“Apple’s decision to offer its own Safari Web browser as a software update for its popular iTunes music service and QuickTime video software could hit rival Mozilla’s Firefox browser hard,” Steven Burke reports for ChannelWeb.
Burke reports, “That’s the word from solution providers reacting to Apple’s controversial decision to tightly tie its music and video software for the first time with its Safari Web browser.”
MacDailyNews Take: Apple has not decided to “tightly tie” Safari to iTunes software. Safari is simply offered to users during iTunes updates. Users can simply uncheck a box and not download Safari if they so desire — and if they are semi-cognizant. We know, for the Windows-only users, chances of that are poor. So, they get a great browser (if they even notice and happen to click Safari’s icon, that is.) So be it.
Burke continues, “The move comes with the first version of the five-year-old Safari Macintosh browser released for the more dominant Windows market. That Macintosh version, released on March 18, apparently triggered Apple to offer Safari as software update for iTunes and QuickTime.”
Burke reports, “‘This could be a fairly substantial blow to Mozilla’s Firefox,’ said Tyler Dikman, CEO of Cooltronics, a Tampa, Fla. solution provider, reacting to Apple’s decision to push Safari version 3.1 for Windows XP/Vista and Mac OS X to users as an update. ‘Even if Safari gets 10 percent share on PC browsers that’s pretty significant. I don’t think it will put anyone out of business, but it sends a serious wake up call that Firefox isn’t the only browser that’s different. It shows that there is another player in the game and a lot of money to be made in the browser business.'”
MacDailyNews Take: For clarity’s sake, what Burke forgets to mention is that Google pays Apple (and Mozilla) for search results conducted through the browser’s built-in Google search. That’s how free browsers can generate revenue. In 2005, for example, Mozilla’S Firefox pulled in $53 million; most of that coming from their Google deal.
Burke continues, “‘I don’t think Safari is going to become the number one or number two browser for PCs in the next year, but I think over the next couple of years they may be able to surpass Firefox,’ said Dikman. The Apple move comes with Firefox growing in popularity as a PC-based browser. Dikman, who is also vice president of business strategy for FlickIM, a Berkeley Calif. communications platform vendor, said Safari is popular with programmers, which also could hurt Firefox. ‘A lot of Web-based software engineers love programming on Safari,” he said. “They think it is very simple and unified for development purposes.'”
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “MacVicta” for the heads up.]
“‘A lot of Web-based software engineers love programming on Safari,’ he said.”
Shouldn’t that be “programming for Safari”? Big difference.
“decision to tightly tie its music and video software for the first time with its Safari Web browser.”
This is definitely a stretch. If people are too oblivious to realize that they are accidently downloading Safari, then they likely won’t know they have it, and won’t use it. It will just take up space on their hard drive. Who knows what else they have on there.
Too bad Safari and FF can’t thrive on IE’s leftovers. I think Mozilla is just pining for attention here. Competition is a good thing. They just didn’t expect Apple to give it to’em this quickly…
http://tmsruge.com
Let’s not forget that Safari also runs on the iPhone and iPod touch. This could end up being huge.
“. Users can simply uncheck a box and not download Safari if they so desire — and if they are semi-cognizant. “
Maybe you mean semi-conscious.
” . . . Safari also runs on the iPhone and iPod touch.”
And the soon to be released widescreen iPad handheld.
@ Tantric Oligarchy,
Really? You spoke to Steve himself and he said you could say that out loud or is this wishful thinking.
What purpose would such a devise serve that the iPhone/Touch doesn’t serve already?
http://tmsruge.com
What’s really cool is that I’m working on a web app right now, and I’m just making sure it works on Safari. Funny thing is, when you develop and test using a standards-compliant browser, your web app “just works” when you access it from another compliant browser like Firefox. And it don’t look half-bad in IE. That’s why programmers love it.
IMO, any issues in there are when using IE are simply because of sub-par browser compliance/performance, and users aren’t tied to any single browser when using my apps. They’re free to upgrade from IE to Safari or Firefox.
For many users, it won’t matter. I have IE, Firefox, and Safari on my Windows computer, but I mainly use FF because of all the great plugins it supports, which neither IE nor Safari support. I expect this is true for many others. When I’m at home with both computers in front of me, my preference for browsing (when not for OS-specific things), in order, is Firebox on Windows, Safari on OS X, Firefox on OS X, IE on Windows.
@Tantric Oligarchy
“‘A lot of Web-based software engineers love programming on Safari,’ he said.” Shouldn’t that be “programming for Safari”?
