Computerworld had a review up Friday on the latest build of Apple’s Safari browser, the development version “WebKit” . Like Firefox builds these are evaluation/ testing builds so can be prone to bugs, but like Firefox what you see in these builds is usually what’s coming to the browser itself some time into the future.
Computerworld said it was quick, so I tested it. They weren’t lying.
Running on a MacPro with twin 2.6GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processors, 4gb of RAM on a 2mb Cable connection, WebKit ran at between 2 to 6 times faster than the latest version of Firefox 3 on a couple of different tests. Computerworld notes that on average it’s 2.5 times faster than the current version of Safari, and says this:
There is no other way to say it. Holy cow is this thing fast! I am currently testing Webkit build r30090 against standard Leopard Safari 3.04. This unoptimized WebKit build version is running circles around the standard Safari browser. It isn’t even close.
Tests mean nothing more than numbers on a screen to me, it’s the use that counts, and to say that this brings an entirely different experience speed wise to general websites is to understate the difference. It has to be seen to be believed. I’m not sure whether it’s as quick on Windows, but if it’s even half as quick again it’s going to be good.
Safari doesn’t have the features, or more importantly the plugins and addons Firefox has so many will stick with Firefox, but the Webkit lifts the bar that much higher in terms of speed that this could be the year Apple finally makes a dent in the browser space. And if enough people switch we might start to see more in the way of addons during the year.
The current version of Webkit isn’t recommeded for everyone; as a developer build it’s bound to have bugs (although I haven’t hit any yet) but if you’re either brave or want to be on the cutting edge, download it and give it a go.
but the Webkit lifts the bar that much higher that this could be the year Apple finally makes a dent in the browser space
Sure about that? Weren’t both Opera and Firebird much faster than IE? Speed doesn’t count, but iPhone and iPod touch might bring Safari in the stats.
Webkit??? Those 0.3% nerds who read TC and probably already have WebKIt installed might love it. Estimated time before those nightly release make it in to Safari??? 1-2 years.
opera 9.5 ftw. I can’t wait til the final version is out
Franky
Suggestions are we’ll see it in Safari later this year. Sure speed doesn’t always count (which is why I noted ppl will stick with FF) but it’s that much quicker it counts for me…mind you, if I had access to high speed broadband it mightn’t be that much of an issue.
Sure, its fast. Right now its faster than firefox.
However… Its the extensions that keep me using firefox, even though its fairly slow.
It’s an odd coincidence that you’re writing about this now. I used to use the Webkit nightlies quite a bit a year or so ago, but got tired of the crashes and other weirdness (fully expected, as you point out) so I went back to Firefox. Also, there are several Firefox extensions that I have a hard time living without.
However, just yesterday I decided to give the latest Webkit build another try, and I agree 100% with the assessment that it is many many times faster than any other browser out there.
As it stands right now I use the latest Firefox 3 for most browsing, but I use Webkit for – of all things – access to my employer’s Outlook Web Access. Safari handles that much better than Firefox.
Duncan,
the old pipelining tweak does wonders in FF. I only see one error in your reasoning: the internet is populated with 98% users at least who never can be bothered by upgrading to the best [sic], fastest browser available.
And not everyone is a techie. Combine iPhone, iPod with compulsary install and default browser settings for Safari, and things might change.
Otherwise, you don’t necessarily need access to high speed broadband. In FF the pipelining tweak still makes a use difference if you go from default to 12-16.
Otherwise, yes the Safari render engine, even in 3.0.4 makes up for the add-ons when it comes to all day browsing, already.
To make a geeky comparison, Safari could be to Firefox, what IntelliJ is to Eclipse.
Not that this comparison add anything to the discussion though.
Opera is still faster than Firefox and has been for years. Hasn’t helped them much…
John #8
true, although Safari will have one advantage: it will get pushed out in Mac updates.
Franky
all good points, although with FF I’d basically stopped using plugins because everyone kept telling me they made the browser slower and/ or buggy, so the bar to switching for me was lower…as I’d noted ppl aren’t about to give up FF, but I can see Safari growing market share (not leading, or even beating FF) this year if and when these changes are rolled out.
