Related
I have read lots of blogs about how to get firebug lite to work on the iPad and from what i can gather it worked at some point but hasn't worked in awhile. I can't get it to work myself.
So my question is has anyone gotten firebug lite or something simliar to work on the iPad recently. With the iPad being so popular I find it amazing that there isn't a good solid developer tool out there for it yet. Especially because in my experience it doesn't render web pages as expected quite often and needs specific tweaking.
Just to stop some quick replies, I already know its a webkit browser and the issues that I have spotted only show up on the iphone and ipad, not in chrome or desktop safari. So i really would love a solution that is native to the ipad itself.
The suggestion below worked for me on an iPad3 running IOS6.
This technique is from http://www.jamesmacfie.com/2012/03/debug-your-html-css-on-the-ipadiphone/
Bookmark any site on iPad then edit the address. Paste in the following code:
javascript:(function(F,i,r,e,b,u,g,L,I,T,E.{if(F.getElementById(b))return;E=F[i+'NS']&&F.documentElement.namespaceURI;E=E?F[i+'NS'](E,'script'):F[i]('script');E[r]('id',b);E[r]('src',I+g+T);E[r](b,u);(F[e]('head')[0]||F[e]('body')[0]).appendChild(E);E=new%20Image;E[r]('src',I+L);})(document,'createElement','setAttribute','getElementsByTagName','FirebugLite','4','firebug-lite.js','releases/lite/latest/skin/xp/sprite.png','https://getfirebug.com/','#startOpened');
Try Remote Debugging with Chrome browser. However iOS 6 comes with built-in support for remote debugging - link.
I've installed this many times (and in the past month on the new iPad) and it has worked.
http://martinkool.com/post/13629963755/firebug-on-ipad-and-iphone
FYI: The directions might be a little outdated so don't give up. What you will be doing is creating a bookmark. Then you edit the link in the bookmark with the script on Martin's website. That also means Firebug Lite can be used on Internet Explorer...although I couldn't edit any elements after getting it up and running.
Good luck!
I found a few articles how clipboard works in IE and Firefox without flash, but I did not find any example regarding to Safari and Chrome. Could somebody share with me example or provide link?
Thank you!
I believe you want to manually set the system clipboard contents from JavaScript running in Safari or Chrome? Unfortunately, this capability was disabled a long while ago due to security reasons (previously, it had been possible to do that using execCommand(), but no more.) Sorry I cannot provide you a link to the respective WebKit bugzilla issue offhand. I'd be curious, though, if someone had a working solution.
I want to develop an browser extension/add-on which keeps track of the url value in the address bar. The add-on could either be downloaded to local file system or it could be integrated within the browser.
Also, i'm curious to know how browser extensions like Toolyo are programmed. (It's a demo link of the Toolyo tool. Sorry, I didn't find a better example than this whic is much similar to my requirement). Can someone please throw light on the languages/methods used to develop extensions that can work in multiple browsers.
Sorry for a generic (and vague, as well) question. I would really appreciate any answers/suggestions.
The extension APIs for browsers with add-on functionality (Chrome, Firefox, etc.) are all very different and much of the browser-chrome-privileged code must be rewritten for the different browsers. User scripts, are a good alternative add-on architecture, but they only have the privilege level of an in-page script (except for GreaseMonkey in Firefox).
Greasemonkey is inbuild in Chrome
And also had support for Flock, Safari and Opera
And its also coming for IE soon.
So writing Greasemonkey script is also good rather then writing code per browser vendor.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
From a web developer point of view, what changes are expected in the development arena when Google Chrome is released?
Are the developments powerful enough to make another revolution in the web? Will the way we see web programming change?
Or is it just another web browser?
I think this is just another web browser. The most impact I expect to be improved Javascript performance, and the usability perspective. The first will benefit developers, especially when using Google Gears. I think the users will benefit the most from an enhanced user experience, the safety features, and ease of use.
I can only hope other browser vendors (MS) will follow Mozilla and Google to create a faster Javascript implementation, since this is the only thing that can truly impact web development.
This is long-term positioning for Google; they are clearly trying to build a more stable application platform for web-based development. All of their changes (security, sandboxing, process isolation) are clearly intended to make the browser a better application for hosting complex apps.
This is what Microsoft was worried about with netscape, and why they broke antitrust rules to "cut off their air supply". It's going to be interesting to see how MS responds.
It's also interesting to see how the mozilla / firefox team deals with this- Google is pretty much funding firefox now, so it's going to be a potential conflict of interest for these folks down the road.
In a nutshell, things are going to get more complex, require more testing, and will (hopefully) force recalcitrant vendors like Microsoft to become more standards-compliant.
Considering most develops want to reach the larger audience, it just means one more place to test. Since it uses Webkit, hopefully it will render almost identical to Safari.
Integrated Gears may mean a solid place for apps to be developed though. If you have an internal system it may be nicer to just put Chrome on all the machines than building an app that runs locally.
I think the whole purpose or at least the emphasis of the release, as Kamiel said, is to provide better javascript performance. So many of Google's services rely on heavy javascript usage that this is a smart move by them. This should be good for everyone as IE and Firefox work to compete against Google every browser should get better at javascript.
