23 March 2008
As long as we're shoveling
Last week, Trini warned me to watch out for the next iTunes update, inasmuch as it would be carrying Safari with it. I said I didn't have any particular problem with Safari, but I thought this was a genuinely lousy way to build market share: those who would try it and like it would likely be outnumbered by those who resent the intrusion.
Lynne, for one:
Updates shouldn't be bundled with completely new software. If they want to ethically push their browser, after the quicktime update they should have had a message "safari internet browser is now available for windows, would you like to download and install it". It just isn't right! Apple banked on people not paying attention since the check is already in there, and I fell right into the trap.
I continue to believe that "options" of this sort should have three buttons in the dialog box: YES, NO and HELL NO. This last would properly be interpreted as "Don't you dare try to foist this thing off on me again."
Safari users, at last count, make up 5.1 percent of dustbury.com visitors.
Posted at 10:18 AM to PEBKAC
» Helpful Software: Real Quick Alternatives from Hit Coffee
Over at Dustbury, a discussion popped up about Apple's bundling of the Safari web browser with the latest version of iTunes. As many of you know, it's difficult to impossible to download Apple's bundling of Quicktime with iTunes so that you can't get......[read more]
I'm guessing I just moved that Safari needle another point-one with this visit ;)
Apple irritated me when it required that you download iTunes along with an upgrade to Quicktime here not too far back. The only reason I have iTunes (and really don't want it) now is because there's an iPhone in the house. Safari is on the iPhone. I already have IE and Opera. I don't want or need a third browser on the desktop.
The attempted Safari update prompted me to turn off Quicktime/iTunes' automatic update checks altogether.
I haven't been a fan of Quicktime anyway, it's gotten to be as annoying as RealPlayer in its default hijacking of file associations. If it weren't for the number of multimedia things requiring QT -- of which unfortunately a non-zero quantity consist of such things I actually want to see -- I wouldn't have it on my system at all.
I've mellowed a little about RealPlayer in recent years, if only because I don't seem to encounter that many media files anymore that require it.
It allowed me to view flash files again since IE won't play nice with the newest flash version on Vista. Then I downloaded Firefox, which I should've been using all along and all is right on my Vista PC again. At least as far as I can tell.
What's been burning me lately is Google Desktop. Seems to come bundled with a lot of stuff that I install.
If it weren't for the number of multimedia things requiring QT -- of which unfortunately a non-zero quantity consist of such things I actually want to see -- I wouldn't have it on my system at all.
Allow me to recommend QuickTime Alternative. It basically allows other viewers (and browsers!) to play QuickTime videos without actually installing QT. Since it's not a viewer in itself, it doesn't hijack any extensions. It also installs Media Player Classic, though I think you can decline to install it, but MPC doesn't hijack any links or take up any system resources either. See also Real Alternative
IE doesn't play nice with anything. If you're watching an old movie and you hear the so-called "Wilhelm scream," what he's screaming is "IE!"
I did not know that.
Apple "offered" me Safari on my work box today as a solo product, not bundled with iTunes or QuickTime. I declined.
So wait... someone warned you but you failed to warn the rest of us? Tsk! Tsk!
Ah, now we see the benefits of multi-tsking.
It also installs Media Player Classic
Heh. That won't be a problem -- I already have it. Thanks for the word about QT Alternative, Trumwill. I'll look into it.