The Mac Observer

Skip navigational links

You're viewing an article in TMO's historic archive vault. Here, we've preserved the comments and how the site looked along with the article. Use this link to view the article on our current site:
Safari for Windows Beta Hammered for Being Beta

Safari for Windows Beta Hammered for Being Beta

by , 1:25 PM EDT, June 13th, 2007

Apple released a public beta of Safari 3 for Windows XP and Vista on Monday, and it didn't take long for people to find problems with it. Not long after that, people were calling Apple to task for releasing beta software is that, exhibited problems rendering along with potential security related issues.

So far, most of the complaints relate to security issues. Security researcher Aviv Raff found a potential security flaw right away. He commented "A first glance at the debugger showed me that this memory corruption might be exploitable. Although, I'll have to dig more to be sure of that. Again, this is just a beta version.. But, don't you hate those pathetic claims?"

David Maynor, another researcher, was able to produce a memory corruption error. "I'd like to note that we found a total of 6 bugs in an afternoon, 4 DoS and 2 remote code execution bugs," he said.

Security researcher Thor Larholm found what he called a "zero day exploit" within a couple of hours. He said "I downloaded and installed Safari for Windows 2 hours ago, when I started writing this, and I now have a fully functional command execution vulnerability, triggered without user interaction simply by visiting a web site."

Of course, finding flaws like these now is preferable to finding them after Apple releases the final version of Safari 3 for Windows. The problem is that while researchers sift through Safari looking for bugs and security holes, some users have forgotten that "beta" means the software is still in development, and issues are bound to crop up.

Blogger News Network offered a typical reaction to Safari 3 for Windows beta. Nancy Reyes wrote "Living here in the Philippines, we get 'virus' infections all the time on our computer. So I was happy to hear that yesterday, Apple Corporation released a new webbrowser for windows systems [sic]. Ah, wonderful. Maybe this one will keep my computer from getting sick."

Relying on applications that are still clearly in a development and testing phase is likely to reveal problems ranging from stability and performance issues, and leading all the way to security related flaws. Publicly available beta software is so common now that many people seem to have forgotten beta doesn't mean "finished and ready for every day use."

Observer Comments

Show: Subjects Only | Full Comments
Close Name:Guest
Subject: It's Beta inflation!

It's Beta inflation! Some companies have gone so long and so public with Betas that people have started thinking of them as final releases.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Not even beta quality

"...some users have forgotten that "beta" means the software is still in development, and issues are bound to crop up"

Software going out for a public beta should be basically release ready and out there to find the odd missed bug or the rare bugs that are easier to track down with the increased user base compared to an internal beta.

This software is alpha quality (or maybe an early build internal beta) - the basics are in place but the quality ranges from buggy as hell to unstable/unusable.

Close Name:Engine Joe Posts: 413 Joined: 29 Jun 2004
Subject: Oh, please...

Alpha releases are downright unusable. Safari for Windows isn't unusable.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Web vs Desktop Beta

I think a major part of the problem is Web vs Desktop Beta.

Many web "apps" are constantly in beta (al la Google), although they are fairly polished. Web apps can do this, beacuse they can be updated on demand, with no need to run an update, or download a patch.

Desktop apps on the other hand need to be updated. So beta should be treated as a phase, before the full, stable app can be downloaded.

I think that the perpetual web beta has confused the term in peoples minds (given that a much larger portion of the population use the web than are beta testers for software on the desktop).

Maybe Apple should have released it as an alpha? Maybe it should have gone out to developers only? (But of course, giving Safari for Windows to a bunch of Mac Geeks is probably not that fruitful). Well just have to wait and see how fast patches/updates are available.

Close Name:Guest
Subject:

I think the major issue here is that several exploits were found within hours of the public release. Is this truly shoddy programming on Apple's part?

Quote
Guest wrote:
"...some users have forgotten that "beta" means the software is still in development, and issues are bound to crop up"

Software going out for a public beta should be basically release ready and out there to find the odd missed bug or the rare bugs that are easier to track down with the increased user base compared to an internal beta.

This software is alpha quality (or maybe an early build internal beta) - the basics are in place but the quality ranges from buggy as hell to unstable/unusable.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Re: Not Even Beta

You're right, it's not beta quality. It's better. I've been using it for 2 days now, on a Quad G5, a G5 iMac, a Macbook C2D under both MacOSX and Windows XP, and a friend installed it yesterday on an HP laptop running Vista. My friend hasn't used it that much, but she did go to all the websites she usually visits (including her bank) and has not a single issue with it. In fact she loves it compared to her alternatives. I haven't any issues with it either.

