Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'PC/Windows/Linux' started by ozarkshome, Jun 15, 2007.
Excellent article here for PC users.
is it better or simply different?
expected behaviour for me is the browser (Inet explorer) does not honour embedded profiles and I remove the profile since it is not generally used.
if I started using safari and included embedded profiles on images I would be seeing something different to most other i'net users which would seem a backward step (for me)
PS, thanks for posting the link, it is interesting but not something that would give me any advantage (unless nearly all i'net make use of embedded profiles)
Yikes, what a beta. Three crashes in the first couple minutes.
This is only an issue if you are looking at a pic that is in any other color space other than sRGB. Firefox and IE will display the images much differently, whereas Safari is able to read and display the images properly. This is not new - it has been a part of Safari forever. It would be a step backward, though, to start uploading pics in non-sRGB color spaces just because Safari can display them properly.
Think about it - the majority of users probably don't want or know how to install a different browser other than IE. Those that do, will use Firefox.
One thing Safari has that Firefox does not - it allows you to go in "porn mode", a mode that allows you to browse the internet without adding any sites to your history. This is different from firefox in that, when you delete your history, ALL your history is gone. This feature in Safari just simply takes you out of the "loop" when it comes to recording history.