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

RE: so?
By Pirks on 3/28/2008 11:24:16 AM , Rating: -1
Just a few Mac users are assholes. I know a lot of them, most are 100% normal, but there are some pretty nasty bigots. Well, zealotry is everywhere, unfortunately. But Mac users are mostly okay guys from my own experience.

Watching DVDs on 13" screen from such a distance you need a remote? You're a pervert, good sir.

Cables from VGA to DVI do not turn video signal from analog to digital. Hence Toshiba still continues to output inferior analog signal compared to clear digital from MacBook. I'm anal about that because YOU guys are anal about extra 50 bucks to upgrade RAM and HDD on that MacBook. If you stop being anal about 50 bucks, then I'll stop being abal about DVI and gigabit ethernet. Deal?

P.S. speaking of Dell Vostros - my Vostro 1700 is a nice laptop but I really wish I had a secret cache stash to the tune of a million bucks or so, this way I could afford MacBook Pro 17". While Vostro is a decent 17 incher and I can't really complain about it, it's still total piece of cheapo junk when compared to a prefect beauty and functionality and ERGONOMICS of MBP 17". Freakin rich bastards, god I hate them for buying those MBPs. Maybe in my next life if I'm lucky :(


"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer














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