Head to head
Safari vs Apify
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
No reviews yet
Native Safari browser automation for AI agents — 98 tools, zero Chrome overhead.
Full listing
The short version
Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. The safety scan favours Apify (77/100 against 69). Apify is hosted and callable through the gateway; Safari runs on your own machine. Safari has noticeably more public adoption.
| Safari | Apify | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | C69/100 | B77/100 |
| Adoption | Established | Growing |
| GitHub stars | 203 | 0 |
| Downloads / week | 3.3k | – |
| Runs where | Your machine (local) | Hosted (remote) |
| Gateway-ready | No | Yes |
| Tools | — | 39 |
| Write actions | — | 5 |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | MIT | MIT |
| Last release | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-19 |
| Category | Scraping and browsing | Scraping and browsing |