News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Firefox 118. Parent comment

Re:Firefox 118 by meiraleal on Tuesday September 26, 2023 @11:36AM (#37660921)
Sadly, my case is the opposite. I use Firefox since the beginning so it is close to 20 years. I'm not going to use it as my main browser anymore as I'm working fulltime with PWAs and service workers and Firefox support of it (or lack of) is unjustifiable.

My new apps make use of modern HTML and JS APIs and I can't count on Firefox implementing them.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Firefox 118 by toyg on Tuesday September 26, 2023 @11:57AM (#37661233)
"Modern HTML and JS APIs" were designed by Chrome for Chrome, so unsurprisingly work better on Chrome.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Firefox 118 by meiraleal on Tuesday September 26, 2023 @03:49PM (#37664908)
And Firefox solution is to ignore all developers that think this is a great platform compared to Play Store and App Store. Great way to lose market share.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Firefox 118 by lucasyvas on Tuesday September 26, 2023 @06:31PM (#37666678)
I think you're justified in this case - this isn't about not supporting Chrome or the features it offers, just saying that it has some issues that make it not great as a browser for many end-users. This is one such case that hopefully has a resolution. But, as for any platform, I think it's fair to take advantage of additional things one platform gives you over the other. That's so long as you properly support the others still.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Firefox 118 by sam_goody on Wednesday September 27, 2023 @04:49AM (#37671928)
I use lots of modern APIs and CSS (on our own site) with no issues. I can only remember one site in the past month that had an issue in FF, and it was probably because of user agent checking. What API's are you referring to, and where did you come across them?
[ Parent | on HN ]