# Safari 1.2 in software update.



## RyanLang (Feb 2, 2004)

A Java update as well.


----------



## MBHockey (Feb 2, 2004)

RyanLang said:
			
		

> A Java update as well.




Heh, interesting.  We all thought it would be included in the 10.3.3 MacOS X update.

Thanks for the heads up


----------



## jhawk28 (Feb 2, 2004)

Slow downloading though.


----------



## chevy (Feb 2, 2004)

not here, I've got 200 kB/s which is normal with my provider.


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Feb 2, 2004)

200kb/sec.. tc.. you guys really got darn spoiled


----------



## MBHockey (Feb 2, 2004)

Safari 1.2 first impressions?

Well, i think it is much faster.  Goodbye Firebird!


----------



## uoba (Feb 2, 2004)

Hehe, just when I thought it was time to sleep as well.

Can't wait to see Safari's improvements (it's been the only app that crashes occasionally for me in Panther). Wonder if there's any CSS3 additions.


----------



## macridah (Feb 2, 2004)

cool .... i thought we would have to wait for 10.3.3.  Awesome, i'm so happy


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Feb 2, 2004)

yeah, feels much faster now. I just didn't find it funny that safari was closed all of the sudden without asking me. This happened while I was updating. I know, it was kinda obvious, but still...


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Feb 2, 2004)

Under Mac OS X server, in addition to Safari 1.2 and Java 1.4.2, are other updates... can't remember them all, but one was a JBoss update.


----------



## MBHockey (Feb 2, 2004)

Zammy-Sam, i have the exact same powerbook as you except for the ram.  I have 512, do you see better performance with an extra 256?


----------



## uoba (Feb 2, 2004)

The download manager is now better (stop and then resume downloads... remove individual downloads from the list rather than the whole list)... anything else (apart from the speed increase)?


----------



## RyanLang (Feb 2, 2004)

I like this new loading icon feature a lot too.


----------



## MBHockey (Feb 2, 2004)

uoba said:
			
		

> The download manager is now better (stop and then resume downloads... remove individual downloads from the list rather than the whole list)... anything else (apart from the speed increase)?




I really like the smallest font size feature.  it allows you to set the smallest font that safari will display on any website.


----------



## cjohnson78 (Feb 2, 2004)

I can now tab through all links in a page, but I still cannot tab to form elements like checkboxes and drop-downs.  Does anyone else have this behaviour?


----------



## fryke (Feb 2, 2004)

Yep, form elements not tabbable. (Btw.: I like it that I can turn the tab-to-link feature OFF, as I basically hate it, anyway.) ;-) And oh yeah: Back to OmniWeb, too. ;-)


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Feb 2, 2004)

MBHockey said:
			
		

> Zammy-Sam, i have the exact same powerbook as you except for the ram.  I have 512, do you see better performance with an extra 256?


To be honest: I can't really tell. I bought the tibook with 768mb of ram from the beginning on. My brother has an alubook 12 inch which has just 256mb of ram. Comparing these, the tibook is much faster. But this could be due to the faster cpu, graphic.. I really don't know for sure. But more ram would never harm you (beside your wallet)


----------



## btoth (Feb 2, 2004)

cjohnson78 said:
			
		

> I can now tab through all links in a page, but I still cannot tab to form elements like checkboxes and drop-downs.  Does anyone else have this behaviour?



I can tab to buttons and drop-down menus now, but it still sucks.  You have to hit the down arrow to get the menu to appear, then hit Enter for your choice to take effect.  Doesn't really save much time over using the mouse.  Hate to say it, but IE still does it much better.  Seems Apple is still good at making things look nice but can't get the basics to work (that goes for their hardware too).


----------



## ScottW (Feb 2, 2004)

SCROLLING IS AWESOME! I was working on a website project of mine and was scrolling a lot this weekend and I was like... this is soooo slow! But this is just speedy, reminds me of Windows IE.