Duncan,
I agree, Safari will win share, but let’s break down why:
- Growing amount of switchers. The Apple prices really are compatible and I assume many people would rather by a status symbol MacBook Pro for less than a similar spec’ed Dell XPS;
- Safari is standard browser and probably [subjectively experienced] the fastest one on Mac OS X. No switcher, who wants to be posh knows about Opera;
- Influence of iPhone/iPod touch;
- Safari on Windows (which is a rather slow engine).
And last but not least, the new development coming over WebKit.
Btw, interesting point for Windows users is that several tuning tools, like TuneUp Utilities, already tweak the FF settings. Until user have 47 add-ons installed and FF needs 90MB to launch already.
Agreed again.
I, myself, will stick to Safari, WebKit and Opera. Still, I would be happy if already I could convince all my friends to use FF. Right now I think around 25% of them do.
Last but not least, again a memorable beating for the 3 Lions. And we even weren’t in Australia. :S
Watch out Firefox, an app that only runs natively on about 4% of the computers out there is catching up!
hey duncan:
you wrote:
“WebKit ran at between 2 to 6 times faster than the latest version of Firefox 3 on a couple of different tests.”
care to share what your tests were, so we can validate?
@Duncan Orly
Hey,
I use FF3b2 at home right now, and honestly I am seriously considering switching permanently to Webkit. I am a developer, and have found Webkit indispensable for its Web Inspector, and Drosera.
I used to be a hardcore FF junkie, but its just too slow anymore.
http://webkit.o...g-sunspider-09/
is a pretty good test for you
sorry for a newbie question …how the hell do i install the .dmg file on my XP ??
I fear firefox has become a victim of “hey, this is a good little program… let’s add some useless crappy features to make it even better” business model.
Jon
http://buzvia.com – Share Influence!
After testing WebKit I’ve decided I’m going to make a switch and see how it works. Writing this post I’m using WK and its much faster, almost seems my macbook can’t keep up with the rate its loading.
One thing thats preventing me from making a complete switch is keyword urls/bookmarks. When I started using them on FF it changed the way I browse sites. I’ve found out Saft plugin does this on Safari but its not compatible for WebKit. Guess I’ll have to wait until Safari 3.1 until I can enjoy the new speeds.
@djcarbon43 – cool thanks, but i ‘m really interested in what duncan riley who writes this blog tested. because, you know, i want to test it out myself, and he made some pretty straightforward claims (that he ran couple of different tests where webkit ran 2-6 times faster than firefox 3).
i dunno – when someone blogs at techcrunch and says stuff like this i love to see the proof.
Duncan, I don’t mean to nitpick, but you have it backwards.
According to Webkit.org:
“A common misconception is that WebKit is another web browser, but it’s not a browser. WebKit is a browser engine. Safari is a browser which uses that engine.” – Back to Basics : Webkit.org
WebKit is not the development version of Safari. WebKit is Safari’s rendering engine. This is just another nightly build of WebKit. And WebKit is used in other areas of OS X besides Safari, including iTunes and Mail, etc.
Webkit is an amazing engine, its Javascript rendering is 2-3 times faster than FF in just about everything. What’s sad though is just how slow FF is, it seems like progress on it has really slowed down whereas Webkit/KHTML development has speed up a bunch. FF3 has been in production for about a year or more now? I’ve been using Minefield for awhile now and I’m not impressed (on OSX at least, on Windows it’s a lot faster than FF2). Unfortunately FF has add-ons like Greasemonkey (Greasekit isn’t 100%) that I can’t live without so I’m stuck with a seriously inferior browser.
Actually WebKit doesn’t power iTunes. It powers Dashboard and HTML in Mail. Sorry ’bout that.
@Don Wison: Don’t forget, Safari Beta 3 runs on Windows now too. Try not to cry when the final release of Safari beats Firefox on a PC.
The beta for FF3 is driving me NUTS!! Can’t get WMediaPlayer to play and a few other quirks. Gotta switch back to 2.
Let’s get Safari working on PCs properly already!
@philk – care to share your evidence on these javascript benchmarks? or your evidence on how progress on firefox development has slowed down vs. webkit?
Firefox is dead slow, particularly for javascript with iframe in it. Firefox should either speed up or pack up.
@technicle: you sound super knowledgable on javascript performance, want to share your stats?
