6 ms·

Why I Use Safari Instead Of Firefox

28 points by comatose_kid 14y ago

octotoad 14y ago
Why I Dismiss Webpages Instantly: Green text on black background. My eyes hurt after only a few seconds. It's not 1996.
- web_chops 14y ago
  I still see the reflections if I close my eyes :(
- dustinewan 14y ago
  Well, he did complain about tabs in the browser. Seems like he is stuck in 1996.
  - read_wharf 14y ago
    A very lucrative 1996.
- mikestew 14y ago
  I edit text all day with a black background, often with green text (but not blindingly bright green), and that still makes my eyes hurt. I didn't make it past the 2nd paragraph.
- bjorn2404 14y ago
  The ironic thing is that a lot of it discusses browser UI design.
- bdunbar 14y ago
  Some things get only so good - after that you're just engineering better cup holders. Manual shifts for cars. The IBM model-M keyboard. Unix. Green on black text. That said, he does have the contrast turned up a bit too much for my taste.
- mc32 14y ago
  I had to copy & paste into a text editor to read it.
Craiggybear 14y ago
What a fabulous collection of totally fallacious beliefs and opinion. And no, not every Linux user uses Firefox. In fact I find it becoming a rarity.
antirez 14y ago
The real question is why he does not use Chrome ;)
- dchest 14y ago
  Tabs, I guess.
- Mansyn 14y ago
  Came here to say the same thing.
- stock_toaster 14y ago
  I can only speak to why Chrome irritates me (but apparently not enough to switch to something else yet). 1) When I copy the url, it adds the prefix into the paste buffer. This is the opposite of what I expect from an application -- "Do what I ask you". Even if you select just the hostname of a non-ssl site, it still prefixes the `http://` http://`. This is a constant irritant when I try ssh'ing to a host or pasting a hostname to someone/something that only wants the hostname. 2) It displays some prefixes (https) but not others (http). I would prefer to be shown all prefixes. There was even talk of hiding https prefix for a while as I recall. 3) Location bar history completion always seems to show me the worse possible result. It often omits things that I want, and I find no way to complete to them. Sometimes it shows the result only if it type the full url. 4) Choices that make sense if you are trying to make the browser an OS, by ignoring OS functionality -- native printing dialogs/previews, native dns caches, tabs (custom window management), task managers, etc. Not all of them are choices I like (printing, custom dns cache). Some I like (tabs). 5) I am not sure how I feel about bundling flash. I have 'click to play' enabled, and the only thing I use flash for is the occasional youtube video someone sends me to view.
RandallBrown 14y ago
It's bizarre that this guy doesn't use tabs. Oh well, to each his own. I use Safari instead of Firefox because the swipe gesture to go forward and back works so much better. I love that I can swipe away half the page, get a peek at what I'm going back (or forward) to and then return to the page I was on without triggering a reload or anything happending. It breaks some sites a little bit (GitHub especially) but it looks cool on most of the Internet so I'm fine with it.
- read_wharf 14y ago
  He's using something tab-like, the task bar or whatever it's called on Mac. I use my (linux) task bar to see my separate apps (like everyone does), with sub-"apps" in Firefox tabs. His "tabs" are just migrated up to his task bar as separate instances of Safari. Same thing, different implementation. They both bookmark locations of concentration. The difference is that, on the Mac, for jwz, it works well with Safari and not with Firefox.
  - hollerith 14y ago
    Actually, his "tabs" are just migrated up to the "Window" menu of Safari since there is no bar or anything that allows you to switch between windows of a single app. (The Dock, unlike the task bar in Gnome 2 or Windows, only lets you switch between apps.) You can also switch between windows with the Command-backspace key and with Expose (if you are on Leopard or Snow Leopard) or Mission Control (if you are on Lion), but those are pretty lame IMHO. >The difference is that, on the Mac, for jwz, it works well with Safari and not with Firefox. Not true: on the Mac, switching between the windows of Firefox works the same way as switching between the windows of Safari.
- shabble 14y ago
  There is a school of thought that prefers applications to delegate their window handling duties to the window manager, in order to have consistent behaviour across applications. In that case, both MDI and tabbed UIs remove the capability of the WM to manage that specific rectangle of content, and require you to use in-app controls, which may not even exist. This is especially pronounced for those who use non-standard window managers, say Ion or Awesome window manager which let you tile new windows rather than having them appear whereever they choose. Dunno if that's jwz's reason, but it's one good reason that I've had in the past (although not for browsers, the number of tabs I keep grows too rapidly to manage nicely alongside long-lived windows)
