6 ms·

Doesn't seem to render correctly on Safari.

Semaphor 7y ago
> Because of the artistic nature of this project I have not concerned myself with cross-browser-compatibility, so the live preview will most likely look laughable in anything other than chrome. But it works without a problem in FF
- ekianjo 7y ago
  Did you compare it with the rendering on Chrome? Colors are quite different.
  - Semaphor 7y ago
    Good point. The eyes are wrong in FF, everything else looks almost the same though :)
saagarjha 7y ago
An unfortunate side effect of abusing CSS to the boundaries of what it can do :(
tonetheman 7y ago
Safari is the new IE
- osrec 7y ago
  You do not deserve to be downvoted. As a developer, I wholeheartedly agree with you (anyone remember Safari's super buggy indexed DB implementation?!)
  - robin_reala 7y ago
    The downvotes are happening because this would have been as possible to achieve in Safari as in Chrome had the author chosen to develop purely in that, and Chrome would have been one of the engines that look broken. At this level you’re relying on engine quirks rather than spec compatibility.
    - osrec 7y ago
      Let's just say, Safari has more "quirks" than it should.
    - Uehreka 7y ago
      Disagree. As someone who has tried to make web art that works cross-browser, I frequently follow standards and end up with something that works in Chrome, but breaks in Safari. I end up having to write hacks to detect Safari, cut out the parts of the standard they’ve implemented wrong, and find often crappy looking workarounds. I’ve had issues with canvases just sort of “flashing” for no reason, and if you try to use SVG filters or other parts of the SVG standard that have been standardized for years... well Safari doesn’t choose to just ignore them. Instead it will sometimes just make the parts of the SVG affected by the filter turn black and then call it a day. So I wouldn’t say that it’s as easy to create something that works fine in Safari and breaks in Chrome. Making something that works in Safari is just plain hard.
      - robin_reala 7y ago
        OK, but there’s no use of SVG or canvas here, this is purely CSS.
        ArchReaper 7y ago
        Correct. Safari is a dumpster fire when it comes to modern CSS support. Hence 'Safari is the new IE'
      - kyle-rb 7y ago
        This; I've had issues with Safari when trying to create a smooth animation of multiple elements synced up to each other to create the illusion of them being one continuous looping element. Chrome, Firefox, and Edge had no problem keeping the elements synced together, but in Safari, the time-resolution of animation-delay was terrible, and it forced me to overlap the elements by quite a bit, making things a bit worse across all browsers. Safari also basically destroyed my animation whenever the window size was changed, which also applies to switching from portrait to landscape on iOS.
- _ZeD_ 7y ago
  Safari is the new netscape. Chrome is the new ie
- robertoandred 7y ago
  Devs not caring about compatibility and instead focusing only on a particular browser that abuses its market position to impose its own standards on the industry? Chrome is the new IE.
  - JDiculous 7y ago
    As a frontend developer, IE and Safari have always been awful and give the most trouble. They also pretty much always lag behind Chrome and Firefox when it comes to new standards. Rather than targeting your frustration towards developers who don't want to or have the time to bend over backwards to accommodate terrible browsers, how about directing that energy towards encouraging those browsers to catch up and stop holding back the web?
    - pwinnski 7y ago
      A "standard" seems like an odd word to describe a process in which one company does new things, and all other companies take some time to do the same.
- ogre_codes 7y ago
  People who spout this nonsense don't recall how bad IE was. Comparing the current state of any browser to IE (6-7-8) is utter nonsense. There is a really good center of the road set of web browser features which all modern browsers support. This was not the case when IE was big, in order to make nice, functional web pages you needed to either give up supporting one platform or the other or you needed to spend tons of time and energy making 2 (or 3) pathways for extremely basic features. If one browser is 1 year or two behind standards generally doesn't matter because as web developers we need to support 3-4+ year old browsers regardless. The truly crappy thing about IE was that Microsoft had zero commitment to web standards at all and many things they did outright contradicted them. Since IE had such massive market presence they undermined the standards process for more than a decade.
  - mtarnovan 7y ago
    I think you're missing the point. We're not comparing Safari with IE6 -- that would be absurd, we're just saying Safari compares to it's peers (Chrome, Firefox, heck, even Edge) like IE6 used to compare to the other browsers back in the day: stuff would mostly work on everything else but always needed special attention/polyfills/workarounds for IE. On the project I currently work on the codebase is _littered_ with workarounds and hacks to get stuff to work on Safari.
    - ogre_codes 7y ago
      > we're just saying Safari compares to it's peers (Chrome, Firefox, heck, even Edge) like IE6 used to compare to the other browsers back in the day < Again, this is nonsense. There is a gap, but it's not bending the shape of the web or costing the average developer hundreds of hours to work around bullshit. Safari is behind on some features... no doubt at all. But to compare that to IE 6 is just wrong.
      - pier25 7y ago
        > it's not bending the shape of the web Safari for iOS (and Apple in general) is bending the shape of the web. For example the poor support for PWAs.

