Comments on: WebKit – or, Of frameworks and browsers http://www.techiteasy.org/2007/08/27/webkit-or-of-frameworks-and-browsers/ A Technology and Business Weblog provided to You by a Global Group of Friends. Thu, 18 Mar 2010 12:29:11 +0100 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Xbehave http://www.techiteasy.org/2007/08/27/webkit-or-of-frameworks-and-browsers/#comment-3106 Xbehave Fri, 30 Nov 2007 06:48:13 +0000 http://techiteasy.org/2007/08/27/webkit-or-of-frameworks-and-browsers/#comment-3106 how is firefox 2 crap? it features session restore and undo close tab. firefox 3 is faster than 2 and has a whole bunch of nice features I find it funny how apple users often forget to mention that apple only gave code back to khtml in horribly big badly commented lumps. p.s any news on a firefox extension to render on webkit/khtml, id like to see its better rendering of text while keeping my extensions and better ssh performance unfortunately i feal the microsoft apple battle is hiding the fact that linux is ready! safari for linux maybe? how is firefox 2 crap? it features session restore and undo close tab.

firefox 3 is faster than 2 and has a whole bunch of nice features

I find it funny how apple users often forget to mention that apple only gave code back to khtml in horribly big badly commented lumps.

p.s any news on a firefox extension to render on webkit/khtml, id like to see its better rendering of text while keeping my extensions and better ssh performance

unfortunately i feal the microsoft apple battle is hiding the fact that linux is ready!

safari for linux maybe?

]]> By: Jeremy Fain http://www.techiteasy.org/2007/08/27/webkit-or-of-frameworks-and-browsers/#comment-3102 Jeremy Fain Mon, 27 Aug 2007 19:43:19 +0000 http://techiteasy.org/2007/08/27/webkit-or-of-frameworks-and-browsers/#comment-3102 Completely agree with you Kari: Firefox 2 is crap. Thanks for this post, an interesting snapshot of the current state of the browser market. Completely agree with you Kari: Firefox 2 is crap. Thanks for this post, an interesting snapshot of the current state of the browser market.

]]> By: Marc Duchesne http://www.techiteasy.org/2007/08/27/webkit-or-of-frameworks-and-browsers/#comment-3103 Marc Duchesne Mon, 27 Aug 2007 17:26:10 +0000 http://techiteasy.org/2007/08/27/webkit-or-of-frameworks-and-browsers/#comment-3103 @Steve : QuickTime is NOT an application per se. It is a piece of software used to DISPLAY things on your screen, nothing more, at least from the average PC user perspective. This guy doesn't see why he should prefer QT to Windows MediaPlayer, and he's right : why bother with something from another vendor when you get the equivalent from your PC maker right in the box (when you buy a PC, MediaPlayer is bundled with Windows, whilst you need to download QuickTime from Apple). For Average Joe, QT doesn't bring that much difference against WMP, because it's just a player which pops up automatically when he goes on his favorite porn sites (that is a bit rude, but it's kind of reality). Safari is a totally different story : it is an application in the sense of something you will use daily for many tasks : surf the Web, manage your online data, etc. Safari is the key software of the iPhone. People willing to develop their own iPhone' apps shall use Safari to get the best out of it. It's called User Experience. Go visit Apple.com to understand the true meaning of it. Safari is not aimed at generating direct revenues for Apple. It's aimed at generating new users. That's different. More Safari users means more Apple customers on the long run. That's the objective. You've got to think different to understand Apple's strategy. I mean, you shall forget what Microsoft teached you and your peers all along those years ;-) @Steve : QuickTime is NOT an application per se. It is a piece of software used to DISPLAY things on your screen, nothing more, at least from the average PC user perspective. This guy doesn’t see why he should prefer QT to Windows MediaPlayer, and he’s right : why bother with something from another vendor when you get the equivalent from your PC maker right in the box (when you buy a PC, MediaPlayer is bundled with Windows, whilst you need to download QuickTime from Apple). For Average Joe, QT doesn’t bring that much difference against WMP, because it’s just a player which pops up automatically when he goes on his favorite porn sites (that is a bit rude, but it’s kind of reality).

Safari is a totally different story : it is an application in the sense of something you will use daily for many tasks : surf the Web, manage your online data, etc. Safari is the key software of the iPhone. People willing to develop their own iPhone’ apps shall use Safari to get the best out of it. It’s called User Experience. Go visit Apple.com to understand the true meaning of it.

Safari is not aimed at generating direct revenues for Apple. It’s aimed at generating new users. That’s different. More Safari users means more Apple customers on the long run. That’s the objective.

You’ve got to think different to understand Apple’s strategy. I mean, you shall forget what Microsoft teached you and your peers all along those years ;-)

]]> By: Steve Danino http://www.techiteasy.org/2007/08/27/webkit-or-of-frameworks-and-browsers/#comment-3104 Steve Danino Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:31:15 +0000 http://techiteasy.org/2007/08/27/webkit-or-of-frameworks-and-browsers/#comment-3104 @Marc: I wouldn't be so optimistic. Quicktime has been around in the PC world for decades without allowing any significant "push" or "halo effect" for other Apple solutions (and thanks the iPod BTW, otherwise Windows' Quicktime installed base would have shrunk to next to nothing). So even with a decent Safari version for Windows, which is not yet the case as of today, I woudn't expect Apple to get any significant benefit from it - except, of course, revenues from search engines willing to become the default embedded search technology. @Kari: Do you think that there are too many HTML-rendering engines ? OmniWeb had a nice technology a few years ago, but then it had to abandon it in order to endorse the more powerful, Apple-backed WebKit. Nonetheless, this browser is still alive and kicking - my best choice when I use (seldom) a Mac, for instance. So can we imagine that leading browsers could switch from a rendering engine to another ? I believe that this will put a mess in the plugins ecosystem, right ? @Marc: I wouldn’t be so optimistic. Quicktime has been around in the PC world for decades without allowing any significant “push” or “halo effect” for other Apple solutions (and thanks the iPod BTW, otherwise Windows’ Quicktime installed base would have shrunk to next to nothing).

So even with a decent Safari version for Windows, which is not yet the case as of today, I woudn’t expect Apple to get any significant benefit from it – except, of course, revenues from search engines willing to become the default embedded search technology.

@Kari: Do you think that there are too many HTML-rendering engines ? OmniWeb had a nice technology a few years ago, but then it had to abandon it in order to endorse the more powerful, Apple-backed WebKit. Nonetheless, this browser is still alive and kicking – my best choice when I use (seldom) a Mac, for instance.

So can we imagine that leading browsers could switch from a rendering engine to another ? I believe that this will put a mess in the plugins ecosystem, right ?

]]> By: Marc Duchesne http://www.techiteasy.org/2007/08/27/webkit-or-of-frameworks-and-browsers/#comment-3105 Marc Duchesne Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:20:54 +0000 http://techiteasy.org/2007/08/27/webkit-or-of-frameworks-and-browsers/#comment-3105 Safari for Windows is the new Trojan Horse defined by Apple to take over a large piece of Microsoft's customers, thru the iPhone. Actually the same tactic than iTunes with the iPod. Just wait for another smart move soon, leveraging on Safari's powerful features set. note : comment wrote on a Mac using... Opera ;-) Safari for Windows is the new Trojan Horse defined by Apple to take over a large piece of Microsoft’s customers, thru the iPhone. Actually the same tactic than iTunes with the iPod. Just wait for another smart move soon, leveraging on Safari’s powerful features set.

note : comment wrote on a Mac using… Opera ;-)

]]>