
Please build websites for the web, not just Google Chrome - lsc36
https://thenextweb.com/dd/2017/11/28/please-build-websites-web-not-just-google-chrome/
======
bootsz
I sympathize with both sides of this argument. The author is correct: If
you're providing a service on the web, especially a widely used one, you
should make it usable for all web users to the fullest extent possible,
regardless of browser.

But on the other hand... boy am I glad I switched from web dev to primarily
back-end work. Building and maintaining complex software that works reliably
in one environment is enough of a challenge as it is... without all the extra
variables of an ever-changing landscape of browsers and devices, with varying
levels of feature support, all of which you have zero control over.

IMO being a front-end dev is borderline masochistic :)

~~~
talmand
>> IMO being a front-end dev is borderline masochistic :)

Some of us just like the challenge.

------
skate22
This reminds me of the microsoft rep that installed chrome mid demo because
edge wasnt working properly lol (article was posted on HN a few weeks ago)

[https://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2017/10/30/microsoft-
engine...](https://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2017/10/30/microsoft-engineer-
chrome-edge-google/)

~~~
talmand
Yet again another example of one good use for MS browsers, installing a
different browser.

------
fanpuns
This isn't really my area of expertise so if this already exists feel free to
educate me.

Would it be possible to have a generic browser that isnt controlled by any
vendor, but perhaps contributed to by all of them, which could be used as a
dev standard? It doesn't even have to be available to users, just devs.
Vendors could still develop their browsers any way they want, but when output
diverges from this kit, they would at least know it. As a dev you could use
this as your test kit and know that if it works here, it works everywhere.

I could see problems with this being backwards compatible, but at the point
where the major vendors sign on, all future releases would compatible (and
eventually all releases as older versions are retired).

I suppose that perhaps though this is already accomplished by Chrome, but it
seems less than ideal for many reasons.

~~~
Scarblac
I think that would in effect become just another browser developers need to
test with.

Vendor browsers will miss features compared to it, and have extra features,
and do some things a bit different. Developers wouldn't consider it "the dev
standard" since it wouldn't be used by many people, and what matters is that
your users can use what you meant them to use.

------
talmand
Reminds me of the time of websites only using -webkit vendor prefixes in the
CSS even though the same properties were available to other browsers.
Available either as other vendor prefixes or just the standard property. It
got so bad that other browsers started supporting the webkit prefixes, which
defeated the purpose. Not that vendor prefixes were a good idea to begin with.

------
ilaksh
Please build IE to be compatible with standards that have been implemented for
years in Firefox and Chrome.

Last I tried, IE still does not have a fully compatible CSS grid and doesn't
handle HTTP 2 server push at all.

Is it because they don't have enough smart programmers to implement those
things? Or they can't update their software? Even though every few weeks or
months there are full updates that they push at will.

I can't believe people still haven't figured out at this point that MS is
doing it deliberately, just like they have been all these years. Because every
time the web becomes more powerful and compatible, it weakens MS's position.

~~~
ksec
Have you tried Edge, IE at this stage is pretty much abandoned, or Edge is
taking over IE.

~~~
ilaksh
Windows 10 automatically opens things in IE still as far as I know.

------
bradknowles
Unfortunately, thenextweb.com site doesn’t open at all for me on iOS and
Safari.

Hmm. Maybe they should take some of their own medicine?

~~~
yesbut
You should upgrade to Netscape 9. Works fine on my Nokia.

------
curtisblaine
Companies will build websites for whatever gets them the most money. If
supporting FF costs more than the additional revenues from only-FF users, they
will build Chrome-only sites. Really surprises me how easily people forget
that companies are out there to make money.

~~~
jerven
Seems silly, that often its 40% of the market that companies are willing to
leave to competitors for relatively tiny development costs.

~~~
curtisblaine
Then another company will capture that 40% of the market and disrupt the first
company for tiny development costs. Still can't see the problem.

~~~
foobarchu
And until that time, the customers are entitled to bitch and moan as much as
they want for the company to do things right. Which is exactly what this is.

~~~
curtisblaine
And until that time, the company is entitled to tell them "install Chrome",
which is exactly what this is :)

------
herbst
If I build for Chrome I build for like 80%. Then I can also usually assume it
works for Safari and Opera. In in most cases also perfectly well for Firefox.

If there are small design issues on a minority browser it's not bad. And more
than small issues are very unusual these days anyway.

