backtop


Print 90 comment(s) - last by ArchiesBoy.. on Apr 13 at 5:51 PM


Apple's EULA, as pictured here in Windows XP says you can't install Safari on non-Apple hardware, meaning that Apple has just massively violated its own EULA.  (Source: DailyTech)
Safari for Windows is having some serious issues that deserve a second look.

Fueled by Safari's release on Windows last June and strong Mac sales, Apple's Safari browser has been making modest inroads in the browser marketshare competition, moving up from around 4.6 percent around 5.7 percent between April 2007 and February 2008, according to Net Applications.  It even was able to best the Acid3 test, showing off its compatibility prowess.

However  Safari has run into some troubles.  Apple made the dubious decision of trying to coerce iTune's 500 million users into installing Safari along with the normal iTunes update, via a pesky dialog, which comes with the install Safari option checked by default.  Mozilla blasted Apple for this tactic, saying it "borders on malware distribution practices". 

Now someone has humorously pointed out that in its promotional zealousness, Apple appears to have unintentionally encouraged massive violation of and made a mockery of its own End User License Agreement (EULA) for Safari.  EULAs are supposed to set clear legal guidelines for terms of use and help consumers know what they can and cannot do (i.e. you cannot install this software on everyone in your neighborhood's computers).  Apple's EULA states that Safari can be installed on "
a single Apple-labeled computer at a time", forbidding non-Apple-marked hardware Windows machines, and the updater itself states that "Use of this software is subject to the original Software License Agreement(s) that accompanied the software being updated."

So apparently Apple has succeeded in massively violating its own EULA, a possible first of this scale, depending on the number of accidental or intentional Safari downloads.  Lawyers point out that concerned citizens need not fear about legal action from Apple.  Jonathan Kramer, a tech attorney who runs Kramer Telecom Law Firm states, "We call this an impossibility issue, you can't enforce a term that's impossible."

Amidst this embarassing debacle, new reports are coming in that Safari is faring rather poorly on Windows XP, with many users experiencing crashes.  Windows XP users who felt smug about Windows Vista bugs, may find an unexpected new source of problems-- Apple.  Apple's support forum is being flooded by angry posters complaining that their XP version of the Safari browser is broken.  Says SakJosep, one such poster, "When I try to start Safari 3.1 in Windows XP, it crashes right away."

OllieK92 echoes the previous posters sentiments, stating, "I have this problem too, I have no idea what it is."

Some users are reporting that the browser simply will not open.  The thread on the problems has received over 1,000 views well before receiving much media coverage, making it clear that the problem may be afflicting many users.  There have also been scattered reports of Safari not running on Vista, though XP has received many more such reports.  Of the Vista problems, most posters said the previous versions worked properly, but that the update to the current version, 3.1 broke the browser.

Ironically, the new version of Safari-- 3.1-- had mostly received glowing reviews.  Many reviewers lauded its better speed, security, search tools, and improved support of HTML standards.  However all is not sunny in Cupertino as it appears that Apple may be in for some more criticism amid poorly though out attempts to leverage its iTunes user base as a means of pushing the browser, and from some pesky bugs that have cropped up.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

so?
By Gul Westfale on 3/27/2008 1:54:11 PM , Rating: 4
"Apple's EULA states that Safari can be installed on "a single Apple-labeled computer at a time", forbidding non-Apple-marked hardware Windows machines"

it's not like someone in their right mind would install it on a windows machine anyway. we have IE. firefox, and opera, why do we need this apple junk? and i say junk because if their product were so great then they wouldn't have to resort to cheap tricks to distribute it.




RE: so?
By teldar on 3/27/2008 2:04:51 PM , Rating: 5
While I agree whole-heartedly, I can but cringe at this post.

I'm just waiting for the Apple die-hards out there to flame this article and everyone who reads it for saying Apple is not the best company on the face of the earth and who obviously makes better products that are simply superior to everything else out there and the only reason not everybody uses them is because they are stupid.

Of course, the fact that Apple charges twice as much for hardware as every other vendor out there and that they don't allow the variety of hardware that Microsoft allows doesn't make the slightest difference....

T


RE: so?
By Gul Westfale on 3/27/2008 2:12:33 PM , Rating: 3
flamers and fanboys have never stopped me from expressing an opinion, and they never will.


RE: so?
By Etsp on 3/27/2008 2:29:14 PM , Rating: 5
also, they can never be stopped from stating opinions as facts.


RE: so?
By JAB on 3/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: so?
By JasonMick (blog) on 3/27/2008 3:11:59 PM , Rating: 5
No, you're right-- why should companies have to write sensible legal documents?? Secondly, what does Sony have to do with anything??

Firefox 3 has very little memory leak issues. I've found it pretty fast and efficient on Vista 32. I don't think "Firefox people" are terribly worried about Safari, imo. And did you not read that Safari also reportedly has problems on Vista?

And your statement about it being time to switch from XP is funny. What if you don't have a faster computer. I know plenty of college students that don't have 600-1,000 to go out and blow on a decent laptop. XP is still very viable for some users. I switched to Vista, but I see the logic on both sides.


