5 ms·

There was a time when IE was the dominant browser, and happily did whatever they wanted to. That was arguably better, because at least they acted predictably.

There was a time when IE was the dominant browser, and happily did whatever they wanted to. That was arguably better, because at least they acted predictably. Chrome has been continually altering how autocomplete is handled in the last 5 or 6 major releases

sebazzz 7y ago
The most horrible is that it is almost completely unstylable, last time I checked. If you have floating placeholders it gets fun.
IshKebab 7y ago
They acted predictably by never updating IE and letting it stagnate. Hard to see how that is better in any meaningful way.
- pjmlp 7y ago
  You still had a choice, nowadays being a Web Developer is almost a synonym for Chrome Developer and it was the IE hatting crowd that made it happen.
  - IshKebab 7y ago
    You didn't have a choice. That was the whole problem!
    - pjmlp 7y ago
      Well, shortly you won't have a choice anymore. And there was a choice, back then alternatives like Opera, did actually ship their own engine.
      - IshKebab 7y ago
        We're not talking about choice for users. This is about choice for developers.
        pjmlp 7y ago
        Likewise I had Netscape, Opera, IE on my development environment.
        IshKebab 7y ago
        Are you being deliberately obtuse? Choice of which browsers to develop for. You had to support IE6 back in the day. Now you have to support Chrome. When they do weird shit you can't say "well that browser is broken", you have to work around it. Surely most people here are old enough to remember the days of IE6? It wasn't that long ago.
  - yoz-y 7y ago
    Except Chrome is still far below the user-base of IE in its heyday. And the most "valuable" users are all on mobile Safari. So it still makes sense to at least test with that.
    - pjmlp 7y ago
      Mobile Safari is only relevant on first tier countries. Plenty of web sites aren't for international consumption.
    - capableweb 7y ago
      "the most "valuable" users are all on mobile Safari" Not at all, as only 20% of the people using mobile browsers at all, are using Safari.
      - The_rationalist 7y ago
        To be accurate: Safari has 20% of mobile browser marketshare. And 5% of desktop browser marketshare. So globally they are <20%
      - yoz-y 7y ago
        Yes but these users account for a very disproportionate amount of spending.
    - avodonosov 7y ago
      Doesn't matter, chrome started to ignore standards and dictate their understanding.
  - IfOnlyYouKnew 7y ago
    You must have lived in a different past than me. IE was far more dominant, and browsers actually had meaningful differences back then. Porting CSS written for IE to Firefox could easily take 50% of the initial implementation time, if not 100%. Today, it's not completely uncommon to have something developed on Chrome working in Firefox and Safari without any changes. And the most significant problem with IE was obviously that it wasn't FOSS, and was only available for Windows. Neither applies to Chrome.
    - pjmlp 7y ago
      Yeah all those Web sites that are Chrome only must be a product of my imagination. It doesn't matter if Chrome is open-source, when it is technically owned by a single corporation.
      - The_rationalist 7y ago
        Update your beliefs.. Microsoft is now a major contributor to chromium.
        rndgermandude 7y ago
        [citation needed] They are now a major user of chromium, and may contribute, but they do not have any say in what goes into chromium. That is still controlled by google employees. If said google employees do not like microsoft patches, they will reject the proposed changes, and microsoft can then at best push them into their own fork.
        The_rationalist 7y ago
        Google rejecting Microsoft changes has not yet been observed, it could happen. Most people think that Google agenda could conflict with Microsoft agendas. I have read a LOT of chromium issues. I can tell you that the higher management at Google does not dictate chromium changes as they are too technical for them. The truth is, except for maybe a few exceptions, chromium evolve through the decisions of engineers that want to create the best possible product. They are not different to Firefox or edge engineers. Thus they should collaborate pretty well and a Google and Microsoft team should not have more "conflicts" than between two Google internal teams. As you said for the exceptions, Microsoft can maintain a fork, it's still order of magnitude more economic and smart than to constantly duplicate work in a redundant browser (firefox) You can see a list of their merged pull requests here: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/q/author:*.microsoft.com+AND+status:merged https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/q/author:*.microsof... BTW I really wonder when Apple will switch back to chromium.
  - Gibbon1 7y ago
    I seriously can't wrap my head around why anyone decided it would somehow be 'okay' to use googles web browser. Because unless you are a Pollyanna coolaid drinker you know where that's going to lead us.

sebazzz 7y ago

The most horrible is that it is almost completely unstylable, last time I checked. If you have floating placeholders it gets fun.

