Time for Chrome to go
-
gggustafson wrote:
So I suggest that you fix it or throw it.
:thumbsup:
Cheers,
SMPRecent Tip/Tricks
Prevent a drag and drop text and Copy paste text in your textbox control
Find a column name within SQL databaseI hope chrome gonna maintain its standard as well step support for accepted standards too.. Freelance Web developer, growing with Outsourcing Nepal Cheap Hosting Services
-
I'm sorry, Google. The time has come to tell you that you need to withdraw Chrome. Although I love your search engine, I have grown to dislike your browser. Why? First, as a developer, I am again facing the "browser wars." Something that works well in Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari, requires an inordinate amount of time to get working in Chrome. And I've tried - tried very hard to make my HTML, CSS, and Javascript work across browsers. But usually I find myself Googling for Chrome solutions. Secondly, the Google Chrome development team is arrogant. I understand the frustration that the team may feel in trying to keep standards compliant, but to reject a large percentage of the development community requests for repair is arrogant and ill-conceived. Standards can be wrong! They are the creations of humans and are fraught with misinterpretations and possibly downright errors. I speak from personal experience as a former member of the X3J9 standards technical committee. Google, you have a looser on your hands. And I think that is true in both the marketplace (ranking just above Bing) as well as in the developer community. So I suggest that you fix it or throw it.
What sort of things are you doing that mess up in Chrome? I've never, ever had a problem with pages rendering in Chrome, whether it was a project at work or a project at home. Every once in a while I hear someone complain about pages rendering in Chrome but I have yet to come across a single problem. :confused:
-
I'm sorry, Google. The time has come to tell you that you need to withdraw Chrome. Although I love your search engine, I have grown to dislike your browser. Why? First, as a developer, I am again facing the "browser wars." Something that works well in Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari, requires an inordinate amount of time to get working in Chrome. And I've tried - tried very hard to make my HTML, CSS, and Javascript work across browsers. But usually I find myself Googling for Chrome solutions. Secondly, the Google Chrome development team is arrogant. I understand the frustration that the team may feel in trying to keep standards compliant, but to reject a large percentage of the development community requests for repair is arrogant and ill-conceived. Standards can be wrong! They are the creations of humans and are fraught with misinterpretations and possibly downright errors. I speak from personal experience as a former member of the X3J9 standards technical committee. Google, you have a looser on your hands. And I think that is true in both the marketplace (ranking just above Bing) as well as in the developer community. So I suggest that you fix it or throw it.
-
I'm sorry, Google. The time has come to tell you that you need to withdraw Chrome. Although I love your search engine, I have grown to dislike your browser. Why? First, as a developer, I am again facing the "browser wars." Something that works well in Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari, requires an inordinate amount of time to get working in Chrome. And I've tried - tried very hard to make my HTML, CSS, and Javascript work across browsers. But usually I find myself Googling for Chrome solutions. Secondly, the Google Chrome development team is arrogant. I understand the frustration that the team may feel in trying to keep standards compliant, but to reject a large percentage of the development community requests for repair is arrogant and ill-conceived. Standards can be wrong! They are the creations of humans and are fraught with misinterpretations and possibly downright errors. I speak from personal experience as a former member of the X3J9 standards technical committee. Google, you have a looser on your hands. And I think that is true in both the marketplace (ranking just above Bing) as well as in the developer community. So I suggest that you fix it or throw it.
Why? Pages I develop work fine in Chrome/FireFox/Opera, the one that causes me nightmares almost every day of my working life is IE because it resolutely objects to being standards compliant, it's developer tools are lacking when compared to Chrome Developer Tools and Firebug (sorry, I've not tried DragonFly) and it's just a massive pain in the posterior. I mean any browser which needs 4 different rendering modes just needs dragging out into the street and shooting (http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/ie8-mode.png[^]) Standards exist for a reason, they might not always be the popular choice but at least they work if you stick to them.
-
gggustafson wrote:
My spellchecker let me down.
Actually, it didn't. "looser" is a real word, so the spell-checker was correctly doing it's job. What we need in browsers is a lexical parser that can determine what you're trying to say and indicate where you might want to use a different word. This would be a boon to people that don't know when to use 0) "there", "their", and "they're" 1) "too", "to", and "two" 2) "it's" and "its" 3) "see", "sea", and "si". 4) "site" and "sight" 5) "dough" and "doe" 6) "so" and "sew" BTW, why does "dough" sound like "doe", but "tough" doesn't sound like "toe"? It's no wonder English is so hard to learn...