----------



## ScottW (Feb 2, 2004)

Shucks, now I will have to update RAM in our server to take away what little lag we do have.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Feb 2, 2004)

Scrolling *is* much better.  Very fluid and accurate, even on my old-ass machine.

Seems a little faster, and I'm not one of those people who percieves speed increases with every OS update like some do.

Haven't had a chance to check out the new tabbing functions, but I'm sure one day in the near future I'll be using tab for something and it'll just jump out at me, and I'll go, "Hey, cool!"

Can't wait for 10.3.3.


----------



## cjohnson78 (Feb 2, 2004)

btoth said:
			
		

> I can tab to buttons and drop-down menus now, but it still sucks.  You have to hit the down arrow to get the menu to appear, then hit Enter for your choice to take effect.  Doesn't really save much time over using the mouse.  Hate to say it, but IE still does it much better.  Seems Apple is still good at making things look nice but can't get the basics to work (that goes for their hardware too).



I wonder what the difference is?  When I hit tab, it skips over the drop-downs and goes to the next text box or link.


----------



## btoth (Feb 2, 2004)

cjohnson78 said:
			
		

> I wonder what the difference is?  When I hit tab, it skips over the drop-downs and goes to the next text box or link.



Do you have full keyboard access turned on in the Keyboard preferences?  That's the only thing I can think of.


----------



## btoth (Feb 2, 2004)

It would also be nice if the download window would close when the last download finishes when you have it set to clear the download when it's done.... seems simple enough.


Also..... (while I'm in a ranting mood)

Since they managed to get links from other apps to load in a new tab, why can't they make links on webpages that are coded to open a new window, open as a new tab as well?  For example, when you click a link in a thread here, it'd be nice to open a tab (without having to hold down a command key) instead of a new window.  Obivously this would only be for people that have tabbed browsing turned on in the first place.  Maybe I'm missing something.... oh well.


----------



## Urbansory (Feb 2, 2004)

switching between tabs while a page loads still is slow. Scrolling is fast, just fix the tab switch and I'm satisfied for now.


----------



## boi (Feb 2, 2004)

smaller form buttons = yay. it actually uses css to figure out how big they should be. they're still aqua, but as long as they're following css size guidelines, i'm happy.


----------



## larry2161941 (Feb 2, 2004)

Hey

What about the folk who still run Jaguar?? Does that mean we have to buy Panther to get the browser update ?

LarryD


----------



## RyanLang (Feb 2, 2004)

Buy Panther anyway for crying out loud.


----------



## gribuz (Feb 3, 2004)

i wish they could add a option to have the download window in a tab


----------



## fryke (Feb 3, 2004)

larry: Or download OmniWeb 5 Beta 1, which also runs in Jaguar. 
gribuz: Yes! That'd be great. I love one-window things.


----------



## andrewhicks (Feb 3, 2004)

RyanLang said:
			
		

> Buy Panther anyway for crying out loud.



 

Might not be that simple.  I have a 1 GhzTiBook, and an old beige G3 desktop with a 450 Ghz Zif card upgrade.  Of course Panther is on the Ti Book, but I was a bit upset that I could not install Panther on the desktop.  I was using the larger hard drive on the desktop for file serving and storage, and like to keep both systems up to date.  Unfortunately, the desktop is now unable to keep up, just because USB ports are not inbuilt.  I know its time to upgrade to a G5 (and will do once I have recovered from the TiBook purchase), but its a shame that installation is disabled.  Despite having installed a DVD drive in the desktop, I could never get DVD player installed during system upgrades bacause it was disabled, even though it runs fine.

Never quite understood why.

A.


----------



## Randman (Feb 3, 2004)

There's a new version of Safari Enhancer to go with 1.2 as well.


----------



## cq107 (Feb 3, 2004)

HUGE SPEED IMPROVEMENT... Scrolling is VERY VERY FAST now...


----------



## mindbend (Feb 3, 2004)

I have noticed no improvement whatsoever. I'm running SF1.2 on DP G4s, so scrolling was already very fast. So was caching in general, though some pages load in much faster than others. This site is average, 2-pop is slow and Maya forums are instant.

