Safari 4 Beta Tested, Gives IE7 a Sound Thrashing at JavaScript Performance

[Black Hades]

I agree that this is a bit to obscure of a test, no name no specific method mentioned... wouldnt use a browser just for java's sake.
I'll stick with my Opera, it let me down at rendering pages far lesser times than Firefox did. And it has all I need.

 

[Haytch]

The latest safari vs the outdated Ie7 ? Anyways . . . . Lets ignore the irrelevant statistic.
The latest safari is better in javascript performance. Is that all ?

 

[iStink]

Apple already had their UI. Google Chrome came out and introduced tabs at the top.

I mean, FFS the old tabs were used by everyone and their mother. IE, FF, and Safari all had tabs situated right below the address bar.

Lets not get into who started what here... Bias posting at its best.

no no no, it's not just that. Look at safari 3, now look at google chrome, now look a safari 4's changes. They completely ripped off google chrome in so many more things than just where the tabs go.

Apple is trying to stick it to Palm for copying iphone finger gestures on the palm pre, all the meanwhile they are copying google chrome to a T.

 

[btarunr]

The latest safari vs the outdated Ie7 ? Anyways . . . . Lets ignore the irrelevant statistic.
The latest safari is better in javascript performance. Is that all ?

The Latest Safari vs. the current market leader. Relevant statistic. If you want a more even competition, compare the latest Safari vs. the latest IE8 beta.

 

[tomkaten]

I've been using Minefield for about four months now. Currently it's FF 3.1 b2. It's lightning fast and it's... Firefox really (addons and everything else that takes the web to the next level).

They keep raving about Safari's JS speed, but noone mentions the fact that it's very limited and that it installs more crapware than most users care for. I, for one, swore to never touch any software that secretly installs updaters and shit without giving me the choice to opt out of it. I'm afraid Chrome and Safari fall into that category.

If you want crazy JS speed + full functinality, give FF 3.1 b2 a try. It's rock solid and with 4 or 5 vital addons it's still the best web experience around.

My 2 cents...

 

[Ravenas]

The latest safari vs the outdated Ie7 ? Anyways . . . . Lets ignore the irrelevant statistic.
The latest safari is better in javascript performance. Is that all ?

Actually these stats also show that Safari not only pounded IE7, but it dominated IE8, Opera (which keeps getting more and more outdated), and Chrome. FF was lagging behind as well, even more is the fact that Safari 4 beat out Minefield, which is a beta platform off FF.

I'm pretty sure all of these stats are pretty damn relevant in one way or another. At this point I doubt you even read the article.

You took your preconceived bias and posted what you thought the article said. Now go read it and tell me that you already read it!

Javascript load times mean a lot, more than a lot actually. JS load times determine how fast just about any general webpage is going to load.

 

[Ravenas]

I've been using Minefield for about four months now. Currently it's FF 3.1 b2. It's lightning fast and it's... Firefox really (addons and everything else that takes the web to the next level).

They keep raving about Safari's JS speed, but noone mentions the fact that it's very limited and that it installs more crapware than most users care for. I, for one, swore to never touch any software that secretly installs updaters and shit without giving me the choice to opt out of it. I'm afraid Chrome and Safari fall into that category.

If you want crazy JS speed + full functinality, give FF 3.1 b2 a try. It's rock solid and with 4 or 5 vital addons it's still the best web experience around.

My 2 cents...

The only "crapware" that Safari installs, which is optional before you even click the download of download Safari + Quicktime or Safari alone. No tool bars, no crap.

It doesn't secretly install updates either, every update released is shown to you, and then asks if you want to download it.

 

[Hayder_Master]

if this program have good accessories like firefox im goona use it

 

[pr0n Inspector]

good JS performance won't change the fact that Safari is a crappy browser with little features and primitive functionalities.

 

[Ravenas]

good JS performance won't change the fact that Safari is a crappy browser with little features and primitive functionalities.

How does Safari 4 have minimal features and primitive functionalities? Site things that make what you said true... Give us a hands on of someone talking about how it has little features and primitive functionalities. I would really love to see that hands on.

What's more, I can find 150 features, none of which would be categorized as "little features" or "primitive functionalities".

http://www.apple.com/safari/features.html

 

[tomkaten]

Ravenas, do you work for Apple ?

Yes, Apple is a really trustworthy company, especially after pushing unrequested "updates". You know the old Safari story...

Apple has made it incredibly easy--the default, even--for users to install ride along software that they didn't ask for, and maybe didn't want. This is wrong, and borders on malware distribution practices.

It's wrong because it undermines the trust that we're all trying to build with users. Because it means that an update isn't just an update, but is maybe something more. Because it ultimately undermines the safety of users on the Web by eroding that relationship. It's a bad practice and should stop.

That Mozilla quote pretty much sums it up.

And your second point... Safari lacks so many features, it's not even funny. No mouse gestures, no super drag and drop, no ad blocker (easily fixed with resident proxies though, but they eat up memory). The font rendering is all wrong. No download manager (multithreaded one at least).

It's fast, I'll give you that, but feature-wise it's still Stone Age material.

 

[h3llb3nd4]

man safari4 is giving me grief already! going back to firefox!