Comment Re:local anecdote (Score 5, Interesting) 1016
I would characterize Chrome as "Safari for Windows done right."
There were massive mistakes Apple made (out of arrogance or incompetence, I'm not sure), when releasing Safari for Windows:
- Apple style Font rendering. Having to switch your eyes between Safari's anti-aliasing and ClearType on a regular basis starts to hurt your eyes, one seems blurry in comparison to the other.
- Safari didn't follow many of the standard windows app behaviors, another snafu. You can't stuff OS X app behaviors down the throats of Windows users, and vice versa.
- It also had an incredibly slow startup time. (Although it would render extremely fast)
Contrast this to Chrome, which renders text using ClearType and windows font rendering, behaves like a windows app, starts up really fast.
It's not even like I'm bashing Apple for a bad port. iTunes for windows was ported really well, it follows (for the most part, except menus) the windows UI conventions and font rendering, so it feels more like a Windows app.
(By the way, I'm primarily a Mac user and use Safari regularly on the Mac)