drcube 14y ago
I tried using Safari when it was first ported to Windows, back when I used Windows, which means at least 5 years ago. It was slow and I couldn't do the things I was used to doing in Firefox or Opera, so I switched back after about a week. I can't live without tree style tabs, noscript, ghostery, firemacs, facebook purity and especially adblock plus, which is why I have stuck with Firefox for a good part of a decade. Does Safari even have plugins? What, besides allowing you to turn off tabs and being the unchangeable default on Mac, does Safari have going for it? In my extremely limited experience, it seems to fall short of even IE, let alone Firefox, Opera or Chrome.
- twiceaday 14y ago
  It does have ad block, it does have plugins, and it is a changeable default.
  - drcube 14y ago
    Thanks. I misread. According to jwz, it is the unchangeable default on iOS, not OSX.
- maratd 14y ago
  > It was slow and I couldn't do the things I was used to doing in Firefox or Opera It's still slow. But you can do all the stuff you can with the other browsers. I use it for developing mobile stuff, the ability to switch user agents is built in and it's at least slightly similar the iOS Safari.
mistercow 14y ago
>Google takes this even further: all of their UI decisions are made statistically. I like how the author scoffs at this as if it is self-evidently preposterous, yet Google is one company whose UI design elegance is consistently competitive with Apple's. I can't think of a single UI design choice in Safari that I prefer over how Chrome does it.
- jfb 14y ago
  Google's UI is competitive with Apple's in elegance? That's an interesting perspective; obviously, I don't agree.
  - koeselitz 14y ago
    I think it's kind of silly to argue Google v. Apple on elegance, yeah. But to my eye, Chrome really is a lot more elegant than Safari. There are a billion things Chrome does to make browsing quicker for me, not just because of raw browser speed but because things are just so graceful, simple, and direct. Just being able to search within a URL by starting to type the URL and then hitting 'Tab' is golden to me, and saves me a huge amount of time every single day.
    - jfb 14y ago
      Yeah, it's subjective, and of course the way one works doesn't exist in the world of Platonic forms but is a function of the tools one uses. EDIT: So, therefore, it's very difficult to make claims across toolsets. I am an Apple/Emacs guy from back in the Stone Age, so what I think of as "elegant" is going to be very different than someone who has a different history. YMW truly V.
  - mistercow 14y ago
    Well I should qualify that by saying that I mean the Apple of today vs. the Google of today. Apple's design has slipped considerably – just look at Lion, iTunes, more recent versions of Safari, or the latest UI for the Apple TV. But if we were talking about Apple ca. 2009, Apple would easily win in any contest of UI design.
yalestar 14y ago
If we all told the author that he was an utterly fascinating contrarian, would that help him not feel so angry?
klausa 14y ago
I don't know whether it's my Mountain Lion install, particular version of Chrome/Opera/Firefox - but there is one reason why I use Safari - its butter-smooth scrolling. Seriously, I was pretty huge Opera fanboy - but then I switched over to Safari to check out some page that was just broken in Opera and I was blown away. If you don't have Mac with multi-touch trackpad, it might not be that big of a deal, but boy, does it make difference. I hate almost everything else in Safari (no ability to pin tabs, that ridiculous "yeah, we won't resize tabs so we can show you more, just hide them in this stupid little >> menu" thing, I could go on and on...), but the way it scrolls outweighs anything else for me.
ajross 14y ago
Huh... "this guy", "the author" (2x). Do people really not know who jwz is or why it might be notable that he doesn't use Firefox? Generally when a personal rant like this is upvoted, the reason isn't the content alone.
- gammarator 14y ago
  His wikipedia page redirects from his initials: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jwz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jwz
- bradleyjg 14y ago
  Since people still don't seem to be getting it: jwz was one of the principle programmers of Netscape Navigator. He coined the term mozilla. He spearheaded the effort to get it open sourced. If you learned to program in the 90s the only hacker that was even comparable was Carmack. ... and further more all of you youngsters need to get the hell off of my lawn.
