6 ms·

When it comes to CSS Safari is rarely behind, and often ahead. When it comes to Chrome-only non-standards Safari is right where it needs to be: not implementin

When it comes to CSS Safari is rarely behind, and often ahead. When it comes to Chrome-only non-standards Safari is right where it needs to be: not implementing this bullshit.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
azemetre 4y ago
Thank you for calling this out. I feel like there is a psyops campaign paid for by Google denouncing any organization/tech that doesn't blindly follow their non-standard standards.
- soperj 4y ago
  I don't even use chrome, nor do I develop against it.
  - eyelidlessness 4y ago
    Then presuming you use Firefox, the only viable non-Chromium alternative that’s mature enough to fit your implicit preference, you’re surely aware there are a wide variety of things not supported in that browser too. If you’re inclined to look for patterns, you’ll find that quite a lot of them overlap with Safari—either for the same privacy-respecting reasons, or the same standards process-respecting reasons, or the same second implementation in the standardization process reasons. It’s good that both browsers are a hindrance to Google just shipping stuff and that stuff becoming a de facto web standard. It’s even good that they have different priorities because that gives them different perspectives from which to catch mistakes before they’re almost totally irreversible.
- spoils19 4y ago
  This is absolutely true in my experiences. I don't think I've genuinely met one Chrome user who hasn't beamed at the prospect of using Safari, yet in light discussions they seem to promote Google products extensively.
- dmitriid 4y ago
  Google has a very large share of developers' minds. They have a large network of "developer advocates" whose only job is to promote Google and Chrome under the guise of promoting web standards. And, of course, these "web advocates" will often go out of their way to vilify other browsers. They own web.dev where they push out propaganda pieces and present their own work as fait accompli often without as much as mentioning that no, these are not standards. Coupled with the fact that Chrome is actually the most dev-friendly browser, and you have huge swaths of dev community lapping up whatever Chrome throws over the wall without a single second thought.
hot_gril 4y ago
I mostly agree, but mobile Safari seems intentionally behind on PWAs, and I do blame Apple's obvious conflict of interest with the App Store. Biggest thing is lack of support for notifications, though supposedly that's finally changing after years: https://www.searchenginejournal.com/web-push-coming-to-ios/464365/ https://www.searchenginejournal.com/web-push-coming-to-ios/4...
- dmitriid 4y ago
  > mobile Safari seems intentionally behind on PWAs There's no such thing as a PWA. There are a dozen disparate standards, and everyone has their own idea which collection of standards constitutes a PWA. Mobile Safari supports the absolute vast majority of those standards. IIRC the only "major" standard from that bunch that mobile Safari didn't support was push notifications.
  - mccorrinall 4y ago
    The still don’t support web push & notifications on ios and ipados. Even when you enable push api and notifications in experimental settings of safari it just doesn’t work. Or am I doing something wrong?
    - hot_gril 4y ago
      You're not missing anything. It's not supported. That's one of the most important features. The other thing is that no website can ask you to install it like on Android. You have to go to the "share" menu and add to homescreen. Most users don't know about that.
woojoo666 4y ago
Safari is so behind in terms of lack of support for free media formats/codecs like webm, webp, and av1. You can't even switch browsers to view them, since it's all webkit
- dmitriid 4y ago
  > support for free media formats/codecs like webm, webp, and av1. You mean codecs developed exclusively by Google (often in rapid succession) and which Google aggressively pushes by abusing its dominant position https://www.protocol.com/youtube-tv-roku-issues https://www.protocol.com/youtube-tv-roku-issues
  - woojoo666 4y ago
    What's an alternative free media format? Not everything Google does is bad. In fact if you're against companies abusing their dominant position, Apple is perhaps one of the worst. Worth noting that Safari is starting to roll out support for VP9, one of the formats by Google. Unfortunately this format is already rather outdated, and if Apple was going to support a free format now they should have gone for AV1. Which goes to show how slow they are
- alwillis 4y ago
  Safari is so behind in terms of lack of support for free media formats/codecs like webm, webp, and av1 Both WebM [1] and WebP [2] have been supported by Safari for nearly two years now. WebKit added support for AVIF (essentially the single-frame version of AV1) back in September [3]; AV1 is expected during the iOS 16/macOS Ventura release cycle. [1]: https://webkit.org/blog/11648/new-webkit-features-in-safari-14-1/ https://webkit.org/blog/11648/new-webkit-features-in-safari-... [2]: https://webkit.org/blog/11340/new-webkit-features-in-safari-14/ https://webkit.org/blog/11340/new-webkit-features-in-safari-... [3]: https://webkit.org/blog/13152/webkit-features-in-safari-16-0/ https://webkit.org/blog/13152/webkit-features-in-safari-16-0...
  - woojoo666 4y ago
    > Both WebM [1] and WebP [2] have been supported by Safari for nearly two years now. Which was incredibly late. For example, Firefox had it since v28 [1], which was 8 years ago. Firefox has also supported AV1 for 3 years already. And obviously Chrome supported both for longer [1]: https://caniuse.com/webm https://caniuse.com/webm [2]: https://caniuse.com/av1 https://caniuse.com/av1
Sateeshm 4y ago
I was testing my app on safari about a year ago, at the time even a simple property like transform required webkit vendor prefix.
- dmitriid 4y ago
  Safari hasn't required a prefix since version 9 (except for the backface-visibility property which I personally never heard of) https://caniuse.com/?search=transform https://caniuse.com/?search=transform Last release of version 9 was in 2016, 6 years ago.
ricardobayes 4y ago
So what about lookbehind regex for example? Every single major browser supports it apart from Safari. https://caniuse.com/js-regexp-lookbehind https://caniuse.com/js-regexp-lookbehind
- dmitriid 4y ago
  Yes, there are a few specs where I wish they were faster in implementing them.
lenkite 4y ago
I just wish Safari was available on other operating systems - windows, android, etc.