> Because of the artistic nature of this project I have not concerned myself with cross-browser-compatibility, so the live preview will most likely look laughable in anything other than chrome. But it works without a problem in FF

ekianjo 7y ago
Did you compare it with the rendering on Chrome? Colors are quite different.
- Semaphor 7y ago
  Good point. The eyes are wrong in FF, everything else looks almost the same though :)

saagarjha 7y ago

An unfortunate side effect of abusing CSS to the boundaries of what it can do :(

tonetheman 7y ago

Safari is the new IE

osrec 7y ago
You do not deserve to be downvoted. As a developer, I wholeheartedly agree with you (anyone remember Safari's super buggy indexed DB implementation?!)
- robin_reala 7y ago
  The downvotes are happening because this would have been as possible to achieve in Safari as in Chrome had the author chosen to develop purely in that, and Chrome would have been one of the engines that look broken. At this level you’re relying on engine quirks rather than spec compatibility.
  - osrec 7y ago
    Let's just say, Safari has more "quirks" than it should.
  - Uehreka 7y ago
    Disagree. As someone who has tried to make web art that works cross-browser, I frequently follow standards and end up with something that works in Chrome, but breaks in Safari. I end up having to write hacks to detect Safari, cut out the parts of the standard they’ve implemented wrong, and find often crappy looking workarounds. I’ve had issues with canvases just sort of “flashing” for no reason, and if you try to use SVG filters or other parts of the SVG standard that have been standardized for years... well Safari doesn’t choose to just ignore them. Instead it will sometimes just make the parts of the SVG affected by the filter turn black and then call it a day. So I wouldn’t say that it’s as easy to create something that works fine in Safari and breaks in Chrome. Making something that works in Safari is just plain hard.
    - robin_reala 7y ago
      OK, but there’s no use of SVG or canvas here, this is purely CSS.
      - ArchReaper 7y ago
        Correct. Safari is a dumpster fire when it comes to modern CSS support. Hence 'Safari is the new IE'
    - kyle-rb 7y ago
      This; I've had issues with Safari when trying to create a smooth animation of multiple elements synced up to each other to create the illusion of them being one continuous looping element. Chrome, Firefox, and Edge had no problem keeping the elements synced together, but in Safari, the time-resolution of animation-delay was terrible, and it forced me to overlap the elements by quite a bit, making things a bit worse across all browsers. Safari also basically destroyed my animation whenever the window size was changed, which also applies to switching from portrait to landscape on iOS.
_ZeD_ 7y ago
Safari is the new netscape. Chrome is the new ie
robertoandred 7y ago
Devs not caring about compatibility and instead focusing only on a particular browser that abuses its market position to impose its own standards on the industry? Chrome is the new IE.
- JDiculous 7y ago
  As a frontend developer, IE and Safari have always been awful and give the most trouble. They also pretty much always lag behind Chrome and Firefox when it comes to new standards. Rather than targeting your frustration towards developers who don't want to or have the time to bend over backwards to accommodate terrible browsers, how about directing that energy towards encouraging those browsers to catch up and stop holding back the web?
  - pwinnski 7y ago
    A "standard" seems like an odd word to describe a process in which one company does new things, and all other companies take some time to do the same.
ogre_codes 7y ago
People who spout this nonsense don't recall how bad IE was. Comparing the current state of any browser to IE (6-7-8) is utter nonsense. There is a really good center of the road set of web browser features which all modern browsers support. This was not the case when IE was big, in order to make nice, functional web pages you needed to either give up supporting one platform or the other or you needed to spend tons of time and energy making 2 (or 3) pathways for extremely basic features. If one browser is 1 year or two behind standards generally doesn't matter because as web developers we need to support 3-4+ year old browsers regardless. The truly crappy thing about IE was that Microsoft had zero commitment to web standards at all and many things they did outright contradicted them. Since IE had such massive market presence they undermined the standards process for more than a decade.
- mtarnovan 7y ago
  I think you're missing the point. We're not comparing Safari with IE6 -- that would be absurd, we're just saying Safari compares to it's peers (Chrome, Firefox, heck, even Edge) like IE6 used to compare to the other browsers back in the day: stuff would mostly work on everything else but always needed special attention/polyfills/workarounds for IE. On the project I currently work on the codebase is _littered_ with workarounds and hacks to get stuff to work on Safari.
  - ogre_codes 7y ago
    > we're just saying Safari compares to it's peers (Chrome, Firefox, heck, even Edge) like IE6 used to compare to the other browsers back in the day < Again, this is nonsense. There is a gap, but it's not bending the shape of the web or costing the average developer hundreds of hours to work around bullshit. Safari is behind on some features... no doubt at all. But to compare that to IE 6 is just wrong.
    - pier25 7y ago
      > it's not bending the shape of the web Safari for iOS (and Apple in general) is bending the shape of the web. For example the poor support for PWAs.