When comparing Safari vs Qutebrowser, the Slant community recommends Qutebrowser for most people. In the question“What are the best desktop web browsers?” Qutebrowser is ranked 6th while Safari is ranked 15th.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pro Works elegantly in OSX
The rendering of the pages and the browser compatibility with OSX works smoothly, when compared to other browsers. Also you get very high battery life with Safari, when compared to Chrome.
Pro Extremely fast
Pro Sleek design
– No distraction stuff like favicons in tabs, all that borders, bevels and embosses in panels like in other browsers, no ugly shaped tabs.
– Neat adress bar.
– Good looking start “show all tabs” screen.
Pro iCloud syncing
Tabs, passwords, bookmarks and, history all sync across devices.
Pro Safari uses Webkit, a great open source web engine
Webkit is very light compared to Blink, renders web pages at an incredible speed, great CSS support and is also constantly evolving.
Pro Fast and light on resource usage
Pro Vim-style keyboard shortcuts and commands for rapid navigation
With suggestions/auto-complete to reduce the learning curve.
Pro Highly customizable
And quite easy to configure. You can even write your own config.
Con OSX only
Apple dropped Windows support after Safari 5.
While Safari er is currently available gratis (without monetary charge) on Mac OS X, it is currently not libre (meaning that it does not allow users to view the source code used to create, to modify that code, or to redistribute modifications) and is therefore neither free nor open-source software.
Con Poor support for new web technologies
Safari usually takes its time when it comes to adopting new and useful web technologies meaning that the user gets an inferior experience compared to other modern browsers.
Con Terrible support for open source formats like .VP9 or .ogg
Apple does not support open source formats. Instead, they use H.264 and H.265.
Con Outdated Rendering engine
All other browsers and toolkits (Qt/GTK) have shifted to Googles Blink-fork of KHTML/Webkit so Apple is currently the only main contributor left.
Con Requires additional support and plugins for video playback
Con Steep learning curve
If you're not a vim user it will take some time to get used to the shortcuts.
Con Poor adblock in comparision to ublock origin
Con Software rendering only with Nouveau Drivers
As it is mainly written in Python it's startup is slower than the competition.