RE: so?
By JAB on 3/27/2008 4:13:30 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
sensible legal documents
Oxymoron dont your think? If you look hard enough for mistakes you can find one simple as that if people here looked that hard on all company it would be a different matter but extreme effort to find any fault in those to complays here kind of blows your indignity out the window. Even if you are not doing it you lie in the same bed and share the lice.

Apple is putting a new and very serious effort into upgrading Safari with nightly updates? If the Firefox crew doesnt sit up and notice that they have a bigger problem.
They wont steal many Firefox users but they might steal many of those sick of IE before they try Firefox.

The threat is not what they have now but how fast they are improving. Almost daily updates and fixes?

One example:
http://webkit.org/blog/168/gdi-text-on-windows/

Vista VS XP People rarely upgrade the OS on a laptop that is a strawman argument for XP no need for dirty tricks here do we? An extra GB of RAM and a budget video card does wonders for Vista. I would care a lot more about the Vista bloat if memory wasn't dirt cheap. 8gb is cheaper than 500MB 5 years ago. I an not recommending Vista without modern parts but most people here already have decent ones.


RE: so?
By arteekay on 3/27/2008 6:11:05 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Apple is putting a new and very serious effort into upgrading Safari with nightly updates? If the Firefox crew doesnt sit up and notice that they have a bigger problem.


You do know that Fx does hourly builds, right?


RE: so?
By teldar on 3/27/2008 6:06:23 PM , Rating: 4
Personally, I use XP as well, partially because I am a grad student and my wife is pregnant, we own a house, I'm living in another city 5 days a week renting an apartment.... The $600 for a new laptop isn't even a consideration. I don't even want to spend a couple hundred on a new desktop MB CPU and Memory at this point....

And as far as FF3B4 goes.... I endorse it whole-heartedly. It's a wonderful step forward even when compared to FF 2. If you all out there havn't tried it yet, I would recommend it.


RE: so?
By encryptkeeper on 3/28/2008 8:58:20 AM , Rating: 2
I'm still on XP, and I'm running FF beta 4 on my home machine. It's fast, it looks great, and it's as stable as far as I can see. There was a refresh issue when I first installed it where moving the mouse around the screen and right clicking would leave the previous menu on the screen, resulting in 3 or 4 right click menus on the screen at one time, but I haven't been able to duplicate it since. I installed the Opera browser, but I haven't even fired it up, FF3 is just too good.


RE: so?
By Ryanman on 3/27/2008 3:14:28 PM , Rating: 1
you excellent use of grammar shoes that you are one of the superior users that enjoy apple's company, and that you hold high importance in legal wording.

It doesn't matter if a program makes god act as a helper on your system, if it's forced into the hands of an angry mob and has bugs for a percentage of people it's not worth it.


RE: so?
By mikefarinha on 3/27/2008 3:22:46 PM , Rating: 5
What are "grammar shoes" and where can I get a pair? I'll pick you up a pair too while I'm at it.


RE: so?
By almared on 3/27/2008 3:45:48 PM , Rating: 2
lol didn't you notice that he is a PC user and he tried to prove his point


RE: so?
By therealnickdanger on 3/27/2008 3:54:16 PM , Rating: 3
get some for I too while you out


RE: so?
By Gul Westfale on 3/27/2008 4:09:32 PM , Rating: 4
The European Commission have just announced an agreement whereby
English will be the official language of the EU, rather than German, which
was the other possibility. As part of the negotiations, Her Majesty's
government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and
has accepted a five year phase in plan that would be known as "EuroEnglish".

In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c". Sertainly, this will
make the sivil servants jump for joy. The hard "c" will be dropped in favour
of the "k". This should klear up konfusion and keyboards kan have 1 less
letter.

There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year, when the
troublesome "ph" will be replaced with the "f". This will make words like
"fotograf" 20% shorter.

In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be
expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible.

Governments will enkorage the removal of double letters, which have always
ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of
the silent "e"s in the language is disgraseful, and they should go away.

By the 4th year, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th"
with "z" and "w" with "v".

During ze fifz year, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords
kontaining "ou" and similar changes vud of kors be aplid to ozer
kombinations of leters. After zis fifz year, ve vil hav a realy sensibl
riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubls or difikultis and evrivun vil find it
ezi to understand each ozer

ZE DREAM VIL FINALI KUM TRU!

(i saw this in a magazine a while back, but now it is ebaum's and a couple of other sites. i haf no idea hoo ze original auzor mite be.)


RE: so?
By mikefarinha on 3/27/2008 4:22:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
get some for I too while you out


ah, very good Zoolanderese!


RE: so?
By Etsp on 3/27/2008 4:38:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Only the patent trolls and the like really care about the wording.
This is true, if by "patent trolls" you mean lawyers.

Also, I have not bashed Apple for Safari having a few bugs, I haven't even mentioned it. I didn't even bash apple, or even target its users specifically. I bashed fanboys. There are windows fanboys, apple fanboys, linux fanboys, EA fanboys(all 3 of them), Lets not forget fanboys of a particular hardware vendor (Intel/AMD/Nvidia).

