Safari and Firefox change how big sites render based on the domain. TikTok, Netflix, Instagram… even SeatGuru. Chrome doesn’t. Why is that?
  • TheFogan@programming.devEnglish
    19 hours

    So TL:DR, chrome is like internet explorer was before firefox. It does some things outside the standard, and because it’s the modern day “default”. sites sloppily code to work with it, and other browsers are left carrying the bag because if tiktok doesn’t work on firefox, people will view that as a firefox problem. Even if firefox is the one actually following the standards when tiktok and chrome aren’t.

    • Pycorax@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      10 hours

      Same issue with AMD’s drivers sometimes. Not to say that their drivers are perfect but as a graphics engineer, I’ve had stuff my colleagues wrote and tested on Nvidia work fine but break on AMD because AMD was implementing the OpenGL spec exactly but Nvidia decided to be “lenient” and add hacks that make incomplete code work.

      • Venator@lemmy.nzEnglish
        9 hours

        Could also be that nvidia adds fixes in the drivers for specific games, and then other games ended up with the same bugs later, or they add fixes during the development process when they provide “free QA”…

        • Pycorax@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          3 hours

          Nah I meant when we’re writing rendering code on our own. Those fixes in the drivers are custom made for those games only and aren’t applied in any other application, especially anything you write yourself.

    • kureta@lemmy.mlEnglish
      16 hours

      Shit like this will continue to happen until governments start enforcing interoperable open standards and resume enforcing antitrust laws, which were, in practice, suspended for a long time, for whatever reason.

      • MoogleMaestro@lemmy.zipEnglish
        15 hours

        Shit like this will continue to happen until governments start enforcing interoperable open standards and resume enforcing antitrust laws, which were, in practice, suspended for a long time, for whatever reason.

        Which will never happen if we keep ending up with republicans every 4 years. Sad state of affairs, but technology will remain corporate as long as people are awful putting their money where their mouth is (or time, in the case of social web)

        • youmaynotknow@lemmy.zipEnglish
          2 hours

          This is the reality. As long as the herd keeps using whatever big tech throws at them without question, this will only escalate to infinity.

    • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zipEnglish
      19 hours

      Thanks you saved me a click.

      Google has been doing this with all kinds of (web) standards, and the industry has always obeyed. Fuck’em all.

    • jimmy90@lemmy.worldEnglish
      7 hours

      deeeep tech analysis from lemmings as usual

      actually no. IE dominated because MS owned the desktop and still do. IE was fucking awful and did not care about standards

      chrome dominated because it was fucking great. chrome now defines standards because the other browsers lag behind and standards themselves lag behind

      if anything safari is the new IE in apples fucking awful walled garden

      • sanitation@lemmy.radioEnglish
        3 hours

        Chrome? This maybe reflects state from about 5-7 years ago. But nowadays it’s waaaay behind firefox.
        No ad blocker.
        No mobile extensions
        No compact bookmarks.
        Tracking built in.
        Chrome pushes ai llm without consent.
        On every update have to disable more things in settings pushed without consent.

        You are a browser, I don’t need you to store all my addresses and passwords and credit cards or loyalty cards whatever the fuck that is.

        It’s basically ms edge now

      • KatherinaReichelt@feddit.orgEnglish
        6 hours

        Google is also abusing its monopoly to push Chrome. They are sabotaging other browsers on their sites while showing Chrome ads.

    • einkorn@feddit.orgEnglish
      19 hours

      I think similar how the EU adopted the USB-C as mandatory standard for charging, it should force other industries, including software vendors, to follow commonly defined standards.

      In case of browsers that is Chrome using it’s de facto monopoly to force other browser to rush to catch up with their custom crap. Yes, as a side effect that would also break a lot of existing webpages because they rely heavily on browser bending over backwards to accommodate sites serving effectively broken HTML i.e. but in the long term this would improve the internet as a whole.

      • reddig33@lemmy.worldEnglish
        19 hours

        The industry needs to shift to identifying html, css, and JavaScript versions in browser headers instead of which rendering engine. Saying “I support these versions of these standards” instead of “I’m chromium”.

        It’s been a problem since day one. Maybe have some sort of independent certification for each browser to pass before being able to declare that it supports a particular version.

        • nyan@lemmy.cafeEnglish
          17 hours

          You’d have to indicate “I also support these optional bits” for this to really work, which would lead to truly massive headers.

          I prefer the idea of slapping people who put up pages that cater to Chrome rather than reading and following the standards upside the head with a large dead fish. People who write faulty WYSIWYG web design software get smacked once for every bad site deployed with their help.

          • reddig33@lemmy.worldEnglish
            17 hours

            There shouldn’t be any “optional bits”. Thats part of the problem. Either it’s part of a standard or it’s not. Either you meet the standard for that version number, or you don’t.

            • groet@feddit.orgEnglish
              3 hours

              The problem is that the standard is fucking huge and maybe your browser supports every feature of version 5xx but is missing a feature related to authentication using guinea pigs introduced in v369. So it would only be allowed to advertise compatibility with v368 even though it can do everything except Guinea pigs.

              Realistically you would trim the standard to a core set and advertise compatibility with a version of that and then advertise optional extensions. And that’s optional bits if you ask me.

              • youmaynotknow@lemmy.zipEnglish
                2 hours

                A standard is that, a standard. The amount of moving parts (features?) is irrelevant.

                Either it’s up to the standard or it isn’t.

                • groet@feddit.orgEnglish
                  1 hour

                  Then no browser will be “up to” the last 15 years of the standard as none implement all features.

    • SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      19 hours

      as a webdev: this is (mostly) not really chrome’s fault.

      It’s the fault of devs not testing or not getting enough time to get something run on more than just chrome.

      For too long the web standards were “eh, it’s stable enough. works on one browser, works on all”. But that only holds true for the basic feature set. When you start using features that are not super common, the browser implementations start to diverge slightly. And that needs to be tested for. But often isn’t

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.zipEnglish
      19 hours

      Actually, it’s somewhere about 160 standards and around 120 are expected and the rest are 50:50 mostly supported or optional. And each browser has a different set of the 50:50. But yeah, lock-in effect still applies.

      Btw, a few years back last i looked, but QtWebKit supported most standards of all engines.