Google Chrome looks promising. It is of course in an early beta so it's missing a lot of the things people would need or at least feel they need, like plugins, cross-machine synchronization of data (could be done with plugins), cross-platform support (ie. Linux and Mac versions).
So far it renders Gmail like a bat out of hell, so I'm going to pay very close attention to it.
Edit: In fact, these posts are done using it, and except for some minor issues like smaller font in input fields, it works as I expect it to. Fast, stable (already tested it with a javascript killer-page I have for some test applications).
This is just a natural for Google. This way they can control how well their apps work in a container on & off line. Expect more tools, potentially GUI designer type tools and an IDE for use with their cloud offerings as well as a mobile version of this for Android. It's most likely a lead in to Visual Google.
If they are smart they will have this container/browser perform other tasks like parsing content for a fresher Google cache and search results.
Personally, I'm hoping it has less of an impact on web developers and more of an impact on browser developers. Some of the features are really nice, and while the process-oriented approach to separation of tabs will probably make it hefty compared to other browsers, I like the ideas behind it.
My guess is it's going to have to spend a year or longer post-beta to make the kind of impact that Firefox has on web development.
I'd say that I see the improved Javascript engine being the major contribution as far as web applications go. And hopefully will cause a new look for the other browsers and possibly make Javascript implementations a bit more standardized.
Chiming in on this topic. If you have used Chrome, you'll notice a significant speed upgrade, especially on sites using js. I have found that it renders things almost EXACTLY the same as Safari (as you would assume), so I think this drastically minimizes the issue of having to develop on yet another browser.
I think the main thing Chrome does is to offer another (and even perhaps the best to date) alternative to IE. If people start using these, 'advanced' web browsers (man it's sad I have to say that), Microsoft will almost certainly have to step things up with IE9. IE8 seems to me to be more of the same from Microsoft who just can't seem to grasp the UI goodness and overall speed of Safari, Firefox and now Chrome. IE8 is freaking 360MB for godsakes. I think FF3 is like 90MB.
On a side note, has anyone checked out how fast Chrome opens? I found that very impressive.
#Lassevek - The first thing I did was check the js speeds on gmail and "bat out of hell" is precisely how I would describe it.
I just hope Chrome, Firefox and Safari can be temporary friends so they can overthrow IE. After that, it's fair game!
To be quite honest I've always hated Google, with a passion. But, I love their web browser Chrome. It just works. No need to download updates every 5 minutes, No stupid security bars that pop up every time you visit a website, and when I'm writing webpages - I don't even have to test my code anymore because it is standards-compliant, and it just works properly. My current website that I'm building now is about half-done, and it works and looks perfect in Google Chrome. Looks and works perfect in Opera, but as for Internet Explorer, it looks terrible, and it looks fairly good in Firefox.
I don't know. People should stop using Internet Explorer (in my opinion) because it just doesn't work the way it should. Have YOU ever noticed after downloading Internet Explorer 8 on WindwosXP that once you start visiting a few websites, the more sites you visit the longer it takes IE to open a new tab. Sometimes I'm left frustrated, almost sending me into a murderous-rage waiting for a new empty tab to open up! Blah!
As always, it depends on their implementation. If they decide to mess with the rendering engine, we could be looking at a whole new list of browser "quirks" which will mean WebDev's will be uber-pissed.
If they stay standards-compliant (which TBH, I expect they will) it could be a really good thing to heat up the competition.
Be interesting to see how the sandbox mode affects plugin compat, and of course, the tight Gears integration..
That fact that its OSS is a really good thing.. Since any of the above issues could easily be fixed with a patch as soon as the dev community get on to it. :)
Hopefully it will be standards compliant and erase a little midget of Internet Explorer's market share - Firefox has ease of use and plugins going for it, but "security" is something non-technical people can understand... which one could hope would make development easier.
That's assuming it stays standards compliant and innovates well, of course.
As long as there are the other web browsers (and I don't believe that they will die - which is good, because I don't want to see the internet in the hands of Google) it's just another web browser that you need to check compatibility with.
It's not good. More platforms leads to more testing, leads to more time fixing bugs, leads to less time having fun implementing new features, leads to anger, hate, suffering, etc.
I wonder whether plugins/addons will ever be a big focus for Chrome. It seems to be very much focused on providing a fast, clean environment that puts the focus on the web rather than the browser. I suspect that in order to keep it nimble and stable, they may keep the extension capabilities fairly limited (plus, they wouldn't want Adblock for Chrome, would they :-)
I wonder also, given Google's existing relationships with OEMs to include things like the Google Desktop on PCs sold, whether we might start to see Chrome pre-installed on computers. If that were the case, it might become more prevalent than other competitors to IE.
#bpapa
It's just another web browser that
very few people are going to use
because there are already 4 major
browsers out there that work just fine
for most people. It doesn't have the
extensions like Firefox,
Actually, it is pretty clear that it has a plugin architecture
it doesn't
have browser sync with an iPhone like
Safari, it doesn't come with your
computer like IE, and it doesn't...
well I don't know what Opera does that
makes it stand out but I don't think
Chrome has it.
