6d ago

"Works for me"

85 comments

If your website only works with Chrome, it’s not a website. It’s a Chrome site.
You didn’t design for the web. You designed for Chrome.
- Fuck chrome. Such a dogshit unoptimized spyware browser that now disables ad-blocking plugins
  
  I agree that Chrome fucking sucks, but it's disingenuous to call it unoptimized. Chrome and chromium-based browsers are as fast as or faster than Firefox. Although I agree that manifest V3 is horrible to the web as a whole and shouldn't have been created.
  
  Their plugins were fucked from the beginning. You never had control of your extensions.
  
  The problem for me is that the built-in translator is too convenient
- Chrome is awful in nearly every way one can measure a browser. Anyone still using this as they're main driver in 2025 is technologically challenged.
  
  It’s wild to see Chrome going from the browser to use if you had any tech sense whatsoever to being universally derided.
- I just design for IE6
  
  An Antiquarian I see. Carry on my good fellow!
  
  I do this, but unironically.
  
  I code raw html in notepad as god intended
- 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.
  
  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.
  
  I'm gonna be honest, if they used a feature that wasn't ready for prime time, it's still on them.
  
  If only one browser runs it, it's not a standard
  
  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.

My website only works with Chrome, but it has to be a specific old version of it. And you also need to install some extensions. Very specific versions of these extensions. Few of them already removed from the store due to security backdoors.
I have a Docker image you can use to run Chrome though.
- What version of Docker do I need to run your container?
  
  You'll need my fork of docker, and you'll need to apply a patch.
- At that point, just release your website as an electron app.

I like this template so much better than the Spider-Man one that people constantly use backwards.
- But this one's also backwards? I haven't seen the movie, talking purely about the two photos.
  
  In the movie the glasses let the wearer see the truth. This template is often used backwards but it's correct in this case.

When developing photon I always end up with more issues on chrome browsers than firefox. and half of those are because of its god awful scrollbar. Please use an overlay scrollbar instead of shifting the stupid page around, chrome.
- ugh yeah classic chrome am I right? (I forgot how to center a div)

I wish I could like this thrice
- Make an alt account.

Or... The client wanted a WordPress site and that's just the result of it.
¯(ツ)/¯

Greatest format ever. I present you with the Demi-God of memes award for best use of THEY LIVE if you originated the template. If you did not originate you get the cool assed dude award for sharing. Many thanks.

This has been a problem for a very very long time
- I agree with you that failing to support multiple browsers is an old problem, but I think the cause has shifted.
  Back in the last century, supporting both browsers amounted to sniffing the browser and implementing the same feature twice. document.layers vs document.all for example.
  Nowadays I think the problem is different: we just don't know what's going on. The site is transpiled from TypeScript, written on top of React or Vue which drastically switches paradigm (bonus for Tailwind), packed with building tools, and the average dev has little understanding of what actually comes out. It's a tall stack of leaky abstractions on top of the already tall one of the web. The dev is pretty sure it works on Chrome so they say it does work there, but it was not even a deliberate choice.
  
  For most sites it’s a testing matrix issue. Most testing teams look at browser stats and choose how to apply their limited resources based on that. So the dev probably doesn’t even see the bug that exists for an old Firefox version as there’s no testing done on it.

How did we get from "SGML varient for formatting text" to this?

I’m going to have to go down the rabbit hole of making my own website soon. Just curious but would there be an easy way to show a pop up just to people using chrome?
No reason in particular… 😏
- lol i did something like what i assume your goal is on my neocities when i detect !!window.chrome === true
  
  Why the double negation?
- Not sure if serious, but there's a million ways to do this, some that require importing thousands of lines of code and none of which are guaranteed to work in all possible circumstances. But here's a simple one.
- Im stupid Stones but I think it's in the user agent information, browser and version and other shit
  
  User agents cannot be fully trusted anymore since every browser puts every possible word in it so they are not excluded by anything.

In most cases yes.
However I did find this really weird bug where Firefox was caching something to do with sockets (that would disallow connecting a new socket) that could only be cleared by restarting Firefox itself.
- Is that http2? Cause http2 allows for reuse of a connection for additional requests.
  This caught me out with envoy reverse proxy doing a few subdomains using a wildcard cert.
  The browser would reuse the connection cause the cert authority and IP was the same, but envoy couldn't figure out how to route the request correctly. Absolute head scratcher!

85 comments