They seem pretty good about using the open specification.
Also they're starting to phase out -webkit tags for experimental chrome only features. They're hidden behind flags so you basically can't use them in production unless it's endorsed as part of the spec.
Not to derail but safari mobile is the real IE6, plus lock in so users can't even get away from it.
I completely agree. It's re-enforced with Chrome's supplied dev tools which are really, really nice (I always found them far better than Firefox's built-in or Firebug).
It's going to be harder to unseat Chrome. IE 6 wasn't so difficult due to an increase in competition who offered features that IE wasn't even working on (standards, tabs, etc). How would you even unseat Chrome?
I miss the "DOM" tab, that Firebug for Firefox had features had, and I haven't found anywhere else. You can browse the DOM tree state and edit - similar to Smalltalk and Windows Registry - very useful & powerful. Sadly, they just killed Firebug, broke the addon, deactivated it with an update and replaced it with a still not feature-complete (at the moment sub-par) solution.
> I miss the "DOM" tab, that Firebug for Firefox had features had, and I haven't found anywhere else.
It's in the Fx DevTools sinve v48 [1]. You may need to enable it though in the DevTools settings.
> Sadly, they just killed Firebug, broke the addon, deactivated it with an update and replaced it with a still not feature-complete (at the moment sub-par) solution.
Who's they? The Firebug Team works with the DevTools team since forever to port all functionality to the internal tools. The Firebug Team decided it was not worth to maintain the standalone version beyond v2 (also related to architectural changes to Fx, see project e10s) since they almost achieved feature parity by now and are working on the last remaining pieces [3]. Firebug v3 is Fx DevTools + a lot of extra features that Firebug never had. If you miss a feature in the DevTools, try Fx DevEdition [3].
I think that what you're asking for is already doable in the "Elements" tabs of Chrome DevTools, no?
Or maybe I didn't get what you really meant by "You can browse the DOM tree state and edit"?
But my guess is that Google will become more and more monopolistic, more and more close in disguise. And closer to the big companies interest with DRM and such.
And if Mozilla keeps being Mozilla, they will be a natural alternative.
Firefox dev tools are sometimes painful to use and lacks some important features which Chrome's has.
Some examples:
- debugging with source maps: it doesn't work properly (I can set breakpoints and debug variables content on typescript files in Chrome, but not in FF)
- JS exceptions: clicking on the filename inside the stack opens a new window with the source of the JS file, not the debugger (ugh)
Did you try the Fx DevEdition? I know of some recent Source Map related changes. If the issue persists (same with the other issues you mention), would you mind filing a bug [1]?
I won't directly mention the project that's best placed to do that, as it's not yet ready for primetime, but let's just say Chrome may not have the performance crown in the next 5 years.
Also, aside from on the Mac, what's holding back Firefox? I accept that the Mac version seems to have more problems than the Windows or Linux versions (I have no technical explanation for this, it's just what I've heard anecdotally), but on Windows it seems to be a solid choice. Is it just about momentum for Chrome rather than superiority at this point?
As another poster in this thread mentioned: bookmarks and other personal data syncing. Allowing 3rd party sync servers would go a long way towards Chrome projecting the message they don't want to lock you in but that's probably not the case -- if we judge by their team's [lack of] actions.
(And don't get me started on services like XMarks. They're miles behind.)
Yeah, no; most times when you test in Firefox it works just fine with no changes; specially when you already tried on mobile, because if it works in mobile it works on desktop Firefox.
The other thing is that major libraries (CSS, JS: jQuery, bootstrap, React) make sure they work on all browsers so you don't have to worry about that part.
The winXP-IE6 was hell because that never happened, you always had to changes to make it work on IE6 and some other changes to support IE7 and so on.
Most times but not always unfortunately. Had a couple of times that I did not check a small frontend change on firefox because I assumed a small change would be fine, yet had different results in chrome as on firefox.
I use Firefox on Android and often run into web sites that don't work right because they are dependent on some Chrome or Webkit behaviour, and I need to switch the browser to desktop mode to resolve the problem.
It's rare for me to find one, although the highest profile annoyance for me is textboxes break on m.facebook.com. The caret refuses to move from the current line without deleting or adding a character.
Known issue and I'm yet to see a fix (other than "mbasic" which you have to use for messenger anyway).
Almost everything else seems to be fixed with uBlock Origin and/or Reading Mode.
I experianced this myself and was pretty sure this is on purpose. If you request desktop on Chrome for Android you get a stretched out version of the mobile site and the auto complete of your keyboard makes the textbox on messages impossible to use. I think they want to funnel people to the app I just don't go on the site anymore.
i often run into google web sites that render and behave terribly in android chrome (usually floating windows with the close hidden or extending outside the screen).
most web problems are now bugs either by the site developer or in a specific browser.
thats a long way from ie6 problems where either you needed a unique site configuration for every browser or supported ie6 only.
"It is slowly starting too look like in the early 00's, most developers are starting to support only chrome, with no testing in Firefox or latest IE.
"
Certainly you realize this kind of cycle has been going on for longer than that.
In browsers, yeah, but that's only because browsers have only existed that long.
This is pretty much the way of all software cycles since the dawn of computers. No area of software that i'm aware of has really broken out of this kind of cyclic behavior.