What's your problem with it? Got a web site that doesn't work well with it? Tell us. I'm sure there are some out there but I've not come across one yet.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Beta is as beta does

I have been running Safari 3 on both OS X and WinXP for 1.5 days. Overall, the Windows version is definitely rougher but certainly at beta level. I am certain that the typical issues will be worked out.

So far, I like it. While I have FF, IE, Camino and Omniweb around me, Safari is refreshingly simple which is why I keep coming back to it on the Mac.

The Windows version will freeze with some Flash animations - I have yet to find a problem with the Mac version.

It says "beta", treat it that way.

Close Name:macslut Posts: 61 Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Subject: Here's why Apple did right...and why idiots are ruining it.

This is *BETA*. It comes with warnings. It is publicly available, but it was announced and released at a DEVELOPER's conference.

Safari for Windows is perfectly fine as a beta development browser.

This means that you don't even install it on a mission critical machine or use it for critical tasks specifically including instances where stability and security are an issue.

A bunch of idiots who don't understand what beta means are ruining it for web developers who want beta browsers to be available so that they can make sure their web development is compatible with new browsers. The same is true for 3rd party add-on developers.

Safari for Windows greatly exceeds this minimum threshold for being beta release worthy.

Close Name:Sir Harry Flashman Posts: 792 Joined: 08 Feb 2007
Subject: A question for you programmers on this blog

How much of the security problems with the Windows version is Safari related and how much is Windows related?

That being said I think Apple should have released the beta version of Safari under the Apple Developers Program. It is going to get a bad reputation out there when any Tom, Dick, or Harriet can download it and have beta related problems.

I installed it on my HP and it works okay. I will get a chance to test it more in a few days.



Last edited by Sir Harry Flashman on Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:40 pm; edited 1 time in total
Reply | Quote
Close Name:Guest
Subject:

Safari 3 for Mac is much better than for Win. I am using it on Mac without any big problems (just some widgets are not working) otherwise I like it. I love new search, because in old one it was very hard to locate what is actually highlighted.
But on the windows it different story, because on my PC I can't see any letters in Safari or in the pages, no menus, nothing. On Apple discussions this issue has over 7000 views in main thread and couple other threads with 300+ views in two days, which means that lot of people has the same problem. I have to say that if it can't get even properly installed on significant number of computers it should not be called beta, because its very disappointing for people.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Yes

To me, it finally removed one of the main reasons why I have used Firefox as a second browser; some buttons I need to click on to log in to one of my banks, were of that bulby, 3D-kind and the digits on them didn't show! Since those digits changed all the time, I had to open the page in FF to see the digits, but in Safari 3 I can see them:)
So far, it seems to be faster as well, both on my iMac and my iBook, but it seems like the fans on the iMac starts to work hard after a while using Safari. I am not 100% sure it is related, but...

That said; it is really weird how some people get upset when Apple claims its OS is more secure than Windows. Maybe that has changed, finally, after a zillion patches and with Vista, but who in their right mind can deny that there has been a security problem with Windows and not with the Mac?
I can accept that all OSes are vulnerable but what with ActiveX, the Registry and how all applications could write into it and I don't know what, it seems to me that they just made some foolish decisions securitywise up at Redmond, which were Gefundenes FreЯen for hackers and crackers and script kiddies alike.

So, now they find some vulnerabilities in Mac OS and I am sure there will be more. And then they start to crow; What didn't we say!? What didn't we say!? And the chorus will grow so overwhelming that anyone may doubt, especially since there is obviously a trend among old and new Mac-users trying hard not to appear as a "fanboy". Thus one must show some scepticism:)

Well, I know how it is. It has happened time and time again that I have become convinced; PCs must be just as good or even better, just because I have been shouted down so many times, if I have been foolish enough to say that I actually like the Mac better than a Windows-PC. So then I have tried PCs agaian, either because I've had to or just because - and each time I am left with the same sensation: Ha! How on Earth can some people claim that this works just as well as a Mac?

OK, so if you've built your own PC and if you're a geek who's been finetuning the machine and the software and if you're really, really careful and smart etc. and if you spend hundreds and thousands of dollars in annual upgrades. But I am sorry; for an average user like me, I'd like a car which just starts. I am not interested in opening the hood and stand over the innards hours after hours...