Personally, I also have not experienced these memory leaks people complain about in firefox. That certainly doesn't mean that they don't exist, but I have been fortunate enough to not experience it.


RE: so?
By blwest on 3/27/2008 9:47:20 PM , Rating: 2
I had to mark him up b/c most of the DT trolls here are idiots anyway.


RE: so?
By robinthakur on 4/2/2008 11:14:25 AM , Rating: 2
Whilst i'd love to step in and defend Apple at this point as 3.1 is an extremely good browser based on my actual use in Vista, the fact that so many people are having problems (i.e. not enough testing) and the fact that Legal didn't check it against the EULA (read, rushed release) means they've only got themselves to blame. If you can't defend it when MS do it, the same rules apply to Apple...!


RE: so?
By Pirks on 3/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: so?
By beyazkeyat on 3/27/2008 5:24:52 PM , Rating: 5
...What? The internal hardware is no different, it's just in a different case and runs on a different OS unless you dual boot. Get your head out of that cloud of smug and you might see that. :)


RE: so?
By Pirks on 3/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: so?
By beyazkeyat on 3/27/2008 5:42:51 PM , Rating: 4
You keep thinking that, bub. Whatever helps you sleep at night. I'm not going to try to prove my point because you obviously don't get it and am going to cite the "Arguing on the internet" image clause as my 2nd reason.


RE: so?
By Gul Westfale on 3/27/2008 6:02:50 PM , Rating: 4
pretty much all cases 9including laptops) are made by the same handful of companies in taiwan/china. apple's have a different design and internal layout, but how does that justify an increase in price of several hundred dollars? especially when even high-end systems still come with lower mid-range graphics cards at best?


RE: so?
By beyazkeyat on 3/27/2008 6:22:54 PM , Rating: 3
It's all about branding and the looks on the outside. Most people don't care about the internals. But people like our buddy Pirks here seem to think that Apple uses "superior hardware" when it's all the same, and I didn't really feel like sitting there trying to make the point, because many have tried before and he just doesn't get it.


RE: so?
By Pirks on 3/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: so?
By Pirks on 3/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: so?
By Gul Westfale on 3/27/2008 7:11:45 PM , Rating: 2
so you do lie in your posts hahahahaha fanboi, now with an i because you have reached a new low in blind brand fanaticism.

you have claimed that the laptop in your link has similar specs to the apple macbook, yet is $50 more expensive. here is that link you posted:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...

now here is the macbook:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...

remember you said similar specs? the macbook has HALF the RAM, and less than half the hard drive space. and then there is the limited software selection you get with OS X... and the lame-o white plastic case.

i love winding people up over the intarwebz but appletards make it too easy.


RE: so?
By Pirks on 3/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: so?
By Gul Westfale on 3/27/2008 7:49:00 PM , Rating: 2
1. the results of surveys depend always on the people that are being asked. what the public or some idiot who has no idea what a real operating system is, thinks, does not make a difference to me. for the record i am sticking with XP because vista is overpriced and useless (except for DX10, but i don't need that atm).

2. your link and post were misleading and now you are trying to backpedal. you can easily price out a windows machine with a larger screen for less than $1000. not as small then i guess, but the macbook isn't an ultraportable either.

3. i never said twice as much, i said hundreds more, and that is correct.

4. i don't care what computer you use, owning a mac is your problem, not mine. what i don't like is the pretentiousness of people who, by any objective standards, have either inferior or overpriced hardware (and in some cases both, see ipod/iphone). it's not like windows doesn't have it's idiot fanboys though...

5. i'm hungry so i'm going to eat some pizza now. salami, ground beef, onions, 'shrooms , and extra cheese.


RE: so?
By Pirks on 3/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: so?
By Pirks on 3/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: so?
By beyazkeyat on 3/27/2008 11:06:39 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, where to start? First of all, I never said or even insinuated that they charge twice the price for the same hardware. I just pointed out that Apple uses the same internal hardware as everyone else and charges more for it. Did I say how much? Nope, sure didn't. I just posted a somewhat sarcastic rebuttal to your "hardware is twice as good" line of bullshit.

Second, the differences in the two laptops. You're justifying the higher price with things most people would call petty. Multitouch, LA DEE DAH. Little crap. Magnetic latches on the power cord, oh wow. You're reaching. I dunno about these Toshibas but on my Vostro, it doesn't have a problem with staying in or coming out when it gets pulled.

How about some things the Macbook can't do or doesn't have. What about burning DVD's? Oh, can't do that on that Macbook, probably costs another $50. If we're gonna talk about petty stuff, what about playing games? A lot of games don't work on Mac. Sure you can dualboot XP or whatever, but hey, that's another $100-150 on top of the price of the laptop. Where's the SD card reader on that Macbook, huh? Probably another $20-30. Where's the express card slot? Can you even get one on it? What if you're one of those types who has a card from your cell provider that gives you internet access? Guess you're screwed with that Macbook! If you wanna sit here and point out little petty differences, I can do that all day, man. Want to output the display to another screen? Gotta buy an adapter. Speaking of the display the Toshiba can use more memory for the video card! OH and the Toshiba has more USB ports. Suck on that! :D

Oh GOD, here we go. "Virusless" OS AHAHA. There's one reason there's NOWHERE NEAR as many viruses for OSX It's called security through obscurity. OSX has problems just like any OS does, they're just not as widely taken advantage of. Why? Take this theoretical situation (actually it's really not THAT theoretical but anyway...) If you wanted to make a virus to wreak computer havoc worldwide, would you do it to maybe a few million Apple users or a few HUNDRED million Windows users? The answer is obvious. NO OS is perfect. NONE. Not to mention, you saying it works "much snappier" than Vista is your opinion. Vista is really nice on my laptop here. If it's coupled with proper hardware, it's fantastic, like on my laptop.

