WebKit

NOTE: These are open source code resources used to build the latest experimental alpha of WebKit. If you're not a developer, or don't want to compile your own WebKit, then don't bother. IF you'd like a compiled version of the latest client WebKit beta, what you want is Safari Technology Preview, which is available at Apple's Developer website at the link below. The current version is Release 71, aka Safari 12.1, WebKit 14607.1.15. https://developer.apple.com/safari/download/

All right, consider me a dolt, but what the hell does one do with these files?

They finally revamped their archives and classified them by OS version! — at least the last three of them: https://webkit.org/build-archives/#mac-elcapitan-x86_64

"Note: Now requires OS X 10.9.5 or later" Not Correct! This Build does NOT SUPPORT 10.9!

Anyone know how to D/L this without the MacUpdate Trojans? I can't find a specific link at "Apple."

Since Apple states on its own web site that the app for tracking and reporting bugs and testing new developments is Safari Technology Review, why is the current WebKit daily build appearing on MU?

Just in case, I tried downloading this last version but though it looks like launching, I soon got a message that 10.9 is not supported. So don't lose your time trying if you don't run one of the latest OSes (I would even bet it only runs under Sierra...)

The last version to date is 197354 and it's not compatible with 10.9 or earlier. You won't find any information on their site about which is the last version for a given OS! I've found empirically the last ones for the OSes I use: r192684 (20 november 2015) is the last for 10.9 meaning that the official Safari 9.0.3 is probably best for Mavericks (22 january 2016), even more if Apple realize a new update in the future (who knows?). Hard to say if there's a benefit in using the last Webkit, its launch time is 1s more than Safari but maybe in some situation it's beneficial... (I had the case in Leopard, when some site was not rendering well in Safari and it did well in Leopard Webkit)

This browser isn't the best, but not bad. I don't like the new tabs' openings. not very user-friendly I'd say.

Get the latest nightly build here: http://nightly.webkit.org/ WebKit r171105 was built on 15 July 2014 and is a 59.3 MB download. Thanks ... Ken

I'm surprised that there is no mention of "WebKit Leopard" here. For those of use who prefer PowerPC (and we are legion) it is also possible to enjoy all the benefits of the latest Safari without sacrificing to the demons of Intel. Visit https://code.google.com/p/leopard-webkit/

OK, here's another possibly stupid question: If Webkit is the nightly build of Safari, how come the requirements for WK are 10.6+? I thought Safari is no longer supporting OS 10.6 in the Safari 6.x.

Pardon my ignorance, but I am confused. The description says it is a browser engine, yet one commenter says webkit is his/her secondary browser. Can you just download this and run it like another version of Safari, i.e. analogous to Chrome vs. Chromium, or is it more complicated than that? Went to both the Webkit page and the Webkit wiki page and -- surprise, surprise -- there are no simple explanations of what exactly web kit is and how to use it. And if it is just an engine, is there a straight-forward way to replace temporarily the installed webkit engine that comes with Safari with this one?

I have used WebKit as my secondary browser for quite some time. Be advised, however, that while the download listed here does work on Snow Leopard, more recent nightly builds will not. I believe the last build that supported 10.6 was r130273. As of today, current build is r141985.

Some people get pleasure out of using the most cutting-edge product available, and these nightly builds of WebKit contain stuff in advance of the most recent Safari version. But there are downsides: a.) every now and then you can get an unstable version which is a crasher. b.) They don't indicate to the general public what's new in any given version, so you never quite know what you're getting. c.) Since their updates are so frequent I'd like to see them implement pushed auto-upgrades or at least the same super-friendly dmg used by Dropbox. (Their seems to be no way for members of the general public to give feedback to their design team, I'd love to give them a piece of my mind about these last two issues).