[Tyrannosaurs]

The last paragraph:

"However, we still haven't figured out exactly why Google is blocking Inbox on Firefox. That the application is not working, seems to not be fully true. With some more man hours, it seems trivial for Google to get the application to run in Firefox to. Maybe too much Chrome specific technologies or just a try to limit the usage of Firefox on the web?"

Is odd as he's spent the rest of the article pointing out that there are bits of missing functionality (such as transitions), he's disabled CSP which worries him and that there are errors showing, and that's just what a relatively brief review found. Given what is listed it seems pretty straight forward to me that in it's current form it shouldn't be supported on Firefox.

[diggan]

What I know, given the right vendor prefixes, transitions works mostly the same way on both platforms. I don't think it makes sense to only have transitions for one browser when it's trivial to support other browsers as well. The CSP issue I honestly don't know why that's so but I'm fairly sure they should be able to follow CSP on their own domains, just like the rest of the applications on the web have to do.

To me, it feels like Google has an unfair advantage on doing web applications when they can do stuff on their own domains that no one else can, unless they also develop their own browser with unique features.

[couchand]

To me, it feels like Google has an unfair advantage on doing web applications when they can do stuff on their own domains that no one else can, unless they also develop their own browser with unique features.

And legally dangerous, too. It's as if they forgot entirely about the half a billion Euros Microsoft shelled out for doing precisely the same thing.

[silverwind]

Looking at the CSP error, it looks like there's a blob being blocked, not some XSS from Google's domains.

My guess at the cause would be an CSP implementation difference.

[couchand]

Animations are not important enough to justify. Not wanting to serve all your content from a single domain is not enough to justify. These are excuses, not technical reasons.

[Tyrannosaurs]

I disagree.

They're short cuts you might take to get a product out and get early feedback, the same sort of shortcuts most of us have taken when pushed to release something sooner. This is a product in Beta, not the finish article.

Even if everything work in theory just dropping multi-browser testing would save time. If their aim is a beta product for early user testing, I really don't think what they've done is unreasonable.