Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

This seems like one of the most difficult solutions to the problem of switching to a browser that's not Chrome.

Not only are there other browsers like Firefox and Safari, but there are other Chromium-based browsers like Vivaldi and Opera.

I would have liked to read about some expected use-cases in the readme.



sort by: page size:

Yes, but if you're developing a cross-browser web app you can't expect your users to just not use Chrome.

I imagine they would not suggest moving to Chrome and instead would suggest moving to Firefox.

The article doesn't mention that it's not supported by other browsers. The two things (pushed by chrome / unsupported by others) are not consequential.

If you don't clearly state it and people start using the shiny new thing you're hindering the few alternative browsers out there.


I've already encountered a number of sites which appear to only work in Chrome, so arguably that ship has already sailed.

You know that Chrome is also planning a similar switch?

https://www.silicon.co.uk/workspace/browser/google-chrome-do...


Hi, while we're in beta we've been keeping things to Chrome only, as it lets us progress the product faster at this early stage. Specifically, this cuts out a lot of time spent on cross-browser testing and bug fixing and lets us focus on making sure we've got the right mix of features first.

It's the first time I've tried this approach myself, so it's a bit of an experiment, but I think it's been useful for this particular product. In saying that, we will be looking to offer wider browser support down the track, so stay tuned!


I think if enough people start actually using it other browsers will eventually implement support.

But for now, yeah, it has the downside of being Chrome(ium) only, which makes it far less useful than it could be.


So it's an another Chrome-based browser?

I hope this is something that non-Chrome Chromium-based browsers can omit from their builds.

As a basically-everything-except-Chrome user, I'm increasingly skeptical of excuses this. There's almost certainly some feature(s) that you've spent a lot of time on that provide less value than having the app working in Firefox and Safari.

As soon as I saw it was Chrome only, I closed out.


> Chrome already supports it.

Chrome supports it on windows.


I will sound harsh but I'm really curious so I have to ask:

- What was the thinking behind supporting only Chrome?

- For a tool that support cross-browser, wouldn't it expected that tool itself runs on multiple browsers?

- Is it really reasonable not to spend time to support multiple browsers and have let possible first adapters to have bad taste with the product ?


Possible in Firefox? Some people won't use Chrome.

Yeah, since Chrome doesn't support it, why would anyone use it? It's a chicken and egg problem

None apparently, with everyone bundling Chrome alongside their application, just not to bother with cross browser support.

Then they complain about ChromeOS mighty kingdom.


Chrome-Brave, Chrome-Chromium, Chrome-Vivaldi, Chrome-Edge and other Chrome clones are no go because it entrenches Google monopoly and bad practices. IceCat doesn't exist on Windows.

There is really close to no choice for browser alternatives.


Interesting that some Chromium-based browsers such as Opera and Android don't have this, while Chrome does.

Do you have a link to the documentation? And if there is no documentation for this many year old project why is that? Is using it in this manor different than the explicit goals of that code (which from what I understand is to only support chrome)

Chrome isn't the default on a lot of platforms.
next

Legal | privacy