So everyone's wondering about the announcement at WWDC that Mac's web browser Safari is now available for windows.
More precisely, everyone is wonder, why?
It seems there is no blindingly obvious reason, and no blinding revenue stream, yet clearly this takes some work.
So here's my thoughts. Safari is a tester.
Currently Apple has two products (which come bundled) for windows. Quicktime and iTunes. Delivered by "Apple Software Update" (ASU) designed for windows. (Apple might have other bits of software for windows but I'm not aware of anything really).
There's some value in developing ASU for a few applications. There is a lot of value in developing ASU for many applications.
Safari is a tester.
Safari as everyone has pointed out (google: blog safari window) has a few uses, but is going into a highly competitive saturated market with no really killer reason.
So what is Apple testing.
Can they use iTunes as a way of getting people to install, use and convert (to other Apple programs).
Firefox switchers are mainly techies and techies convincing other people to switch. But there are a lot of windows user who might switch if something was plonked on them and pretty much use IE because it's the default installed application. With it's massive installed base iTunes could reach these users pretty easily. If this works and Apple can convince even a few percent of users to change, this shows that Apple can support and deliver software for windows, and importantly get people to use it .
Why would Apple want to developer software for windows? Well they don't really, they'd rather you bought a Mac. However there are instances ubiquity is more valuable and enhances the Mac platform.
The iPhone is one instance of this, and Safari is a helper in this step. What will be interesting to see is how Apple manages the syncing of personal data (address book, calendar etc) in the windows environment.
But here is the end game. And I know it's a long winded way to get there.
Right now iChat is marooned on Apple. I know of know one who is a switcher who really uses it, and you can't speak to anyone via iChat natively, unless they are on a Apple on the same network as you, or have a .mac account. Oh yeah, and on AIM but outside the US the take up of AIM is not as good.
And right now you have GoogleTalk, Skype and MSN which everyone can use on any either platform.
If the new voice quality using the AAC-LD codec they where raving about at WWDC is that good, then they have a good product with a great UI (really all the other competitors are fighting it out to see who has the least shit UI) and great voice quality.
And chat programs that can call normal phones have a revenue stream
And chat programs that can work on a phone have a good selling point. (Of course the networks hate this, but eventually they'll realise they should be selling bits not mins anyway)
So watch this space, but I bet iChat is the next Apple software realise on the windows platform.
Safari is a tester.
1. Simon
I think you’re right Adrian, I’m a dedicated Firefox user on a mac book pro which makes me one of those techie geeks, and proud of it. Safari has always been a bit meh for me as I think Firefox does it all a lot better. Apple are, however, quite clearly trying to test the waters with a brand product and say ‘look, it’s much nicer than IE and our entire operating system works like that’ - don’t think it’s enough to convince people immediately thought, especially when it’s already got security issues.
IChat though - never used it as I’m not paying for a.mac account and don’t know anyone else in my network who does but I’d really like to use it having seen what it will be capable of. Apple should really take a look at what Adium does as that’s the bees knees instant messenger on a mac, plus, it’s pretty!
2. razorhead
On the other hand Safari is really standards compliant (ACID2 and all) browser, but it still suffers from sites either not rendering properly, not recognizing the browser or (worse?) not running in their web 2.0 glory.
I was quite surprised the other day to find google reader and maps worked on Safari - can’t remember when that happened.
If they increase the usage, they get people writing for Safari as well as the other browsers. That would mean mac users would not need to rely so much on the Firefox crutch (ever seen a mac without the flamingbadger?)
iChat? Well that’s just an aim/jabber client and the only cool thing about it is video chat (+now quick look). If that migrates with all its underlying CoreXXX technology, then that weakens the Mac platform, surely?
3. Matt
When you say “no blinding revenue stream”, you are clearly forgetting Safaris’ (and Firefoxes) built-in search function. This generated $2 million for Apple last year, which considering Safaris’ tiny, tiny install base, is pretty huge.
Firefox currently makes Mozilla about $50 million/year from referrals to web search companies (Google, Yahoo, etc), all from that little search box. That’s what that “&client=firefox” means in your search address, it means Mozilla just made a penny or two.
