• henfredemars@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    If your website only works with Chrome, it’s not a website. It’s a Chrome site.

    You didn’t design for the web. You designed for Chrome.

      • Lena@gregtech.eu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I agree that Chrome fucking sucks, but it’s disingenuous to call it unoptimized. Chrome and chromium-based browsers are as fast as or faster than Firefox. Although I agree that manifest V3 is horrible to the web as a whole and shouldn’t have been created.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      That’s not necessarily true. Circa 2016–17 I frequented a website that worked in Chrome but not Firefox. This was due to Firefox at the time not implementing web standards that Chrome did. Firefox only got around to it in 2019. So naturally, the developer of the site was telling people to use Chrome.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t know the history of column span but the reason Firefox was “behind” on standards was because Google was pushing new standards through committee faster than competing browsers could keep up. Google would implement a new feature, offer it as a free standard, then get it through the committee. Because Google already had it in their browser, they were already compliant while Firefox had to scramble.

        It was Google doing their variation of “embrace, extend, extinguish”

        It got so bad that not even Microsoft had the resources to keep up. They said as much when they said they were adopting Chromium as their engine.

    • luciole (he/him)@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I agree with you that failing to support multiple browsers is an old problem, but I think the cause has shifted.

      Back in the last century, supporting both browsers amounted to sniffing the browser and implementing the same feature twice. document.layers vs document.all for example.

      Nowadays I think the problem is different: we just don’t know what’s going on. The site is transpiled from TypeScript, written on top of React or Vue which drastically switches paradigm (bonus for Tailwind), packed with building tools, and the average dev has little understanding of what actually comes out. It’s a tall stack of leaky abstractions on top of the already tall one of the web. The dev is pretty sure it works on Chrome so they say it does work there, but it was not even a deliberate choice.

      • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        For most sites it’s a testing matrix issue. Most testing teams look at browser stats and choose how to apply their limited resources based on that. So the dev probably doesn’t even see the bug that exists for an old Firefox version as there’s no testing done on it.