When it comes to CSS Safari is rarely behind, and often ahead. When it comes to Chrome-only non-standards Safari is right where it needs to be: not implementing this bullshit.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

azemetre 4y ago

Thank you for calling this out. I feel like there is a psyops campaign paid for by Google denouncing any organization/tech that doesn't blindly follow their non-standard standards.

soperj 4y ago
I don't even use chrome, nor do I develop against it.
- eyelidlessness 4y ago
  Then presuming you use Firefox, the only viable non-Chromium alternative that’s mature enough to fit your implicit preference, you’re surely aware there are a wide variety of things not supported in that browser too. If you’re inclined to look for patterns, you’ll find that quite a lot of them overlap with Safari—either for the same privacy-respecting reasons, or the same standards process-respecting reasons, or the same second implementation in the standardization process reasons. It’s good that both browsers are a hindrance to Google just shipping stuff and that stuff becoming a de facto web standard. It’s even good that they have different priorities because that gives them different perspectives from which to catch mistakes before they’re almost totally irreversible.
spoils19 4y ago
This is absolutely true in my experiences. I don't think I've genuinely met one Chrome user who hasn't beamed at the prospect of using Safari, yet in light discussions they seem to promote Google products extensively.
dmitriid 4y ago
Google has a very large share of developers' minds. They have a large network of "developer advocates" whose only job is to promote Google and Chrome under the guise of promoting web standards. And, of course, these "web advocates" will often go out of their way to vilify other browsers. They own web.dev where they push out propaganda pieces and present their own work as fait accompli often without as much as mentioning that no, these are not standards. Coupled with the fact that Chrome is actually the most dev-friendly browser, and you have huge swaths of dev community lapping up whatever Chrome throws over the wall without a single second thought.

