5 ms·
Which I think was the original poster's point.
by TuringTest 11y ago
Which I think was the original poster's point.
- ZenoArrow 11y agoDropping Firefox OS on smartphones is nothing to do with Gecko vs. Webkit.
- pjmlp 11y agoYes it is, Mozilla is fighting to keep it relevant.
- ZenoArrow 11y agoThe decision to move away from a smartphone OS and towards IoT devices is not based on what serves Gecko. Gecko is better suited to smartphones. Besides, Gecko is still relevant, and will continue to be for quite some time. Mozilla and Google appear to have a good working relationship when it comes to web standards, and new standards are only signed off when at least two browser vendors (or rather, browser engine vendors) implement the proposed functionality.
- gsnedders 11y agoGecko isn't relevant on mobile. Nothing apart from WebKit and Blink are: look no further than the fact that everyone else supports webkit prefixed CSS properties on mobile.
- ZenoArrow 11y agoFirefox on Android uses Gecko. All iOS browsers are based on Webkit due to Apple's policies. > "everyone else supports webkit prefixed CSS properties on mobile" The question is, how often are these directly used? Isn't the common pattern to target modern features without universal support through polyfills and solutions like Babel nowadays?
- gsnedders 11y ago> Firefox on Android uses Gecko. Which has < 1% marketshare, and is largely ignored by web developers. I didn't say it didn't exist, I said it wasn't relevant. :) > The question is, how often are these directly used? Isn't the common pattern to target modern features without universal support through polyfills and solutions like Babel nowadays? Plenty often enough that users refused to use browsers without support for webkit prefixed properties. People who have a clue may well use polyfills and Babel and autoprefixer, but plenty just do copy/paste coding.