Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

mastodon.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 602 posts

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#281

Post by fsflover »

Kiro wrote: post #274
fsflover wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you try to fill bugs in Firefox's bug tracker?

I have and actually gotten a couple of them fixed in a timely manner. One was even marked with highest severity so it's not like I'm hallucinating this or doing something wrong. The team clearly cares about fixing performance issues. With that said, it's not always easy to create a minimum working example reproducing some things (general low fps, stuttering, unstable rendering, sudden black screens, strange audio art…

Thank you for supporting Firefox then.

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#282

Post by addandsubtract »

omgmajk wrote: post #209

* The "Manifest v3" sabotage of content blocking extensions: https://archive.is/i2vGD * The attempted sabotage of #JPEGXL: https://archive.is/2ihEV * #WebEnvironmentIntegrity a.k.a. #DRM for whole websites would hurt the web, #opensource browsers and OSes: https://archive.is/S912x

That's a pretty short list. I would argue the list should start 7 years ago with AMP.

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#283

Post by bunga-bunga »

joshstrange wrote: post #250
bunga-bunga wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IE was different things to different people. To developers, IE was the browser for which you had to spend hours debugging issues. Sounds like Safari to me. Considering you have to buy a whole device to use Safari, I’d argue it’s worse than IE was. (Sent from my Safari browser)

> Considering you have to buy a whole device to use Safari, I’d argue it’s worse than IE was. Until Edge (which is just Chrome essentially) the only way to run IE was on a windows computer. Not sure how that’s different.

The difference is that Microsoft did not sell computers and did not sue anyone trying to run their OS on non-Microsoft hardware.

Safari can only be run on Apple machines manufactured by Apple.

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#284

Post by Gareth321 »

halifaxbeard wrote: post #245
Gareth321 wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I need translate on iOS. Chrome and Edge are the only browsers which offer that, and Chrome is much better than Edge. I hope Firefox brings native translation to iOS soon. I'll be making the jump when they do.

Safari has translate webpage for me

Sadly Apple doesn't offer many translation languages such as Danish.

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#285

Post by codedokode »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #164
tommiegannert wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IE was absolutely hated for not evolving. I'm curious what "its own vision" was, other than "do as little as possible, while Mozilla and Opera keeps pushing forward." Now, this is from the perspective of the web developer. I don't think IE was ever hated the same way from the end-user perspective. Chrome is still innovating, but now end-users hate it, because it's trying to be too much. The "new IE" hat still belongs…

>IE was absolutely hated for not evolving. I'm curious what "its own vision" was, other than "do as little as possible, while Mozilla and Opera keeps pushing forward." IE6 was the best for a long time, also it had VML which it kept in place and didn't move on SVG for a looooonnnnnngggg time, because of course VML was integrated in office products as the vector markup format and probably because it was made in MS. So…

IE6 had a lot of bugs (not different vision of standards, but bugs). A kind of bugs that looked like developers were lazy to cover all possible cases.

As an example, take "double margin bug" [1]. It cannot be explained by alternative standards.

I remember there were more bugs of this type, but can't google them quickly.

[1] https://css-tricks.com/ie-css-bugs-thatll-get-you-every-time...

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#286

Post by joshstrange »

bunga-bunga wrote: post #283
joshstrange wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Considering you have to buy a whole device to use Safari, I’d argue it’s worse than IE was. Until Edge (which is just Chrome essentially) the only way to run IE was on a windows computer. Not sure how that’s different.

The difference is that Microsoft did not sell computers and did not sue anyone trying to run their OS on non-Microsoft hardware. Safari can only be run on Apple machines manufactured by Apple.

Aside from selling hackintosh computers I don’t think I’ve ever heard of Apple going after someone for running macOS on third party hardware or running it virtualized. If you try to make a business out of it they will come after you but they are going after developers.

Nowadays something like BrowserStack feels like a requirement anyways since I’ll never have all the devices I need to test.

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#287

Post by cubefox »

cowsandmilk wrote: post #95
tommiegannert wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IE was absolutely hated for not evolving. I'm curious what "its own vision" was, other than "do as little as possible, while Mozilla and Opera keeps pushing forward." Now, this is from the perspective of the web developer. I don't think IE was ever hated the same way from the end-user perspective. Chrome is still innovating, but now end-users hate it, because it's trying to be too much. The "new IE" hat still belongs…

> Chrome is still innovating, but now end-users hate it, because it's trying to be too much. Of the items in the link, only one is “adding functionality”. The others are (1) not supporting an image file format and (2) removing functionality from extensions. > IE was absolutely hated for not evolving IE was also hated for activex along with a number of non-standard extensions added to support Microsoft use cases. See…

Thanks for that link. Though I'm a bit confused by the date, wasn't IE6 already out by then?

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#288

Post by arp242 »

cubefox wrote: post #268
arp242 wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The IE block model was better though, and everyone is using it today with box-sizing: border-box. I still maintain that the pragmatic and sensible thing to do was to just modify the standard – "best viewed in IE" was a self-inflicted wound. Also remember the context: Netscape was just as gung-ho with standards as IE and everyone was kind of figuring out what did and didn't work on the fly. To just ossify a standard a…

The standards are there for a reason (interoperability), so following them makes sense even if a browser vendor reasonably thinks it should have been done differently. If everyone just implemented what they think is best, no standard would be required in the first place. Apart from that, IE6 also had massive rendering bugs and no CSS2 support. They only fixed the worst stuff five years later, with IE7. Of course web…

In this case, the standard reduced interoperability. As a general point you're correct of course, but you need to consider the context and specific situation.

No one implemented standards back then, and IE WAS the de-facto "standard" as it had something like ~98% market share. I'm not saying standards should have been made bug-compatible with IE or even that they should have gone out of their way to accommodate IE, but a "CSS 2.2" cold have updated stuff like the box model which was 1) actually better (or, at the least, equivalent), and 2) a huge pain for everyone.

It would have reduced headaches for everyone, and would have been a lot easier than changing every website. Especially non-IE users would have benefited: the people who suffered the most from this weren't the IE users and devs who only cared about IE, they were the Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox and Opera people and devs who cared about them. One has to wonder if uptake of things like Firefox or Opera wouldn't have been much faster in an alternative universe where these changes were made.

Mindlessly following standards just makes no sense. Also see GNU and POSIX_ME_HARDER/POSIXLY_CORRECT.

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#289

Post by kristiandupont »

INGSOCIALITE wrote: post #150
roenxi wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What difference do you see between a browser and an OS? A browser is an OS. They perform the same role. A context to run whatever 3rd party software. If a project is too complex for a single organisation, then break it up into 2-3 projects. That is how OSS software handles complex tasks. Someone could do a real LLVM-style browser project then we don't have to use javascript which'd catapult us all into the 21st centu…

> What difference do you see between a browser and an OS? A browser is an OS. They perform the same role. A context to run whatever 3rd party software. This is where everything has gone screwy. A browser should only be rendering and displaying html files. Browsers should be minuscule in size, and /definitely/ not run any 3rd party software.

>This is where everything has gone screwy

I, on the other hand, find that "browser as OS" is one of the best things that has happened in recent software history. I can run Photopea anywhere, on any platform that has a decent browser. Absolutely magic!

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#290

Post by 2muchcoffeeman »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #164
tommiegannert wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IE was absolutely hated for not evolving. I'm curious what "its own vision" was, other than "do as little as possible, while Mozilla and Opera keeps pushing forward." Now, this is from the perspective of the web developer. I don't think IE was ever hated the same way from the end-user perspective. Chrome is still innovating, but now end-users hate it, because it's trying to be too much. The "new IE" hat still belongs…

>IE was absolutely hated for not evolving. I'm curious what "its own vision" was, other than "do as little as possible, while Mozilla and Opera keeps pushing forward." IE6 was the best for a long time, also it had VML which it kept in place and didn't move on SVG for a looooonnnnnngggg time, because of course VML was integrated in office products as the vector markup format and probably because it was made in MS. So…

>Also Safari had advanced color profiles before the other browsers, Safari does better work on accessibility than the other browsers, if most web developers thinks Safari is the new IE and Chrome is great then I think they aren't paying more than superficial attention to things

Apple seem to be better than most at accessibility features and have been since day one. It's a shame that the best in business for accessibility is a private company.

Post reply on HN