Link tabbing is ho-hum to me, maybe I'll use it but I doubt it. Nice to have tho.

I have very basic browser needs, so 1.2 gets me nothing really, but that's OK. Still my fav browser.


----------



## larry2161941 (Feb 3, 2004)

Thanks for all your input . No matter what was written its stll befuddling why Apple's Engineers will not write software backward compatible .And ,Yes I will purchase Panther along with more Ram than my 512  .My real concern was is y processor fast enough to really run Panther . (IMAC 400dvd ) .

LarryD


----------



## Urbansory (Feb 3, 2004)

It has the downloading progress indicator file icon, like IE, or did it always have that? I don't recall that from before.


----------



## chevy (Feb 3, 2004)

larry2161941 said:
			
		

> Thanks for all your input . No matter what was written its stll befuddling why Apple's Engineers will not write software backward compatible .And ,Yes I will purchase Panther along with more Ram than my 512  .My real concern was is y processor fast enough to really run Panther . (IMAC 400dvd ) .
> 
> LarryD



I run Panther and my 400 MHz B&W G3 too, and it's very good speed (400 MB RAM, 40 GB HD).


----------



## larry2161941 (Feb 3, 2004)

Wow Chevy,
Thats great news . 

Thanks,

LarryD


----------



## jonparadise (Feb 3, 2004)

I may have completely missed it before, but Safari now seems to display image descriptions like IE for Windows when you put your little hand over it.


----------



## twister (Feb 3, 2004)

I like the fact that you can save images and downloads anywhere by right clicking and, if you open an image, you get the size dimensions.


----------



## Ripcord (Feb 3, 2004)

Can you download Safari 1.2 for Jaguar?

If not, why the heck not?


----------



## Ripcord (Feb 3, 2004)

Nevermind, I just noticed that only 1.0 is available for 10.2 on the Safari download page.

How is it that Apple seems to get away with not supporting a slightly more than *year-old* OS?  If Microsoft intentionally stopped releasing products for, say, Windows 2000, there'd be massive public outcry.  And that's a 4-year old platform.

I don't like this idea of being forced to upgrade *every year*, especially if they're going to charge me full price...


----------



## mindbend (Feb 3, 2004)

I hope I'm wrong on this and there's a work around. If not, I am very upset at this seemingly trivial change.

Formerly, when you chose to download an image or movie or other file type, you right-clicked and chose Download this... and it automaticaly started dl-ing it to your preferred location.

Now it's a freaking approval window for every single DL! WTF! 

Tell me I am missing something and that I'm overreacting. Well, I guess I'm clearly overreacting, but this is insane to me. What is the freaking point of setting a DL preference location if you're going to make me approve it every *$*&#**&*(& time? 

I looked in preferences to see if there's something, but I couldn't find it. Anyone else? 

This is a terrible decision. There is no reason on earth to force approval on the DL location if one is already chosen in prefs.

To add to the frustration, in 1.1 if you DL-ed a file that had the same file name as something already DL-ed, it just added a "-1" to the file name and DL-ed. No fuss, no muss. Now, because of the approval window you're forced to rename manually if that file name is taken. I've got clients with large image database of genericly named files, so this is going to be a very annoying issue. Hopefully one of these Safari hack-on apps will fix this poor decision.

I will go back to 1.1 in a heartbeat if this is the case. Though eventually I'll be forced to update for one reason or another. Grrrrr.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Feb 3, 2004)

Try holding down 'option' and clicking the link.  This downloads the file immediately to the place of your choice set in the Preferences.


----------



## mindbend (Feb 3, 2004)

Thanks! I preferred the old way, but this is acceptable.


----------



## steven_lufc (Feb 4, 2004)

Has anyone else noticed that the reload arrow now goes the other way?? Why would apple do that??


----------



## twister (Feb 4, 2004)

I'd rather tell the file where to go.  But that's just me.  However it does always default to my downloads folder so it's kinda the same.