I don’t know Tantric. Some days I code a lot better if just grab Teddy Roosevelt hat, my Land Cruiser and an Elephant Gun and go for a ride.
I agree with Military Police. I’m a web application developer. I use Firefox for all development because of all the plugins like Firebug. Safari is used only for checking the apps to make sure everything is working.
I know that it’s largely what you get used to when you’re talking FireFox vs Safari but I really prefer Firefox to Safari. FireFox has add-ons that aren’t available or don’t work as well on Safari such as Stumble, FireFTP, and Forecastfox.
>Maybe you mean semi-conscious.
See mw’s definition of cognizant
@HMCIV:
LOL! And what that elephant was doing in your pajamas, we’ll never know.
a lot of people seem to prefer FF for plugins. I have yet to see a plugin that was worth the download time. YMMV.
The Important point is the iPhone and touch link. It is an important piece of the puzzle for being the next generation of computing.
This is simply good, affordable, and targetable marketing using other software that Apple has created WITH, allthewhile giving the option either to do or not to do. They are just saying ‘give Safari a try’. Mozilla can run a less targetable, more expensive TV add if don’t haven’t created any other resources to hold banners for their own stuff.
Maybe you guys should have look at Drosera and the Web Inspector. You can enable “Develop” menu in the preferences window.
Steve Jobs grand scheme is finally coming to fruition. Selling boatloads of iPods was great, but that wasn’t the true story. Selling boatloads of iPods allowed Apple to set the standards for digital media AND gave Apple a back door into Windoze PCs.
MDN idea of lots of Mac “How-To” movies on the Windows/iTunes store is a great one. Maybe a demo of Filemaker, too.
Mozilla has a new astro-turf campaign up and running with the goal of talking down Safari and promoting Firefox by focusing on plug-ins.
Here are the facts:
99% of Firefox’s plug-ins are amateurish shit and the remaining 1% mostly try (and fail) to replicate what Safari already offers.A few of Firefox’s plug-ins are unique, but they hardly offer enough to deny myself the speed and elegance of Safari.
Great – the iTunes, Quicktime and Safari combo on Windows leaves Microsoft providing just the dodgy OS and Office. All the important bits being done by Apple!
Bit of a turnaround.
“FireFox has add-ons that aren’t available or don’t work as well on Safari such as Stumble, FireFTP, and Forecastfox.”
Why would I use a browser based FTP client when I can use FUGU or Fetch? As for Stumble, does the world really need a web based utility for finding 2500 web sites that people MIGHT be interested in? Forecastfox is just another weather radar site, one of many. This information is easily available on OS X widgets, BTW. I’m reminded of the early website that you could visit that was a graphic of a ticking clock with the correct time for your time zone. As we all know, it quickly replaced all those clocks on the wall, and clockmakers everywhere are now out of business, right?
@shen and steve
I don’t bother with FF plugins for non-developer stuff so for random browsing I’m good with safari, but Derosia etc can’t compete with Firebug, Web Developer and Lori for building websites.
For web development, debugging Javascript/CSS, etc Firefox wins, for speedy browsing Safari 3.1 rocks, even on windows.
It’s more likely that Safari will cut into IEs share because the update will offer an alternative browser to many people that didn’t even realize an option existed.
No one is forcing anyone to install the software. Apple are just making it very easy for those who have iTunes for Windows to gain access to Safari. Excellent marketing ploy and Mozilla would do that if they had the choice.
Now if Safari is better than FF then Mozilla could lose market share because of this.
I use both browsers on my PC at work since FF is a bit more reliable (or was) for sites I use for business.
I sent out a mass email to my Windoze suffering friends yesterday. At least one has downloaded it and switched away from IE.
ABIE (Anything But IE)
Steve said
“Here are the facts:
99% of Firefox’s plug-ins are valuable and unique and the remaining 1% successfully replicate what Safari already offers.A few of Firefox’s plug-ins are useful enough to deny myself the speed and elegance of Safari.”
I fixed your statement for accuracy.
Seriously, all Apple needs to do is set up a plugin store like Mozilla.
Steve said:
“I’m paranoid and take things way too seriously and think Mozilla has a new astro-turf campaign up and running with the goal of talking down Safari and promoting Firefox by focusing on plug-ins, because one person disagrees with me. For some reason I’m not going after Internet Explorer, which has still has the greatest browser market share and coincidentally is the worst thing to ever happen to the internet.”
I fixed your statement for accuracy again.