The Macbook is, in terms of technology, very lacking compared to the Toshiba and it's more expensive. Get over it. It's like Gul Westfale said:

quote:
1. the results of surveys depend always on the people that are being asked. what the public or some idiot who has no idea what a real operating system is, thinks, does not make a difference to me. for the record i am sticking with XP because vista is overpriced and useless (except for DX10, but i don't need that atm).

4. i don't care what computer you use, owning a mac is your problem, not mine. what i don't like is the pretentiousness of people who, by any objective standards, have either inferior or overpriced hardware (and in some cases both, see ipod/iphone). it's not like windows doesn't have it's idiot fanboys though...


XP is nice, and the only reason I got Vista on this laptop was to familiarize myself with it. I was kind of skeptical because of all the bad things I had heard, but when I got it none of them turned out to be true. It's been a great experience for me personally, I'm running SP1 now with no install or post-install problems. The only problem I've ever had was Intel driver related. Vista has a LOT of nice little perks that I like compared to XP almost to the point where I don't like using an XP machine anymore.

The biggest problem I have with most Mac owners is when they try to act all superior because they have a Mac. Piss off. I couldn't care less, if that's your bag that's fine but don't try to smack talk about it, that's senseless. I don't talk bad about Macs unless someone is trying to make them look vastly superior to Windows machines, because they're not. It's not that OSX isn't nice or anything like that, or that either is inferior to the other. It's how asshole-ish a lot of Mac owners act. (Though try expanding the hardware set to what MS has done and then come talk about superiority. :) ) There's no reason to go around acting like a dick because you own one OS or the other. Good for you.

*thumps your ear and runs off*


RE: so?
By Pirks on 3/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: so?
By beyazkeyat on 3/28/2008 4:50:04 AM , Rating: 1
Seriously? I mean for God's sake, man, I thumped your ear at the end of the post. Come on, man. Come on. Here, I'll denote the jokes for you with :D faces so you don't get all huffy again, k? *ahem*

First off, I never said mac users were "idiots" as you said. I just said most of them are assholes. BIG difference.

Second, the people I know who have HSDPA just went up to the provider store and got the nice little add-in cards. I really don't give a shit about the service, so no, I didn't care to look up that there were USB modems :D. I don't care if you buy it or not, it's the truth, haha. Touche there though, good sir. (But that also means there's no nifty little hole to store a remote in for when I watch dvd's, or when I have my computer playing music and am too lazy to get up and change the song. :D)

I was just pointing out silly little things. Like, of course, the adapter thing. You should know, Mr. High and Mighty, that there are also VGA to DVI cables, so sure the ol' Toshiba could output DVI, just not in oh so pretty digital or HDCP, if you wanna get all anal about it. I was just being silly. :D It's all silly stuff that a few care about. And you say "proper" gigabit ethernet, pfft, most people (well, here in the good ol USA anyway ;D ) still can't even saturate 100mbps or even know what mbps are. About the only people who really need gigabit are big businesses around here.

In the end it all really comes down to what you really want out of your computer. I just think it's silly when people get big headed about dumb little shit like, well, a magnetic power cord. I also enjoy poking fun at you because you get so easily riled up. :D Personally, I like a good mix of horsepower and looks. My Vostro isn't the BEST LOOKING LAPTOP EVAR but it looks good enough for me. Has a built in 2MP webcam, Bluetooth, SD card reader, oh and it even plays games pretty well! I spent about $1400 on it back in August, the only thing I wish I had gotten was a bigger hard drive. Only got 120gb. :( It's quite a handicap when Steam and music takes up over half of it. Everything else is great, though.

I mean when you look at it, Macs aren't even priced that bad especially when compared to Sony stuff. It's been good fun but I say we put it all behind us. Let's unite and turn this into a Sony bashfest. Deal? :D


RE: so?
By Pirks on 3/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: so?
By 777 on 3/27/2008 10:09:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm just waiting for the Apple die-hards out there to flame this article and everyone who reads it for saying Apple is not the best company on the face of the earth and who obviously makes better products that are simply superior to everything else out there and the only reason not everybody uses them is because they are stupid.


I mostly use Apple computers but I also use pc's almost as much, I do prefer apple, so does this make me a Apple diehard? I have no intention of flaming this article or your possible hatred of Apple. I think both computers have their strengths and weeknesses and trust me Apple does some things I don't like and it seems they screwed up here big time, so to that I say don't use Safari. I have used Pc's that have been complete piles of crap especially the cheap ones everyone always compares to Apple. Also all of Apples hardware is not twice as much, compare the Macbook Pro laptop line and there are some pc vendors who make laptops you have to pay more for to get what you get in a Macbook pro. Just go to Newegg.