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997(Pedantry warning) You're mixing terms here. A lexical analyser does the lexical level: so the spell checker already does that. A parser (grammar analyser) checks that the usage is valid. We need grammatical analysis that is able to check for "close" lexemes (words).
-
:thumbsup: IE is the better option. I like it. Sometimes even firefox does not position correctly. ;P
I only read newbie introductory dummy books.
Its odd then that IE is the browser that consistently scores lower on standards compliance. I know there's a lot of MS developers here, but to try and pretend that because something doesn't render like IE it is broken is shocking. IE is the single browser that breaks web compatibility more than all others, although improving from IE9 onwards.
-
gggustafson wrote:
Google, you have a looser on your hands.
A looser what? I suspect you meant "loser".
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997 -
Chrome is my primary browser, so when I develop web apps then Chrome is the first one to be tested for layout - so it works exactly as planned. So far this has not been a issue, yes there have been differences that require different CSS classes for some parts, but these specific parts usually require slightly different code for all the 5 browsers you mentioned anyway. So while yes, it may be another browser to test in, it is just a small price to pay for a great browser. And before you say how bad Chrome is, then why is it the other browsers (namely IE) want to look like it so much? And lest we forget Chrome is currently winning the HTML 5 compliant race[^]
If my jokes make me laugh, then I have already succeeded with 100% of my target audience
-
What sort of things are you doing that mess up in Chrome? I've never, ever had a problem with pages rendering in Chrome, whether it was a project at work or a project at home. Every once in a while I hear someone complain about pages rendering in Chrome but I have yet to come across a single problem. :confused:
I have just completed an Article in which I dearly wanted to dynamically create a stylesheet in the Javascript function that initializes the web page. I followed the following track:
function create_stylesheet ( ) { var created = false; var head = document.getElementsByTagName ( 'head' ) [ 0 ]; if ( head ) { var style = document.createElement ( 'style' ); if ( style ) { var CSS_string = new String ( ); CSS_string = ".green_link," + ".revised_green_link" + "{" + "}" + ".abbreviation_alone" + "{" + "display:none;" + "}" + ".abbreviation_definition" + "{" + "display:inline;" + "}" + ... style.type = "text/css"; style.rel = "stylesheet"; if ( style.styleSheet ) // IE { style.styleSheet.cssText = CSS_string; } else // W3C { var CSS_text = document.createTextNode ( CSS_string ); style.appendChild ( CSS_text ); } head.appendChild ( style ); created = true; } } return ( created ); }
The two rules, abbreviation_alone and abbreviation_definition were then to be retrieved from the page stylesheets and pointed to by two Javascript global variables. Although Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari all performed as desired, Chrome did not. I had to revert to an external CSS file. The only reason for the dynamic stylesheet was to avoid having two files (.js and .css) included in the project. Please see DOM Style Sheets for further details. The Security in Depth: Local Web Pages describes a "feature" that has effectively crippled users of earlier Chrome versions. As a result, folks are suggesting a move away from Chrome. HTH Gus
-
I'm sorry, Google. The time has come to tell you that you need to withdraw Chrome. Although I love your search engine, I have grown to dislike your browser. Why? First, as a developer, I am again facing the "browser wars." Something that works well in Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari, requires an inordinate amount of time to get working in Chrome. And I've tried - tried very hard to make my HTML, CSS, and Javascript work across browsers. But usually I find myself Googling for Chrome solutions. Secondly, the Google Chrome development team is arrogant. I understand the frustration that the team may feel in trying to keep standards compliant, but to reject a large percentage of the development community requests for repair is arrogant and ill-conceived. Standards can be wrong! They are the creations of humans and are fraught with misinterpretations and possibly downright errors. I speak from personal experience as a former member of the X3J9 standards technical committee. Google, you have a looser on your hands. And I think that is true in both the marketplace (ranking just above Bing) as well as in the developer community. So I suggest that you fix it or throw it.
And that's why I've never even installed Chrome.
