3 ms·
Honestly, this hasn’t always been my experience: multiple times I’ve targeted Firefox for doing something mildly out of the normal but absolutely within spec an
by chrismorgan 3y ago
Honestly, this hasn’t always been my experience: multiple times I’ve targeted Firefox for doing something mildly out of the normal but absolutely within spec and supported across the board for years, and then tried it in Chromium and found debilitating bugs, to the point where once in a case of CSS blending I just had to give up on the entire concept, or else the page would just stop rendering after 8192px.
I’ve never actually developed against Chromium, and my position as a staunch Firefox user (and a Nightly user at that, for at least eleven of the last thirteen years) may be negatively affecting my judgement in this, but although what you say may be true from a features perspective, I don’t find that at all difficult to manage, and from a bugs perspective my impression is that Chromium has historically tended to be much buggier: that Firefox shipped better quality, later, while Chromium shipped lower quality, earlier. Though I do get the sense that this is less true than it used to be, and that Chromium is generally of higher quality for features of a certain age now than five years ago. And I reiterate, this is about the vibes I’ve got, as a Firefox user. I’ve tended to have to file more interesting or problematic bugs against Chromium than against Firefox.
- acdha 3y agoI’m not definitely not saying any browser is perfect - I’ve filed many bugs against all of the major browsers - but I think Chrome took over from IE in the category of browsers which a certain type of developer uses as the only browser and decides that if it works for them it’s ready to ship. I’m not sure I’ve ever had someone rant in the inverse case saying that if code works in, say, Safari but not Chrome it must mean that Chrome is a terrible browser and shouldn’t be used. That default mentality is toxic for the web but not uncommon.