One More Thing: Safari for Windows

First Thoughts

If it seems like this isn't a very positive review of Safari, it's not for the lack of trying. We were impressed with Mac OS X 10.4, and happy with Safari there, however that's not enough. Currently Internet Explorer and Firefox are the dominant web browsers, for Safari for Windows to make a place for itself it needs to form a user base by taking users from those two web browsers. Given what we're seeing with Safari 3 today, that's hard to imagine.

As we mentioned previously Safari needs a hook, but at this point it doesn't have one. Internet Explorer is included by default with Windows, and it's the most compatible browser and currently the only browser that supports a sandbox mode on Windows Vista. Firefox has its versatile extension system that allows profound levels of customization and is completely cross-platform. Safari has its inline search, and that's the most notable feature. When we ask the question of "why should we use Safari instead of Firefox/IE?" we come up blank, there's just not enough different about Safari worth going through the effort to switch browsers.

When we ask the question of "why should we not use Safari instead of Firefox/IE?" we come up with the interface problems, and they make a very solid case. Given the current interface problems, it's very hard to use Safari, and no one likes using a hard to use application if there's an alternative. We have to come to the conclusion that unless/until Apple straightens out the interface issues with Safari, we won't recommend it over the current web browsers available for Windows.

This is problematic for Apple. Although we have other theories on Safari that we'll get to in a moment, we're not ready to be so bold as to proclaim that Apple doesn't intend for this browser to be used on Windows by the masses - if that was the case they wouldn't have made it WWDC's "one more thing" or have giving it such prominent billing on their website. So why they've ported the Mac interface over so perfectly remains a mystery as it will hurt adoption of the browser. Perhaps it's another Trojan horse to entice Windows users to use Mac OS X by showcasing how the Mac interface works? Perhaps it's just a genuine Apple blunder by not taking in to consideration how much trouble the Mac interface can cause in a Windows environment? Or perhaps it's something else.

Early-on we mentioned that there have been several more diabolical theories proposed on and off the show floor at WWDC about Safari. The current front-runner of these, and one that we partially agree with, is that Safari for Windows isn't meant to be a browser, it's a developers' kit. As best as we can tell, Safari for Windows is a perfect port of Safari for Mac OS X straight down to the font smoothing; for anyone needing to do compatibility testing with Safari they no longer need a Mac to do it.

This makes website designers' lives much easier as they can test for what amounts to Mac compatibility without a Mac. Additionally, any significant adoption of the browser by Windows users will help drive designers to test for such compatibility, which in turn helps Apple achieve greater compatibility with the default Mac browser.

But it was also announced at WWDC that the only kind of third-party development allowed for the iPhone would be web-based applications under Safari, with these applications designed around the so-called Web 2.0 technologies. If Safari for Windows is a perfect port, as is Safari for the iPhone, then it would be possible to not just test web pages for rendering problems under Mac OS X and the iPhone, but it would be possible to develop applications for these platforms, the iPhone in particular. Given the current situation, this theory makes a great deal of sense based upon what we have encountered with Safari for Windows.

Wrapping things up however, we're left with a slightly sour taste on the whole situation. From a Windows end user perspective, Safari isn't even worth downloading in spite of the hype. From a developer's perspective, it's a useful way to put together web sites and web based applications for Apple's two major platforms. One way or another Apple seems to be in things for the long haul, and given Apple's past software efforts on Windows this probably won't be the last time that they make a big push for Safari on Windows. Let's hope however that things are a little more sensible the next time.