And the reload changed?  Hummmmm.


----------



## fryke (Feb 4, 2004)

I'm glad Safari now asks where to save to, as one couldn't decide that before. Want to download to your default directory? Just click. I guess it's as straight-forward as can only be.


----------



## soulseek (Feb 4, 2004)

ive ready many articles about users bein mad at the fact that safari1.2 runs only on panther!
well tough luck.
safari 1.1 runs perfectly on jaguar. any future updates *may* require technologies only in panther! and even if safari1.2 could run on jaguar , safari is a software company.
they do want people to upgrade. if you dont like this, user Camino, use Mozilla, use Omniweb. all 3 are perfect browsers !


----------



## cjboffoli (Feb 6, 2004)

I'm pleased that Apple addressed the issue of Safari 1.2 features being a result of Pather advances as I was tired of so many Jaguar users whining about this.  You paid $129 for the technology advances that Jaguar offerred and you have enjoyed the benefits of that OS.  If you want to experience the considerable advances of Panther, then you should pay for those advances. Apple spent a lot of money and time developing the newest features of Panther and I do not understand why people believe they are entitled to experience these benefits for free.  What kind of a country is this when people complain about being inconvenienced because things are not given to them for free?


----------



## fryke (Feb 6, 2004)

So there are a couple of things Panther has and Jaguar hasn't. I'm not surprised. But why not release Safari 1.2 for Jaguar _minus_ those features that need Panther? I'm quite sure that most users wouldn't even notice those. Whatever Apple says right now, they can't hide the fact that they _want_ to give people who upgraded to Panther some incentives.

But Safari is only one example. What about other applications that lose compatibility with older versions of OS X? These are practises that we all have damned when Microsoft were doing them. I guess after Microsoft got away with it, Apple has learned how to 'optimise'?


----------



## cjboffoli (Feb 6, 2004)

I don't think there is any conspiracy afoot and I think it is unreasonable for people to think that Apple is punishing them for not upgrading to the newer operating system.  Based on new advances in Panther, Apple was able to release a new version of Safari that takes advantage of these features.  Again, people expect Apple to continue investing money in Jaguar, an outdated operating system, and providing new features to them.  Jaguar and Safari work just fine without Panther.  You got what you paid for.  Now if you want the significant innovations and advances of Panther and the new version of Safari BASED ON THOSE PANTHER INNOVATIONS then you need to purchase the new software!  Imagine how ridiculous I would sound if I said:  "Hey, I bought a 2003 VW jetta for $16,000 and a year later they came out with a new 2004 model with many new features (and that goes faster with less fuel consumption).  VW should come back and provide those new features to my car from last year because I paid so much for it."  Gimme a break!


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Feb 6, 2004)

fryke said:
			
		

> So there are a couple of things Panther has and Jaguar hasn't. I'm not surprised. But why not release Safari 1.2 for Jaguar _minus_ those features that need Panther?



They did!  It's called Safari 1.1!


----------



## fryke (Feb 6, 2004)

Things like a preference about tabbing from link to link? I'm _quite_ sure that's not a Panther thing. A preference about where to open links from other apps? Not a Panther thing, I'm _also_ quite sure of. What else is new? Ah, yes, contextual-menu download to... A Panther 'technology'? I don't think so. These are all functionality updates that can be important to customers. And these could very well be released in an update for Jaguar, too.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Feb 6, 2004)

No one knows if Apple will release Safari 1.2 for Jaguar, but the way things have been going, I'd say that they will -- just later on.  Apple focuses on the here and now, and their most current technology.  Then they update the older software.


----------



## azrad (Feb 7, 2004)

Zammy, if your Safari is close while your doing the updating... maybe it's because it automatically write to the Safari program... ( i just think...) 

reason is because i've changed my Safari icon, during the updating, my Safari icon changed back to the old one... im not 100% sure on this....  just a though...


----------



## azrad (Feb 7, 2004)

errmm... forget to add this...

how about the mozilla engine? is it updated? cause im using the HTMLArea code... which require atleast version 1.3... if this not updated... i might have to use firebird instead....


