151–160 of 316 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't use any of those things. I just know that I had to install Chrome to get Telegram's desktop app working.
FYI Telegram has a history of serious security issues: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/02/13/telegram_messaging_... https://www.theverge.com/2017/1/11/14237136/trump-leak-teleg... https://gizmodo.com/why-you-should-stop-using-telegram-right...
But I did know that.
It was just that Everpedia used it for chat, and I was curious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While Safari’s desktop market share is minimal and it really only competes with Chrome directly on Macs. No one is going to use Chrome only features that don’t work on iPhones.
I hope you are right.
I'm not going to use Firefox for development and I'm not going to install Firefox for my family members, simply because Chrome is better for both scenarios. Firefox is pretty good, but Chrome is just better. Instead, I send Mozilla some money every month (a small amount), because I still care that Firefox continues to be developed.
What would Mozilla have to do to make their browser better than Chrome?
For my family, Chrome is on desktop and their phones, everything synchronized. Chrome autoupdates without bothering them. Chrome is simple and it just works for them, and everything works in Chrome.
Please don't downvote me, I've been supporting Mozilla with monthly donations for years, and after Edge switches to Chromium, I'll probably increase the amount ;-) And I invite more of us to do the same. :-)
Waited a week post-announcement to talk about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The concern is not 'now' it's 'later'. Google is a business like any other - and when they have the power to lever a monopolized situation - they will. For example, they may start integrating technologies for which they have exclusive, or at least 'special' access. Can you imagine if all of a sudden Google apps start performing better than anyone else's? Or what if they integrate technology that de-facto collects usa…
"For example, they may start integrating technologies for which they have exclusive, or at least 'special' access. Can you imagine if all of a sudden Google apps start performing better than anyone else's?" This is already happening. I very recently worked on the Edge team, and one of the reasons we decided to end EdgeHTML was because Google kept making changes to its sites that broke other browsers, and we couldn't…
Author starts by saying NDAs are useless, and he keeps secrets better without them... Then in the right next sentence, he shares how he learnt about a big secret from a friend at Microsoft without any NDA!
I feel like I’m missing something, because I keep seeing blog posts that tell me a browser monoculture is bad (and the irony of Microsoft saying this is nearly too much), but none of them tell me why. I understand that it was bad in the IE6 days, but IE6 was also closed source and could only be run on Windows (see also the irony of Microsoft discontinuing IE on Mac, not wanting to compete with Safari, a browser made…
This sort of thing boxes out other vendors/rendering engines and forces them to have to add non-standard features themselves. Vendor prefixes are not enough. If devs no longer test on non-Chromium platforms, vendor prefixes have to be adopted by non-Chromium engines or risk utter obsolescence. This is also true of Chromium forks. If a fork is a niche player, being open source doesn't buy you much because the Chromium governing body (i.e., Google) still has the lion's market share, and thus the decision-making authority for what the web should look like.
The web browser vendors have too much money. They have no incentive to keep the platform small. Google in particular, the cost to implement Blink is essentially meaningless to them, but it is beyond affordability for almost anyone else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Microsoft has hardly offered much as far as competition and diversity goes since IE6, basically the only web "innovations" they're responsible for is a bunch of IE-specific APIs that didn't work in any other browser. I don't have much love for MS, but this is just wrong. XMLHttpRequest, the precursor to fetch, pretty much allowed "web 2.0" to exist. Now we use fetch, but they introduced it first. box-sizing: border…
You seem to have missed the part of my comment that said "since IE6" AFAIK the box-sizing box model you mentioned was implemented since the beginning of Trident, well before IE6 came about. XHR was available from IE5 onwards (only accessible via ActiveX object, it didn't become available as a native window property in JS until IE7 but the feature was still available), so again isn't "since IE6". If you think whether…
There are definitely examples:
IE8 was the first browser with separate content processes (before Chrome was announced).
CSS Grid was heavily pushed by MS (and shipped, prefixed, in IE10).
Ultimately, being in a game of perpetual catchup in unsurprising when they stood still, with only an absolute minimal amount of work happening, for three years, while other browsers continued to march forwards.