- milesc 14y ago
  The irony of his essay really hit home after watching the first few minutes the Alex Faaborg video he linked to. Alex uses an interview with jwz to introduce the philosophical foundation that Mozilla is built one. Times sure have changed. I thought Jamie's essay was pretty reasonable. It highlights the open vs. closed debate that's been going on for decades. I doubt that open systems will ever be able to provide the end-to-end consistency and integration that an Apple-style walled garden can provide (if done right). You have to decide what's more important to you.
  - ajross 14y ago
    > You have to decide what's more important to you. Unless the walls get too high. And of course there's the argument that the walled gardens are built on land fertilized by open systems; they can't survive alone.
    - milesc 14y ago
halayli 14y ago
I feel jwz is trying to find a rational to his feelings.
CervezaPorFavor 14y ago
When one starts using the "it just works" phrase or its variants, I know no further reasoning would be necessary.
rmk2 14y ago
>> "I'm certainly willing to inconvenience myself for my political beliefs. I've done it before and I'll do it again. But in this case, the inconvenience is too great. Apple's approach is resulting in a product that is just so much more usable than Mozilla's (and especially Google's) product that using it all day, every day would be just too much of a pain in the ass." This seems to be a wee contradiction, you don't mind inconvenience when it's for political conviction, however, the inconvenience stops at tabs in your browser and your browser's UI. Luckily there are the many, many, many political beliefs that do not touch on the unsurmountable problem posed by UX/UI for which one could live with a bit of inconvience. I don't mind some inconvenience to take to the street and partake in a demonstration, but my sofa's user experience is just so much better. I'm certainly willing to inconvenience myself for my political beliefs, though.
- ajross 14y ago
  He's explaining it correctly: some amount of inconvenience is worth some amount of adherence to principle. Different people put that bar in different places -- jwz is willing to compromise in places where rms isn't. And neither is about to light themselves on fire or blow up a building for free software. Now, you can argue with his metrics if you like (I happen to like Chrome a lot, though not so much Firefox or Safari these days). But that's just an opinion, it doesn't make what he says a contradiction.
  - rmk2 14y ago
    I just seemed off to me considering how he (probably rightly so) preempts most critique throughout in a somewhat hyperbolic yet lacks the the same tone in his closing statements.
ZeroGravitas 14y ago
While I can sympathise since I also dislike tabs and prefer integrated browsers such as Safari and Epiphany (though I'm currently using Pentadactyl which sort of has tabs) I'll note this contradiction: "Anyone who truly understands UI design realizes that every preference option is an admission of defeat: it's there because you couldn't just get it right the first time." Yet Safari offers tabs and gives you an option to turn them back off. Seems to directly contradict his issue with Firefox not giving him that option.
kijin 14y ago
> Anyone who truly understands UI design realizes that every preference option is an admission of defeat: it's there because you couldn't just get it right the first time. No, it's there because "getting it right" is subjective. If you're happy with Apple's defaults, the only thing it means is that your ideal of UI happens to coincide with Apple's idea of UI, no less, no more. If you would like everyone to respect your subjective preference of one browser over another (and there's nothing wrong with that), let's keep it all consistently subjective and avoid using moralizing phrases, okay?
hollerith 14y ago
>every few months I'm forced to upgrade [Firefox] and shit has moved around and I need to re-learn how to do a task that I was happily doing before There is a fix for that, which I have been happily using for the last month: Switch to the "Extended Support Release" version of Firefox. Since Mozilla makes it slightly difficult to get this version, I will provide instructions: go to ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ and download and install the latest version with "esr" in the name. If you make a mistake in identifying the latest version, it will upgrade itself to the latest version when you run it.
voidr 14y ago
Sorry, but I refuse to read any content that makes my eyes bleed.

