Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Safari 10.1

developer.apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 169 posts

Re: Safari 10.1

#111

Post by eridius »

pippy wrote: post #69
j_s wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this mean Safari is no longer the new IE? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9804533

Safari cleaned up their act in the last year: http://caniuse.com/ So far they're third going by the caniuse score, which is based on the features developers can use. Previously it last place. I don't think it was the developer backlash that forced Apple to start releasing TP previews of Safari and progressing features. I was likely more of a gap between major versions (Safari 9.x vs 10.x)

Safari has actually had WebKit Nightlies for many years. The Technical Preview is just basically a semi-stable beta track (as opposed to the Nightlies which are of course nightly builds).

Re: Safari 10.1

#112

Post by yeskia »

dawnerd wrote: post #81
mmanfrin wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Safari has consistently lagged behind Chrome and Firefox for functionality and standards compliance? And still does: http://caniuse.com

Chrome chrome dev tools still beats out Safari. If I'm going to use a browser to develop with I might as well use it all the time. I would love to switch to safari full time though. The battery gains are pretty nice.

Yeah, I left Safari when they rebuilt their dev tools. Should have stuck with the original WebKit dev tools.

Re: Safari 10.1

#113

Post by Strom »

Osmium wrote: post #66
melling wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safari was never the new IE. Microsoft took 5 years to go from IE6 to IE7, and 7 was really bad. IE completely stagnated, while being the default browser on a billion PC's. Then they were very slow to adopt HTML 5 features. Developers were supporting IE6 over 10 years after it was released. I doubt if many people are supporting 5 year old versions of Safari, let alone 10 year old versions.

> Microsoft took 5 years to go from IE6 to IE7, as 7 was really bad. IE completely stagnated, while being the default browser on a billion PC's. I feel like many people have forgotten how bad this really was, or simply weren't developing back then ...

Sure it was bad, but not for those specific 5 years. When IE6 came out it was a really good browser. The real problem was that people were still using IE6 when IE7 was already out, and even when IE9 was already out.

Re: Safari 10.1

#114

Post by Turing_Machine »

tbrock wrote: post #19

Biggest deal here (for me) is the HTML 5 download attribute. Without that you cannot name or provide an extension for files that are triggered for download.

That's actually already in the Webkit Nightly for macOS, and the task has been assigned for iOS. So... it's coming.

Re: Safari 10.1

#115

Post by [deleted] »

eridius wrote: post #32
tbrock wrote: post #19

Biggest deal here (for me) is the HTML 5 download attribute. Without that you cannot name or provide an extension for files that are triggered for download.

The server can do this with the Content-Disposition header. The `download` attribute just lets you trigger downloads (optionally with a filename) for URLs that otherwise wouldn't be downloaded.

[deleted]

Re: Safari 10.1

#116

Post by Turing_Machine »

AshleysBrain wrote: post #47
eridius wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The server can do this with the Content-Disposition header. The `download` attribute just lets you trigger downloads (optionally with a filename) for URLs that otherwise wouldn't be downloaded.

It's important to download JS-generated data as well, such as something in a Blob. You can't set a HTTP header on local content. The 'download' attribute lets the user "download" that without having to wastefully post it to a server and back.

To make what AshleysBrain said a little more concrete, imagine an image editor program (or a music editor, or a word processor, or whatever) that's written completely in client-side JS. There are starting to be a lot of these, actually. Without a working download attribute, the only way to save your work is to post it back to the server and redownload it. That is a slow, ugly, and unsatisfying hack to get data that's actually already present on the local machine.

Even IE 11 has a way to do this (non-standard, of course, but it does have a way to do it :-). Edge supports the standard way.

As I noted in a different post, though, support for the download attribute has already landed in Webkit Nightly for macOS, and is apparently being worked on for iOS.

Re: Safari 10.1

#117

Post by mrmondo »

I really wish I could have a bookmarks bar with just favicons showing in safari, it's something that's a key part of my workflow in Firefox and I actually really like safari and other than that and the annoying wide tabs thing which I'd probably get used to if use it more often.

Re: Safari 10.1

#118

Post by mitchty »

ebbv wrote: post #39
jbmorgado wrote: post #10

I don't understand the down votes since it's factual that you can't sign your plugins and distribute them inside Safari (AND ALSO keep them automatically updated) unless you pay Apple their anual fee. But well, fanboys will be fanboys.

People may be downvoting you because this meme that Safari needs open development of extensions is tired and they're sick of reading it.

Extensions in the gallery also didn't take a $100 membership until 2015. Needless to say not many people developed extensions then either. So blaming Safari membership as being the problem for extensions not being developed seems to also miss the history of extensions. Also you can install extensions outside of the gallery: https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari/releases

Re: Safari 10.1

#119

Post by xenadu02 »

mmanfrin wrote: post #73
macrael wrote: post #50

Safari is a great browser and I'm sometimes surprised at how huge Chrome's mindshare among developers is. Every time I try Chrome out on my Mac I end up running screaming back to Safari. Safari doesn't choke on tons of tabs, it doesn't eat battery and memory for breakfast, it's never started autoplaying videos when I open a tab in the background, it's got support for picture in picture video which is my most used new…

Because Safari has consistently lagged behind Chrome and Firefox for functionality and standards compliance? And still does: http://caniuse.com

I don't think it is fair to discount battery life, memory usage, and performance so heavily. Looking at the http://caniuse.com list there are plenty of features supported by Safari and not supported by Chrome including Audio Tracks, Video Tracks, ES6 modules, SVG Fonts, Animated PNG, CSS regions. Safari is actually the first to 100% ES6 compliance; Chrome sits at 89%.

I would also remind everyone that Google chose to fork Webkit to create Blink. They could have contributed their IndexDB engine to webkit at any time but chose not to. They could have contributed to the process isolation refactor but chose to do their own thing instead. They could have collaborated on JSCore instead of creating V8. That isn't wrong or right but it is the truth and it does mean duplicated effort.

Some of the features supported by Chrome are interesting to web-only developers I'm sure, but I don't want the browser on my mobile phone running service workers eating my battery in the background. With great power comes great responsibility and the JS-advertising-infested web has a really poor record on handling responsibility.

If you give a web developer media playback, they force auto-playing media on you.

If you give a web developer responsive layouts, they steal your ability to zoom.

If you give a web developer cookies, they inject tracking bugs to invade your privacy.

If you give a web developer service workers they will absolutely drain your battery.

(Yes not everyone but it will be widespread enough that browsers will be forced to invent countermeasures.)

Re: Safari 10.1

#120

Post by soperj »

xenadu02 wrote: post #119
mmanfrin wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Safari has consistently lagged behind Chrome and Firefox for functionality and standards compliance? And still does: http://caniuse.com

I don't think it is fair to discount battery life, memory usage, and performance so heavily. Looking at the http://caniuse.com list there are plenty of features supported by Safari and not supported by Chrome including Audio Tracks, Video Tracks, ES6 modules, SVG Fonts, Animated PNG, CSS regions. Safari is actually the first to 100% ES6 compliance; Chrome sits at 89%. I would also remind everyone that Google chose to…

That's only the newest version of Safari, before that it was pretty shit (on par with IE). Can't expect the mind share to change overnight, especially when it has lagged for years.
Post reply on HN