So good it's not even on the chart.
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2
> So good even MacFreaks reject it.
>
> So good it's not even on the chart.
>
> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2
>
>
<http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=3&qpcustom=Safari+4.0>
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=3
And that affects Apple or Mac users how?
The fact is though, if you want your website to work with modern smart
phoness, you better try to target WebKit since close 90% of all smart
phones are (or soon will be) Webkit based -- Palm, Android and iPhone
are all Webkit based. Nokia is moving toward WebKit as is RIM (with
the purchase of Torch Mobile).
A prime example of Redirection at it's finest.
Everything Apple is shit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebKit
"WebKit's WebCore and JavaScriptCore components are available under the GNU
Lesser General Public License, and the rest of WebKit is available under a
BSD-style license."
"WebKit was originally derived by Apple Inc. from the Konqueror browser's
KHTML software library for use as the engine of Mac OS X's Safari web
browser and has now been further developed by individuals from the KDE
project, Apple Inc., Nokia, Google, Torch Mobile and others."
Was there a point to that? How does that refute anything that I
posted?
You're bragging about open source software from the KDE project and from
many companies as if it were some sort of victory for Apple.
Actually it is, Apple branched off Webkit from the main KHTML branch.
The KHTML branch was basically abandoned for Apple's Webkit branch.
You can always check out the source code between the two branches and
do a code diff.
Bottom line here: Safari is a huge POS. And nothing you can do or say will
change that. Even Chrome is more widely accepted and in only a few short
months.
Meaning Apple's work is based on open source software. If this were
Microsoft, you'd be yelling "theft!"
"The KHTML branch was basically abandoned for Apple's Webkit branch."
Apple's "Webkit branch" has been developed and contributed to by other
companies besides Apple, and is also open source software.
"You can always check out the source code between the two branches and
do a code diff."
You're still giving Apple credit for the open source efforts of others!
LOL
That would depend on whether or not Microsoft has done what Apple has
done: release they're changes back to the open-source community.
>
> "The KHTML branch was basically abandoned for Apple's Webkit branch."
>
> Apple's "Webkit branch" has been developed and contributed to by other
> companies besides Apple, and is also open source software.
Does that mean that Apple *hasn't* made substantial contributions, Edwin?
>
> "You can always check out the source code between the two branches and
> do a code diff."
>
> You're still giving Apple credit for the open source efforts of others!
> LOL
You're still trying to deny them credit for the work they've done...
--
"The iPhone doesn't have a speaker phone" -- "I checked very carefully" --
"I checked Apple's web pages" -- Edwin on the iPhone
"It is Mac OS X, not BSD.' -- 'From Mac OS to BSD Unix." -- "It's BSD Unix with Apple's APIs and GUI on top of it' -- 'nothing but BSD Unix' (Edwin on Mac OS X)
'[The IBM PC] could boot multiple OS, such as DOS, C/PM, GEM, etc.' --
'I claimed nothing about GEM other than it was available software for the
IBM PC. (Edwin on GEM)
'Solaris is just a marketing rename of Sun OS.' -- 'Sun OS is not included
on the timeline of Solaris because it's a different OS.' (Edwin on Sun)