3 ms·

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

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

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