New ask Hacker News story: Ask HN: Why do browsers include developer tools?
Ask HN: Why do browsers include developer tools?
4 by vghaisas | 2 comments on Hacker News.
This is a question a friend asked me a few years ago and I never found a satisfactory answer. As a developer, sure, I love the fact that browsers have developer tools included. But how did we get to this state? There must be a story here. The vast majority of browser users aren't going to use the developer tools and aren't even expected to. And it's not like a toolbox included with some furniture because you don't expect the average user to "fix" a web page or build one themselves. Is it just that someone did it and then everyone else thought they might as well do it too? I remember Firebug being more useful than whatever Firefox included, but it still included something iirc? Is it that it's just easier to keep them bundled in than to offer something separately and then deal with add-on problems (permissions, distribution, etc.) Is it that binary size isn't a big deal, so why not just keep it included? Even Firefox and Chrome on Android have a "view-source:" option, complete with syntax highlighting (for HTML at least). Would love to hear what information HN has (or can find)!
4 by vghaisas | 2 comments on Hacker News.
This is a question a friend asked me a few years ago and I never found a satisfactory answer. As a developer, sure, I love the fact that browsers have developer tools included. But how did we get to this state? There must be a story here. The vast majority of browser users aren't going to use the developer tools and aren't even expected to. And it's not like a toolbox included with some furniture because you don't expect the average user to "fix" a web page or build one themselves. Is it just that someone did it and then everyone else thought they might as well do it too? I remember Firebug being more useful than whatever Firefox included, but it still included something iirc? Is it that it's just easier to keep them bundled in than to offer something separately and then deal with add-on problems (permissions, distribution, etc.) Is it that binary size isn't a big deal, so why not just keep it included? Even Firefox and Chrome on Android have a "view-source:" option, complete with syntax highlighting (for HTML at least). Would love to hear what information HN has (or can find)!
Comments
Post a Comment