----------



## ora (Feb 7, 2004)

I really like the new version. Its finally made me buy panther, which i'd been putting off for ages. Got the Ed discount so not too pricy either.


----------



## larry2161941 (Feb 7, 2004)

Hello
I guess after reading most of the replies I have a different slant on the updated version .

LarryD


----------



## pds (Feb 7, 2004)

re: safari update for Jaguar, I read that 1.2 employs bits of the new BSD from Panther and there won't be a comparable upgrade for Jag folks. It's not just that Apple is abandoning Jag, but the improvements in 1.2 are tied to updates in 10.3.

Least that's what I read at MacWorld. Sorry, I don't have the link.


----------



## hulkaros (Feb 7, 2004)

Come on people! Use OmniWeb, Camino, Mozilla, et al for Jaguar!   Quit whining!


----------



## bjurusik (Feb 8, 2004)

Hmm ... I'm not sure if this is a new feature or not, but if while browsing macosx.com (or possibly other forums) you hover over a thread, you get a tool tip that contains the entire post (first), without having to click on the link.


----------



## Arden (Feb 8, 2004)

Not new, and not browser-specific.  That uses the HTML "title" attribute.


----------



## ora (Feb 8, 2004)

bjurusik said:
			
		

> Hmm ... I'm not sure if this is a new feature or not, but if while browsing macosx.com (or possibly other forums) you hover over a thread, you get a tool tip that contains the entire post (first), without having to click on the link.



I'd heard about this feature a while back, but it only started to work after I upgraded to Panther.


----------



## larry2161941 (Feb 8, 2004)

Thanks

PDS
Been reading the same . I guess there are enough improvements to justfy the purchase of Panther . Anyhow , thats my gameplan . Thanks again for taking the time to reply .


LarryD


----------



## Ripcord (Feb 8, 2004)

ElDiabloConCaca said:
			
		

> No one knows if Apple will release Safari 1.2 for Jaguar, but the way things have been going, I'd say that they will -- just later on.  Apple focuses on the here and now, and their most current technology.  Then they update the older software.



Really?  Show me all the software that was released for Jag-only when it first came out, then later supported 10.1?

Come on, the press had to brow-beat Apple for weeks before they finally agreed to just release a critical OS update for Jag...


----------



## Ripcord (Feb 8, 2004)

cjboffoli said:
			
		

> What kind of a country is this when people complain about being inconvenienced because things are not given to them for free?



When I bought Jag, I bought it with the expectation that 1) It would continue to be supported for more than *a year* and 2) that new software would continue to be released for it by Apple for more than a year.

I don't like being told that I have to upgrade my OS at full price *every year* just to be able to run new software.  It's like what MS does, but much, much worse - even MS doesn't have the balls to tell new users that they have to upgrade every year.

Even if Apple had done what they did with iChat AV and offered the new software as a low-priced upgrade, it would be better than what they're doing now (and it's unclear whether iChat AV 2.1 will ever be released for Jag, even for users that PAID $30 for 2.0).  Right now I have no choice but to buy their new OS.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Feb 8, 2004)

Ripcord said:
			
		

> Come on, the press had to brow-beat Apple for weeks before they finally agreed to just release a critical OS update for Jag...



I don't think Apple got "brow-beaten" and then "agreed" to release the update for Jag.  I think it was more like, "Hold your horses, it's coming!"  I think they had the security update in the works for Jag and people were just becoming impatient.

I do agree with you that Apple is moving towards a yearly update plan for their OS, though.  And yes, it does seem like a forced upgrade, too, but many of my friends still use Jag and love it.  They'll upgrade to Panther when they feel the need, but Jag works just fine for them and I doubt any of the security "holes" in Jag will be exploited to the point where they feel pressured to update.