I'm not a player, I just code a lot! Alex Dresko
-
I think you have lost the point I was making. Firstly, it is not easier to use the same high quality English because it means you have to go slower and/or re-read your posts. My point isn't write completely different words and it is not a problem. I was simply talking about words that sound the same. Readers know what is intended when I use there, their or they're. They understand because they apply the context on the rest of the sentence, just the same as would be applied to determine which version to use. All my sounds like mistakes are automatic, therefore I do not forget how to use them properly because I don'y realise I am making the mistakes. I don't need to
If my jokes make me laugh, then I have already succeeded with 100% of my target audience
I think you're missing his point. You would not need to go slower and re-read your posts if you used the same high-quality English everywhere. It is because you have the two versions of typing that it requires extra effort on your part to type correctly the first time through. (Granted, mistakes will still be made, but the frequency should be a lot lower.)
-
Dalek Dave wrote:
musefan wrote:
Apple will certainly have a looser something when Google finish with them
Stool?
Pushed in?
The environment that nurtures creative programmers kills management and marketing types - and vice versa. - Orson Scott Card
its rare for me to have something which works on FF but not Chrome, but very common to have something which works in firefox and chrome but not IE. usually i find i develop something in FF (mostly because of firebug which is better than ie and chrome's built in debuggers) then i work on making it work in chrome (usually works right out of the box, sometimes i need a few minor tweaks because i used FF specific things) then IE (which is a nightmare that adds another month to any development project)
-
I'm sorry, Google. The time has come to tell you that you need to withdraw Chrome. Although I love your search engine, I have grown to dislike your browser. Why? First, as a developer, I am again facing the "browser wars." Something that works well in Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari, requires an inordinate amount of time to get working in Chrome. And I've tried - tried very hard to make my HTML, CSS, and Javascript work across browsers. But usually I find myself Googling for Chrome solutions. Secondly, the Google Chrome development team is arrogant. I understand the frustration that the team may feel in trying to keep standards compliant, but to reject a large percentage of the development community requests for repair is arrogant and ill-conceived. Standards can be wrong! They are the creations of humans and are fraught with misinterpretations and possibly downright errors. I speak from personal experience as a former member of the X3J9 standards technical committee. Google, you have a looser on your hands. And I think that is true in both the marketplace (ranking just above Bing) as well as in the developer community. So I suggest that you fix it or throw it.
-
I'm sorry, Google. The time has come to tell you that you need to withdraw Chrome. Although I love your search engine, I have grown to dislike your browser. Why? First, as a developer, I am again facing the "browser wars." Something that works well in Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari, requires an inordinate amount of time to get working in Chrome. And I've tried - tried very hard to make my HTML, CSS, and Javascript work across browsers. But usually I find myself Googling for Chrome solutions. Secondly, the Google Chrome development team is arrogant. I understand the frustration that the team may feel in trying to keep standards compliant, but to reject a large percentage of the development community requests for repair is arrogant and ill-conceived. Standards can be wrong! They are the creations of humans and are fraught with misinterpretations and possibly downright errors. I speak from personal experience as a former member of the X3J9 standards technical committee. Google, you have a looser on your hands. And I think that is true in both the marketplace (ranking just above Bing) as well as in the developer community. So I suggest that you fix it or throw it.
Why we have to be worried about the browser when there are amazings 3rd part components fully cross browser compatible? Since I use one of them, I only have to think about which browser would runs faster the apps, instead of think about an app could run in different browsers. :-D
-
I have just completed an Article in which I dearly wanted to dynamically create a stylesheet in the Javascript function that initializes the web page. I followed the following track:
function create_stylesheet ( ) { var created = false; var head = document.getElementsByTagName ( 'head' ) [ 0 ]; if ( head ) { var style = document.createElement ( 'style' ); if ( style ) { var CSS_string = new String ( ); CSS_string = ".green_link," + ".revised_green_link" + "{" + "}" + ".abbreviation_alone" + "{" + "display:none;" + "}" + ".abbreviation_definition" + "{" + "display:inline;" + "}" + ... style.type = "text/css"; style.rel = "stylesheet"; if ( style.styleSheet ) // IE { style.styleSheet.cssText = CSS_string; } else // W3C { var CSS_text = document.createTextNode ( CSS_string ); style.appendChild ( CSS_text ); } head.appendChild ( style ); created = true; } } return ( created ); }
The two rules, abbreviation_alone and abbreviation_definition were then to be retrieved from the page stylesheets and pointed to by two Javascript global variables. Although Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari all performed as desired, Chrome did not. I had to revert to an external CSS file. The only reason for the dynamic stylesheet was to avoid having two files (.js and .css) included in the project. Please see DOM Style Sheets for further details. The Security in Depth: Local Web Pages describes a "feature" that has effectively crippled users of earlier Chrome versions. As a result, folks are suggesting a move away from Chrome. HTH Gus
Have you consider use jQuery? It would make you easier the management of the DOM with js, and it's cross browser compatible :)
-
Have you consider use jQuery? It would make you easier the management of the DOM with js, and it's cross browser compatible :)
Although jQuery may be an answer, it's not the answer - fix Chrome!