"I don't know what Opera has, but this piece of software that I've never touched clearly doesn't have it"... what??
Another reason why I don't see it
taking off - since it's not on OS X a
lot of tech people aren't going to be
using it.
Did you miss the part where the Linux and OS X distros are coming right behind Windows?
Is anyone writing applications specifically to take advantage of google chrome?
Are there any enterprise users who are considering using it as the standard browser?
Yes, I have started to pay very good attention to Google Chrome for my applications. Recent analytics show that between 6%-15% of my users are accessing my applications (varies between 6 to 15 in different applications) on Chrome. And, this number looks on an upward trend.
Thus, I can't really ignore it for testing right now.
As far as taking it as a standard goes, thats a long way off. I still have to test for IE6! :( Though, we have been planning to start using features like Gears (inbuilt in Chrome - downloadable elsewhere) once Chrome crosses the 25% mark. Thats when I believe that we will be looking at Chrome to be our preferred browser. I hope that we have Chrome 1.0+ by then! ;)
I switched to Chrome and haven't looked back except for the occasional site which doesn't work properly, forcing me to load it in Firefox. All my existing web applications work fine on it, and I'm using it for primary testing on my current development project.
I'm not actually targeting chrome, but I have added chrome to my browsers to test sites on. I've found some odd quirks in this product where some plugins cause the browser to hang, or run really slow in some environments, but they are still in beta in active development. But I definately now make sure sites I work on render well in chrome, as well as firefox, latest versions of IE, safari, Konquerer and opera. I usually check out how it looks on lynx as well, that helps me catch "un-alternated text" in images. Yeah, I know that isn't a word, but some people will understand what I'm saying.
Because chrome uses the webkit to render HTML, you can be assured if it works in safari, it'll work under chrome, however it's rendering engine isn't up to scratch quite yet. I think writing applications that take advantage of it is similar to writing iPhone applications, remember chrome is expected to be adopted by android to make it similar to iPhone. That way it pretty much takes advantage of all those iPhone apps.
Would I install it as the browser of choice? not yet - but i'll certainly work on valid web pages that will render across all browsers.
One of our major customers has outlawed Chrome because it installs on the C drive without asking. They deploy a standard image with a small C drive and large D drive so they can easily re-clone the system part of the image on C without destroying the client's personal files on D. Most software allows you to choose the install directory. Anything that violates this is disallowed, and they're a big enough company to have some weight with most vendors.
We have enough headaches trying to support
Firefox
Two versions of IE which have their own iffy bugs
Safari
I'm not sure why we continue to support Safari. Most of our users (corporate) use IE6 or IE7. We try to make sure that things work in both of those.
Maybe not for programming purposes but Chrome w/ Google Reader makes for the most powerful RSS reader. Can handle up to 1500 feeds w/ performance still ok, managing subscriptions still functioning.
I'm using it on my work machine, but that's about it. It's been stable for me, and I like the barebones UI. I'll still switch to Firefox for the web developer extensions however.
I'm liking some of GoogleChrome- the Start page with your 9 most recent is the winner for me. The interface takes a little getting used to, but the speed is impressive, especially with Gmail.
However, it glitches with Java, which rules it out for serious work at the moment. I use FireFox mostly and have Chrome for the "other" websites at work.
I'm considering using GWT on an intranet project and considering suggesting to the users that use Chrome to take advantage of the enhanced Javascript performance. Any AJAX-heavy app would be a great candidate to target Chrome.
At my company, we're not targeting it, but we're definitely paying attention to it. My boss is using it as his primary browser, and I have implemented browser detection for it in our scripts in case we ever to need to target it for some reason.
Chrome has the .png opacity bug where the transparent parts of the .png are a solid color if you try to transition the opacity from 0 to 1. In IE7 the opaque parts are black, and in Chrome, they are white. Today, I decided to go ahead and account for this bug in my JavaScript. I don't really test sites on Chrome that often, but I am actually using it for almost all of my browsing.
I will target Chrome as soon as a stable Linux and OSX client is available.
Targeting Chrome/Chromium right now, I think is like targeting Konqueror web browser. It will get popular, but you should wait to a more stable beta, and/or some Linux and OS X client.
My website statistics shows 3.xx % visitors using Chrome which arrived just few weeks back. And Opera is only 4.xx % which has been around for several years.
Easily you can see that rate at which Chrome is picking up.
You can see how easily Google takes over all areas of your computing world and personal world too.
Since Chrome uses Webkit, it has the same rendering engine and DOM support as Safari (not necessarily the same revision of Webkit though). By testing in Safari, you can generally get by without worrying about Chrome. Any differences you find are probably just bugs that you should file on instead of work around.
However, because Chrome uses a different JS engine, there may be a few incompatibilities with Safari. So, if you're doing anything with JS, you might as well fire up Chrome and see if there's anything obviously wrong.
Generally though, you don't target browsers, you target rendering engines (with their associated DOM support and JS engines).
I am using Google Chrome, so far all the web apps I have work fine in it with no modifications.
No.
Why help Google further build an evil empire? In this particular case it is so obvious that they do not care about users but only obsessed with gathering usage info.
It's not any major player yet