So, to round it off - let us hope Safari will go out of beta soon and then these people will probably relax and find other things to shout about, like hacking a MacBook now and then:)

Close Name:Staggie Posts: 21 Joined: 06 May 2004
Subject: It sure has a Beta-sized memory leak on XP

I had Safari open in the background with four open tabs and it was using just under 500 MB of memory. I like being able to use Safari on my work system, but for now it's just not ready.
I think a beta to Developers only would have made a lot more sense, per Sir Harry. It's just not at the point that is should be available to the general public, even as a beta.

Close Name:Biff Posts: 1479 Joined: 08 Apr 2004
Subject:

Quote
Staggie wrote:
I had Safari open in the background with four open tabs and it was using just under 500 MB of memory. I like being able to use Safari on my work system, but for now it's just not ready.
I think a beta to Developers only would have made a lot more sense, per Sir Harry. It's just not at the point that is should be available to the general public, even as a beta.
And when you closed, I dunno, lets say 3 of those tabs, did the memory usage not drop somewhat proportionally? Or alternatively, did the memory usage continue to increase without you opening any more pages? If not, then its probably not a memory leak and Safari is just a memory hog at the moment. If it is a huge memory leak, both Apple and I would appreciate it if you could report it to them using the Bug button. It sounds like you can reproduce it pretty easily, so include those steps in your bug report. Believe me, they will be very happy if you found a memory leak for them to fix.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Disappointed

Yes, I know it is beta. So is Boot Camp and that works well... Windows Safari 3 beta is, for me, totally unusable. It crashes when authenticating to our proxy server and it fails to load our protected intranet pages.

I'm an Apple fan but Apple screwed up big time in releasing Safari for Windows in its current state. It will end up being a PR disaster and may well taint Safari for Windows forever.

Close Name:LaurieF -   TMO Forum Mod Posts: 3547 Joined: 15 Jun 2001
Subject:

Caveat utilitor. For you it's unusable, sure. For many it is not. Probably, and this is the whole point of beta testing, the squeaky wheels will get the oil. Those people who have no problems probably won't report that it's working fine. Did you tell Apple that Boot Camp is without a glitch?

I suggest you report the problems you are having to Apple, so that it knows about it. Apple will love you for it.

PR disaster? taint Safari for Windows forever? Have you been taking your hyperbole pills again?



Last edited by LaurieF on Wed Jun 13, 2007 7:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
Reply | Quote
Close Name:Guest
Subject: i don't know how you could get to this conclusion

I've been using it on a Windows PC and on my Mac and I haven't seen anything wrong with either. I haven't had any crashes. My text is NOT blurry and all the features that I used in 2.0 work in 3.0 so far. So either you have a lot of extra crap from 3rd party vendors installed or maybe you need to run a diagnostic program on your computer. Believe me I've seen really bad beta's but Safari 3.0 isn't one of them, not even close.

Close Name:Guest
Subject:

Quote
Guest wrote:
"...some users have forgotten that "beta" means the software is still in development, and issues are bound to crop up"

Software going out for a public beta should be basically release ready and out there to find the odd missed bug or the rare bugs that are easier to track down with the increased user base compared to an internal beta.

This software is alpha quality (or maybe an early build internal beta) - the basics are in place but the quality ranges from buggy as hell to unstable/unusable.


Can you direct me to a relevant RFC or ISO standard that backs up your assertion? Or is this just your opinion?

Close Name:gslusher Posts: 2088 Joined: 13 Nov 2002
Subject: Not just developers

Quote
Sir Harry Flashman wrote:


That being said I think Apple should have released the beta version of Safari under the Apple Developers Program. It is going to get a bad reputation out there when any Tom, Dick, or Harriet can download it and have beta related problems.


That might not get it really tested under Windows. One of the big problems Windows applications have is the mind boggling array of CPUs, graphics cards, sound cards, etc. that are running Windows. The only way to really test it is to let a lot of people with a wide variety of hardware use it. It will also more likely show up problems that arise from user errors--we ordinary folks are more likely to make such errors than developers.

Betas should go to the user community, not just experts.

