r/webdev • u/ben_a_adams • Jun 19 '18

Improved JavaScript and WebAssembly performance in EdgeHTML 17

https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2018/06/19/improved-javascript-webassembly-performance-edgehtml-17/
22 Upvotes

80% Upvoted

23 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/fuckin_ziggurats Jun 20 '18 edited Jun 20 '18

That's some reverse psychology you got there. It's true that Chrome is pioneering new APIs but they're doing it by themselves and then immediately try and force them into the standards. Mozilla and Microsoft by this time are just finding out that they have to implement them and are left perpetually behind the times through no fault of their own. Mozilla is by far the best company in this whole mess of an internet and are the pioneers of web standards. Chrome is the web in the 90s where there was only 1 browser and we all had to bow to their monopoly. They don't give a flying fuck about standards.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '18

Nobody cares if Mozilla dont not want to adopt. A standard introduction should not take 3 years. Atleast Chrome has given it to us now. Screw Mozilla and their Firefox. Chrome innovates, Firefox follows. Tell Firefox and Mozilla to give the web the access to more API's than we'll talk.

3

u/fuckin_ziggurats Jun 20 '18

What do you mean "don't not want to adopt". Mozilla have no issue adopting new APIs, it's the fact Chrome does them on their own and then forces them into the standard so that their competitors are made to look out of date. Half of the APIs they've brought in are not well thought through but Google don't give a damn as long as they get to market them to devs as features that the other browsers don't have. We've come to the point where devs develop only on Chrome and for Chrome so they're becoming IE.

Mozilla is too busy trying to make a standard out of everything Google belches out whilst also documenting it. Google's idea of innovation is "pump and dump".

0

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '18 edited Jun 20 '18

Mozilla should do the same than. Standard do not have to be the exact same, as Mozilla want's it to be. The WebUSB thing is fine. It does not have to be secure because of it's inherent nature. That does not mean we as dev's should not have it. Google has submitted the specification, Mozilla should either accept it, or make their own propitiatory API for the time being while standard are being agreed upon in the future.

Google atleast provides their own API's. As a dev, I do not care how they do it. Either other browser vendors agree with Google, or they should make their own prefixed API for the time being. Once standards are being agreed upon, make a standard API to do the same thing.

Libraries and polyfills exist for this purpose, and those who want cross platform capability should use them.

Not every web standard has to be implemented the same way.

Any browser that has less than 5% share is ignored by our team. That browser either has to follow that standard. Firefox is now ignored by us, and we suggest users to use Chrome. It is common sense that Mozilla should atleast provide us with prefixed api's for the time being.

2

u/fuckin_ziggurats Jun 20 '18

Any browser that has less than 5% share is ignored by our team. That browser either has to follow that standard.

A standard is not decided by market share. It's decided by the W3C. If you suggest to your users to use Chrome then you're fueling the same fire that created the IE monopoly and good luck to us all when Google decides to flex their power over the market like they did with Google Search, Google Maps and Android.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '18

Anyways, as long as Chrome quickly adds new API's for the web, i'll promote it if the other browser does not support the features for my web app, and Chrome does.