Run multiple (old) Safari browsers on one system

[BabyJeffy]

Linked to from Ajaxian today, I noticed this very handy collection of antique Safari Browsers available for download:

http://michelf.com/projects/multi-safari/

They remain "self contained" and are bundled with the same web-kit (internally) as was available when they first shipped (so you can regression test without having to reinstall multiple versions of the OS).

Cheers,
Jeff

[tt]Jeff's Blog [!]@[/!] CodeRambler

http://www.coderambler.com/

http://www.coedit.co.uk/

[/tt]

Make sure your web page and css validates properly against the doctype you have chosen - before you attempt to debug a problem!

FAQ216-6094

 

[jimoblak]

There still seems to be a need to have multiple versions of OSX since these releases all have limitations as to which OSX version can be used.

 

[BabyJeffy]

Those limitations may be important for some users, but having the stand-alone versions (which include the correct web-kit) are great if you are concerned with testing layout or css related issues (which most users tend to be most concerned about).

The more tools we have available in our tool-chest the better, though... so I'm keeping a set handy "just in case"

Cheers,
Jeff

[tt]Jeff's Blog [!]@[/!] CodeRambler

http://www.coderambler.com/

http://www.coedit.co.uk/

[/tt]

Make sure your web page and css validates properly against the doctype you have chosen - before you attempt to debug a problem!

FAQ216-6094

 

[jimoblak]

I understand where you are coming from but a developer working in 10.3 is not going to be able to use the versions of Safari that were created for 10.4. Likewise a developer working in 10.4 is not going to be able to use the versions of Safari that were created for 10.3. So these 'self-contained' Safari browsers are of little help. If testing these versions is important, it is little trouble to install another bootable version of OSX on an external firewire drive.

The incremental Safari releases within each OS are insignificant since many users will be using Apple Software Update and running the most recent version.

 

[Foamcow]

it is little trouble to install another bootable version of OSX on an external firewire drive

Is it less trouble than installing the standalone version in your existing OS? Umm, no. It might be simple to boot from another drive, but you need the different versions of the OS to do so in the first place. Myself, I have a Macbook running 10.4 and a G5 running 10.3. I can't install 10.4 on the G5 because I don't have a copy for it. Likewise I don't have 10.3 for the Macbook or 10.2, 10.1 or 10.0.

So for me it is much more useful to have standalone versions of a browser containing the WebKit release for older OS's.

If you are a developer working in 10.3 and need to test in 10.4 then you will have to upgrade your OS anyway - even if on an external FW drive.

Likewise if you are a developer working on a Mac you will need to have Bootcamp/Parallels/Windows on hand to test for Windows browsers.





--
Tek-Tips Forums is Member Supported. Click Here to donate

<honk>*:O)</honk>

Tyres: Mine's a pint of the black stuff.
Mike: You can't drink a pint of Bovril.

 

[jimoblak]

So for me it is much more useful to have standalone versions of a browser containing the WebKit release for older OS's.

I don't think we are understanding the text of the web page. Read it again. These won't work for you.

It should be noted however that versions 1.2.x and 1.3.x of Safari won’t work under Mac OS X 10.4.

You cannot run 1.x versions of Safari on 10.4; You cannot run 2.x versions of Safari on 10.3. In order to use these 'Multi-Safari' packages, you still need to be running both 10.3 and 10.4.

There is no way that you can run all those versions of Safari on one system. The Ajaxian title is misleading.

 

[BabyJeffy]

There is no way that you can run all those versions of Safari on one system

Indeed. I don't recall saying you could.

I think you have confused 1.2x and 1.3x (in the article) to include 1.0 -- and that's simply not the case. 1.0 will work on the latest MacOSX no problem (as the original article says).

I use MacOSX 10.4 natively and I will now be able to run the following versions of Safari in my support matrix (without any effort):
- 1.0 (first release)
- 2.0 (first release of version 2)
- 2.04 (last release of version 2)
- 3.03 (current release of version 3)

That's all I need (it is actually more than I need). If a client has a 1.2 or 1.3 problem, you are right - I will not be able to deal with it (I couldn't deal with it yesterday either)... but I can now deal with many other scenarios than I could earlier on today!

Cheers,
Jeff

[tt]Jeff's Blog [!]@[/!] CodeRambler

http://www.coderambler.com/

http://www.coedit.co.uk/

[/tt]

Make sure your web page and css validates properly against the doctype you have chosen - before you attempt to debug a problem!

FAQ216-6094

 

[jimoblak]

I still see no reason to get too excited about the other scenarios (And I do not mean to poo poo your news; I merely find Ajaxian's article title misleading). Do you really think anyone in the 5% of Mac users on your web sites is also using such an old release as Safari 1.0? You might as well be testing for Netscape 4 compatibility as well.

 

[BabyJeffy]

Netscape 4 compatibility is number one on my list of priorities (along with IE 4 for the Mac, of course)

I don't tend to bother testing older than the latest version of the last major revision (so 2.04 of Safari, 1.5.0.12 of Firefox etc), but from time to time the need arises (especially when it's the CEO's daughter's room-mate's mother's computer that shows the problem - for instance).

You'd be surprised the requirements that come out of large corporate testing suites... and even though you would think they'd listen to you explaining how it's an irrelevant browser combo, they'll still insist on testing it (because it was in the contract that they signed... 2 years ago).

Cheers,
Jeff

[tt]Jeff's Blog [!]@[/!] CodeRambler

http://www.coderambler.com/

http://www.coedit.co.uk/

[/tt]

Make sure your web page and css validates properly against the doctype you have chosen - before you attempt to debug a problem!

FAQ216-6094