2 ms·

> Perhaps it speaks more to your priorities? I can't see anyone outside of a web developer who needed that feature 1 time or even caring that backdrop-blur wasn

> Perhaps it speaks more to your priorities? I can't see anyone outside of a web developer who needed that feature 1 time or even caring that backdrop-blur wasn't implemented. The point is, if Firefox can't even make basic web features like blur work on the browser (that are available on even no name mobile browsers) I can't expect Firefox to ever surpass Chrome or other competitors and it's evident. > The fact that you're salty about a specific CSS property and that it's reason enough to boycott a browser speaks volumes. As a web developer, I 100% stopped development on Firefox because it doesn't support even the most basic features all other browsers have. Like it or not, it's an inferior product because of the missing web APIs. You know what's better than fighting monopoly with an ideology? Fighting monopoly with an even better product that supports the ideology. Firefox is sadly not that.

cptskippy 4y ago
> Firefox can't even make basic web features like blur work on the browser I wouldn't call backdrop-blur trivial or a basic feature. It's non-trivial to implement and used very little. Why should it be a priority? > (that are available on even no name mobile browsers) What no-name mobile browser that isn't based on an engine like Chromium has implemented more "basic" features than Firefox? The fact of the matter is that large corporations like Microsoft have given up trying to implement their own custom browser engine and pivoted to using Chromium. > it doesn't support even the most basic features all other browsers have. Like backdrop-blur? > Fighting monopoly with an even better product that supports the ideology. You're trivializing browser development as if you could build a better browser in a weekend. Of the 4 major browsers developers only one isn't a billion/trillion dollar corporation; one uses it's monopoly in search to bankroll and push it's browser, one uses their monopoly position in smartphones to force their browser on users and restricts the feature set of it's browser so as not to detract from custom App development, one threw in the towel and just rebranded Chromium, and the last is a non-profit that's financially dependent on the other three for handouts.
- NayamAmarshe 4y ago
  > I wouldn't call backdrop-blur trivial or a basic feature. It's non-trivial to implement and used very little. Why should it be a priority? Why shouldn't it be? If Firefox can't lead in web development, how do you even expect it to keep up with times? I'm not sure why someone would defend Firefox's incompetency. I see things as they are and I make decisions based on that. Even if I see things as they could be, I'd rather not bet my money on Firefox.

cptskippy 4y ago

> Firefox can't even make basic web features like blur work on the browser I wouldn't call backdrop-blur trivial or a basic feature. It's non-trivial to implement and used very little. Why should it be a priority? > (that are available on even no name mobile browsers) What no-name mobile browser that isn't based on an engine like Chromium has implemented more "basic" features than Firefox? The fact of the matter is that large corporations like Microsoft have given up trying to implement their own custom browser engine and pivoted to using Chromium. > it doesn't support even the most basic features all other browsers have. Like backdrop-blur? > Fighting monopoly with an even better product that supports the ideology. You're trivializing browser development as if you could build a better browser in a weekend. Of the 4 major browsers developers only one isn't a billion/trillion dollar corporation; one uses it's monopoly in search to bankroll and push it's browser, one uses their monopoly position in smartphones to force their browser on users and restricts the feature set of it's browser so as not to detract from custom App development, one threw in the towel and just rebranded Chromium, and the last is a non-profit that's financially dependent on the other three for handouts.

NayamAmarshe 4y ago
> I wouldn't call backdrop-blur trivial or a basic feature. It's non-trivial to implement and used very little. Why should it be a priority? Why shouldn't it be? If Firefox can't lead in web development, how do you even expect it to keep up with times? I'm not sure why someone would defend Firefox's incompetency. I see things as they are and I make decisions based on that. Even if I see things as they could be, I'd rather not bet my money on Firefox.