Safari 9.1
developer.apple.com
developer.apple.com
Which leads to frustrating issues like webpages you can't read because someone checked in a bit of cide that stuffs up viewport scaling in at webpage that has style="overflow:hidden" in the body tag.
In other words, don't try to browse source code in OpenGrok.
So you get critical issues that don't get fixed for 3-6 months.
I'd love a Safari with a Chromium rendering engine, though. Except that Webkit is probably quite important to keep Chrome moving as fast as it does.
Here's an example: I just started chrome to read some articles here on HN and it already bypassed my email client in battery usage that was running for for a good bit longer.
Even worse is that a lot of apps nowadays decide to ship their own chromium in form of electron. Slack, Nylas, Atom - it's a battery disaster and makes these tools virtually unusable when I'm not plugged in.
I quite often use the automatic feature on my iPhone "open what you are reading in safari on the Mac Pro on your phone".
Then I leave work, commute home reading that, and then my Mac at home senses what's open in my phone's Safari and it's one click to open it on the big screen.
Safari is actually a pretty great browser, too. Faster than any other for me, more stable, less battery drain on laptops.
I still use Chrome and Firefox all day long too, but mainly for specific development chores, or to stay logged into services with my work account, while Safari is logged into my personal account.
Safari is, IMO, pretty great!
I'm not saying Chrome is a bad piece of software – it may or may not be but that's beside the point. What I'm saying is that when you and many others complain about browsers not being standards compliant, I'm willing to bet you mean de facto standards compliant – i.e. whatever Chrome dictates. Just like IE used to.
IE came up with all sorts of features that became de facto standards and in many cases these days an actual standard – @font-face anyone? Microsoft strong armed everyone else into submission until Google decided enough was enough. But it's not like Google did it out of the goodness of their hearts. They did it because their business depended on people having the ability to consume the web. They need the web to be great, because otherwise they couldn't have sold so many ads on: the web. So their products need features, and it just so happens that a lot of us got to benefit as well. Compatibility however, isn't really important. At least not while they control the market. What they say, goes. It'd be very difficult to create a site these days that won't work on Chrome, but it's not uncommon that you find disclaimers around the web say "optimized for Chrome" or worse: sites just not working at all on anything but Chrome.
Now they have done, and continue to do a lot to advance the state of the art. But so did IE back in the day. At least until the competition died out.
I for one am glad Safari is weird – I only wish there were more weirdos.
https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/releasenotes/General...
CSS variables are a great way to do theming and cross-scoped styling for Custom Elements and shadow DOM. Polymer's had a shim for this for a while, but native support is much faster and more flexible.
I also remember many years passing when IE6 stuck around like an unwelcome fart and we all hoped and prayed that it would die so we could move on. Rapid silent updates are the best thing that happened to the web for both the user and for developers. Chrome has many serious issues but it's update cycle isn't one of them.
I'm not sure what part of the dark ages you would like to return to. Are we talking pre-Chrome, pre-Firefox or the days when Netscape 4 roamed majestically across the Triassic plains?
I'd be ok without these, thanks. So many improvements turn out to be regressions in usability, causing and endless cycle of "now how do I do X today?"
The compatibility updates, well, I don't recall actually seeing a lot of those day to day. So, not a lot of benefit there either.
When I first heard about Chrome's secret updates I freaked out. Now I have used the chrome stable channel for years and have yet to see anything serious magically appear. It is king of disconcerting though to see the UI change. For example the new gray bookmark folders are still confusing my eyes. They disappear into the background for me.
Safari will remain relevant for a long time as long as it is the default browser on OS X and iOS.
I prefer Safari and don't care much for 6-week release cycle for Chrome and Firefox. If anything, they've gotten worse in stability since they switched to 6 weeks cycle for me.
I really love Safari for being just a really good browser. No 'sneaky OS' like Chrome (I don't need Chromes User management, thank you, and I'd much rather have my OS's context menus and font aliasing), and speedier, if you will, 'snappier' than Firefox, with its custom animations for every button and overall not very 'native' look and feel.
No, I want a browser that does what a browser should do; let me easily and speedily browse the web. Safari is great at that.
Except it isn't. Because it's non standard different way of handling things means it's a lot more work for Web developers to give the same experience they give in chrome to safari users. You get a dumbed down experience on safari as a result.
This seems like a regression to me. If some page is bugging me then I'd like to know which one it is so I can close it.
Not much of an alert, is it.
I find that I'm having to close a whole bunch of tabs in order to get pages to properly render. It'll work for a while then stop working again. Really quite annoying.
Doing so yielded much better performance:
https://blog.chromium.org/2016/01/a-faster-more-stable-chrom...