Close Name:daemon Posts: 344 Joined: 17 May 2007
Subject: Safari

I used Safari on Windows XP today. I have to say, I didn't notice any difference in safari's speed over internet explorer. I loaded in to each www.wotmania.com, www.youtube.com, video.google.com, and www.tomshardware.com on different tabs (I normally surf with between 5 to 10 browser windows open) and found that they each seemed just as responsive as the other. I checked my memory load and noticed one strange thing, IE had 68 megs of memory used and safari had 140 megs of memory used. As far as looks go, safari looked like it had all the text bold face compared to IE's normal, which aethetically didn't please me, and it seemed to show colors darker than IE. As far as features go, like all non IE XP browsers it wasn't able to take advantage of the premium extentions of exchange server 2003's web interface, and it lacked the capability to zoom in on a webpage, a feature that I have a huge love for in IE 7.0.

All in all, it's an alright browser, I don't think I'll use it much tho.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: Perhaps it's that slick Apple advertising blurb....

Perhaps it's that slick Apple advertising blurb that makes people overlook the fact that it's beta.

"Safari has always been the fastest browser on the Mac and now it’s the fastest browser on Windows, loading and drawing web pages up to twice as fast as Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 and up to 1.6 times faster than Mozilla Firefox 2."

Sure, the word BETA is up there, but Apple makes it look so good that you think it's a finished product without any bugs.

Sometimes the Apple hype machine is too slick for its own good!

Close Name:Bosco Posts: 1002 Joined: 03 Jun 2002
Subject: Is it a Windows problem?

Quote
Sir Harry Flashman wrote:
How much of the security problems with the Windows version is Safari related and how much is Windows related?


None. The browser basically has a few tasks. The first is to communicate with remote servers. For this, it uses the platform's TCP/IP stack. Expect that stack to be pretty robust because if it wasn't, it would exploited routinely for everything. The second task is to parse the HTML code returned by the server. The third is to display the pages and interact with the user. Exploitable code usually suffers from one of two problems: null (or garbage) pointer dereferencing and (a special case of the first) array dereferencing out of bounds. These kinds of problems creep in when programmers aren't cautious, consistent, and thorough.

Frankly, most programmers (especially C wizards) aren't defensive enough and even see defensive programming as being a giant programming pussy. That's the best way to describe it. It's why the idea of millions of eyes from open source or pair programming for agile development are not guaranteurs of quality. These processes reinforce common wisdom, not best practices.

It's also why I see development environments like REALbasic that make it difficult for the programmer to make those errors (or insulate against their effects by having checks against such errors embedded in the frameworks) creating more reliable products. When you work at a higher level of abstraction, you avoid lots of potential security problems. Performance doesn't have to take a significant hit if you know what you're doing and if you can isolate performance specific code in plugins written in C. That also isolates your potential security problems.

Close Name:Sir Harry Flashman Posts: 792 Joined: 08 Feb 2007
Subject: Gott a disagree

Quote
gslusher wrote:
That might not get it really tested under Windows. One of the big problems Windows applications have is the mind boggling array of CPUs, graphics cards, sound cards, etc. that are running Windows. The only way to really test it is to let a lot of people with a wide variety of hardware use it. It will also more likely show up problems that arise from user errors--we ordinary folks are more likely to make such errors than developers.

Betas should go to the user community, not just experts.


The hoi poli won't do "testing" and they won't report back to Apple. They may try it and if it doesn't work they will at the very least stop using it, but will probably bad mouth it to all and sundry. The Windows software developers are another story.

But yeah, the myriad of Windows box configurations is a problem.

Close Name:gslusher Posts: 2088 Joined: 13 Nov 2002
Subject:

Quote
daemon wrote:
I used Safari on Windows XP today. I have to say, I didn't notice any difference in safari's speed over internet explorer. I loaded in to each www.wotmania.com, www.youtube.com, video.google.com, and www.tomshardware.com on different tabs (I normally surf with between 5 to 10 browser windows open) and found that they each seemed just as responsive as the other.


Unfortunately, that's not a good way to test browser speed, as it depends very much upon the Internet response, which can change from second to second. The best way to test browsers is to load pages from your hard drive. One way to come close to this is to:

1. Clear the browser's cache.

2. Load a fairly complicated web page, but not one that has dynamic content (e.g., ads that change every few seconds). Do not use a site like YouTube, which does change every time you access it.

