Comments by "p11" (@porky1118) on "Chrome, Edge, and Firefox Are About To Break Some Websites." video.

  1. You could still just use older versions or other browsers to see these websites.
    11
  2.  @avppr3451  Brave is chromium without google spyware, faster and more convenient and with a shitcoin builtin. And Defiant browser is brave without that shitcoin builtin and dissenter installed by default.
    7
  3.  @belstar1128  Did you even watch the video until the reason is explained, why older websites don't work anymore? Something like this also came to my mind when reading the title, but the issue is just a stupid technical one, no planned deprecation of features.
    5
  4.  @kisaragifan123  It's possible to have multiple browsers installed. I use Falkon as an alternatively to Firefox and it works good enough for most websites.
    3
  5.  @mskiptr  It doesn't matter if it makes sense. I just think, it's likely the reason, why they always update the major version number.
    2
  6. Ah, auch kein Fan der Staatsmedien? :)
    1
  7. So it's just a technical problem :o
    1
  8. I guess it's because of semantic versioning. Everyone tried to switch to semantic versioning in the recent years. Semantic versioning is a versioning scheme, which has exactly three digits, the major version, the minor version and the patch version. The patch version is just increased for small patches which don't really change anything, mostly bug fixes, the minor version is used for new features, which don't break anything, and the major version is used for breaking changes. In general, it's not a bad idea to use such a versioning scheme, I think, but I also think, projects shouldn't switch versioning scheme if they already have some versioning scheme. For example LLVM had versions starting with 3 (3.4, 3.5, 3.6...) for years now, and a few years ago they switched to semantic versioning, and since they break something (most users probably won't even notice anything), they have to increase the major version with every new release (twice a year). The current LLVM version is 13. Especially in a case like this, where basically every version introduces breaking changes, it doesn't sound like a good idea to use semantic versioning to begin with, even if you start it as a new project, but they had to follow this trend of semantic versioning, just because everyone is doing it. In this case, I'd stick with the core idea of semantic versioning, but allow small breaking changes inbetween minor versions, so huge changes are still recognizable as huge changes. And I don't know much about browser development, but I'm pretty sure, the same has been happening to browsers. I wouldn't blame this problem on the browsers, though. Websites should be prepared for every possible version number anyway...
    1