this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2024
412 points (93.6% liked)
Technology
59635 readers
2858 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
But what, practically, is the difference? If more and more websites use shit that only works in Chrome or Chromium based browsers, the effect is the same. The web doesn't work as well for Firefox users.
One is a browser following web standards and the other is a shitty company adding non-standards based development features intended to lock users into there browsers.
It was shitty when Microsoft did the non-standard features to lock in with Internet Exporer and it is shitty that Chrome does it now.
It's shitty for sure, and I definitely think Chrome needs to die, or at least have better competition. Sadly, not enough users are using non-chromium browsers, that they don't see a problem with using chrome only features. It sucks, and it's going to lead (is leading) to the further enshitification of the web. I'm doing my part by using Firefox, and any web application I develop is guaranteed to work in Firefox.
100% this. People loose the wood for the trees with these kinds of things. If something doesn't work in one browser but does in another then 99% of people are not technical enough to understand or care why not. They just know it doesn't work. That makes it a problem for Firefox. Whether it's by their own making or not.