3. Close that page and quit the browser. (Also quit any other applications you have running.)

4. Open the browser and go to the SAME page, precisely--use the history menu.

What this does is to load all the images, CSS, javascripts, etc., into the cache. When the page is loaded a second time, your browser should get all that from the cache, rather than downloading it.

An even better way would be to download an entire page, including all images and other stuff, then clear the cache, quit and relaunch the browser, and open the page you downloaded, from the hard drive, not from the Internet.

Close Name:doogie Posts: 17 Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Subject: Haven't Tried it on Windows ...

... but I'm liking it on my MBP.

I really like the new Find command, the faster speed and spell check in text boxes! I haven't found any problems yet, but I haven't been trying to break it. I've simply been using it. It works.

I wish it hadn't broken Acid Search, but I imagine that this will be fixed. I use it all the time, so I hope it's fixed soon!

Close Name:Guest
Subject: overloaded claims will get you burned

The problem arises when a company tells the public its the "best browser available". First of all thats subjective. Second of all, if you want to make the beta argument which is correct, then is Jobs reffering to a "beta" as being the best browser or the current stable version being safari 2?

The more Apple enters into the technical landscape of applications that are cross platform, spewing loaded words, showing cutesy pictures or advertisements aren't going to get you by.

Close Name:LaurieF -   TMO Forum Mod Posts: 3547 Joined: 15 Jun 2001
Subject:

We're doomed, Captain Mainwaring, we're doomed!

Bloody troll - what's your point?

I'm a software developer. I do a lot of unit testing, because I like a quiet life. But there's a point at which I can test no further, because I've exhausted all the possible (and impossible) things that can go wrong. At that point I pass it over to the testers, and there follows a number of (hopefully few) "D'oh" moments. I go back, fix the problem up, and it goes back to the testers with promises on both sides of beer for failure. That's how the Software Development Life Cycle works.

This is a beta test. It says so when you download it. Jobs said it's Beta - that's a fact. He said it's the best browser available - that's marketing.

Get a grip.

Close Name:coaten Posts: 3071 Joined: 10 Oct 2001
Subject:

Quote
LaurieF wrote:
We're doomed, Captain Mainwaring, we're doomed!

Bloody troll - what's your point?

I'm a software developer. I do a lot of unit testing, because I like a quiet life. But there's a point at which I can test no further, because I've exhausted all the possible (and impossible) things that can go wrong. At that point I pass it over to the testers, and there follows a number of (hopefully few) "D'oh" moments. I go back, fix the problem up, and it goes back to the testers with promises on both sides of beer for failure. That's how the Software Development Life Cycle works.

This is a beta test. It says so when you download it. Jobs said it's Beta - that's a fact. He said it's the best browser available - that's marketing.

Get a grip.


You know, in all my years of watching Dad's Army, it had never occured to me that Captain "Mannering" would be spelled in what I assume is an old-English form. But of course, it is!

Oh, and yes, it's a beta, dude... get over it.

Close Name:Intruder -   TMO Mac Specialist Posts: 3149 Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Subject: RE: overloaded claims will get you burned

You mean like Bill Gates claiming that Vista is "dramatically more secure than any other operating system released"?

Those kinds of overloaded claims?

If you can't see marketing for what it is, then there really is no hope for you.

Close Name:Terrin Posts: 414 Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Subject:

I have mixed feelings on that. Mac users understand the concept of a Beta. I am using Safari 3 on my Mac, and it solves a bunch of minor issues with the previous version, so I am glad I did not have to wait. Especially when I have no known bugs. I am also running a four year old Mac.

I might agree with you about releasing it as a Windows Beta. However, I think the problem is more the way Apple released it. It is already marketing it as the best and fastest browser. Jobs should have said Apple intends for it to be the best and fastest browser when released. Apple also should make it more clear when people are downloading Safari exactly what Beta means. Many people do not know. Apple should also make it more clear that many of the plugins are needed to make the browser functional.

For what it is worth, I installed it painlessly on my girlfriend's XP machine. The only issue was I had to install some plugins. However, she has been using it exclusively since Monday, and hasn't complained of any bugs yet. It is also interesting to note that she is studying online for the Nursing Exam using Kaplan. Firefox had issues using some of Kaplan's calculator functions, so much so that she had to use Explorer instead. Safari has not had the Firefox problems.


Quote
Sir Harry Flashman wrote:
How much of the security problems with the Windows version is Safari related and how much is Windows related?

