They are serious... Ohyah..

Firefox is the new IE for them, ridiculous company.

Sometimes I wonder how devs make things work in only one browser well, I barely try and things just work in most browsers these days 🤔

I must be doing something wrong.

@C0D4 while talking about style, it could happen, sometimes some default CSS properties are different on different browser (if you not define them on chrome they could look different than not defined on Firefox). But at least 1 test should be done before release the product.
But how the hell you can make “scripts” incompatible?

That sounds like a bullshit answer. No company would specifically develop for one target browser, unless its for internal use in an organisation (even then its a shit and fucked up way to do things).

@JS96
Css not working correctly sure but JS I don’t understand unless your using chrome specific experimental maybe?

omgwtfbbq, I love Groupon now! ... jokes aside, the reasoning behind this if you guys dont know is because sometimes sites tend to use stuff like DRM software and such that are optimized for Chrome, like Widevine and others

@JS96 That’s what a reset/normalise is for.

I also remember a few years ago when WebRTC was being introduced for anyone here that has worked with that, you guys remember that firefox had some piss poor support at first if the damn thing even worked on their browser, also Mozilla liked a while ago to engage in Not Invented here™ stuff.
Now drop me some -- because Im not part of the Firefox fanclub like many seem ot be here

We found one situation using eval where chrome worked and ff did not.

It proved to be an undefined situation when trying to access objects that should not be reachable.

Chrome and ie returned null while firefox gave an exception.

And while the ff way caused an immediate problem I am quite sure that an unexpected null will cause a much more difficult to solve error later.

But that was a case where the specs only state that the object should not be available to protect against some js injection, nothing on how it should be prevented.

@legionfrontier that’s a fair point, but still that goes back to my first point. How can you actually make something single browser compatible these days besides old things for IE or using browser experiments.

Actually, some bank systems working only on Internet Explorer (IE) and you can NOT do any operation using any other browsers...

@Badr I don’t believe you, not in 2017, perhaps that was true in the early days of internet banking.

@helloworld I think @badr is talking about internal bank software... the tools bank employees use over their intranet. And I can vouch for that. Only works with IE.

@arminlinzbauer See my first comment...

How exactly can a website's scripts fail to load on Firefox? Optimised for Chrome? What does that mean? Is there something like that? Scripts which only run on Chrome?

Roasted.

Currently we have the issue that if the user has a shittone of data defined the conversion of this data takes forever in IE (20+ seconds). In chrome it only takes 1...

@Jop- Is an example of software that is only """optimized""" for one type of website sometimes, Im not fucking trying to defend them here at all, just pointing out that type of shit may be the reason, their site still usable in Memefox