3 ms·

If laziness got browsers into the vendor prefix mess, laziness could get them out; the way to do that is to build good developer tools. For example, a tool cou

If laziness got browsers into the vendor prefix mess, laziness could get them out; the way to do that is to build good developer tools. For example, a tool could scan CSS files and compare usage of vendor prefixes against the current state of cross-browser support for "better" alternatives. Perhaps you see warnings like "property 'webkit-xyz' can be replaced by 'xyz', which has been supported by the top 4 browsers since 2006".

tomjen3 14y ago
Why would I want to run such a tool? I want the web broken for users of broken browsers. I want those who use IE to suffer, so that they will upgrade to better browsers. I want those who use Opera to stop and to start using a better browser. I am tired of the progress of the web being hindered by this absurd notion that we should support every browser in existence. We shouldn't.
- hnhg 14y ago
  Better in what sense? I don't like Safari and Chrome has turned into a buggy mess for me, whereas Opera is always stable. I've given up on the huge bloat of Firefox. IE is terrible. What's left?
  - tomjen3 14y ago
    I disagree with your concept of Chrome being buggy. It is not more buggy than the rest and has decent support for the new advanced features (with the exception of the calc css feature).
- makecheck 14y ago
  If you can't think of your users, think of your code then. There's probably lots of CSS that has old -webkit/-moz/whatever tags because it "still works" and there hasn't been time to maintain it properly. A tool like this would make the code smaller, clearer and more future-proof without affecting any of your favorite users. It would just so happen to help fringe-browser users as well. I'd say that's a win-win, especially if you value attracting new customers and making money. Right now, if I reach a web site that browser-sniffs or doesn't "support" me I go away and never come back. Generally not a useful way to treat visitors.
  - tomjen3 14y ago
    I can't remove that code until webkit and mozilla have updated their code to use the official standard. That won't happen for a while, so I see no advantage in adding -opera prefixes as well.

tomjen3 14y ago

Why would I want to run such a tool? I want the web broken for users of broken browsers. I want those who use IE to suffer, so that they will upgrade to better browsers. I want those who use Opera to stop and to start using a better browser. I am tired of the progress of the web being hindered by this absurd notion that we should support every browser in existence. We shouldn't.

hnhg 14y ago
Better in what sense? I don't like Safari and Chrome has turned into a buggy mess for me, whereas Opera is always stable. I've given up on the huge bloat of Firefox. IE is terrible. What's left?
- tomjen3 14y ago
  I disagree with your concept of Chrome being buggy. It is not more buggy than the rest and has decent support for the new advanced features (with the exception of the calc css feature).
makecheck 14y ago
If you can't think of your users, think of your code then. There's probably lots of CSS that has old -webkit/-moz/whatever tags because it "still works" and there hasn't been time to maintain it properly. A tool like this would make the code smaller, clearer and more future-proof without affecting any of your favorite users. It would just so happen to help fringe-browser users as well. I'd say that's a win-win, especially if you value attracting new customers and making money. Right now, if I reach a web site that browser-sniffs or doesn't "support" me I go away and never come back. Generally not a useful way to treat visitors.
- tomjen3 14y ago
  I can't remove that code until webkit and mozilla have updated their code to use the official standard. That won't happen for a while, so I see no advantage in adding -opera prefixes as well.