5 ms·
Because it would have only worked for half the users. HTML/CSS/JS support parity across the browsers is a relatively new thing. If IE had python support and Fir
by speg 9y ago
Because it would have only worked for half the users. HTML/CSS/JS support parity across the browsers is a relatively new thing. If IE had python support and Firefox supported Ruby, what would have all the websites been written in?
It's kind of a messy miracle that that didn't happen and we got to where we are today. Now, with established standards support WebAssembly might be the next step you're looking for.
- true_religion 9y agoI may be the minority but I don't consider it a burden to need more than one app for something. Even today people have installed a half dozen chat apps to keep up with friends on different networks. If half the sites require Firefox and half Chrome then that's still only two apps enabling dozens of web apps for daily use.
- mcphage 9y agoYou're in the minority.
- lj3 9y agoNo, he's not. My mother runs Firefox, Chrome and IE. She uses each one for different sites because certain sites only work well on certain browsers. PS: The idea that the web has parity is a joke. It doesn't.
- scarface74 9y agoWhat sites these days work better with Firefox?
- mcphage 9y agoYou actually think the majority of users either do, or want to, use multiple browsers to manage site incompatibilities? Have you not met any people before?
- psyc 9y agoAmong the sites I visit frequently are several that only work well in Opera, one or two that only work well in Firefox, and one that only works at all in Chrome.
- jameshart 9y agoI struggle to imagine how I would build a site that only works in Opera, even if I were trying to.
- psyc 9y agoLoad it up with whatever bloat causes every browser other than Opera to struggle at every moment with scrolling a page. Which is absolutely the case on my 4 year old laptop. For whatever reason, Opera handles this like a dream, while Firefox and Chrome cannot, though I frequently go back and try them again.
- scarface74 9y agoLoad it up with whatever bloat causes every browser other than Opera to struggle at every moment with scrolling a page. Which is absolutely the case on my 4 year old laptop. For whatever reason, Opera handles this like a dream, while Firefox and Chrome cannot, though I frequently go back and try them again. Opera and Chrome use the same rendering engine now. Why would Opera work better than Chrome? The second question is what type of computer is it? I have an old Core 2 Duo 2.66Ghz laptop/4GB RAM (circa 2009) that I've repurposed as a Plex Server. After installing an ad blocker and getting rid of unnecessary services, I don't notice a real world difference between that and my usual laptop - a Core I7 2.66Ghz - except for the difference between an SSD and a 5400rpm hard drive. Web browsing is just not that processor intensive - a four year old A6x iPad can browse the modern web well.
- psyc 9y agoCool, guy, I must be imagining the whole thing. Every day.
- progval 9y agoIt wouldn't be half/half, because many websites would then abstain from using a scripting language at all. Maybe more something like 90% pure HTML/CSS, 5% Firefox, 5% Chrome?
- douche 9y ago> 90% pure HTML/CSS Like in the good old days
- psyc 9y agoIf barely-passable, but mostly imaginary compatibility could be achieved on JS and CSS, then it could have been achieved with something like WebAssembly. That it wasn't is just history and incentives.