My mac is starting to be a bit unresponsive :(

[Deleted member 651465]

It's a bit unfair to say that plug-ins are dodgy for Safari. You could say the same Firefox's vast amount of extensions that are available and they do exactly what you have described.

If anyone likes the functionality plug-ins/extensions provides then they should install and use them. As previously mentioned, if they are beta versions, users will have to be aware that something wrong could potentially happen and the OP is a good example of this.

The articles you've provided which I appreciate you for providing them, are unfortunately out of date since InputManagers have been changed in Leopard to make it more secure. However, "dodgy" plug-ins/extensions can still be loaded and potentially cause the application to crash. It's up to the users of these plug-ins/extensions to see whether they are worth using for the extra functionality at a compromise.

I do agree with what you're saying, but you have to weigh up "is it worth the hassle?" argument, even when using a beta.

For me, I like the stability and will continue to use a "barebones" Safari

 

[Fillado]

It's a bit unfair to say that plug-ins are dodgy for Safari. You could say the same Firefox's vast amount of extensions that are available and they do exactly what you have described.

If anyone likes the functionality plug-ins/extensions provides then they should install and use them. As previously mentioned, if they are beta versions, users will have to be aware that something wrong could potentially happen and the OP is a good example of this.

The articles you've provided which I appreciate you for providing them, are unfortunately out of date since InputManagers have been changed in Leopard to make it more secure. However, "dodgy" plug-ins/extensions can still be loaded and potentially cause the application to crash. It's up to the users of these plug-ins/extensions to see whether they are worth using for the extra functionality at a compromise.

I think this is just a clash of differing mentalities

(This is going somewhere...) The iPhone is a closed platform. Apple control exactly what you can and can't do with the device. The App Store is an example of Apple IMO getting far too big for itself. They are still taking great lengths to stop people doing what they want with the device and as far as I see it you buy an iPhone if it does what you want "as is". If you buy it with the notions to jailbrake/unlock it you're free to do what you want with it, but you shouldn't complain about it. At all.

That is why I own a Nokia N95 8GB, and will probably never own an iPhone. Unless it gains: 5MP Camera with flash, actual Bluetooth (ie. send files to people), MMS, officially usable on Vodafone, the ability to run multiple apps at the same time, a user storage area for files, satellite navigation, crystal-clear guidelines on App Store app acceptance and so on.

My point is if a platform is closed then I won't try to break it open. I will vote with my money/mouseclicks and go elseware. On the other hand if I can tinker with something (Linux being an obvious example) that is supported then I will do to a great degree to make it as close to how I want it to act.

Safari is a closed platform. Apple make it so it's a closed platform. I see it so you either use Safari "as is" or use something else.

Yes, Firefox addons can have problems. The point being that it's just down to shoddy coding. The whole method of writing an addon is an integrated, supported and encouraged part of Firefox. With Safari the whole method is a workaround. If you want to use something that does that, feel free. But don't come complaining when you update to 3.2.2 and it implodes

 

[Cybertronic]

I think this is just a clash of differing mentalities

(This is going somewhere...) The iPhone is a closed platform. Apple control exactly what you can and can't do with the device. The App Store is an example of Apple IMO getting far too big for itself. They are still taking great lengths to stop people doing what they want with the device and as far as I see it you buy an iPhone if it does what you want "as is". If you buy it with the notions to jailbrake/unlock it you're free to do what you want with it, but you shouldn't complain about it. At all.

That is why I own a Nokia N95 8GB, and will probably never own an iPhone. Unless it gains: 5MP Camera with flash, actual Bluetooth (ie. send files to people), MMS, officially usable on Vodafone, the ability to run multiple apps at the same time, a user storage area for files, satellite navigation, crystal-clear guidelines on App Store app acceptance and so on.

My point is if a platform is closed then I won't try to break it open. I will vote with my money/mouseclicks and go elseware. On the other hand if I can tinker with something (Linux being an obvious example) that is supported then I will do to a great degree to make it as close to how I want it to act.

Safari is a closed platform. Apple make it so it's a closed platform. I see it so you either use Safari "as is" or use something else.

I don't see where you're going with this. Symbian is also a closed platform OS since developers are required to have their third party applications digitally signed in order to run within the OS's security guidelines. The same fact also applies for Windows Mobile and its third party applications. Luckily for both OSes, there are hacks available to workaround these limitations. This is exactly the same thing as jailbreaking iPhones/iPod touches.

It's fair that you don't want an iPhone since all phones out there always lacks something and a prime example why I no longer own a Symbian or Windows Mobile smartphone is usability. Each lack of functionality can be compromised with a different one. There is never going to be a perfect phone that suits everyone since there's always one small thing that is guaranteed to disappoint those are interested in buying that phone.

Yes, Firefox addons can have problems. The point being that it's just down to shoddy coding. The whole method of writing an addon is an integrated, supported and encouraged part of Firefox. With Safari the whole method is a workaround. If you want to use something that does that, feel free. But don't come complaining when you update to 3.2.2 and it implodes

CocoaDev: InputManager:

Unofficially, the InputManager mechanism is one of the simplest and most popular ways to load arbitrary external code into other applications.

That quote doesn't sound like a workaround to me. Instead, it sounds like Apple is providing this feature for developers to make external coding easier to load into their applications.

The funny thing is that extensions can also get disabled in Firefox whenever you upgrade to a newer version. Any InputManagers that are used in various applications (not just Safari), that certain application will notify you that the InputManager is incompatible and therefore prevented from running. This has happened to me once before when I was using GrowlMail, an extra functionality which I think makes Mail even better to use.

A minority of users are never going to be satisfied with the product they own straight out of the box hence why they will change/hack/modify it. These forums and the majority of its members is a great example of this dissatisfaction

 

[MuGeN]

does anybody else find it strange how much memory firefox uses? i have photoshop running and taking up about 100mb and bugger me theres firefox chugging away with almost 300bm - what on earth would it need that for

 

[MikeHunt79]

Try turning off spotlight

 

[Feek]

does anybody else find it strange how much memory firefox uses? i have photoshop running and taking up about 100mb and bugger me theres firefox chugging away with almost 300bm - what on earth would it need that for

It needs that memory to fill up with the leak it has I tend to close and restart Firefox every few days just to free up some memory.

 

[Sic]

Same. I wish I could drop Firefox as I prefer the speed and interface of Safari, but Ubiquity has basically forced me to stop using any other browsers and just use Firefox :/

I'd love to see Firefox ported to cocoa. And don't even link to camino - it doesn't support XUL.