That being said I think Apple should have released the beta version of Safari under the Apple Developers Program. It is going to get a bad reputation out there when any Tom, Dick, or Harriet can download it and have beta related problems.

I installed it on my HP and it works okay. I will get a chance to test it more in a few days.

Close Name:daemon Posts: 344 Joined: 17 May 2007
Subject:

Quote
gslusher wrote:

Unfortunately, that's not a good way to test browser speed, as it depends very much upon the Internet response, which can change from second to second. The best way to test browsers is to load pages from your hard drive. One way to come close to this is to:


Oh, you're completely correct, I mean, whenever I browse the Internet I always want last week's macobserver page and I don't want the current news, just stuff I've already read. /sarcasm

Quote

1. Clear the browser's cache.

2. Load a fairly complicated web page, but not one that has dynamic content (e.g., ads that change every few seconds). Do not use a site like YouTube, which does change every time you access it.

3. Close that page and quit the browser. (Also quit any other applications you have running.)

4. Open the browser and go to the SAME page, precisely--use the history menu.

What this does is to load all the images, CSS, javascripts, etc., into the cache. When the page is loaded a second time, your browser should get all that from the cache, rather than downloading it.

An even better way would be to download an entire page, including all images and other stuff, then clear the cache, quit and relaunch the browser, and open the page you downloaded, from the hard drive, not from the Internet.

Close Name:gslusher Posts: 2088 Joined: 13 Nov 2002
Subject:

Quote
daemon wrote:
Quote
gslusher wrote:

Unfortunately, that's not a good way to test browser speed, as it depends very much upon the Internet response, which can change from second to second. The best way to test browsers is to load pages from your hard drive. One way to come close to this is to:


Oh, you're completely correct, I mean, whenever I browse the Internet I always want last week's macobserver page and I don't want the current news, just stuff I've already read. /sarcasm


Get rid of the sarcasm. It's unbecoming. The question is to test BROWSER speed, irrespective of the speed of your Internet connection. Loading random pages, especially without clearing the cache, tells you very little.

In a similar vein, when comparative speed tests are done on computers, standard tasks are used, like applying a Gaussian blur to a large image in Photoshop, sorting a large database, running a standard series of calculations, etc. When testing printer speeds, a set of standard pages is used.

It's about controlling variables--the fewer uncontrolled/unknown variables, the more accurate the test--the more it reflects the inherent speed of the software and/or hardware or whatever you're trying to test.

Close Name:daemon Posts: 344 Joined: 17 May 2007
Subject:

Quote
gslusher wrote:

Get rid of the sarcasm. It's unbecoming.


No.

Quote
The question is to test BROWSER speed, irrespective of the speed of your Internet connection.


Wait, are we talking about application load time here or user experience while browsing the internet? Because I thought the 2 times faster thing was supposed to be browsing the internet.

Quote
Loading random pages, especially without clearing the cache, tells you very little.


It's like you're trying to make sense, but failing.

Quote
In a similar vein, when comparative speed tests are done on computers, standard tasks are used, like applying a Gaussian blur to a large image in Photoshop, sorting a large database, running a standard series of calculations, etc. When testing printer speeds, a set of standard pages is used.

It's about controlling variables--the fewer uncontrolled/unknown variables, the more accurate the test--the more it reflects the inherent speed of the software and/or hardware or whatever you're trying to test.


You see, I think there's something you're missing here. I was testing the subjective speed of both browsers to me as I used them concurrently. Neither had the pages I was loading up cached.

Close Name:Guest
Subject:

Quote
Engine Joe wrote:
Alpha releases are downright unusable. Safari for Windows isn't unusable.


Um... I'm gonna have to disagree with your there Joe. Lot's of alpha software is usable. Beta are pre-final, just working out a few kinks. They shouldn't be riddled with security flaws. All the security flaws will have to be fixed, and this will introduce quite a bit of change to the code base before the final release goes out, thus introducing new bugs and probably some old ones as well.

Close Name:Guest
Subject:

Quote
LaurieF wrote:
This is a beta test. It says so when you download it. Jobs said it's Beta - that's a fact. He said it's the best browser available - that's marketing.


So which part is the lie? You gotta admit, he had a point. Call it the best if you believe its the best. But when it crashes and burns, you only have yourself to blame for the hype that made everyone point their fingers and laugh. Hah, hah (in my best Nelson).

