Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mfer 844 days ago
Consider what support mean. It doesn't mean "works with".

Supported likely means that they test with and design for. It also means that if a customer is using that browser and there's a problem (e.g., seeing their bill online) they will fix the problem if it's just in that browser.

Firefox is 3.3% of users [1]. When it comes to testing features with (including QA validation) and working around browser specific bugs, what % of usage should drive that?

[1] https://gs.statcounter.com/

4 comments

This is a red herring.

If we work to usage, we allow the browser market to be swallowed by one proprietary player.

That manufacturer can then call ALL the shots.

Engineers and development have a duty to work according to open standards to prevent this from happening.

Plenty of engineers are responsible for having Chrome where it is now, and keep going at it, by shipping Chrome all over the place as Electron.

Hardly thinking about their supposed duties.

If Mozilla doesn't care about recapturing market share, why should we? Someone should just fork Gecko and make a new browser at this point.
Well summarized. It's amusing to read Brave on their unsupported list, since it's just Chromium with privacy features built-in. They wouldn't be able to tell, non-invasively, since it self-reports as the most boring, common version of Chrome that it can. Actually, privacy features that break sites by default if you don't know how to adjust them. Works, guaranteed by our developers and customer support folks, should be a different bar.

So long as they don't active sniff and reject non-approved browsers.

Microsoft Edge is now using the same rendering engine as Chrome too
Microsoft Edge isn't on their list of unsupported browsers.
3% isn't that low when you consider how many people there are.
This.

I wish we didn't only measure (and pay for) five nines+ uptime, but also support. Remember how annoyingly often just 99.9% uptime means you're out of business?

Oh, I agree, but some corporate spreadsheet jockey may not think that 3% sounds like much.
Is that a tracker that works even in the presence of AdBlock et al? If not, it's going to significantly undercount Firefox.
I have a theory that Firefox gets under reported in a lot of stats because its users are more likely to use Adblockers. Statcounter for example is going to be blocked by most Adblockers; stats based on server logs will be more accurate.
It's not just client side trackers that get blocked -- any server side tracker that only counts specific resources being requested is going to be blocked by Adblockers too.