Duncan Orly: Stop being so pretentious about everything. Even FF devs will admit that it’s not the fastest game in town. Seriously, take that huge stick out of your ass.
I said, “it seems like progress on it…”. I know it sounds like splitting hairs but all I’m saying is that there’s a definite feeling that progress on Gecko and FF has slowed down. Logically it would have to as a product gets larger, but FF3 has taken an inordinately long amount of time. I’m not directly involved as a developer so I’m just stating my opinion as a watcher of the development community in general. There also doesn’t seem to be the “passion” around FF that there was a few years back. It’s seems like it’s losing developers to hipper more fun startups and projects (again, just my observations).
As for your snootiness about javascript stats…can you read? I’ve seen multiple developers complain about how slow FF’s javascript engine is. Mozilla themselves have practically admitted it with the talk of the new Javascript engine for FF3+1 (which so far has benchmarked extremely well). You could also look at #13’s post with the link to Webkit’s javascript tests (claim biased source if you want, but it’s the coward’s way out). I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone claim FF is faster than anyone except IE (and only slightly faster than IE7).
great info.thanks!!!
@philk: no worries mate. honestly: duncan riley who writes this blog made some straight up claims about webkit being 2-6 times faster than firefox 3 on tests he ran. i know he’s awake and watching this blog’s comments, yet he won’t chime in to share his tests so the rest of us on the web can validate.
come on duncan riley: stand up for the claims you make on techcrunch and share your tests.
Duncan Orly stop being such a douchebag. How do you you know Duncan Riley is sitting watching these blog comments at this very moment?
C’mon, back up your claims! How do you know!?
@Duncan Orly
Don’t have the stats, just speaking from our own dev experience. Try this:
have a html div
put an iframe into the div
use settimeout, position absolute, and top values to animate moving the div up and down the screen
compare that with IE6, IE7, and FF1, FF1.5, FF2.0
Sorry I don’t have the stats… but if someone has exciting news to share,
/ac.
most welcome to email me of ac_AT_technicle.com or post here…
Safari has to deal with crashes first. Safari on iphone and windows is crashing way too frequently. FF minus plugins is the best I guess. Fast and secure. For mac only, I think Camino is a good choice.
Safari is way better than FF…
FF is too slow…
FF on the Mac has always been crappy compared to Camino and Safari. The memory problems, the lack of a native look and feel, the sluggishness, these are all things that drove me to Camino about a year ago. About 2 months ago I made the switch to WebKit and have never looked back. I love how blogs are jumping on WebKit now like it’s the next big thing when it’s been hella fast for a few months now, way faster than Safari and FF.
Well considering Safari on iPhone and Safari on Windows are completely different applications compared to Safari on Mac OS X, I’m not sure what kind of comparison you’re trying to make. Safari has always been incredibly stable for me, and current versions of WebKit are no exception.
the tests linked to by Computerworld, mostly on the Webkit page itself. They ran it Safari v safari webkit, I ran it FF3 v safari webkit. Put it this way, webkit completely the whole test itself probably 3x more quickly that FF3 (I didn’t time that, but it was at least twice as quick time wise), I also only have to use both to see the speed difference.
Also as to the name, yes, Webkit is the platform not the browser technically, but it’s easier to simply call it that, and the download + icon is labelled Webkit, so it’s at least partially applicable in terms of naming.
Don Wilson
WTF? Safari runs on Windows and Mac, how the hell is that 4%?
Mike Rundle
As I said in the post, saw the Computerworld write up, thought I’d test it and was impressed enough to write a post. Safari on my iPhone might have crashed once from me, and it didn’t hang, it just decided to switch off…but it was once. Apologies if I’m a late convert.
To some of the other points
Sure, people use FF because of the plugins, which is fair enough. Safari isn’t about to take over FF or even IE, but with a product as quick as this it will increase market share simply out of word of mouth, because some people at least like their speed, particularly is you’re on a shitty 2mb net connection like I am…it really makes a noticeable difference. If you don’t like it, no probs and all to their own. What I’m really hoping is that Mozilla looks at this and starts looking at ways for FF to catch up in terms of speed. The lean, mean FF of years past is but a memory.
The problem with Safari on Windows is that eats a lot of memory. Just launching the browser takes 100MB. Launch a couple of sites and it doubles. So it’s impossible to use if you want to have 20+ tabs.
