main

Google co-founder promises Safari compatibility with GMail

malebolgia   on 26 April 2004 - 14:27 · 33 comments & 5843 views

Advertisement (Why?)
When Internet search engine giant Google launched its free 1GB email service, Gmail on April 1, 2004, they did so without support for Apple Computer Inc.'s Safari Web browser. The browser requirement page on the company's Web site lists several compatible browsers for the beta of Gmail, but Safari is still not among them. All of that will change before Gmail is available to the public, according to Google co-founder Sergey Brin.

Brin noted that he was "embarrassed" that Gmail's beta doesn't support Safari, but said that they will add Safari support before its public release. "We're going to make it work with Safari and that's one of the high priority things," Brin told MacCentral. "I’ve heard that you can sort of get it to work if you're desperate. I want to fix that, and I want to make it work really well."

News source: MacCentral


Beyond Divinity is already available Germany, Austria and Switzerland, and will soon be available in other territories including the Benelux,Scandinavia,Portugal, France, Australia, Poland, the Czech republic, the Russian speaking territories, China, Japan, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. Beyond Divinity is being localized in French, German, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, Czech and Polish. Other languages and territories may soon be announced.

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 33 additional comments
(6 replies) #1 NinjaMonkey82 on 26 Apr 2004 - 14:39
I'd rather be able to use it with Mail.app. I doubt it will be able to work with any mail clients because of ads.
#1.1 Sn1p3t on 26 Apr 2004 - 15:00
Actually they said they might add POP3 and forwarding services.
#1.2 NinjaMonkey82 on 26 Apr 2004 - 15:16
That's really good to hear. I'd much rather use an e-mail client while I'm at home than have to use a web interface.
#1.3 dougkinzinger on 26 Apr 2004 - 18:32
POP3 would rock.....even I'd use it!
#1.4 Soleen on 26 Apr 2004 - 21:50
pop3 would rock even dougkinzinger would use it!
#1.5 chacho on 26 Apr 2004 - 23:33
lol soleen
#1.6 hoodedone on 28 Apr 2004 - 07:18
With that amount of storage available, it'd also be well-suited for IMAP. I'd give that a shot.
(3 replies) #2 Z3r0 on 26 Apr 2004 - 15:04
Why bother
#2.1 Krankerz on 26 Apr 2004 - 15:50
Why not?
#2.2 Z3r0 on 27 Apr 2004 - 10:21
heh, yesterday I couldn't be arsed typing, but today I'm going to post a more detailed response

The website that google make should be compliant with the latest HTML/coding standards and then it should be up to the makers of safari or other independent browsers to fix the issues with reading the website.

Also, I don't understand the purpose of 1GB of email, to me it seems a bit obvious it'll just be used by people to upload mp3s/mp4s/xvid/divx to each other.
What would be the purpose of providing pop3 access, it would detract from users seeing the ads on the site, therefore they would probably also send spam mail every so often, which would be annoying.
Who actually needs a gigabyte though? assuming the content is just text you would have maybe 20kb per file, that's approximately 50,000 emails, that's way too many emails for any one person to effectively manage anyway and people probably couldn't fill it.
It sounds like an advertising gimic to me and I suspect that the filespace will be scaled down or they'll enforce the accounts quite strictly to stop certain file types being sent, although people can always rename the files or rar/encrypt them.

Last edited by 4205 on 27 Apr 2004 - 10:34
#2.3 jesterzwild on 28 Apr 2004 - 05:53
QUOTE (#2.2)
The website that google make should be compliant with the latest HTML/coding standards and then it should be up to the makers of safari or other independent browsers to fix the issues with reading the website.

The truth of the matter is that GMail isn't compliant with web standards in some ways, and even the parts that are, use methods that are known not to work across browsers. Browser makers shouldn't have to tailor their product to work with specific sites if the said browsers work according to web standards. It is the web site developers that should be making sure their site works in the major browsers and functions according to web standards.
(1 reply) #3 nmarsh1 on 26 Apr 2004 - 15:10
I'm a big Apple fan, but I have to say...

Safari sucks. It's slow, buggy, and hardly fullfeatured.