28 points by comatose_kid 14y ago

octotoad 14y ago

Why I Dismiss Webpages Instantly: Green text on black background. My eyes hurt after only a few seconds. It's not 1996.

web_chops 14y ago
I still see the reflections if I close my eyes :(
dustinewan 14y ago
Well, he did complain about tabs in the browser. Seems like he is stuck in 1996.
- read_wharf 14y ago
  A very lucrative 1996.
mikestew 14y ago
I edit text all day with a black background, often with green text (but not blindingly bright green), and that still makes my eyes hurt. I didn't make it past the 2nd paragraph.
bjorn2404 14y ago
The ironic thing is that a lot of it discusses browser UI design.
bdunbar 14y ago
Some things get only so good - after that you're just engineering better cup holders. Manual shifts for cars. The IBM model-M keyboard. Unix. Green on black text. That said, he does have the contrast turned up a bit too much for my taste.
mc32 14y ago
I had to copy & paste into a text editor to read it.

Craiggybear 14y ago

What a fabulous collection of totally fallacious beliefs and opinion. And no, not every Linux user uses Firefox. In fact I find it becoming a rarity.

antirez 14y ago

The real question is why he does not use Chrome ;)

dchest 14y ago
Tabs, I guess.
Mansyn 14y ago
Came here to say the same thing.
stock_toaster 14y ago
I can only speak to why Chrome irritates me (but apparently not enough to switch to something else yet). 1) When I copy the url, it adds the prefix into the paste buffer. This is the opposite of what I expect from an application -- "Do what I ask you". Even if you select just the hostname of a non-ssl site, it still prefixes the `http://` http://`. This is a constant irritant when I try ssh'ing to a host or pasting a hostname to someone/something that only wants the hostname. 2) It displays some prefixes (https) but not others (http). I would prefer to be shown all prefixes. There was even talk of hiding https prefix for a while as I recall. 3) Location bar history completion always seems to show me the worse possible result. It often omits things that I want, and I find no way to complete to them. Sometimes it shows the result only if it type the full url. 4) Choices that make sense if you are trying to make the browser an OS, by ignoring OS functionality -- native printing dialogs/previews, native dns caches, tabs (custom window management), task managers, etc. Not all of them are choices I like (printing, custom dns cache). Some I like (tabs). 5) I am not sure how I feel about bundling flash. I have 'click to play' enabled, and the only thing I use flash for is the occasional youtube video someone sends me to view.

RandallBrown 14y ago

It's bizarre that this guy doesn't use tabs. Oh well, to each his own. I use Safari instead of Firefox because the swipe gesture to go forward and back works so much better. I love that I can swipe away half the page, get a peek at what I'm going back (or forward) to and then return to the page I was on without triggering a reload or anything happending. It breaks some sites a little bit (GitHub especially) but it looks cool on most of the Internet so I'm fine with it.

read_wharf 14y ago
He's using something tab-like, the task bar or whatever it's called on Mac. I use my (linux) task bar to see my separate apps (like everyone does), with sub-"apps" in Firefox tabs. His "tabs" are just migrated up to his task bar as separate instances of Safari. Same thing, different implementation. They both bookmark locations of concentration. The difference is that, on the Mac, for jwz, it works well with Safari and not with Firefox.
- hollerith 14y ago
  Actually, his "tabs" are just migrated up to the "Window" menu of Safari since there is no bar or anything that allows you to switch between windows of a single app. (The Dock, unlike the task bar in Gnome 2 or Windows, only lets you switch between apps.) You can also switch between windows with the Command-backspace key and with Expose (if you are on Leopard or Snow Leopard) or Mission Control (if you are on Lion), but those are pretty lame IMHO. >The difference is that, on the Mac, for jwz, it works well with Safari and not with Firefox. Not true: on the Mac, switching between the windows of Firefox works the same way as switching between the windows of Safari.
shabble 14y ago
There is a school of thought that prefers applications to delegate their window handling duties to the window manager, in order to have consistent behaviour across applications. In that case, both MDI and tabbed UIs remove the capability of the WM to manage that specific rectangle of content, and require you to use in-app controls, which may not even exist. This is especially pronounced for those who use non-standard window managers, say Ion or Awesome window manager which let you tile new windows rather than having them appear whereever they choose. Dunno if that's jwz's reason, but it's one good reason that I've had in the past (although not for browsers, the number of tabs I keep grows too rapidly to manage nicely alongside long-lived windows)

