Safari beta for Windows updates to 3.0.4, fixes most of what was wrong

Filed under: Internet, Windows, Apple, Microsoft, Freeware

Safari beta for Windows updates to 3.0.4, fixes most of what was wrong

by Jason Clarke Nov 15th 2007

Apple released a whole slew of updates today, covered very extensively by our sister-site TUAW. They included updates to Tiger, iPhoto, and many of Apple's Pro apps. However, in addition to updates to Mac software, Apple also released an interesting update to a Windows application: Safari for Windows.

The list of improvements is pretty remarkable, and it appears that Apple has addressed most of the highest-profile deficiencies that were noted in the initial beta. For example, Windows users balked at the fact that Apple originally chose to have Safari act like a Mac app rather than a Windows app when it comes to basic window interactions like resizing. Many users also found the way that fonts are rendered in Safari to be inconsistent with other Windows applications.

If you find yourself agreeing with either of these complaints, you'll be happy to note that the new version of Safari actually acts like a Windows application, and can be resized from any side. Apple has also added the option of using Windows' standard font-smoothing technology (ClearType) instead of Apple's font-smoothing method. We'll spare you the debate as to which is better, and simply acknowledge that both are valid methods for smoothing fonts on screen, but are certainly different and it's not surprising that people have strong preferences.

You can view the whole list of improvements on a page Apple has up called About the Safari 3 Beta Update 3.0.4 for Windows.

Tags: Apple, ClearType, font-smoothing, Microsoft, Safari, Safari-beta, Safari-for-Windows, Windows-Safari

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Fox318 said 12:16PM on 11-15-2007

Is there any reason at all why someone should use this over Opera/Firefox?

John said 1:55PM on 11-15-2007

Yeah...I fail to see the point of this.

michael said 7:26PM on 11-15-2007

Who would actually use Safari on Windows?

Seriously, Apple software sucks on Windows. iTunes is garbage, QuickTime is garbage, and even Safari is all garbage on Windows.

I'll stick to my IE7, thanks. Nice try, Apple.

Naren Hazareesingh said 7:41PM on 11-15-2007

I love Apple's font smoothing. It is undeniably the best out there. But, unfortunately, it looks plain weird on a PC! I'll stick w/ClearType on Vista. Unfortunately. Stupid Anti-competitive Mirosorft [sic].

rocketboy said 9:17PM on 11-15-2007

If you think that Apple's font smoothing method is "undeniably the best", you do need actually realize how font smoothing looks. Windows tries to match the font with the pixels, which in some ways gives a smoother display at the risk of changing the look of the font. Apple tries to make the pixels fit the font, so although theirs is more 'true' to the font, in many ways it's not smoother.

james 42 said 10:21PM on 11-15-2007

I think it is generally agreed the Windows font smoothing is superior to Apples. That has been my experience. But to each his own.

It is nice to hear they are working on it, but do we really need this? If you're not happy with IE7, there's Firefox. Safari is better then Opera in that a lot of web 2.0 stuff works much better in Safari then in Opera. Opera is still not ready for prime time, but it is getting really close. It reminds me of the early Firefox, maybe around .8. I can't recall the exact rev, but there was definitely a tipping point maybe around .9 when Firefox finally hit the mark. Opera is nearly there.

Oh, and to answer my own question, yeah, some of us do need Safari for windows. It means that those of us developing web sites on a Windows platform don't have to have a Mac to test a site in Safari.

And for my last two cents, let me just add that I think it is funny that Apple is making it more 'Windowsy'. One of the reasons for putting Safari on Windows was to give Windows users a taste of OS X and maybe lure them to a Mac. But if they admit that it needs to be more Windowsy, then doesn't that mean OS X needs to more Windowsy too? Only kidding, I love OS X just the way it is (but will continue to use XP).

Skippi said 11:33PM on 11-15-2007

One important thing - Gmail is supporting chats in this new Safari build. Maybe just a coincidence but a long awaited update!

Bram said 11:38PM on 11-15-2007

The biggest problem of safari (ver 3.0.3) in my PC is, safari can't load ajax webmail(gmail/yahoo). Has it change in this newer version (3.04)?

donely said 6:29AM on 11-16-2007

...but unfortunately they haven't fixed the "bug" of not being able to use the trackpoint(with pressed down button above the two mouse-buttons) on a IBM laptop to scroll as you can in Firefox/IE, which leaves me sh*t out of luck of using Safari without changing the way I use browsers...dang!

james 42 said 10:22AM on 11-16-2007

@Bram, I had no problem loading Gmail in 3.0.3. I did not test it extensively, but it did work better the Opera. 3.0.4 loads Gmail just fine too and Yahoo Mail too. Live mail seems to work, but not perfectly.

rutger said 4:03PM on 11-20-2007

Just tested the Gmail chat function on 3.0.4, but it doesn't seem to work. On OSX (leopard) it works, but it doesn't on PC. :(
So far, for switching to Safari on pc...

Greg M said 3:51PM on 11-26-2007

Could someone tell me WHY someone would EVER want to run Safari in Windows? This browser is lousy and not compatible with a ton of applications and plug-ins. Firefox is by far, hands down, the best browser on the market. Even IE 7 is better than Safari.

Safari_User said 2:43AM on 12-07-2007

This is one of the best browsers on windows, completely better than Firefox, Opera and Google. This is way faster, easy to learn, and easy to install.
I love it.

Featured Time Waster

Civiballs is a beautiful, soothing physics puzzle Time Waster

I have an absolute weakness for physics games, and while Civiballs isn't the strongest physics-based game, what it lacks in the physics department it makes up for a few times over in style and fun.

In Civiballs, you are presented with a few colored balls, and your goal is to get those balls into the same-colored urn on the level. The "civi" part of Civiballs is that there are 3 sets of levels to play, each representing a different civilization. While the civilization doesn't affect gameplay, the artwork for each level is beautifully themed to it's appropriate era.

To play the game, you are given only one tool - a sword with which to cut the chains that are holding the balls. The puzzle part of the game is in figuring out what order, and with what timing to cut each chain. Do it right, and all the right balls end up in the right urns, with no stray balls entering an urn (a no-no). Do it wrong, and you get to start over again.

Civiballs is not terribly deep on gameplay; the entire game can be completed in about 15 minutes. But if you enjoy this type of game, it will be a very enjoyable 15 minutes.

View more Time Wasters