Supporting IE Is Too Much Work

Re:Supporting IE Is Too Much Work by chao- on Thursday May 10, 2012 @07:49AM (#3952948)

Agreed. Not a single person in my company (a whole five people) owns a Mac, and it leaves us with no real options on the compatibility front. I prefer to develop in Linux, but I have a Windows partition since it's easy enough to do. But none of us have the pocket change lying around to buy a redundant machine just to check up on some demonstrably minimal segment of our users who use Safari on OS X.

I'll put in the time to boot into a Windows partition and double-check IE9, but when it comes to OS X/Safari, I've got little recourse but to crossing my fingers and bank on Safari's Webkit rendering being the same as (or close enough to) Chrome in Windows and Chromium in Linux.

Safari DOES have a Windows version, but I've never seen it enter into the conversation at all. Is it guaranteed to have true rendering/display parity with the OS X variant?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supporting IE Is Too Much Work by doc4t on Thursday May 10, 2012 @08:01AM (#3952990)

"Is it guaranteed to have true rendering/display parity with the OS X variant?" No. Last time I made a hackintosh running Safari on Win and Mac sometimes produced different outcomes in certain scenarios. Things might have changed though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supporting IE Is Too Much Work by zbuc on Thursday May 10, 2012 @10:27AM (#3953640)

> I'll put in the time to boot into a Windows partition and double-check IE9, but when it comes to OS X/Safari, I've got little recourse but to crossing my fingers and bank on Safari's Webkit rendering being the same as (or close enough to) Chrome in Windows and Chromium in Linux.

Might want to try the Windows version of Safari then. The JS engines in Chrome and Safari have some quirks between them and can behave differently in some scenarios, mostly things that JSLint would catch though.

[ Parent | on HN ]