On Windows one should try Opera or KMeleon for the raw speed. As for FF it has to be the slowest GUI ever. Even IE7 is better.
It’s all the OS integration that keeps me using Safari, and I don’t just mean the iTunes/iPhone syncing. It’s all the other details, like the text field I’m typing this in right now ties into Mac OS X’s system-wide spelling dictionary. I can tell Safari to learn the spelling of someone’s name, and all other applications will know it as well. Then there’s Safari’s use of Mac OS X’s system-wide Keychain application for storing passwords—the same tool most other apps use to store passwords, like Transmit for all my FTP sites, and ecto for all my blogging accounts. Having just that one Keychain file to back up and sync to all my other Macs via Apple’s .Mac is a god-send.
It’s these things, and all the other ties into the rich integration features of Mac OS X, that keep me using Safari.
For what it’s worth, I’ve heard that a lot of this speed, and some other wild new features—like downloadable custom fonts for rendering websites and storing data in SQL databases like Google Gears (which is more of a feature in HTML5)—are actually landing with the next 3.1 version of Safari in Mac OS X 10.5.2.
Cool. Thanks for trying it out b/c I never get around to reading CW.
FF add-ons might make FF a _bit_ slower, but the iMacros auto-browsing add-on saves me at least an hour per day of mindless clicking. If my browser does all the routine stuff itself, I do not care if it takes 70 or 80 min to complete
https://addons....efox/addon/3863
Of course, the same is true for other great add-ons, such as Adblock or Speeddial.
What about memory use? It’s the only thing I really care about because I have so many browser windows open at any time. Rendering speed becomes really unimportant once the thrashing starts.
Also, what I would like to see in browsers real soon is a way to manage a large number of windows. If I run gmail in one window, I need to be able to select that window quickly and not search for it in a mountain of other windows. I basically want to see some but not all browser windows in Cmd+Tab (Alt+Tab) switching.
I still use FF because of specific plugins I need for research, but many people would be surprised just how many FF plugins already have Safari equivalents. I did some research on this and posted the results to my blog:
http://keywords...efox-vs-safari/
Since I wrote that post some extensions (like DeliciousSafari) have already seen upgrades which bring them closer in line with their FF equivalents. If you are thinking of switching to Safari because of the speed, this list of plugins might make up your mind.
I would fully expect webkit to be getting better with adobe and google developers now contributing to it.
I used safari for about a day before I installed firefox and the reason…. F5 = refresh ….
FF is not without its problems on the mac, I don’t have these problems on my devlopment rig which is a windows box. I have a wierd refresh problem and its always on TC.
on a shitty 2mb net connection like I am…..
god, i would kill for such a connection…. about 10KBPS on india’s finest cellphone network, and costs more than the same thing in usa, let alone oz
Wow ! Is it true that it faster than firefox?
Does anyone know about nestcape , I heard it’s gone already.
Opera is the ron paul of the internet…. everyone knows its better, but it never gets the coverage it deserves….
I will stick to FF since I love Piclens addon too much. It’s that good!
I prefer Firefox the Safari.
http://www.i-guide.ro
uh, did anybody happen to notice if the server is slow it doesn’t really matter how super that browser is?
I have found it a lot faster in testing… especially in displaying photos. Not sure if this enough to make me switch…
When you are comparing Firefox to Safari, you are comparing apple and oranges.
Safari is a completely closed thing: People have to use an Input Manager hack to add any functionality to the application.
Firefox on the other hand was designed from the get go to be extensible. It was also designed from the get go to use its own dog food and have a UI buillt completely in HTML, CSS and Javascript. That was a crazy bet 7 years ago but given how fast CPUs are getting and the evolution of the JS VM with tamarin and others, I think that the bet day took is going to clearly pay off.
Performance is only going to matter so much in the decision people make when selecting a browser. The overall experience and innovation will matter more I think and by being more open and extensible, I think that Firefox is set to win on the innovation front.
Note: The problem is not webkit, the problem is Apple and Safari. They could very well have taken webkit and built a more open and extensible browser on top of it.
How closely tied is FF to Gecko? What kind of effort would be required to switch? Anyone know?
Big deal, Opera has been the fastest browser for quite some time, that never got it more then a hand full of users.