Google Chrome ships a default, hidden extension that allows code on *.google.com access to private APIs, including your current CPU usage
Google Chrome ships a default, hidden extension that allows code on *.google.com access to private APIs, including your current CPU usage
It turns out Google Chrome ships a default, hidden extension that allows code on `*.google.com` access to private APIs, including your current CPU usage You can test it out by pasting the following into your Chrome DevTools console on any Google page: chrome.runtime.sendMessage( "nkeimho...
You're viewing a single thread.
Just use Firefox
shrug
My biggest issue is video streaming on older computers. I have an old laptop I use casually for video playing in the background, and Webkit browsers like Edge definitely load YouTube with far less stuttering. I'm still trying to find good alternatives - lately even changing the user agent doesn't seem to make it faster.
This to me sounds like an issue with hardware video decoding not working right and it falling back to software decoding on the CPU.
there's a portion of the internet that just doesn't work in Firefox because the company pays only $2 million a year for developers and they can't do it
I mean web developers not the Firefox developers stop down voting me
I use Firefox and Linux and I don't drive a car how about that
please give me $40
As part of our company's security policy, our IT admin disallows firefox to be installed in dev machine.
our engineers cannot test their work in firefox.
LOL
That's wack.
I think our company does something similar (Chrome by default, need to ask IT for anything else), but our department just said, "we need Macs to do our work, you have no power here..." I hate macOS, but I hate stupid IT policies more.
This nonsense is part of why I prefer to work for smaller companies.
Whenever I face an issue in our company portal and I ask the IT team, their response is "Can you please try on Google Chrome?"
🤦🏽🤦🏽
there's no quality control with a test suite of browsers and versions running in virtual machines?
Due to security policy, we cannot run vm. Oh, btw, we do android development too. I guess they didn't know android studio runs a vm. So that is ok
I've yet to find more than a handful of pages that have had issues, and most were fairly poorly coded to begin with
I found one the other day but I don't even recall what it was. I almost never have any problems.