drcube 14y ago

I tried using Safari when it was first ported to Windows, back when I used Windows, which means at least 5 years ago. It was slow and I couldn't do the things I was used to doing in Firefox or Opera, so I switched back after about a week. I can't live without tree style tabs, noscript, ghostery, firemacs, facebook purity and especially adblock plus, which is why I have stuck with Firefox for a good part of a decade. Does Safari even have plugins? What, besides allowing you to turn off tabs and being the unchangeable default on Mac, does Safari have going for it? In my extremely limited experience, it seems to fall short of even IE, let alone Firefox, Opera or Chrome.

twiceaday 14y ago
It does have ad block, it does have plugins, and it is a changeable default.
- drcube 14y ago
  Thanks. I misread. According to jwz, it is the unchangeable default on iOS, not OSX.
maratd 14y ago
> It was slow and I couldn't do the things I was used to doing in Firefox or Opera It's still slow. But you can do all the stuff you can with the other browsers. I use it for developing mobile stuff, the ability to switch user agents is built in and it's at least slightly similar the iOS Safari.

mistercow 14y ago

>Google takes this even further: all of their UI decisions are made statistically. I like how the author scoffs at this as if it is self-evidently preposterous, yet Google is one company whose UI design elegance is consistently competitive with Apple's. I can't think of a single UI design choice in Safari that I prefer over how Chrome does it.

jfb 14y ago
Google's UI is competitive with Apple's in elegance? That's an interesting perspective; obviously, I don't agree.
- koeselitz 14y ago
  I think it's kind of silly to argue Google v. Apple on elegance, yeah. But to my eye, Chrome really is a lot more elegant than Safari. There are a billion things Chrome does to make browsing quicker for me, not just because of raw browser speed but because things are just so graceful, simple, and direct. Just being able to search within a URL by starting to type the URL and then hitting 'Tab' is golden to me, and saves me a huge amount of time every single day.
  - jfb 14y ago
    Yeah, it's subjective, and of course the way one works doesn't exist in the world of Platonic forms but is a function of the tools one uses. EDIT: So, therefore, it's very difficult to make claims across toolsets. I am an Apple/Emacs guy from back in the Stone Age, so what I think of as "elegant" is going to be very different than someone who has a different history. YMW truly V.
- mistercow 14y ago
  Well I should qualify that by saying that I mean the Apple of today vs. the Google of today. Apple's design has slipped considerably – just look at Lion, iTunes, more recent versions of Safari, or the latest UI for the Apple TV. But if we were talking about Apple ca. 2009, Apple would easily win in any contest of UI design.

yalestar 14y ago

If we all told the author that he was an utterly fascinating contrarian, would that help him not feel so angry?

klausa 14y ago

I don't know whether it's my Mountain Lion install, particular version of Chrome/Opera/Firefox - but there is one reason why I use Safari - its butter-smooth scrolling. Seriously, I was pretty huge Opera fanboy - but then I switched over to Safari to check out some page that was just broken in Opera and I was blown away. If you don't have Mac with multi-touch trackpad, it might not be that big of a deal, but boy, does it make difference. I hate almost everything else in Safari (no ability to pin tabs, that ridiculous "yeah, we won't resize tabs so we can show you more, just hide them in this stupid little >> menu" thing, I could go on and on...), but the way it scrolls outweighs anything else for me.

ajross 14y ago

Huh... "this guy", "the author" (2x). Do people really not know who jwz is or why it might be notable that he doesn't use Firefox? Generally when a personal rant like this is upvoted, the reason isn't the content alone.