-
I'm sorry, Google. The time has come to tell you that you need to withdraw Chrome. Although I love your search engine, I have grown to dislike your browser. Why? First, as a developer, I am again facing the "browser wars." Something that works well in Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari, requires an inordinate amount of time to get working in Chrome. And I've tried - tried very hard to make my HTML, CSS, and Javascript work across browsers. But usually I find myself Googling for Chrome solutions. Secondly, the Google Chrome development team is arrogant. I understand the frustration that the team may feel in trying to keep standards compliant, but to reject a large percentage of the development community requests for repair is arrogant and ill-conceived. Standards can be wrong! They are the creations of humans and are fraught with misinterpretations and possibly downright errors. I speak from personal experience as a former member of the X3J9 standards technical committee. Google, you have a looser on your hands. And I think that is true in both the marketplace (ranking just above Bing) as well as in the developer community. So I suggest that you fix it or throw it.
With all of the statistics and pedantic arguments, it feels like the point is being missed. Chrome is a pain for many of us, and it doesn't really feel like we should have to "tip-toe" through the css just to make things look right. Also, arrogance from the dev team is inexcusable, and merely adds to the stereotype that programmers are prima-donna crybabies. My personal opinion is that Chrome sucks, it thinks it knows best, and it really doesn't. I only have it installed because I have to support it to some degree. The call to google remains, fix it, isn't that why you have the luxury of being perpetually "beta"? Throw the web programmers a bone and support existing layouts before trying to forge ahead with an html 5 spec that is far from mature.
-
http://html5test.com/[^] According to this site, the latest Dev build of Chrome is more compliant than any other offical / dev build of any other browser ;P
-= Reelix =-
So? A browser can be 100% compliant and it won't mean a thing if the sites visited are not written to the standard and display like kaka because of it. And if you think anyone is going to spend the time and money to fix their websites to make Chrome happy... Sure, if you're starting from scratch creating a site, it's no big deal. But to redo everything you already have?
Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. My Mu[sic] My Films My Windows Programs, etc.
-
I guess I should have stated "Most US web pages...." In my experience developing US business and US Government sites since 2005, all sites were developed using Visual Studio and were targeted at IE (normally 7 or above). Of course, there may be exceptions, but in my experience, that's the fact.
I'm sorry, but most sites are not developed using VS/IIS. Apache has far more market share than IIS. My experience has been similar to yours, all my jobs since 2000 have been on the MS stack, but there are still more java jobs than C# (Dice survey)[^] and apache leads IIS in market share (http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2011/02/15/february-2011-web-server-survey.html[^]) I don't see how you can make that claim. And anecdotally, I know MS developers who develop using FF or Chrome because IE's developer tools were so late to the game and in my experience haven't been as good as the latter two. So given the apache statistics (the java link is a stretch I admit since that doesn't directly correlate with web pages) and the fact that not all IIS developers develop using IE I'd say that your claims are not factual at all.
Code responsibly: OWASP.org Mark's blog: www.developMENTALmadness.com Bill Cosby - "A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones that need the advice."
-
With all of the statistics and pedantic arguments, it feels like the point is being missed. Chrome is a pain for many of us, and it doesn't really feel like we should have to "tip-toe" through the css just to make things look right. Also, arrogance from the dev team is inexcusable, and merely adds to the stereotype that programmers are prima-donna crybabies. My personal opinion is that Chrome sucks, it thinks it knows best, and it really doesn't. I only have it installed because I have to support it to some degree. The call to google remains, fix it, isn't that why you have the luxury of being perpetually "beta"? Throw the web programmers a bone and support existing layouts before trying to forge ahead with an html 5 spec that is far from mature.
Maybe I should have written my comments using your comments. They are much more succinct and to the point. Thanks, Gus