I just now got around to looking at the new site and I must say I'm impressed! I tend to peek around the source code of new sites I encounter that have unique layouts and I was pleasantly surprised to see some intelligent CSS instead of tables.For what it's worth, everything looks good in both Safari and Firefox on Mac OS X to me. The only issue I noticed is that the "Bomber X" and "Collectables" images on the Galleries page have no links, but that seems intentional.
(Crash Override @ Nov. 08 2007,00:12)QUOTEIt looks fine under safari - the fonts are just a little bit heavier than in Firefox and Explorer. There's not a lot we can do about that.On Windows, Safari's fonts overall appear a little heavier and blurrier compared to IE and Firefox because Apple's font rendering engine aims for print-like accuracy over display-level pixel hinting. If interested, you can read a brief explanation with comparisons here. On a Mac, all fonts are rendered the same (as Safari on Windows) and a user wouldn't notice anything out of the ordinary in Safari versus Firefox.Of course, there's also the matter of the "font-weight: bold" attribute on the body tag in bigdaix's CSS, but that affects all browsers equally.
(Crash Override @ Nov. 08 2007,00:12)QUOTEIf something else is wrong in an older Safari I wouldn't worry too much because everyone I know who uses a Mac uses Firefox instead.Of course, I have the opposite experience.
Google Analytics' browser report (when restricted to Mac OS) for my site shows that over 3/4 of Mac users browse with Safari.That said, yeah, I wouldn't worry about going too far to support older versions of Safari. It seems Mac users are pretty diligent about staying on top of updates, as two-thirds of my Safari users are already using Safari 3.0 and a quarter are using the latest 2.x version, leaving only a tenth using anything older.Just my two pence!