I wish the Apple haters would get off their rant and get over it, if you don't like them than don't use their hardware or software, no one forces you to buy or download any of their products. Just as know one makes me use a pc, well I do have to at work, but so what, I don't go around flaming some of the sh--ty hardware from pc makers or some of the bogus software that comes from microsoft. It's personal choice and that's great we have that, it just seems like some on dailytech have a seething hatred of Apple and those that use them.


RE: so?
By beyazkeyat on 3/27/2008 11:14:00 PM , Rating: 1
Well, it's not so much that we hate Apple users, it's the ones who act like assholes because they own Apple products. As far as the PC's go, they're the same hardware, they both have problems, and they both come out with some crap software. Apple just charges more for their hardware. ;) But no, I wouldn't call you an Apple diehard at all. You'd be flaming it up if you were and blaming the problems on MS :D

(And there's laptops on the "Windows side" that yes do cost too much [I'm looking at you, Alienware] But, who wants SLI on a laptop? I mean really.)


RE: so?
By Pirks on 3/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: so?
By mikeyD95125 on 3/29/2008 12:47:04 AM , Rating: 2
I have no idea why teldar get's a 5 for his post. "twice the price" is a gross exaggeration. Just look further down the thread.


RE: so?
By Pirks on 3/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: so?
By otispunkmeyer on 3/27/2008 3:06:40 PM , Rating: 2
heck i have a mac and love it to pieces (and it was heavily discounted thanks to being a broke ass student) and even i dont use safari

i dont think ever give it the time of day, when i got my machine the first thing i did was get some familiarity by installing Opera and then later, Fire Fox (for the sole reason that FF lets me actually see my passwords instead of locking them away like opera)

Safari only gets used in the event that FF and Opera cannot display a page properly. thats it.


RE: so?
By Bigjee on 3/27/2008 3:23:04 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
it's not like someone in their right mind would install it on a windows machine anyway


Its not the consumer thats chooses always. Just recently apple's been forcing the Safari and Quick time + Itunes installation notice onto consumers(i have quick time installed). I don't think anyone would want to install safari alone as a browser but because of that annoying notification I almost pressed "install 2 items" rather than the "cancel" button.


RE: so?
By walk2k on 3/27/2008 4:20:58 PM , Rating: 4
I'm curious as to why I can only install it on 1 computer?

Isn't it... free? Don't they really want you to install it on as many computers as you can??

Of course after trying it out last year, I would never touch it. It was slow, buggy, and had horrible font rendering... like someone smeared vasoline on the screen... couldn't read anything!


RE: so?
By encryptkeeper on 3/28/2008 8:50:54 AM , Rating: 2
Apple's EULA states that Safari can be installed on "a single Apple-labeled computer at a time", forbidding non-Apple-marked hardware Windows machines

Well, it's a good thing I avoided legal action by not downloading Safari.


RE: so?
By jlips6 on 3/28/2008 12:08:38 PM , Rating: 2
I have a macintosh with lepord, and let me just say, that safari is so buggy that it makes me want to test the CPU's ability to function when covered in explosive powder. Safari is only good for mobile devices, on computers it's so awful it can't even render a website like yahoo correctly. I hate safari so much that I hope the rage from my post pours out of the screen and destroys whoever programmed safari.
*cough cough*...

I mean hi. Great job apple.


Ironic?
By bplewis24 on 3/27/2008 1:41:23 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Amidst this embarassing debacle, new reports are coming in that Safari is faring rather poorly on Windows XP, with many users experiencing crashes. Windows XP users who felt smug about Windows Vista bugs, may find an unexpected new source of problems-- Apple. Apple's support forum is being flooded by angry posters complaining that their XP version of the Safari browser is broken. Says SakJosep, one such poster, "When I try to start Safari 3.1 in Windows XP, it crashes right away."


There's irony in here somewhere...I just can't spot it :)

Brandon




RE: Ironic?
By borismkv on 3/27/2008 2:05:21 PM , Rating: 5
"It just works!" - every Apple Fanboy ever.


RE: Ironic?
By Cobra Commander on 3/27/2008 2:05:26 PM , Rating: 2
I have a problem with the article's comment, "Windows XP users who felt smug about Windows Vista bugs, may find an unexpected new source of problems-- Apple." - this makes it sound like XP users shouldn't be so smug anymore but its premise conflicts with the statement made - we're comparing (Microsoft) Windows Vista bugs with Apple Safari bugs... this has nothing to do with XP vs. Vista.

Smug & Happy with XP,
Cobra Commander


RE: Ironic?
By Symmetriad on 3/27/2008 3:58:11 PM , Rating: 2
Not surprising - Apple software is one of my biggest annoyances when it comes to using my PC. Who's the only company whose software doesn't play nice with my pro-audio production sound card? Apple! Whose programs keep wanting to steal all my file associations? Apple! Who has multiple useless services running in the background at Windows startup just taking up memory? Apple!

