2019-07-31
787
#chrome#web design#what's new
Facundo Corradini
4338
Jul 31, 2019 ⋅ 2 min read

New in Chrome 76: The frosted glass effect with backdrop-filter

Facundo Corradini Frontend developer, CSS specialist, best cebador de mates ever.

Recent posts:

Building AI apps that remember: Mem0 vs Supermemory

Compare mem0 and Supermemory to learn how modern AI apps manage long-term memory beyond RAG and stateless LLM chats.

Kapeel Kokane
Jan 26, 2026 ⋅ 9 min read
how to animate svg with css

How to animate SVG with CSS: Tutorial with examples

Animate SVGs with pure CSS: hamburger toggles, spinners, line-draw effects, and new scroll-driven animations, plus tooling tips and fallbacks.

Hope Armstrong
Jan 23, 2026 ⋅ 16 min read
a dev’s guide to Tailwind CSS in 2026

A dev’s guide to Tailwind CSS in 2026

Tailwind CSS is more popular than ever. This guide breaks down v4’s biggest changes, real-world usage, migration paths, and where it fits in the AI future.

Oscar Jite-Orimiono
Jan 23, 2026 ⋅ 12 min read
react animation libraries 2026

Comparing the best React animation libraries for 2026

Evaluate the top React animation libraries for ease of use, developer experience, and bundle size.

Fortune Ikechi
Jan 22, 2026 ⋅ 21 min read
View all posts

2 Replies to "New in Chrome 76: The frosted glass effect with backdrop-filter"

  1. Instead of writing

    @supports (backdrop-filter: none) {

    backdrop-filter: blur(8px);

    }

    one should be writing

    @supports (backdrop-filter: blur(8px)) {

    backdrop-filter: blur(8px);

    }

    because you’re not in fact interested if the browser supports “backdrop-filter: none”, right?

    This is especially important once you realize that the same property (e.g. display) supports values with wide range of support by different UAs.

  2. Hi Mikko,

    The idea is to query the support of the property instead of the value. Querying for “backdrop-filter: none” will throw the same true / false result as querying for “backdrop-filter: 8px”, but allow us to change the value in a single place if for whatever reason we decide to do that in the future.

    It might not be such a dramatic impact in the small scale, but going with a query for property+value can lead to issues as the codebase grows and we start to have a lot of repetition and forgotten queries that doesn’t really make sense.

    Your point is certainly valid for properties such as display or position, but for most others, querying for property instead of property+value is a better approach in my opinion.

Leave a Reply

Hey there, want to help make our blog better?

Join LogRocket’s Content Advisory Board. You’ll help inform the type of content we create and get access to exclusive meetups, social accreditation, and swag.

Sign up now