Close Name:Guest
Subject:

Quote
Intruder wrote:
You mean like Bill Gates claiming that Vista is "dramatically more secure than any other operating system released"?

Those kinds of overloaded claims?

If you can't see marketing for what it is, then there really is no hope for you.


Because pointing your fingers at another offender alleviates you of all culpability. Just another instance of the inferiority complex of mac zealots thinking that criticism of Apple is promotion of Microsoft. Yeah, that was really our point dude, Vista is great. (that's sarcasm in case you can't see it for it is).

Close Name:acdc1174 Posts: 723 Joined: 16 Apr 2004
Subject: Memories are so (conveniently) short.

I am a big fan of Mozilla products, hence I use Camino and Firefox as much or more than I use Safari. But all these people howling at how unstable Safari is in one breath and exalting the virtues of Firefox in the next are either 1) relatively new to the world of non-MS web browsing, 2) purposefully disingeuous, or 3) stupid. I love Firefox. I am TRYING to love Camino...But it was a LONG, buggy, sometimes painful road for those programs to get where they are and they did so through WIDESPREAD public beta testing. That way, every flash video, porn site, online gaming, imbedded chat, graphics-intensive, sound intensve, web 2.0 (I hate tha phrase) site that could be thrown at them ACTUALLY got thrown at them. I now have Safari on my work machine...so far, so good. Not perfect, but not awful and I have no doubt that the updates will be many and frequent.

Close Name:Guest
Subject: So beta MUST mean buggy? TWADDLE-SPEAK says I.

What the cut-throat attitude towards beta software has done in the Windows sphere has been to give rise to better-baked betas.

The days of the "Hey! It didn't kill my system when I started it! PUSH IT OUT!" betas have been dead since the days of Windows 95.

If you're going to offer software on a platform with industrial strength threats, you have to do industrial strength QC.

Simply running it in a clean Windows VM on a mock Internet on your LAN and having it not kack Windows doesn't cut it.

Close Name:Guest
Subject:

Welcome to the real (PC) world. We don't pussyfoot around. Either you deliver the goods, or it's end of the line for you. If you can't compete in an open environment, don't whine when we beat your crappy pre-alpha "beta" release into the ground.

Close Name:LaurieF -   TMO Forum Mod Posts: 3547 Joined: 15 Jun 2001
Subject:

Quite right. Hey, Apple, why don't you make your software as crappy as all the other stuff that's around?

Sigh.

Hey, anonymous troll, do you know for sure that Safari/Windows is rubbish, or are you just trying to compensate for your choice of computing platform? Have you investigated a large sample of the people who have downloaded Safari to find out whether the majority are happy or not? Have you tried it? did it work? did you find any problems? did you report them? (hint - it's in one of the drop-down menus)

No you didn't. You're a troll. You're being a prat. Go away.

Close Name:Guest
Subject:

Quote
LaurieF wrote:
Quite right. Hey, Apple, why don't you make your software as crappy as all the other stuff that's around?

Sigh.

Hey, anonymous troll, do you know for sure that Safari/Windows is rubbish, or are you just trying to compensate for your choice of computing platform? Have you investigated a large sample of the people who have downloaded Safari to find out whether the majority are happy or not? Have you tried it? did it work? did you find any problems? did you report them? (hint - it's in one of the drop-down menus)

No you didn't. You're a troll. You're being a prat. Go away.


SOMEBODY is surely compensating for his choice of platfrom (hint, it's the person that asks questions without having the answers himself). Oh well, I guess when your in the losing camp...

Close Name:Guest
Subject: OH NoEAS

aPPLe Fan Boys unite...god forbid infallable apple release a crappy product.

Oh wait...that's all they do.

DIAF.

Close Name:David Nelson -   TMO Staff Posts: 5407 Joined: 11 Jun 2001
Subject:

I was going say "Welcome to the 1990's" but this is even better. Now that Apple has has a browser of its own, we get OS wars and browser wars rolled into one! I can't wait to see where this goes.

Close Name:Guest
Subject:

Oops, wrong title for the article. We know it's a beta. Safari for Windows Beta Hammered for Being BUGGY

Close Name:LaurieF -   TMO Forum Mod Posts: 3547 Joined: 15 Jun 2001
Subject:

There seems to be a large misunderstanding as to what beta means.

Quote
Wikipedia wrote:
A beta version is the first version released outside the organization or community that develops the software, for the purpose of evaluation or real-world black/grey-box testing. The process of delivering a beta version to the users is called beta release.