IshKebab 7y ago

They acted predictably by never updating IE and letting it stagnate. Hard to see how that is better in any meaningful way.

pjmlp 7y ago
You still had a choice, nowadays being a Web Developer is almost a synonym for Chrome Developer and it was the IE hatting crowd that made it happen.
- IshKebab 7y ago
  You didn't have a choice. That was the whole problem!
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    Well, shortly you won't have a choice anymore. And there was a choice, back then alternatives like Opera, did actually ship their own engine.
    - IshKebab 7y ago
      We're not talking about choice for users. This is about choice for developers.
      - pjmlp 7y ago
        Likewise I had Netscape, Opera, IE on my development environment.
        IshKebab 7y ago
        Are you being deliberately obtuse? Choice of which browsers to develop for. You had to support IE6 back in the day. Now you have to support Chrome. When they do weird shit you can't say "well that browser is broken", you have to work around it. Surely most people here are old enough to remember the days of IE6? It wasn't that long ago.
- yoz-y 7y ago
  Except Chrome is still far below the user-base of IE in its heyday. And the most "valuable" users are all on mobile Safari. So it still makes sense to at least test with that.
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    Mobile Safari is only relevant on first tier countries. Plenty of web sites aren't for international consumption.
  - capableweb 7y ago
    "the most "valuable" users are all on mobile Safari" Not at all, as only 20% of the people using mobile browsers at all, are using Safari.
    - The_rationalist 7y ago
      To be accurate: Safari has 20% of mobile browser marketshare. And 5% of desktop browser marketshare. So globally they are <20%
    - yoz-y 7y ago
      Yes but these users account for a very disproportionate amount of spending.
  - avodonosov 7y ago
    Doesn't matter, chrome started to ignore standards and dictate their understanding.
- IfOnlyYouKnew 7y ago
  You must have lived in a different past than me. IE was far more dominant, and browsers actually had meaningful differences back then. Porting CSS written for IE to Firefox could easily take 50% of the initial implementation time, if not 100%. Today, it's not completely uncommon to have something developed on Chrome working in Firefox and Safari without any changes. And the most significant problem with IE was obviously that it wasn't FOSS, and was only available for Windows. Neither applies to Chrome.
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    Yeah all those Web sites that are Chrome only must be a product of my imagination. It doesn't matter if Chrome is open-source, when it is technically owned by a single corporation.
    - The_rationalist 7y ago
      Update your beliefs.. Microsoft is now a major contributor to chromium.
      - rndgermandude 7y ago
        [citation needed] They are now a major user of chromium, and may contribute, but they do not have any say in what goes into chromium. That is still controlled by google employees. If said google employees do not like microsoft patches, they will reject the proposed changes, and microsoft can then at best push them into their own fork.
        The_rationalist 7y ago
        Google rejecting Microsoft changes has not yet been observed, it could happen. Most people think that Google agenda could conflict with Microsoft agendas. I have read a LOT of chromium issues. I can tell you that the higher management at Google does not dictate chromium changes as they are too technical for them. The truth is, except for maybe a few exceptions, chromium evolve through the decisions of engineers that want to create the best possible product. They are not different to Firefox or edge engineers. Thus they should collaborate pretty well and a Google and Microsoft team should not have more "conflicts" than between two Google internal teams. As you said for the exceptions, Microsoft can maintain a fork, it's still order of magnitude more economic and smart than to constantly duplicate work in a redundant browser (firefox) You can see a list of their merged pull requests here: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/q/author:*.microsoft.com+AND+status:merged https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/q/author:*.microsof... BTW I really wonder when Apple will switch back to chromium.
- Gibbon1 7y ago
  I seriously can't wrap my head around why anyone decided it would somehow be 'okay' to use googles web browser. Because unless you are a Pollyanna coolaid drinker you know where that's going to lead us.