I should really just give Apple the boot and switch over to Anapod Explorer for transferring stuff to my iPod.


RE: Ironic?
By 777 on 3/27/2008 10:42:10 PM , Rating: 1
If you hate Apple and their products so much why did you ever buy a ipod or install any of their software? No one forced you to do this, there are plenty of alternative products you can get and do everything and probably more than with Apple. I never get why someone buys a Apple product and then moans and moans about how bad they are.

I have a two desktop Mac's that have always worked great, oh yeah with Pro-tools audio software, final cut pro, dvd studio pro, excel, word, photoshop, Cinema 4d, Sorenson Squeeze, Toast and Boris Red. I have two pc laptops and gave away a third, the two I have now are slow and can be a pain in the ars to use just for email and internet surfing. Hmmmmm . . .


RE: Ironic?
By jlips6 on 3/28/2008 12:13:05 PM , Rating: 2
I think that he's complaining because apple programs not on an apple cause his pc to run sluggishly. Wonder why? maybe windows can make some malicious code for microsoft office for apples new operating system (not that it even needs it.) So it slows down the boot time, or general operation. Still think this is legitimate?


RE: Ironic?
By PWNettle on 3/28/2008 7:58:15 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I hate apple, their products, their marketing, and their attitude.

Hence, I don't install apple crap on my PC and will never buy an iPod, which is just a wannabe trendy MP3 player - it's nothing special.

Apple should get out of the browser business and stick to what its good at - whatever that might be.


iTunes is malware!
By cochy on 3/27/2008 2:18:05 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Apple made the dubious decision of trying to coerce iTune's 500 million users into installing Safari along with the normal iTunes update, via a pesky dialog, which comes with the install Safari option checked by default. Mozilla blasted Apple for this tactic, saying it "borders on malware distribution practices".


Just reinforces my opinion that iTunes is the worst POS software available for a PC. I tell people it's a virus. I'd never buy an iPod just because of iTunes.




RE: iTunes is malware!
By wien on 3/27/2008 2:23:29 PM , Rating: 3
You (thankfully) don't need iTunes to use an iPod. My Nano is perfectly content talking to Winamp. There are of course other reasons for not buying an iPod, but don't let iTunes stop you. :)


RE: iTunes is malware!
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 3/27/2008 2:28:18 PM , Rating: 1
I found the older versions of iTunes better than some of the newer ones.


RE: iTunes is malware!
By Hare on 3/27/2008 3:32:20 PM , Rating: 2
To each his own...

I've spent countless hours trying to tweak foobar to do what I want. I've also tried mediamonkey, songbird, windows mediaplayer, winamp and n+1 other players and I've always gone back to iTunes. I just haven't found another app that works as well (browsing, smart playlists, library streaming to LAN) etc.

I understand that some people want a lightweight player that simply plays songs and that's it. iTunes is a bit bloated for that but calling it a virus seems a bit too much.


RE: iTunes is malware!
By jlips6 on 3/28/2008 12:18:13 PM , Rating: 2
But they don't have coverflow!

iTunes is great software ON A MACINTOSH. windows media center works fine for me on my PC. I have both, and they are designed for their own systems.

Just in general, may I ask what the point of coverflow is? I would really appreciate if they just took it off the touch, as it slows it down, takes up memory, is extremely frustrating to use, inefficient to use, and takes up the ability for the sideways turn that could be used for something different.


RE: iTunes is malware!
By Hare on 3/28/2008 1:59:45 PM , Rating: 2
Cover flow is just eye candy. I personally don't understand it at all. It's a lot faster to just search by name/album etc.

One key feature why I use iTunes is the LAN library sharing. I can access my friends playlists over our VPN network like their entire collection was on my HD.


All Hail Apple (**gag**)
By steve1014 on 3/27/2008 3:03:28 PM , Rating: 4
Apple has finally become a victim of its own greed and slander. They have walked around bashing PC's publicly for the past 2-3 years and now that their greed has sent them into the PC market they have created crashing software that borders on the line of being unethically distributed. They should be very proud of themselves and their we don't make faulty products campaign.

All the Apple lemmings should be falling off the cliff any time now.




RE: All Hail Apple (**gag**)
By beyazkeyat on 3/27/2008 3:56:20 PM , Rating: 2
Well you know that it's OBVIOUSLY not Apple's fault but Microsoft's for having a buggy OS, right?

I mean come on. Apple never does ANYTHING wrong. Everybody knows this ;)


RE: All Hail Apple (**gag**)
By chick0n on 3/28/2008 12:09:52 AM , Rating: 1
lol !

Next thing I know is that they gonna put blame god said why did God allowed PC to exist in the first place !

Why God WHY !?

(Mac sux, all the time, period.)


RE: All Hail Apple (**gag**)
By 777 on 3/28/2008 4:32:37 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
(Mac sux, all the time, period.)


Your an ignorant ass who's probably never used a Mac and afraid to use one, period. Mac's may not do everything well, but you show me one audio professional that uses Pro-tools and likes the pc version better. I have worked as a sound engineer/editor professionally for almsot 20 years and Macs have always ruled here over the mostly pile Sh-t Pc's, period. I know of not one professional that uses the pc version. Get over yourself, that's why we have different computers for different uses and both computers serve their purposes well.