hot_gril 4y ago

I mostly agree, but mobile Safari seems intentionally behind on PWAs, and I do blame Apple's obvious conflict of interest with the App Store. Biggest thing is lack of support for notifications, though supposedly that's finally changing after years: https://www.searchenginejournal.com/web-push-coming-to-ios/464365/ https://www.searchenginejournal.com/web-push-coming-to-ios/4...

dmitriid 4y ago
> mobile Safari seems intentionally behind on PWAs There's no such thing as a PWA. There are a dozen disparate standards, and everyone has their own idea which collection of standards constitutes a PWA. Mobile Safari supports the absolute vast majority of those standards. IIRC the only "major" standard from that bunch that mobile Safari didn't support was push notifications.
- mccorrinall 4y ago
  The still don’t support web push & notifications on ios and ipados. Even when you enable push api and notifications in experimental settings of safari it just doesn’t work. Or am I doing something wrong?
  - hot_gril 4y ago
    You're not missing anything. It's not supported. That's one of the most important features. The other thing is that no website can ask you to install it like on Android. You have to go to the "share" menu and add to homescreen. Most users don't know about that.

woojoo666 4y ago

Safari is so behind in terms of lack of support for free media formats/codecs like webm, webp, and av1. You can't even switch browsers to view them, since it's all webkit

dmitriid 4y ago
> support for free media formats/codecs like webm, webp, and av1. You mean codecs developed exclusively by Google (often in rapid succession) and which Google aggressively pushes by abusing its dominant position https://www.protocol.com/youtube-tv-roku-issues https://www.protocol.com/youtube-tv-roku-issues
- woojoo666 4y ago
  What's an alternative free media format? Not everything Google does is bad. In fact if you're against companies abusing their dominant position, Apple is perhaps one of the worst. Worth noting that Safari is starting to roll out support for VP9, one of the formats by Google. Unfortunately this format is already rather outdated, and if Apple was going to support a free format now they should have gone for AV1. Which goes to show how slow they are
alwillis 4y ago
Safari is so behind in terms of lack of support for free media formats/codecs like webm, webp, and av1 Both WebM [1] and WebP [2] have been supported by Safari for nearly two years now. WebKit added support for AVIF (essentially the single-frame version of AV1) back in September [3]; AV1 is expected during the iOS 16/macOS Ventura release cycle. [1]: https://webkit.org/blog/11648/new-webkit-features-in-safari-14-1/ https://webkit.org/blog/11648/new-webkit-features-in-safari-... [2]: https://webkit.org/blog/11340/new-webkit-features-in-safari-14/ https://webkit.org/blog/11340/new-webkit-features-in-safari-... [3]: https://webkit.org/blog/13152/webkit-features-in-safari-16-0/ https://webkit.org/blog/13152/webkit-features-in-safari-16-0...
- woojoo666 4y ago
  > Both WebM [1] and WebP [2] have been supported by Safari for nearly two years now. Which was incredibly late. For example, Firefox had it since v28 [1], which was 8 years ago. Firefox has also supported AV1 for 3 years already. And obviously Chrome supported both for longer [1]: https://caniuse.com/webm https://caniuse.com/webm [2]: https://caniuse.com/av1 https://caniuse.com/av1

Sateeshm 4y ago

I was testing my app on safari about a year ago, at the time even a simple property like transform required webkit vendor prefix.

dmitriid 4y ago
Safari hasn't required a prefix since version 9 (except for the backface-visibility property which I personally never heard of) https://caniuse.com/?search=transform https://caniuse.com/?search=transform Last release of version 9 was in 2016, 6 years ago.

ricardobayes 4y ago

So what about lookbehind regex for example? Every single major browser supports it apart from Safari. https://caniuse.com/js-regexp-lookbehind https://caniuse.com/js-regexp-lookbehind

dmitriid 4y ago
Yes, there are a few specs where I wish they were faster in implementing them.

lenkite 4y ago

I just wish Safari was available on other operating systems - windows, android, etc.