41–50 of 140 posts
My general recommendation is to make Safari your main browser for development work. Check your work in Firefox later. By that point it should be good. If any weirdness shows up in Chrome, you'll just end up comparing it to IE6.
Say what you will about IE, at least Microsoft make an attempt to make it available to everyone (via free Windows VM preloaded with specific IE version).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I want everything in the browser too - except the ads. And FF isn't keeping up :( WebUSB for example.
WebUSB is insane security-wise. About the only worse thing would be a WebPCIe.
Given the seemingly extensive support for doing emulated USB passthrough/redirection to VMs, I'm assuming people have looked into the security implications to the host.
My general recommendation is to make Safari your main browser for development work. Check your work in Firefox later. By that point it should be good. If any weirdness shows up in Chrome, you'll just end up comparing it to IE6.
A recommendation predicated with "Get a Mac first for development work"? Last I checked Safari unlike Firefox and Chrome is not cross platform. Small aside: Webkit browsers used to have problems with CSS (especially things involving 3d) when hardware acceleration is unavailable. Spent so many hours back in the day debugging why certain CSS effects did not work. Switched to Firefox and worked like a charm... Only real…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>My general recommendation is to make Safari your main browser for development work. How do you that if you don't own a mac?
Well, you can't, but it'd be the same story as if you only had a Mac in 2006 and wanted to test IE6. Consumers have a choice for the devices they use, so it might make business sense to test changes with hardware your customers use at the same frequency or more often than you do on your own preferred hardware.
My general recommendation is to make Safari your main browser for development work. Check your work in Firefox later. By that point it should be good. If any weirdness shows up in Chrome, you'll just end up comparing it to IE6.
1. Tell customers it will cost x more money to fix bugs on Safari (likely zero will pay this premium)
2. Put a notice or banner for Safari users that they are using a non standards compliant browser and they may see minor or major issues and maybe should use Firefox or Chrome.
3. Educate customers on standards and show them alternatives so they can do the same for their customers.
4. Record actual brower useage data and demonstrate the low count of actual Safari visitors and star back at #1 above with this newly applied info.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A recommendation predicated with "Get a Mac first for development work"? Last I checked Safari unlike Firefox and Chrome is not cross platform. Small aside: Webkit browsers used to have problems with CSS (especially things involving 3d) when hardware acceleration is unavailable. Spent so many hours back in the day debugging why certain CSS effects did not work. Switched to Firefox and worked like a charm... Only real…
GNOME Web is officially recommended by Apple for testing WebKit on Linux. The devtools even look identical to those on Safari.
'Cause if it isn't then it's not really a good proxy for testing Safari behavior in this context...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Safari, flaws and all, is pretty much the only browser that has any weight against Chrome. Tell your manager that you want the web site to support Firefox or Brave or something else, and they'll tell you it's a waste of time. Tell them that the web site won't work on their MacBook, and it's a four-alarm fire. In a lot of ways, I wish Safari would deviate even more from Google's "standards" just so that maybe…
> I think Safari, flaws and all, is pretty much the only browser that has any weight against Chrome. This is a terrible argument. That an inferior, proprietary, broken browser made by a company trying to cripple the web to protect their lucrative walled garden should be more popular in order to prevent Google from having more market share just for reasons? Chrome became popular and is popular because it works. It's c…
> Chrome became popular and is popular because it works.
Google promotes Chrome by leveraging the most valuable real estate on the web: the google.com homepage, and GMail popups. This ad space is unavailable to everyone else. They also bundled Chrome with Adobe Flash installers.
I agree Chrome is a good product, but Google uses their influence in search and email to gain Chrome market share. That's fine, it's their prerogative, but it means Chrome's rise is not pure organic growth based on its technical merit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Safari, flaws and all, is pretty much the only browser that has any weight against Chrome. Tell your manager that you want the web site to support Firefox or Brave or something else, and they'll tell you it's a waste of time. Tell them that the web site won't work on their MacBook, and it's a four-alarm fire. In a lot of ways, I wish Safari would deviate even more from Google's "standards" just so that maybe…
Microsoft Edge is gaining some serious ground and is closing in on Safari [0]. Their aggressive conversion tactics seem to be paying off. The problem with Safari is that they either simply haven't, and, in some cases, even flat out refuse to implement certain standards that they themselves have had a hand in establishing. And then most of what is available comes half-arsed, undocumented, and is not supported/iterated…
I encounter random CSS bugs all the time in Chrome, it's just trendy to say Safari is behind the times. Google wants everything to be done in the browser, their browser, so they can track everything without cookies to sell ads
There's nothing wrong with the browser being the next generation cross-platform execution environment. All the older options for this (Java, Flash etc.) sucked... I would like to see a strong competitor to Chrome someday though... - Firefox still has weird issues occasionally (most recently scroll position randomly jumping sometimes). I still keep it around though because its sane when it comes to standards and will…
It's a bit funny, and a bit sad, that this wasn't always so; I rather liked the Windows version of Safari, and IE for UNIX was apparently pretty good.
In one case the code failed because the form object there doesn't implement the method to validate and submit. In another, it wasn't sending a form field if it was styled with "display: none;" (had to change to "left: -9999px;"). In another, playing a non-muted video would error out some of the time, if clicking an element wasn't recognized as a user event. In yet another, the mobile version refused to center text inside no matter what. And so on.