Oh, and I think you’re wrong about iChat too. I mean, you could be right, but I don’t think you are. Linking Safari on Windows to iChat becoming a VOIP client is a bit of a leap.
4. Gordon
Dear Adrian.
Start reading “Daring Fireball” John Gruber’s blog.
Matt obviously does. ;-)
5. Gordon
PLUS the whole iPhone/Safari platform thing. Releasing Safari for Windows increases the potential developer base tenfold.
6. Matt
Actually I didn’t get it from Daring Fireball. I can’t remember where I did get those statistics from, but I remember it wasn’t DF.
And Adrian’s a DF subscriber, he’s got the t-shirt and everything.
But yeah, I agree, I’m still totally right.
7. Adrian
Simon , actually I have just switched form FF to Safari 3. Find as you type was the one feature I wanted. Security issues will be ironed out pretty quickly.
iChat does look good, but as you say, no compelling reason to use it because not enough people to talk to. Without changes to .mac (which I reckon are coming) this will never be more than a bit player.
Adium is very nice, and I use it for everything but MSN and Skype. However native IMs always have better integration that multi system IMs.
Razor, Totally agree, Safari on Windows would have a big advantage to increasing usage and support for Safari on Mac and iPhone. This can only be a good thing and is most definitely part of their strategy.
iChat isn’t a crown jewel. It can only increase the halo effect. Because it can work with AIM and GTalk, people might switch if it’s a nice client. And Mac Users can now speak to Windows users. I can only see this increasing switchers and strengthening the mac platform.
Matt, The £50 million Mozilla makes is big money for the. The £2 million Apple makes is peanuts. It’s a nice to have. Pocket change. The cost of developing, especially for a non native platform, and supporting this is not worth the money they will make from search. This is about opportunity cost, both of not doing it, and of using those engineers elsewhere.
This is not the endgame. This is a tester. I could be wrong about iChat but I doubt it. I might be wrong about the VoIP stuff, but I really think we’ll see iChat on windows. Watch this space.
If I am wrong about iChat I doubt I’m wrong about Safari being part of a bigger picture.
Gordon, as Matt says I’m a DF subscriber. I’ve got two teeshirts (although annoyingly the exact same ones).
You’re right, Safari on windows will definitely increase the developer base. Which if they like the browser enough will get them to get other people to switch too. This is what happened with Firefox. And they can also eat into a share of IE that FF hasn’t been able to target.
But this isn’t the end game. Or it is and I’m wrong. I’m never wrong. Even about stuff I’m wrong about I’m right.
8. Matt
I can’t see existing Windows Gtalk users switching to iChat for their IM’ing. AIM maybe. The Windows Gtalk client is fantastic, and the only thing I really miss on my Mac (although Adium is totally brilliant).
I agree that the $2 million Apple makes from Safari is, to them, peanuts. But more people using Safari will make them more money. If they convert all (or most of) the existing Mac users to Safari, and corner even a small percentage of the Windows browser market, they could make a considerable amount from search referrals. This is, after all, the only way to really make money from a browser (even Microsoft are doing it).
More people using iChat might make them more money too, but if they integrate VOIP into the interface, would that be for Gtalk users? iChat isn’t really a standalone IM client after all, relying on Jabber, etc. And isn’t Gtalk VOIP free? I dunno, maybe I’m not making the stretch but I still don’t see them making an iChat for Windows.
The only result of a third “big player” entering the browser market, in my opinion, is an increased amount of emphasis on developing to web standards, instead of developing for a particular browser. Which is, of course, a Good Thing.
And this isn’t the endgame at all, as you say. Apple introduced Safari on Windows so that more people, seeing the fantastic UI and feel of an app originating on a Mac, would buy a Mac. I really don’t see iChat as being part of the overall plan as regards Apple programs on Windows.
But I could be just as wrong as you are. :-)
9. Adrian
Safari security holes fixed. Happened between me writing the post and my comment. That was quick.
iChat is it’s own client. It also does jabber/gtalk/aim etc, but it is it’s own client. All VoIP to VoIP is free. VoIP to pots or mobile isn’t.
