marketing goal.

Half a million downloaded it... (5, Funny)

Thabenksta (125165) | more than 6 years ago | (#19532543)

Then the same half a million downloaded it again the next day for the bug fixes.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account