Comano is much better. Even OS X FireFox 1-ups Safari.

http://mozilla.org/products/camino/
http://mozilla.org/products/firefox/

Last edited by 27230 on 26 Apr 2004 - 15:29
#3.1 NinjaMonkey82 on 26 Apr 2004 - 15:20
I've never had a problem with Safari, only my bank's website doesn't like it too much but it is still functional. Camino needs serious help, it could be a great browser but development is slow and it is very buggy. Firefox is about the most well rounded but I much prefer Safari's interface and bookmark managment.
(6 replies) #4 Erich on 26 Apr 2004 - 15:44
BAH! If they wanted compatibility, they would have bought a pc and installed windows on it. Instead they'ld rather have stability and a user friendly interface, hence they sacrifice compatibility. Quit bitching, you made your choice.
#4.1 N@t5 on 26 Apr 2004 - 16:11
Except its not up to them whether developers choose to focus on one platform or not.
This is a nice case of open-mindedness and kindness from Google
#4.2 roadwarrior on 26 Apr 2004 - 16:19
QUOTE (#4.0)
If they wanted compatibility, they would have bought a pc and installed windows on it.

You seem to forget that the internet is supposed to be platform-independent.
#4.3 neufuse on 26 Apr 2004 - 17:09
how the internet works is supose to be platform independent (communication wise, TCP/IP,UDP,etc), what people make websites do can be what ever they want it to be.. If they want to deny windows users they have the right to.. Let in only Mac users sure it's the web site owners decision.

Last edited by 47883 on 27 Apr 2004 - 04:35
#4.4 bogd on 26 Apr 2004 - 20:08
why be only opened to 95% pf the market when you can be opened to 100% of the market?
#4.5 em_te on 26 Apr 2004 - 23:57
QUOTE (#4.4)
why be only opened to 95% pf the market when you can be opened to 100% of the market?

But then we'd be back to HTML 3.2 to support people still using old 3.0 and 4.0 browsers.
#4.6 jesterzwild on 28 Apr 2004 - 05:49
Actually the number of people using browsers that old is less than 1%.

The point here should be that Google has knowingly locked themselves into an incompatible design that requires extra work to be usable in various browsers.
#5 BTallack on 26 Apr 2004 - 17:22
Glad to see that they didn't forget us Mac users.
(2 replies) #6 Sushubh on 26 Apr 2004 - 17:36
So, we have to campaign for Opera support?
#6.1 aent on 27 Apr 2004 - 00:42
Not before Konqueror
#6.2 Danrarbc641 on 27 Apr 2004 - 06:35
Isn't Safari support Konqueror support anyway? They are both using the KHTML rendering engine after all.
(1 reply) #7 ~~NeYo~~ on 26 Apr 2004 - 17:37
Thats good of them to do that. Personally I've used Spymac mail (1Gb) via Pop3 in Mail. But I'll probably sign up for a Gmail account, so i can get spammed there.

Roadwarrior is spot on about the internet. Props to ya, totally agree. i've found since using a Mac, i've appreciated open standards and good coding a hell of a lot more.
#7.1 Magallanes on 27 Apr 2004 - 17:06
Yep!. Everyone forget about spymac, it work NOW! (gmail is still on beta).

(2 replies) #8 berger on 26 Apr 2004 - 17:41
Is he as embarassed that Gmail doesnt Opera?
#8.1 CheeseCow on 26 Apr 2004 - 21:20
Isn't it? Isn't it coded to proper standards?
#8.2 Soleen on 26 Apr 2004 - 21:48
opera is not supported
and this is wierd i have to say
#9 Neobond on 26 Apr 2004 - 18:24
Nice how our compatibility issues didn't hit the news!

Neowin is cool on most major browsers
#10 fjv on 26 Apr 2004 - 19:22
blah... **** compatibility... when is it going live??

fjv.
#11 eXplosive on 27 Apr 2004 - 01:06
Next they should look into fixing the bugs with Adsense and FireFox.
#12 jesterzwild on 28 Apr 2004 - 05:45
The real problem here is that GMail uses a number of non-standard HTML/Jscript coding practices. Links aren't really links, etc. Support for any of the four major browsers (IE6, Moz/etc., Opera, and Safari) shouldn't even be an issue if the site was coded using web standards, except with the possible visual (read CSS) glitch here or there (IE comes to mind).

I expect better from Google. GMail is an awesome mail application, but it has some shortcomings that could have easily been avoided.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)