Because in web development there are compatibility tables of what features work with which browser. If a developer has used a feature poorly supported, they either haven’t done their homework, or intentionally made that call.
In web development, most reputable Front End Devs would not choose bleeding edge, barely supported features even if the temptation was there because the user comes first. Generally, you wait until it has been adopted by the main browsers (chrome, safari, ff).
I didn’t drink or have sex for a big proportion of my life (until 16). Was quite happy to ditch old habits.
The thing is, chrome was probably built for spying.
Never noticed an issue and if websites using only chrome supported features, it’s an issue with the website, not the browser.
Blender or GIMP? Idk.
Unit tests, yes, but you don’t only do unit tests. Integration and e2e tests still exist.
I’d rotate it so it starts to grow to the light and give it a bit more balance.
I’d personally try it outside and see his it gets on with the drainage holes, can always bring back in if it gets sad.
Was there even tests?
I’m not sure what’s with your first sentence. Everything else you said agreed with the point I was making…
Real mugs.
Henry Ford invented breaks to extract more out of the peasant Labour.
The fact we’re years later and cognitively demanding jobs don’t support this well show how amateur managers are and his spineless devs that enable them are.
I know enough, little one. Maybe you do.
You’re insufferable. Surprised you still ain’t on reddit. That’s where the corporate bootlickers are. I guess Lemmy.world is the next best place.
No. It’s when bugs and crashes happen, and trying to identify how. Such as stack traces for example, or memory usage when an app keels over.
I’m not here to market FF, I’m here trying to counter balance the Firefox haters that spend so much hate to trash the only real legitimate chance we have of Google not dictating web standards. I don’t know why so many people shill for billion dollar companies. Do they love Google that much, or are they simply useful idiots?
It’s open source. You’re assuming this is telemetry without having an idea. Could be diagnostics, could be pocket, could be sync check.
Without evidence, sounds like a load of FUD.
It’s ironic you call me dense.
Of course not. It’s an internet browser. What point are you trying to make?
What are you stating cannot be turned off?
This sounds baseless without any evidence.
And it can be turned off.
This is the bargaining stage of the five stages of grief.
Maybe it’s Stockholm Syndrome.
Firefox works for nearly everything. The only stuff that doesn’t work for me is Xitter embeds, and this is a gift that keeps on giving.
Not perfectly optimised is fine, but non-functional isn’t acceptable. I’ve never seen a quirk personally, and quirks aren’t a good reason to help maintain Google’s monopoly on web standards.
You may say less than 5% is fine, but it could be the margins in a low margin industry. 2% could be 40% of the profit.
I haven’t seen a team operate where a senior isn’t checking it.
Usually the bleeding edge stuff is used by small companies trying to establish themselves because they have nothing to lose and no reputation to protect.
Plus, when you got Browser Stack, you catch a lot of problems like this.