3 ms·

Instead of Chrome being the modern Internet Explorer, mobile Safari has taken that place. From this point of view I'm not sure what we're losing in the proposi

Instead of Chrome being the modern Internet Explorer, mobile Safari has taken that place. From this point of view I'm not sure what we're losing in the proposition when we still get Firefox and alternative browsers on iOS. Right now the choice is between Safari holding back the whole web on mobile (as Safari stagnates Chrome gets a pass for barely coasting as well on android) or finally have it move forward at perhaps the cost of Chrome gaining more market share. Refusing progress just to spite a single company doesn't feel worth it to be honest.

wodenokoto 3y ago
No it hasn’t. There’s at least a duopoly now.
al_borland 3y ago
With sufficient market share, where is the incentive for web developers to test in anything but Chrome? Today they need to ensure it works on the iPhone, and if they are already testing two browsers, or ensuring capability across two browsers, that means Firefox is likely coming along for the ride. With this move I’m preparing for a future where developers simply put up a message, “best viewed in Chrome”, or they simply do a user agent check and don’t even load the page if it’s not Chrome. Not because the page wouldn’t work in Safari or Firefox, but rather because they couldn’t be bothered to test. I don’t see this as refusing progress, I see it as defense against a monarchy on the Internet, where Google holds all the cards.
- makeitdouble 3y ago
  You are describing the android situation. There is almost no incentive for devs to test non blink based browsers when targeting android. But that's the space where firefox lives, it's actually pretty good, there's extremely fewnpages that don't work in it (disclaimer: I'm not opening figma on my phone) and I'm glad to have it. I sure wish firefox could get better marketshare and bring real competition, but if my choice was "Safari only" or "Chrome dominating, with other browsers on the side", I'd choose again and again the second proposition.

wodenokoto 3y ago

No it hasn’t. There’s at least a duopoly now.

al_borland 3y ago

With sufficient market share, where is the incentive for web developers to test in anything but Chrome? Today they need to ensure it works on the iPhone, and if they are already testing two browsers, or ensuring capability across two browsers, that means Firefox is likely coming along for the ride. With this move I’m preparing for a future where developers simply put up a message, “best viewed in Chrome”, or they simply do a user agent check and don’t even load the page if it’s not Chrome. Not because the page wouldn’t work in Safari or Firefox, but rather because they couldn’t be bothered to test. I don’t see this as refusing progress, I see it as defense against a monarchy on the Internet, where Google holds all the cards.

makeitdouble 3y ago
You are describing the android situation. There is almost no incentive for devs to test non blink based browsers when targeting android. But that's the space where firefox lives, it's actually pretty good, there's extremely fewnpages that don't work in it (disclaimer: I'm not opening figma on my phone) and I'm glad to have it. I sure wish firefox could get better marketshare and bring real competition, but if my choice was "Safari only" or "Chrome dominating, with other browsers on the side", I'd choose again and again the second proposition.