>On Android it is even worse, no one is testing with Firefox Mobile (Fennec) - this is WinXP-IE6 all over again.
I'm always surprised why this is the case. Firefox Mobile + UBlock Origin works really well and is only very slightly slower than Chrome, while also blocking ads
Firefox Mobile works because it has a huge set of fixes they use for exactly that – changing UA on some sites, patching the code of other sites, implementing all the -webkit-* things, etc.
It’s not that sites support Firefox, it’s that Firefox tries to implement 1:1 what Chrome does. At far less than a tenth of the budget.
For me it just never works. It never did during the last 3 years I tried it. The tab just don't sync, and I don't have the time or will to play the debug game.
I was a long time Firefox user until the start of this year. I think I started using Pheonix as my main browser around 0.5 or 0.6. However over the years Firefox has got heavier and slower and taken way too long to evolve. It sucked when I realised I hadn't opened Firefox for a whole month. Now I just stay in Chrome as it is, for me, the best browsing experience. It is fast and looks good. It might be a large program in terms of install size but it doesn't feel bloated. The UI is snappy, scrolling is instant, etc. I do miss a few things about Firefox but not enough to slow down my whole browsing experience. I have moved on from the huge UI changing extensions. Now I just keep things minimal with just a content blocker and one or two other things for convenience.
What I don't understand about Firefox is that Mozilla have a lot of money but progress seems very slow. Sure they get there in the end (or most of the way) but it just seems to take forever. Why?
Firefox slowness is often related to some bad-behaving extension (though that improved over time), some AV software hijacking the process (happens far too often and way harder to detect than it should), or some busted profiles with a lot of cruft that failed to be cleaned up automatically (re: bad behaving extensions). I advise you to try the Firefox DevEdition (which uses a separate profile by default) and check if it works for you. You can also get rid of your old profile or try to reset it (preserving some data).
Money isn't necessarily the issue for Mozilla, they managed to create a decent browser with a fraction of the big player's budget. As always, it's the triangle of complexity and time and manpower, they just can't fight on all fronts at once. At the moment, they are trying to get rid of a lot of legacy that prevented them from improving some aspects of the system (see project e10s, WebExtensions, etc.) all while preserving as much of the ecosystem as possible – which is very hard due to the current extension system that was created more than 10 years ago and just doesn't fit the bill anymore. E.g. e10s is already going on for 5 years or so and it just started rolling out a few months ago.
Good news is that with these projects completing (improving overall responsiveness), there's a huge new project starting (Project Quantum) that aims to overhaul major parts of the rendering engine. This will integrate a lot of the research and investment poured into Rust and Servo, which will probably outrun current browsers by an order of magnitude (at least in some aspects that has already been shown, see WebRender).
while i agree with you ( i use firefox on my macbook and on my nexus 6 ) the situation is not even close to the one with ie6, everybody that has be doing web development in those days knows what im talking about, now days its usually some little quirk, those days you had to rewrite parts of your code or have big if(IE6) do something completely different.
while i also hate that chrome has such a big influence, if all of them implement the common specs, i would be ok with that.
One might say that if one were completely ignorant of economics and economic history. There are no examples of long running monopolies unsupported by state power.
The banking sector, Alcoa, big pharma, automotive, oil/gas energy, telecom, and even groceries. Anywhere you have rents being sought and reaped you have monopolistic power. Im excluding the remark about government supported because that's more of a corporation forcing the governments hand through threats.
When someone calls me ignorant I don't necessarily feel like replying.
Open source ideals defined by who? Richard Stallman? True open source is code that you can do whatever you want with it. When Google releases their code it's under what I consider the true ideals for open source software and not some license that threatens legal action if you don't release your modifications.
How does it feel following your true ideals of open source software, installing AOSP on your mobile device, with the ability to use apps from the Play Store?
What about updating the BSD distribution on the PS4?
We test on browsers we see more than 1% usage on by rule. This includes a swath of versions and platforms of IE, Chrome, Firefox, Edge as well as some foreign ones I know little about like UCBrowser.
Firefox Mobile does not meet that rule for us. I know personally a single person who uses it, and that's only because he's fiercely anti-Google.
There's just little sense testing against something no one is using, lest we want to test NetPositive [1].
> On Android it is even worse, no one is testing with Firefox Mobile (Fennec)
Maybe because (almost) no one uses it? It's definitely a vicious cycle (If there are no users, there won't be any testing on that platform. If there is no testing on that platform, there are no users.).
Developer time/resources are not unlimited. It's not worth their while to target an obscure platform.
This is logical. If you have limited developer resources, it makes sense to target the most popular combos first. Until we have true "write once run anywhere" it will always be this way.
The difference is that Chrome is probably the most standard compliant browser around. IE was just a clusterfuck from a monopolistic company whose intent was to lock you into their self appointed standards.
Doubtful, because someone will come up with their own proprietary rendering engine in a free browser, with some minor built-in feature people want; and then we're back where we started.
It is slowly starting too look like in the early 00's, most developers are starting to support only chrome, with no testing in Firefox or latest IE.
On Android it is even worse, no one is testing with Firefox Mobile (Fennec) - this is WinXP-IE6 all over again.