You Apple haters amaze me as if the Pc was God's gift to world with no problems - wrong!


RE: All Hail Apple (**gag**)
By jlips6 on 3/28/2008 12:23:39 PM , Rating: 2
I have a question that may sound biased, but there's no other way to put it. Please don't mistake it for apple bashing.

All the soundcards in all the apple computers I use (Macbook, E-mac, G-4) are completely awful. As in, I could go Simon Cowell on them and not overstate their suck.

Does the macbook pro (or whatever apple compy you use.) Have a different soundcard? Or is there something I'm missing?


RE: All Hail Apple (**gag**)
By 777 on 3/30/2008 3:05:15 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
All the soundcards in all the apple computers I use (Macbook, E-mac, G-4) are completely awful.


If by this you mean the sound output that comes with the Mac(not a 3rd party hardware plugin) then they are definetly no worse than any pc's built in sound output. But if you're talking about adding 3rd party hardware to your Mac, then it sound's like you didn't buy anything worth squat and this has nothing to do with Apple. Also you cannot install any sound card in a Macbook.

You can buy a scaled down pro tools for $399.00 and the audio goes through the Mbox, which sounds pretty darn good. The hardware I use such as a Black magic decklink card for both video and sound in/out are great, this is high end professional stuff. I have never had the need to buy a cheap 3rd party sound card for the Mac, not sure why one would need to do this when you can record and playback thru either firewire(which is best) or USB.


RE: All Hail Apple (**gag**)
By jlips6 on 4/1/2008 5:51:50 PM , Rating: 2
I mean songs I have bought through itunes, and play on itunes with headphones with a 26,000 Mhz frequency response sound better on different computers with the same headphones.


Lawyers?
By Oregonian2 on 3/27/2008 1:40:44 PM , Rating: 5
Seems like it's Apple that's pushing it onto non-Apple computers, and therefore Apple's lawyers should sue Apple, or at least file for a restraining order against Apple to make it stop.

Lawyers seem to like to do anything that'll keep them busy, so I wonder if they will....

:-)




RE: Lawyers?
By 7Enigma on 3/27/2008 2:56:57 PM , Rating: 2
Reminds me of that coke commercial where they are trying to sue themselves...


Apple made a mistake, No Way!
By purefat on 3/27/2008 2:08:44 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Some users are reporting that the browser simply will not open. The thread on the problems has received over 1,000 views well before receiving much media coverage, making it clear that the problem may be afflicting many users. There have also been scattered reports of Safari not running on Vista, though XP has received many more such reports. Of the Vista problems, most posters said the previous versions worked properly, but that the update to the current version, 3.1 broke the browser.


How is that possible? All Apple's creations are always supersafe and bugfree. It's all Bill Gate's fault!!!!

[Incoming Apple fanboy missiles]




EULA is not an issue
By i4mt3hwin on 3/27/2008 4:03:25 PM , Rating: 3
If the agreement says you can install it on no more than one "one Apple-labeled computer at a time", then there should be no problem installing it on a Windows machine. Because installing it on a windows machine would be ZERO Apple-labeled computers at a time.




RE: EULA is not an issue
By mikefarinha on 3/27/2008 4:21:02 PM , Rating: 2
Good catch... but I think it brings up another question... is it possible to install multiple instances of software on a Mac? Not a very good installer if that is the case, or maybe this is a fault with the OS environment?

In Windows if you try to install IE or Firefox with them already installed it will simply ask if you want to update the software or repair it.


To apple:
By HighWing on 3/27/2008 5:31:35 PM , Rating: 5
To Apple:

Gee it's not that easy to make perfect software when you DON'T control the hardware now is it?

That has been my biggest complaint about apple. They go along saying they are such a great system, but they lock you into hardware that you can't easily fix and/or modify yourself. Then they even further limit the modifications you can "buy".

I have always said and will continue to say it. Apple is only good because 1) they have a small user base and less product in the real world to fail. 2) they only have few bugs and viruses because of #1 and no virus writer wants to write a virus to infect a small % of the market when you can go for the gold. If apple computers were as popular as windows, they would have all the same problems of windows for all the same reasons, only they would never admit it.
I think this recent Safari bug sums up the last part. And if you want to go there... The first gen iPods had a HUGE defect rate as well. And if you don't believe me, ask anyone who worked at a store that sold them at that time and they will tell you they probably had at the least 1 return a day if not more.




Safari virus
By CU on 3/27/2008 2:08:50 PM , Rating: 4
Yall just don't get it. Apple is trying to write a virus. They have got it installing itself through malware practices. They just need to get it to crash XP and not itself. Keep trying Apple you will get the virus working.




