5 ms·

I'm not getting it: why would websites block browsers?

jandrese 3y ago
In the old days there were plenty of websites designed only for IE6, and a few that refused to load if they detected any other browser string. It doesn’t make much sense today, Firefox loads sites developed for Chrome just fine. There is no ActiveX like “embrace and extend” coming from the Google camp quite yet.
- paulryanrogers 3y ago
  I'd argue the rapid pace of new Chrome-only APIs is effectively EEE. Web developers can't wait to use new features, so once features land in Chrome they'll get used. Then folks not using Chrome find more friction until they eventually give up and switch.
  - postalrat 3y ago
    Can you think of any real life examples of websites that use Chrome only apis and don't work in Firefox?
    - paulryanrogers 3y ago
      Just this week: - Snyk - Fastly's support site - background blur on Meet and Zoom
    - xctr94 3y ago
      I don’t have a list of examples, but this is historically a problem for the web. I’ve sat in a couple of Ecmascript events where maintainers complain about Google implementing features before approval. Sometimes Chrome ships stage 2 features because (apparently) Google engineers don’t want to respect due process. It’s known, we just put up with it. I also blame developers working on non-standardized features. You should work with the ES that is official and current, not the one Google is forcing on other vendors. Apologies for not listing all the times this happened, but I think too many.
    - Devasta 3y ago
      MBNA Canada announced last year they werent going to support Firefox. DTCC apps such as Omgeo support Chrome and Edge only.
    - iudqnolq 3y ago
      Yes, but generally for completely legitimate reasons. One example is a tool for flashing code to a embedded device. It's aimed at beginners, so not requiring an install is valuable. It means even kids with locked down Chromebooks can try it out. But the Firefox teams doesn't like the vibes of a web USB API, so it'll be cheome-only indefinitely.
    - AgrMohit 3y ago
      Its more like some functionality only works on chromium browsers. For example vscode.dev doesn't let you open folders in firefox
klibertp 3y ago
Because a page looking off for a subset of people is worse for the brand then the page not working for them at all. On the other hand, making the page work for everyone (including lynx users?) is simply uneconomical - and when the business tries to optimize for it, you get Java Applets and Flash.
- SergeAx 3y ago
  I am an engineering manager in charge of 4 web products. The only problem we have with Firefox is audio/video access on mobile. There are zero problems with the desktop Firefox. There are some problems with the desktop Safari that QA are reporting here and there.

In the old days there were plenty of websites designed only for IE6, and a few that refused to load if they detected any other browser string. It doesn’t make much sense today, Firefox loads sites developed for Chrome just fine. There is no ActiveX like “embrace and extend” coming from the Google camp quite yet.

paulryanrogers 3y ago
I'd argue the rapid pace of new Chrome-only APIs is effectively EEE. Web developers can't wait to use new features, so once features land in Chrome they'll get used. Then folks not using Chrome find more friction until they eventually give up and switch.
- postalrat 3y ago
  Can you think of any real life examples of websites that use Chrome only apis and don't work in Firefox?
  - paulryanrogers 3y ago
    Just this week: - Snyk - Fastly's support site - background blur on Meet and Zoom
  - xctr94 3y ago
    I don’t have a list of examples, but this is historically a problem for the web. I’ve sat in a couple of Ecmascript events where maintainers complain about Google implementing features before approval. Sometimes Chrome ships stage 2 features because (apparently) Google engineers don’t want to respect due process. It’s known, we just put up with it. I also blame developers working on non-standardized features. You should work with the ES that is official and current, not the one Google is forcing on other vendors. Apologies for not listing all the times this happened, but I think too many.
  - Devasta 3y ago
    MBNA Canada announced last year they werent going to support Firefox. DTCC apps such as Omgeo support Chrome and Edge only.
  - iudqnolq 3y ago
    Yes, but generally for completely legitimate reasons. One example is a tool for flashing code to a embedded device. It's aimed at beginners, so not requiring an install is valuable. It means even kids with locked down Chromebooks can try it out. But the Firefox teams doesn't like the vibes of a web USB API, so it'll be cheome-only indefinitely.
  - AgrMohit 3y ago
    Its more like some functionality only works on chromium browsers. For example vscode.dev doesn't let you open folders in firefox

klibertp 3y ago

Because a page looking off for a subset of people is worse for the brand then the page not working for them at all. On the other hand, making the page work for everyone (including lynx users?) is simply uneconomical - and when the business tries to optimize for it, you get Java Applets and Flash.

SergeAx 3y ago
I am an engineering manager in charge of 4 web products. The only problem we have with Firefox is audio/video access on mobile. There are zero problems with the desktop Firefox. There are some problems with the desktop Safari that QA are reporting here and there.