Sure, $129 per year seems like a lot, but when you put it into perspective, you pay more for water and sewage in a year than you do for OS updates.  I don't know about other cities, but here in Texas, we pay a measley $12 a month for water.  That's $144 a year.  I'd gladly pay $12 a month for the newest OS from Apple.


----------



## azrad (Feb 9, 2004)

anyone has tried the Javascript for back function...
example : <a href="#" onClick="javascript:history.go(-1)">Go Back</a>

Safari still does not function accordingly...


----------



## Randman (Feb 9, 2004)

All I know is Safari 1.2 + Panther 10.3.2 + Safari Enhancer + PithHelmet = the best surfing experience I've ever had.


----------



## twister (Feb 9, 2004)

azrad said:
			
		

> anyone has tried the Javascript for back function...
> example : <a href="#" onClick="javascript:history.go(-1)">Go Back</a>
> 
> Safari still does not function accordingly...



If you do the back button in form method it works fine.  Maybe your code is bad.

An example can be found at TwisterMc.com's Resources


----------



## azrad (Feb 9, 2004)

the problem is... it works perfectly in IE and Netscape or Mozilla... 

btw... the word 'javascript' should be in one word actually (without the underscore character)...

My Wishlist:
for the next upgrade for Safari, i wish they upgrade the mozilla engine to atleast 1.3


----------



## Ripcord (Feb 10, 2004)

Mozilla engine?  Safari is based on the Konqueror (KDE) rendering engine, not Gecko (Mozilla rendering engine).  I'm torn as to which is/would have been better, Gecko is quite a bit more mature and masterfully designed (even if it's "bloated"), though Konqueror's engine is lighter and nimbler.

Either way, Safari seems to be coming along reasonably well, in another year it should be a very good browser.  I put it in the "fair to good" category now.

I just wish more people on the Windows platforms were using non-IE browsers...


----------



## Randman (Feb 11, 2004)

> I just wish more people on the Windows platforms were using non-IE browsers...


 I just wish more people on the Windows platform weren't on the Windows platform.


----------



## Ripcord (Feb 11, 2004)

Well, yeah, that too, but one step at a time I suppose =)


----------



## fryke (Feb 11, 2004)

'moving towards a yearly...'? Apple's been releasing Mac OS X upgrades in a yearly fashion since 10.1. - And it's been quite clear that it would move on that way. Also _before_ Mac OS X, the big updates came along in a yearly fashion, with a .1 or .6 update between them. Also: You're _not_ in fact paying full price. 129$ is the upgrade price, since there are no 'full' versions. You've already _got_ a Mac OS license because you've bought a Mac, which doesn't come without one.

Ah, this is really upsetting me right now. After we've finally put the whiners down a bit about the 129$ price tag (remember that ever-recurring question about how much 10.2 and 10.3 would cost and that it was almost _unpossible_ that it would cost 129$?), now there's the same argument because of a simple browser update? :/ Hmm... When Jaguar came out, neither Safari nor iChat AV were around. You did _not_ buy a license for Safari or iChat AV. And Apple never promised to deliver updates to newer software for older operating system versions. If you want to use Safari, use the latest version around for your OS version. If that's not good enough, use OmniWeb, Camino or Firefox. They're all really good, you know...
And come September, you'll be thinking about buying 10.4, which will probably be one BIG upgrade for 10.2 users (and 'just another one' with 150 new features for 10.3 users).

If you're still using Jaguar, btw.: There are many, many things you're missing. Safari 1.2 is probably the LEAST important thing I could think of.


----------



## Arden (Feb 11, 2004)

[sarcastic rant] While we're complaining, I wish Apple and other companies would still support OS 9.  Sure, OS X is here-and-now, and it's awesome, but some of us can't afford to upgrade to a computer that can actually take full advantage of all that.  I mean, what about the other (estimated) 15 million Mac users who haven't switched to OS X? [/sarcastic rant]

I'm sure there are plenty who make this case, but there's not a lot that's going to happen with them.  A few companies still make OS 9-compatible software, but not very many anymore.  Either deal with it and move on, or deal with it and stay where you are, basically.


----------

