Hacker News Reader

Comment by kahlonel | Hacker News Reader

I, on the other hand, appreciate Safari not being an utter resource-hog and a battery drainer. I don't need all these shiny features. I'm ok with "dumbed down" static sites.

View on HN

Exactly this. I've tried Chromium, I've tried Firefox. Safari is simply much faster.

From TFA:

> I'll add a banner asking the user to switch to a more modern browser, like Chrome or Firefox, if he's on a Mac.

I believe the phrase is "good luck with that". Is the author's site genuinely more compelling than the user's choice of browser?

Exactly. If the site doesn’t work in Safari, I don’t need it. If you are designing a site for my consumption, you damn well better be designing it to be usable on my devices. Especially my iOS and iPadOS devices which account for about 70% of my tech use.

How odd to demand anything of a free content producer, no?

There was a free concert in a park of my city recently. I wouldn’t mind hearing it, but traffic and parking was too much of a pain in the ass so I stayed away.

How odd that I would let things that irritate me get in the way of hearing a free concert.

I'm not sure I understand you correctly, but I think it would be a more apt comparison to complain about the songs performed at the free concert rather than all the externalities of it. If that's your complaint, then I stand by my observation: how odd...

Safari on osx makes requests to URLs you type in but before you actually hit enter.

No doubt this makes it feel faster

I've got that turned off. Still much, much faster than anything Chromium-based.

Wait until you try the new Safari Tech Preview. It seems significantly faster. So far, I don't hate the new UI, but I need to add more tabs.

Is it really an issue for you? I have an android phone and run Firefox and I get 2-3 days of battery life.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com