gammarator 14y ago
His wikipedia page redirects from his initials: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jwz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jwz
bradleyjg 14y ago
Since people still don't seem to be getting it: jwz was one of the principle programmers of Netscape Navigator. He coined the term mozilla. He spearheaded the effort to get it open sourced. If you learned to program in the 90s the only hacker that was even comparable was Carmack. ... and further more all of you youngsters need to get the hell off of my lawn.
milesc 14y ago
The irony of his essay really hit home after watching the first few minutes the Alex Faaborg video he linked to. Alex uses an interview with jwz to introduce the philosophical foundation that Mozilla is built one. Times sure have changed. I thought Jamie's essay was pretty reasonable. It highlights the open vs. closed debate that's been going on for decades. I doubt that open systems will ever be able to provide the end-to-end consistency and integration that an Apple-style walled garden can provide (if done right). You have to decide what's more important to you.
- ajross 14y ago
  > You have to decide what's more important to you. Unless the walls get too high. And of course there's the argument that the walled gardens are built on land fertilized by open systems; they can't survive alone.
  - milesc 14y ago

halayli 14y ago

I feel jwz is trying to find a rational to his feelings.

CervezaPorFavor 14y ago

When one starts using the "it just works" phrase or its variants, I know no further reasoning would be necessary.

rmk2 14y ago

>> "I'm certainly willing to inconvenience myself for my political beliefs. I've done it before and I'll do it again. But in this case, the inconvenience is too great. Apple's approach is resulting in a product that is just so much more usable than Mozilla's (and especially Google's) product that using it all day, every day would be just too much of a pain in the ass." This seems to be a wee contradiction, you don't mind inconvenience when it's for political conviction, however, the inconvenience stops at tabs in your browser and your browser's UI. Luckily there are the many, many, many political beliefs that do not touch on the unsurmountable problem posed by UX/UI for which one could live with a bit of inconvience. I don't mind some inconvenience to take to the street and partake in a demonstration, but my sofa's user experience is just so much better. I'm certainly willing to inconvenience myself for my political beliefs, though.

ajross 14y ago
He's explaining it correctly: some amount of inconvenience is worth some amount of adherence to principle. Different people put that bar in different places -- jwz is willing to compromise in places where rms isn't. And neither is about to light themselves on fire or blow up a building for free software. Now, you can argue with his metrics if you like (I happen to like Chrome a lot, though not so much Firefox or Safari these days). But that's just an opinion, it doesn't make what he says a contradiction.
- rmk2 14y ago
  I just seemed off to me considering how he (probably rightly so) preempts most critique throughout in a somewhat hyperbolic yet lacks the the same tone in his closing statements.

ZeroGravitas 14y ago

While I can sympathise since I also dislike tabs and prefer integrated browsers such as Safari and Epiphany (though I'm currently using Pentadactyl which sort of has tabs) I'll note this contradiction: "Anyone who truly understands UI design realizes that every preference option is an admission of defeat: it's there because you couldn't just get it right the first time." Yet Safari offers tabs and gives you an option to turn them back off. Seems to directly contradict his issue with Firefox not giving him that option.

kijin 14y ago

> Anyone who truly understands UI design realizes that every preference option is an admission of defeat: it's there because you couldn't just get it right the first time. No, it's there because "getting it right" is subjective. If you're happy with Apple's defaults, the only thing it means is that your ideal of UI happens to coincide with Apple's idea of UI, no less, no more. If you would like everyone to respect your subjective preference of one browser over another (and there's nothing wrong with that), let's keep it all consistently subjective and avoid using moralizing phrases, okay?

hollerith 14y ago

>every few months I'm forced to upgrade [Firefox] and shit has moved around and I need to re-learn how to do a task that I was happily doing before There is a fix for that, which I have been happily using for the last month: Switch to the "Extended Support Release" version of Firefox. Since Mozilla makes it slightly difficult to get this version, I will provide instructions: go to ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ and download and install the latest version with "esr" in the name. If you make a mistake in identifying the latest version, it will upgrade itself to the latest version when you run it.

voidr 14y ago

Sorry, but I refuse to read any content that makes my eyes bleed.