• Zagorath@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    That’s not necessarily true. Circa 2016–17 I frequented a website that worked in Chrome but not Firefox. This was due to Firefox at the time not implementing web standards that Chrome did. Firefox only got around to it in 2019. So naturally, the developer of the site was telling people to use Chrome.

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      90
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I don’t know the history of column span but the reason Firefox was “behind” on standards was because Google was pushing new standards through committee faster than competing browsers could keep up. Google would implement a new feature, offer it as a free standard, then get it through the committee. Because Google already had it in their browser, they were already compliant while Firefox had to scramble.

      It was Google doing their variation of “embrace, extend, extinguish”

      It got so bad that not even Microsoft had the resources to keep up. They said as much when they said they were adopting Chromium as their engine.

    • Eiri@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m gonna be honest, if they used a feature that wasn’t ready for prime time, it’s still on them.

      • dajoho
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Totally agree. It’s not the fault of Firefox at all. This is just being trigger-happy on new standards before they are ready and unwillingness to fix a problem in a different way.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        It got added because it worked extremely well on browsers that implemented it, and it solved a problem that was needed on the site in question, which was very difficult to solve otherwise. I can’t blame a site for using an open standard that works for a majority of its users and which makes the development effort significantly less.

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      This was due to Firefox at the time not implementing web standards that Chrome did.

      Uhm, yeah, that’s what browsers do. There are somewhere about 150 web standards and some are hard requirement while others are soft. Blink has some implemented that Webkit hasn’t but Gecko has and that’s true for all three. Same for browsers.

      Btw, the one with the most implemented standards is QtWebkit by far. It’s still slower tho.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah? I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with that. I’m saying it’s bullshit to say a developer has done a crap job when one browser doesn’t implement a web standard that is perfect tailor-made for their site’s use case.

        • Ethan@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          22 hours ago

          If your job is to make websites and you make sites that don’t work on a browser that has over 100 million users you’re not doing your job.

        • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          Still a bad job tho, if his implementation requires things that aren’t common and has no workarounds in place.