And whilst the GTalk client is nice, having competing products is good. And Apple reckons their audio codec is better (see original post)
Plus if they do the desktop/application/presentation sharing properly, having this cross platform makes it a more compelling choice. I’ve yet to see a application sharing app that actually works.
And I totally agree with all the good reasons for having Safari cross platform. I just don’t think that’s the full story.
Also their is some evidence that Apple might be thinking of doing more in the windows space
10. Matt
Sorry, going back to your reply to Simon:-
“I have just switched form FF to Safari 3. Find as you type was the one feature I wanted”
Err… Firefox has always had find as you type, since version 1.0. I use it all the time. If the one feature you wanted was in the browser you were already using, then why switch? Unless you’re an Apple fanboy. :-)
11. Adrian
Yeah, exactly as what I said. “Find as you type is the one featured I wanted in Safari (before I considering trying it)”
Why switch? Well because FF keeps crashing constantly, and several times a day. The spell checking in FF is iffy. The buttons are ugly. It doesn’t integrate as well with the OS as Safari (try dragging an image to your desktop). Oh and it kept opening new windows down the page so new windows landed up with the status bar below the bottom of the screen. Drove me fucking nuts.
After a week of switching, I’m happy with Safari and will only use FF for web site fixing (firebug and webdev tool bar)
And you can pull the Apple fanboy line all you want but it’s really starting to get on my tits. Liking something because it’s good and making valid choices doesn’t make me a fanboy. If you’re saying I cannot make intelligent decisions and I’m brand blind I take that as an insult so please stop.
12. Matt
Ah, I see. Just needed clarification re the FAYT thingy.
Why switch, indeed. Firefox doesn’t crash for me, ever. Hasn’t crashed since I switched to a Mac. I figured any problems I had were due to the extensions I had installed, and said as much to you. The spell checking can be fixed by installing a British English dictionary. The buttons? I don’t agree. I’ll give you the point about dragging images, etc to the desktop, but being a recent Mac switcher it hasn’t become an issue for me, yet. And it’s just one of the things that will be fixed with FF v3, along with it looking more Mac-like.
I’m sure Safari is fine though, but I still prefer Firefox.
On your last point, I also get what you mean. But one thing that constantly gets on my tits is your inability to see a smiley or lol at the end of a sentence, implying that the previous line was meant in jest.
I don’t think the fact that you like Apple and their products (a lot) means you can’t make intelligent decisions or that you’re brand blind. Apple make good, good products, and I like them a lot (the fact that I have recently spent two grand on Apple stuff will tell you that), but I still think FF is superior to Safari, as a browser. OS integration and spell-checking are minor problems, vastly outweighed by the plethora or extensions and tweaks which make it beat every browser on the market, imho.
13. Adrian
Putting a smiley on the end doesn’t mean I necessarily find it any less insulting. I know your intention is not to insult, but it still does, smiley or no smiley.
I find the OS integration a more useful feature than than 95% of the extensions. It uses less memory and performs better memory management. When I’m pushing up against my 2gbs of ram constantly then this is of use to me, continually.
Many of the extensions I use are only of use occasionally, and the ones that are really useful are now built into safari (and firefox) browsers. FAYT is an example of that and why I never even considered switching until that feature.
And I never just switched. I tried it out. After a week or so, I am not missing FF, and although there is the occasional way of doing things I preferred in FF (or got used to), Safari is serving me well. I’ll still use FF as a backup and for some specific tasks. But Safari3 has managed to perform as a better browser for me after a week of use so I have switched.
I think you would prefer FF because of some key ways it works and some key extensions you use. However I think after a week of using Safari 3 I’m in a better position to make an intelligent evaluation of what represents value to me.
And Safari is extensible. However I have found out in my life that as I get older, the plethora of tweaks and extensions gets hard to maintain and does cause and entropy of the platform, which if I’m quite honest is a bigger negative to me than the use some of those tweaks bring.
(and Firefox 3 is long enough away for me to not count in my consideration even a micron)
14. Destructor
The spell checking in FF is iffy.
Ah-ha! All is revealed. Does this mean your spelling is about to take a giant leap forward?