Mud in Apple's face...
By cscpianoman on 3/27/2008 2:46:34 PM , Rating: 2
For the past few years we have heard nothing, but great praise for Apple, and in many respects it is well deserved. You cannot fault Apple for one of the most successful products ever, obviously the iPod. It has almost gotten to the point that it would appear nothing would stop Apple. Well, there is one thing, arrogance. Touting you are the best and you can do no wrong is going to cause a shortage of quality control, as we can see with Safari, and further coming under the scrutiny of those who don't buy the infallibility. I'm sure hackers, virus writers and whoever are now working at proving Apple as a secure system or not-so-secure system. Yeah, this stuff seems obvious, but I also can't stand a company that touts themselves as the perfect company.

The interesting thing about this is not matter how small the mistake Apple now makes the more it is going to be blown out of proportion and their stock will reflect that. Take a look at what happened to Apple's stock immediately after the release of the Apple Air for a perfect example of that.




RE: Mud in Apple's face...
By robinthakur on 4/2/2008 11:20:57 AM , Rating: 2
I think that's a bit of a thick causality argument really. The stock price discounts widespread misery and expectations of future misery in the US economy amaongst other things which Investors care about. People bought the stock on rumour of the air then sold once it was revealed to make a profit. Simple as. Investors like companies which frequently issue RNS's (news), Investors aren't that concerned if the macbook air lacks that gigabit ethernet port, unless that is, it fails to sell. This has so far not been the case, at least here in London there are queues of people every day when the Apple shop opens of neophytes looking for the elusive Air.


Wait a sec?
By Hare on 3/27/2008 3:36:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Jonathan Kramer, a tech attorney who runs Kramer Telecom Law Firm states, "We call this an impossibility issue, you can't enforce a term that's impossible."

You can always get a Mac, install Windows on it and then install Safari.

Btw. Do people actually read EULA's?




RE: Wait a sec?
By walk2k on 3/27/2008 4:27:33 PM , Rating: 2
Good point. Nobody reads them. I especially love the ones that force you to scroll to the bottom. Yeah because my keyboard has an "END" key doesn't mean I read all your crappy legalease chum.


Works for me...
By dennqis on 3/27/2008 4:10:54 PM , Rating: 2
I have Safari 3.1 installed on XP right now. I am currenty using it. I have had no problems with it crashing at all. I has been significantly faster than Firefox as well. The only thing it lacks is ad-block and no-script.




RE: Works for me...
By cscpianoman on 3/27/2008 6:50:48 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, and you are the perfect representation of the entire Windows XP user population.


Skynet
By Screwuhippie on 3/27/2008 2:19:14 PM , Rating: 1
Safari - SKynet? Both start with an S

Apple has become self aware!




RE: Skynet
By majorpain on 3/28/2008 11:17:28 AM , Rating: 2
roftlllmao!!
That was a good one.

BTW, still using Kubuntu and FF here with a 3 year old Pentium D... all good. Will Skynet, ups.. Safari ever work with Linux? :D


Just more proof that....
By jon1003 on 3/27/2008 6:54:57 PM , Rating: 3
More proof that no one really reads those EULAs in the impossibly small boxes... ever. Not even the people that write them.




well
By sprockkets on 3/27/2008 3:09:57 PM , Rating: 2
I guess, um, if you are running a virtual copy of XP on your Mac or running it via Boot camp on your computer with a lit up apple logo on it, you are OK. But how many is that! LOL




ugh
By sandorski on 3/27/2008 3:48:21 PM , Rating: 2
Ya, I noticed Safari in my iTunes Updater recently. Was somewhat irritated, especially by it being pre-selected. I'd much prefer they'd fix the Updater so that it actually Updates iTunes(always errors out on me)before trying to trick me into installing more stuff.




New Apple ad
By Janooo on 3/27/2008 4:52:02 PM , Rating: 2
I can not wait to see a new ad where the Windows guy crashes the Apple/Safari guy. :-)




Tee Hee
By fuser197 on 3/27/2008 5:04:02 PM , Rating: 2
"It Just Works".

Haha




Dude wheres my Lexus?
By jvillaro on 3/27/2008 5:23:38 PM , Rating: 2
So nobody (Pirks) is talking about lexus and chevys now?
Thought so...




By PhatoseAlpha on 3/27/2008 8:53:04 PM , Rating: 2
Meh. Another marginal browser to check compatibility with. Theoretically, anyway - realistically, I'll just ignore it's existence like I do Konqueror and Opera and whatever that browser thing on the PS3 is. It's not worth it to management for sure, and it's not worth it to me.

It might be useful if it was 100% identical in function to Safari mac - would at least allow me to check that my js runs on macs, since I don't have nor do I want a mac. But what's the chance of that happening, really?

Firefox has firebug. IE has the market essentially cornered. What has safari got?




You're all lame
By mmmmgood on 4/13/2008 5:33:39 PM , Rating: 2
I read about three comments before I've come to the conclusion that you are all seriously in need of a life. Just use your computer and shut the hell up.




Safari
By ArchiesBoy on 4/13/2008 5:51:13 PM , Rating: 2
Windows? Safari's crashing on my iMac!!! Time after time it simply quits! Time after time it can't load a page! It's a lousy browser; I downloaded Firefox, which so far has been 100% reliable. Not only that, they issue frequent updates which make it even MORE reliable. I've been a stone Mac user since 1990, and I say to Apple: SAFARI IS LOUSY!




"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki