161–170 of 316 posts
Safari, the browser that claims to support standards but always comes with caveats, like saying they support transform/transitions and then everything with box shadows flickering
and Safari finds ways to break existing features with every minor update. My codebase is full of Safari version-specific bug fixes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
and Safari finds ways to break existing features with every minor update. My codebase is full of Safari version-specific bug fixes.
Do you not have fixes for other browsers too?
Other browsers are updated more frequently and do not need OS updates.
Safari users are left behind with a broken browser.
I have more iOS 16.1 users (specific version) than all Chrome users with 6+ months old versions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It definitely is, I was also there, just like everyone was doing IE only sites, not only plenty of people do the same with ChromeOS vision of the Web, they ship Chrome alongside Electron crap. Safari is the last man standing before a ChromeOS world.
Safari is the last man standing before a ChromeOS world. Except it isn't. Maybe I'm being slightly obtuse here, but the world is not "Chrome Vs Safari". It's "Chrome Vs Safari Vs native apps". If Safari dies we'll be in a world of "Chrome Vs native apps", and that is what Apple wants. Browsers represent a way to deliver software to users that's outside of Apple's revenue mechanisms. Apple have every incentive to keep…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Safari is the last man standing before a ChromeOS world. Except it isn't. Maybe I'm being slightly obtuse here, but the world is not "Chrome Vs Safari". It's "Chrome Vs Safari Vs native apps". If Safari dies we'll be in a world of "Chrome Vs native apps", and that is what Apple wants. Browsers represent a way to deliver software to users that's outside of Apple's revenue mechanisms. Apple have every incentive to keep…
Am I the only one left happily using Firefox? You know, the only "major" browser that doesn't seem to have these conflicts of interest?
No not even close by every single possible measure. I was there, I suffered through it, Google would have to make TONS of hostile moves for that fact to change. I have no interest in the arguments of a closed source subscription service that wants me to switch to the bundled browser of the wealthiest company on earth's most popular consumer OS, lecturing me about using the 4th wealthiest company on earth's browser th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand this because I have used Firefox exclusively since it first came out and never run into broken sites. What exactly are these exotic sites you are visiting that break in Firefox? You mentioned an elusive government website but I have used many (IRS, SSA, Edu, etc...)
This is also my experience. But to be fair I have a heavily modified privacy-centric Firefox, and I disabled some features in the config, and I disable js and large images and of course tracking/ads by default, and I delete most cookies on browser close, and I run Wayland on Linux so... any breakage is probably on me.
But the key difference is that it's leagues better than other browser engines on quality. From the perspective of competition this isn't great, but the network effects are hard to ignore. Firefox and Safari (webkit) just tend not to work as well.
It's very different in terms of quality though. Internet Explorer was a terrible browser and often lagging in implementing standards. The better comparison would be Safari now, which often completely breaks many sites on mobile for me. It also doesn't eliminate a lot of newer CSS animations properly.
This is really very unfortunate because it's good to have competition in browser implementations. Everything is Chrome under the hood now except for Safari and Firefox.
No not even close by every single possible measure. I was there, I suffered through it, Google would have to make TONS of hostile moves for that fact to change. I have no interest in the arguments of a closed source subscription service that wants me to switch to the bundled browser of the wealthiest company on earth's most popular consumer OS, lecturing me about using the 4th wealthiest company on earth's browser th…
> Google would have to make TONS of hostile moves for that fact to change I think the biggest issue with IE6 was not the hostile moves Microosft did, it is that it didn't do anything. The browser was just frozen. That's why it was relatively easy for Firefox to take a marketshare. Frankly, with some of the APIs Google are adding to Chrome, I'd rather they'd do a little less.
But by that point it was clear it was already dying and IE7 et. al. were introduced late as an attempt to catch up. During the period when the real bullets were flying, IE6 was actually a really great browser, just one that forced you into using a menu of Microsoft technologies because it didn't support the "standard" stuff. Remember that XMLHttpRequest, the basic tool underneath all modern dynamic web UIs, was originally a non-standard Microsoft invention.
And yes: eventually this proved unsustainable and innovation in the standards-based browser world eventually proved too fast for MS to keep up, and it lost.
But the tool that broke the back of that monopoly absolutely wasn't Firefox. It was Chrome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It definitely is, I was also there, just like everyone was doing IE only sites, not only plenty of people do the same with ChromeOS vision of the Web, they ship Chrome alongside Electron crap. Safari is the last man standing before a ChromeOS world.
Safari is the last man standing before a ChromeOS world. Except it isn't. Maybe I'm being slightly obtuse here, but the world is not "Chrome Vs Safari". It's "Chrome Vs Safari Vs native apps". If Safari dies we'll be in a world of "Chrome Vs native apps", and that is what Apple wants. Browsers represent a way to deliver software to users that's outside of Apple's revenue mechanisms. Apple have every incentive to keep…