4 ms·

I think the perspective is skewed, because who are websites for? Not the developers, that's for sure. It's for the users, and if the users think that Safari is

by fredsir 11y ago

I think the perspective is skewed, because who are websites for? Not the developers, that's for sure. It's for the users, and if the users think that Safari is better, than there might be a reason for this madness, and the other browsers should adjust their goals. I'm a developer myself, and did webdevelopment professionally for 7 years until I switched paths 3 years ago. I know all about supporting multiple browsers and what not. But the thing is, Chrome just doesn't feel and look elegant and smooth like Safari does. The same with Firefox. That's why I use Safari 99% of the time. There's a balance between functionality and design, and chrome seems more skewed towards functionality, and Safari towards design. When this is so, and Safari does all I need better than chrome 99% of the time, I naturally choose safari. ...and yes, Safari should be more standard compliant, I'm not disagreeing with you on those points.

esailija 11y ago
> Chrome just doesn't feel and look elegant and smooth I bet this feeling comes from the "smooth scrolling". Development Chrome currently has it, I really cannot imagine why didn't they do it earlier it's so trivial to do for major benefits.
- fredsir 11y ago
  That's one thing yes. Another is the aesthetics of Safari that feels like it belongs inside of OS X, which I use, where Chrome just looks like it's own kind of deal. There's also the thing about battery life, which again, is a design decision Apple has made (lightness over ultimate performance), and I like that too. I don't do heavy webgl or css3 stuff every minute every day, so I don't need my browser to go "all in" when it comes to performance that I don't feel anyway that in turn reflects badly on my battery. And truth be told, the only place I use my computer plugged in is at work. The rest of it time it runs on battery power, so that's a big deal too.
shmerl 11y ago
> chrome seems more skewed towards functionality, and Safari towards design. Not supporting standards has nothing to do with design. It's either a deliberate sabotage of interoperaibility for the purpose of lock-in and anti-competitive crookedness (not unlikely for Apple), or simply total neglect. Either way, it results in technology being held back because Safari has enough of a market share to do it. That's why calling it "new IE" (in a derogatory way) is quite appropriate.

by fredsir 11y ago

esailija 11y ago

> Chrome just doesn't feel and look elegant and smooth I bet this feeling comes from the "smooth scrolling". Development Chrome currently has it, I really cannot imagine why didn't they do it earlier it's so trivial to do for major benefits.

fredsir 11y ago
That's one thing yes. Another is the aesthetics of Safari that feels like it belongs inside of OS X, which I use, where Chrome just looks like it's own kind of deal. There's also the thing about battery life, which again, is a design decision Apple has made (lightness over ultimate performance), and I like that too. I don't do heavy webgl or css3 stuff every minute every day, so I don't need my browser to go "all in" when it comes to performance that I don't feel anyway that in turn reflects badly on my battery. And truth be told, the only place I use my computer plugged in is at work. The rest of it time it runs on battery power, so that's a big deal too.

shmerl 11y ago

> chrome seems more skewed towards functionality, and Safari towards design. Not supporting standards has nothing to do with design. It's either a deliberate sabotage of interoperaibility for the purpose of lock-in and anti-competitive crookedness (not unlikely for Apple), or simply total neglect. Either way, it results in technology being held back because Safari has enough of a market share to do it. That's why calling it "new IE" (in a derogatory way) is quite appropriate.