With the Mac360 crew suffering from the effects of extended parenthood, I’ve been called out of a leisurely retirement to offer my perspective on all things Mac.
The latest news from Apple is Safari 4, now billed as the fastest web browser on the planet. I like what I see despite the fact that I haven’t checked the speed of all the other browsers on the planet.
Neither has this week’s Major Fool, that champion of Windows, defender of the Microsoft faithful, and Bobby Jindal talkalike, Paul Thurrott.
Here’s the deal. Apple, with not much happening until Steve Jobs returns this summer to save the company yet again, delivered a surprise to the Mac Masses™ in the form of Safari 4; a beta browser for Mac and PC which is billed as the world’s fastest.
There are benchmarks to prove Apple’s claim. There are new features to fawn over or hate, depending on your yin and yang. I like the new Safari tabs, on top of the browser window where God wanted them to be before the rebellion in Eden. God gets what God wants.
Unfortunately, not all of God’s creations are worthy of his time, effort, and forgiveness. Take the professional Microsoft shill, Paul Thurrott. Please. Oh, and along the way, do not cast pearls before swine.
In a cleverly named article entitled “Safari 4 for Windows,” professional Windows apologist Thurrott does the expected and puts his own flavorful, burrito inspired and gaseous spin on Safari for Windows.
He’s against it. Why? Why bother asking? It won’t do you any good, because insightful analysis does not mix with the opinion challenged Microsoft droids lurking on the web, fomenting their quasi-religious views on the unsuspecting, similar to the Ori, but with more money.
For example, Thurrott states, “Safari simply isn’t a good option for Windows users.” Alright, fair enough. A premise. Let the argument proceed. “Why, Paul? Why is it not a good option,” I ask.
Thurrott responds with, “…it‘s also uniquely unsuitable for Windows users.” Uh, yeah. I got that. Why? Paul continues, “I just wish Apple could get the basics right on Windows. Safari 4… is just a horrible Windows application.”
What basics, Paul? Very soon I’m going to sound like a big whiner, a tall, food enjoying blond who doesn’t get what’s expected. Why? Because I’ll be repeating myself ad nauseam with the Why? question.
Why, Paul? Why? Paul doesn’t actually answer my questions, you know. It’s probably easier for him to spout off than give a shred of a reason for his spouts. Unless his spouts can be attributed to the Taco Bell burrito he obviously swallowed before taking Safari 4 for a test drive.
If you didn’t know by now, Apple has Safari for the Mac and Safari for Windows, which, amazingly, looked plenty like Safari for the Mac but in a clearly Frankensteinesque way until version 4. Safari 4 on Windows looks like a Windows application.
Thurrott confuses Safari 4 with Google’s Chrome browser. Hey, they’re both browsers, they’re both not made by Microsoft, they’re both better and faster than Internet Explorer, so it’s easy to see his confusion.
When highlighting Safari 4’s obvious eye candy, the iTunes inspired Top Sites, Thurrott says about folks who buy or use Apple products; “those idiots who would buy anything with an Apple logo on it—will get all giddy and clap like little girls at a Hannah Montana concert.”
Hey. I know Hanna Montana. I watch Hannah Montana. And you’re no Billy Ray Cyrus.
Sigh. Paul, what about my question? Why? Paul responds with, “The nicest thing about Top Sites is that you can turn it off.” Alright, I’m not a Top Sites fan. It’s eye candy, not fully unlike the Cover Flow eye candy in iTunes, now bringing back your memorable web sites in Safari’s new History list.
Paul then retorts, “There are so many problems with this UI paradigm, it’s hard to even know where to start…” so he doesn’t start, and heads straight for the finish. Instead of any semblance to a coherent argument, Thurrott (who, as I understand it, once was charged with hand washing Steve Ballmer’s underwear after his burrito eating binges of the 1990s) simply insults Mac users.
He goes on to say that Apple stole much of Safari 4 for Windows from Google’s Chrome. Uh, Paul. What’s Chrome running on? WebKit, no? Just like Safari. Where did WebKit come from?
Dude. You actually have to click on a link to a web site to see the difference between page loading speeds. Paul is probably on dial up. Even Microsoft is cutting back on expenses, and, it’s obvious that Paul is on the payroll in some kind of journalistic pay-per-word scam.
Without providing a single shred of response to the most basic of inquiries, such as, “Why do you think that way, Paul?” He responds with, “I still feel that Internet Explorer (7 or 8) and Firefox 3 are better Windows Web browsers than their WebKit-based competitors…”
Sure. I get it. You like non-Apple stuff. But answer the freakin’ question. “Why?”
Paul counters my inquiry with a blast of his rapier wit, insightful analysis, and, and, more drivel—it “has nothing to do with the underlying Web rendering technologies involved and everything to do with functionality.”
Alright, we’re getting somewhere. What functionality? Paul responds with, “Both browsers are simply better in day to day usage.” Yes, but why? Are you deaf, man? Why?
It’s summation time. The time to wrap it all up and bring it home. Paul concludes with, “I suspect most people who excitedly try Safari 4 will very quickly move back to the more comfortable confines of IE or Firefox. I already have.”
Sigh. I’m going to be ill.
Look, Safari is a browser. It’s free. It has features, Mac and Windows. It’s fast. Very fast. For some web browser users, they only know what they use. For most users, that’s Windows Internet Explorer.
The more intellectually capable you are, the more educated you are, the higher your household income is, the more likely you are to use a Mac and to make Safari your browser of choice.
Why? Because I said. So there.
That’s out of my system. Over the next week I’ll focus on a few reviews of some very good Mac software I’m sure you’ll like.