For an individual user, what is the point of browser choice when developers stop testing in Safari and instead say "if it doesn't work, install Chrome". That's not giving the consumer a choice.

▲

doginasuit an hour ago | parent | next [-]

The Healthy Web in 2026: Some users can't have a choice so other users can.

▲

edoceo an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

There are three choices: use Safari for sub-par site experience, use Chrome for compatible, don't use the site.

▲

simondotau an hour ago | parent [-]

Yes, except the Safari experience is only sub-par because the developer chose to use some bleeding edge feature that doesn't fall back gracefully, or is relying on a Chrome bug, or a lax feature implementation in Chrome.

There's no reason for Safari to have a sub-par experience except for the laziness of some web developers.

▲

doginasuit 31 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> There's no reason for Safari to have a sub-par experience except for the laziness of some web developers.

How about a browser with a captive userbase that has less incentive to stay up to date with web standards?

Your argument is that we should expect developers to target/test their app on many different browsers where any random CSS property behaves differently. They will have to buy a device just for this purpose. Because it is obviously developers who should have to pick up the slack here, not Apple.

▲

crab_galaxy an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

100vh, PWAs, and full screen support that isn’t absolute garbage aren’t exactly bleeding edge features

	▲	simondotau 40 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Being able to block trackers and not use ridiculous amounts of RAM aren't exactly bleeding edge features either