[latexr]

So first they didn’t do it because of the maintenance burden, and now it’s because the feature sucks and shouldn’t exist. If you’re going to keep ignoring my points and making up new things while moving the goalposts, I don’t see the point in having a discussion.

I’ll say it again:

> Plugging your ears and coming up with excuses doesn’t move the needle. Accept it or don’t, it makes no difference.

[array_key_first]

It's both, obviously. You asked for one reason, I gave it to you, you didn't like it, so I gave another reason. These are all speculative, of course, and just my opinion.

> If you’re going to keep ignoring my points and making up new things while moving the goalposts, I don’t see the point in having a discussion.

I'm not ignoring anything - it's called disagreeing with your points. Because I do disagree with them, to an extent.

I agree that Firefox is missing features. I DO NOT agree that this is generally, keyword generally, a bad thing.

Also, Firefox is not even the most behind browser. Uh, that would be Safari, and it's not even close.

If you don't support Firefox but you DO support Safari, then:

1. You must not give a flying fuck about web standards or features, as Safari is missing the most of both OR

2. You squarely target primarily Apple users so you have no choice but to put up with Apple's subpar software, i.e. you're Stockholm'd in

For option 2, the only way to stop that is to do what I said - stop playing Apple's games and don't target their bespoke barely-functional bullshit.

Also, let me just say: there is absolutely no shame in number 2. You have to make your money. Just a couple years ago, I was maintaining an application that still targeted IE 6. Yes, really. Sometimes you have to do what you have to do to reach the users where they are.

[latexr]

Everything about your answer is wrong and full of assumptions.

> You asked for one reason

No, I did not. I didn’t ask for any reason. I don’t need one, the result is the same.

> I gave it to you

No, you did not, you gave speculation. Which changes nothing.

> you didn't like it

I couldn’t care less about your speculation. I specifically said I don’t care. The only thing I don’t like is how you’re just making up reasons based on what you want and like, as if your tastes and needs are all that matters, instead of what’s the truth for Firefox development.

> I'm not ignoring anything

You moved the goal post without addressing my initial reply to your response, which poked a direct hole in your speculation:

> Then they should just say so and close the open issues, instead of letting them linger for literal decades and have people waste time on them then ignore them. That’s just bad stewardship.

You continue:

> it's called disagreeing with your points.

It makes no sense to disagree with a personal opinion! My reasons are my own. It’s like if you said you disagreed with me for saying I don’t like chocolate. Your opinion is irrelevant to someone else’s taste or needs.

And then the rest is just more speculation. Again, Firefox is the only major browser not supporting AppleScript. And just so you know, Chromium browsers typically support it better than Safari.