The users of a beta version are said beta testers. They are usually customers or prospective customers of the organization that develops the software. They receive the software for free or for a reduced price, but act as free testers.

Beta versions test the supportability of the product, the go-to-market messaging (while recruiting Beta customers), the manufacturability of the product, and the overall channel flow or channel reach.

Beta version software is likely to be useful for internal demonstrations and previews to select customers, but unstable and not yet ready for release. Some developers refer to this stage as a preview, a prototype, a technical preview (TP) or as an early access. As the second major stage in the release lifecycle, following the alpha stage, it is named after the Greek letter beta, the second letter in the Greek alphabet.

Often this stage begins when the developers announce a feature freeze on the product, indicating that no more feature requirements will be accepted for this version of the product. Only software issues, or bugs and unimplemented features will be addressed.

Beta versions stand at an intermediate step in the full development cycle. Developers release either a closed beta or an open beta; closed beta versions are released to a select group of individuals for a user test, while open betas are to a larger community group, usually the general public. The testers report any bugs that they found and sometimes minor features they would like to see in the final version.


As to whether it is buggy, it's quite possible. It can be buggy (although I haven't had any problems) and be a beta at the same time - that's the point.



Last edited by LaurieF on Mon Jun 18, 2007 8:16 pm; edited 1 time in total
Reply | Quote
Close Name:David Nelson -   TMO Staff Posts: 5407 Joined: 11 Jun 2001
Subject:

Quote
LaurieF wrote:
There seems to be a large misunderstanding as to what beta means.


Thanks for pointing this out. People often think "beta" means the same thing as "release candidate" or "leaked copy of the golden master" and act surprised when it's unstable.

Close Name:gslusher Posts: 2088 Joined: 13 Nov 2002
Subject: Another opinion on why Apple released Safari for Windows

See Marc Zeedar's article on MacOpinion for an intriguing idea of what might be Apple's/Jobs' motivation behind Safari for Windows. A few tidbits:

"Apple isn't trying to create Windows software on Windows. Apple is creating Mac software on Windows. That's a very different thing.

"In a way, Apple doesn't care if people adopt their Windows software or not. Apple's software on Windows is meant to sell other things -- iPods, Macs, iPhones, AppleTVs. That's what this is really about."

"What Apple really wants is an easy way to let PC web developers make sure their sites are compatible with iPhones (and Macs and, eventually, maybe AppleTVs)."

"Steve Jobs knows exactly what he's doing. People already have cell phones. People already have PDAs and media players. But no one has a true handheld Internet device. Except Apple. Converging the three into one Must-Have is genius. (Think of the cell phone aspect as a mere Trojan Horse to get people to carry the Internet Device around with them -- that's the way Jobs looks at it, I'm sure.) But the content and web apps must be there and Steve just put out the tool to ensure that they will be. Brilliant."

See the article for more--it's really good.

Comment on this Article


You cannot edit your comments.   You cannot delete your comments.

Comments are currently closed. Please email the author instead.


Recent Headlines - Updated July 5th

Fri, 10:29 AM
News - Apple Warns of Learning Interchange Security Breach
7:30 AM
News - Happy Fourth of July!
Thu, 6:07 PM
TMO Scoop - Psystar Moves to Drop Bankruptcy Ahead of Apple Legal Battle
5:37 PM
News - Uncomfirmed Reports Say Apple & Nvidia On The Outs
4:57 PM
News - Microsoft Sick Over Barf Ad
4:09 PM
Product News - KRK Ships R6 Passive Studio Monitor for Recording
3:45 PM
John Martellaro's Blog - Particle Debris (week ending 7/2)  Juiced, Joost and Goosed
3:12 PM
Product News - ExactScan 2 Pro Released
1:56 PM
Deal Brothers - Apple TV with 160GB Hard Drive:  $324.00 Delivered
12:46 PM
TMO Appearances - TMO Appearances Jeff Gamet Shares iPhone Apps on MacJury
10:41 AM
Product News - Art Text 2.2 Adds New Templates, Layer Options [Updated]
10:04 AM
Hot Forum Topic - Deciphering Mac Sales

The Mac Observer Reader Specials

  • __________
  • Buy Stuff, Support TMO!
  • Podcast: Mac Geek Gab
  • Podcast: Apple Weekly Report
  • TMO on Twitter!