Existing users, 
I'm sorry, but it's absolutely ridiculous that Safari 1.2 can't run in Jaguar - somehow other 3rd party software can manage to work between the 2 versions of OSX but somehow Apple can't manage to create backwards compatible programs for its own operating system?
Some of us aren't ready to update to Panther for a variety of reasons - costs, avoiding major updates during projects, etc. It seems Apple feels everyone should be jumping to upgrade every time they drop an unremarkable system bug-fix that costs another $100. Oh sure, a few finder enhancements and color labels, but otherwise a bug-fix. Is it just me or are we being blackmailed by Apple for the sake of system/program stability?
Apple: Here's the latest groundbreaking update to our groundbreaking application with half the features you once took for granted!
User: What does it do differently?
Apple: Well - it almost works now!
User: Great! I'll download it now - finally I can open my website in Jaguar.
Apple: Jaguar? You're kidding, right? It only works in Panther. Don't you have Panther?
User: Um, no...I can't really afford the update right now...
Apple: Well, too bad for you. We no longer support that ancient platform. 10.2 is sooooo passé...so 2003.
User: But I heard 10.3 Panther will cause my firewire drive to explode in my face, blinding and hideously disfiguring me.
Apple: Sometimes, depends, we have an update that might prevent this - but think about the splendor of an almost functioning web browser!
User: You're right! I love paying to be a beta tester for Apple! THANKS!
Apple Safari
Browse the Web with speed and an elegant interface.
Version: 4.0.4
Not for use in Jaguar 10.2?
Feedback Type: Commentary
Contributed by: jackthegiantkiller Monday, February 02 2004 @ 03:57 PM PST
Product Platform: MacOSX
Used Product For: 1-6 months
Recommend Product: NO
Comments
Not for use in Jaguar 10.2? - sooloo
There are HUGE changes in 10.3 for developers. Cocoa bindings, NSXMLParser, the Cocoa text system has many many new features... the list could be extended. 'Finder enhancements and color labels' are trivial by comparision. The new stuff is extremely useful, to the point where it's just not worth going out of your way to support old versions of the OS. Either users will upgrade or they won't. Users that don't upgrade are obviously happy with what they have, so aren't going to be installing new software.Monday, February 02 2004 @ 04:31 PM PST
Not for use in Jaguar 10.2? - jackthegiantkiller
1. I've supported Apple for 12 years, I can complain if I like.2. Apple has historically overcharged for its hardware - we more than deserve a price break in the software/system updates.
3. That an incremental software update (1.0 -> 1.2) can stop working between another incremental system update (10.2 -> 10.3) which we have to pay for smacks a bit of extortion, regardless of the improvements. I'm sure the new Cocoa bindings, etc. are remarkable, but still bug-fixes nevertheless.
4. Some of us aren't choosing to update for very serious reasons - first was the firewire issue, which I got to see firsthand almost bring an entire video production company I freelance for here in NYC to their knees. The other reason being that I never update a system in the middle of a job. I make my living on these machines, so I can't really afford to have a work program malfunction for the sake of stability in Safari.
5. That Safari is, unfortunately, still so bare bones I can't imagine why it has to rely solely on an entire system upgrade in order to work effectively. I understand and appreciate how complicated programming is, but this is ridiculous.
Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 09:19 AM PST
Not for use in Jaguar 10.2? - brackisback_dotmac
Whining, FUD and misinformation is not welcome and not helpful.if you choose not to upgrade, that;s your choice.
You can't expect everything for free for the rest of your life. R&D and improvements to OS software cost money.
Apple owes you nothing past what you buy.
Buy it or don't. Stop complaining that it is not free for life.
Reply to This
Monday, February 02 2004 @ 04:05 PM PST