this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2024
385 points (98.0% liked)

Firefox

17952 readers
253 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I know I can spoof my useragent, it's just ridiculous that such a massive app doesn't support an equally massive browser.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 85 points 5 months ago (5 children)

Try the user agent switcher add-on. The volume of times I've changed my agent to chrome and had a site work perfectly is infuriating.

[โ€“] tyler@programming.dev 26 points 5 months ago

They said they know about that, but itโ€™s ridiculous.

[โ€“] TastehWaffleZ@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago (6 children)

My problem was that CloudFlare refused to validate me when I have it enabled. I could have stock FF UA, but if my user agent switcher addon isn't disabled then I didn't get to use Crunchyroll and a few other sporadic sites.

load more comments (6 replies)
[โ€“] kionite231@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago

I still doesn't work even if I have changed user agent to chrome. I guess they have some other mechanism to find the browser.

load more comments (2 replies)
[โ€“] Etterra@lemmy.world 77 points 5 months ago

That's okay, I use Firefox and don't support Snapchat.

[โ€“] dog_@lemmy.world 49 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You should submit something to the webcompat website. It would help and they'll contact Snapchat and see what they can do.

[โ€“] Moonrise2473@feddit.it 11 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I doubt that a company with billions in revenue and thousands of coders is going to change mind after that. They exactly know how many people are getting the error and intentionally decided to implement it

[โ€“] otter@lemmy.ca 7 points 5 months ago

At the same time, the variables in that calculation might change over time. If it becomes easy enough for them to support it, or the costs of not supporting it get too high, they might change their minds.

Alternatively: wean yourself and your friends off of snapchat. In my part of the world, snapchat isn't popular anymore. It doesn't offer anything new and so barely anyone uses it.

[โ€“] dog_@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago (4 children)

If Snapchat does nothing, the Firefox team will change the user agent to trick the website into thinking it's something else.

load more comments (4 replies)
[โ€“] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 37 points 5 months ago (5 children)

I imagine the overlap of people who use Snapchat and people who use Firefox is pretty small, they probably see such a small amount of users with Firefox and they just decided not to support it.

[โ€“] kia@lemmy.ca 55 points 5 months ago (3 children)

In this day and age it's more work to explicitly not support a browser than it is to support it...

[โ€“] owenfromcanada@lemmy.world 17 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Sort of. I imagine the idea is they only need to test on Chromium-based browsers.

[โ€“] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 21 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

So often just swapping the user agent from Firefox to Chrome makes these sites work flawlessly. So they're putting in extra code to detect Firefox and serve a "we don't support your browser" page when they could just... not. And if a user complains about X, they could say we don't test on Firefox, try on Chrome.

[โ€“] owenfromcanada@lemmy.world 15 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, but by putting up the "we don't support this" banner, they won't have to deal with the complaints in the first place.

It's also possible they want people to use Chromium for telemetry or other data-collection reasons, not sure.

[โ€“] AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I wonder if it's possible that they're paid money by Google to not support Firefox?

load more comments (1 replies)
[โ€“] otter@lemmy.ca 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Another side I haven't seen mentioned

It might be easier to track users in Chrome. If even a few users open it in chrome instead of Firefox, that's a benefit for them

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[โ€“] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 9 points 5 months ago

I imagine the overlap of people who use Snapchat and people who use Firefox is pretty small

I argue it's 0, as it does not work.It's a joke, I know what you are meaning; you meant using both separately.


load more comments (3 replies)
[โ€“] Vincent@feddit.nl 32 points 5 months ago (2 children)

As @denschub@schub.social always emphasises: make sure to file a report at https://webcompat.com!

We ask everyone to file their reports, because all reports are really useful. Even if we don't respond to every single thing you report, it's a signal that we're processing in many different ways. (...) please, keep reporting all issues you see, because every single blip counts!

https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1de7bu1/comment/l8ghtr2/

never knew about this but I'm definitely going to start using it

[โ€“] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 29 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Fuck every form of this. Website: you deliver the document, and I decide if it works.

[โ€“] toastal@lemmy.ml 6 points 5 months ago (2 children)

You are supposed to do feature detection, not user agent detection since it is easily spoofed, isnโ€™t realiable, & doesnโ€™t account for literally all the alternative UAs that can support it. This is bad/lazy practice.

Fx doesnโ€™t always have all the features you need, but often it usually does & where I have seen this as being deployed is management saying it isnโ€™t worth the effort to support. Just having one person on the team running Fx is usually enough to catch the game-breaking bugs.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[โ€“] AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml 28 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I didn't even know that there was a Snapchat for web

load more comments (2 replies)
[โ€“] mr_satan@monyet.cc 21 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Snapchat has a web client? :o

[โ€“] potentiallynotfelix@lemdro.id 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

~~you can't snap, can only message~~ edit: im wrong you can snap now.

[โ€“] lseif@sopuli.xyz 5 points 5 months ago (2 children)

doesnt that kind of defeat the point ?

[โ€“] mr_satan@monyet.cc 7 points 5 months ago

Dunno never saw the appeal anyway

[โ€“] festnt@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

what even is the point of snapchat?

[โ€“] pyre@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

well it was sending nudes at first, before people realized that nothing really got erased

[โ€“] dorumon@lemmy.world 17 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It actually works just fine if you change your user agent. BTW Snapchat likes to break support for Firefox or re-enable support all the time. Don't know what their issue is but whatever.

load more comments (1 replies)
[โ€“] jbk@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 5 months ago (1 children)

doesn't it utilize some fancy camera APIs or whatever? last time I tried it on firefox with a spoofed user agent there were errors in the console

[โ€“] potentiallynotfelix@lemdro.id 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

yeah it just won't let me in on firefox at all, i had to use chr*mium ๐Ÿคฎ in a vm to get in

[โ€“] refalo@programming.dev 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

holy shit stop using snapchat

load more comments (1 replies)
[โ€“] yoz@aussie.zone 14 points 5 months ago

Well keep logging in via firefox. Send them a message

[โ€“] Fades@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago

โ€ฆ Snapchat for web??? Wtf

[โ€“] 0x2d@lemmy.ml 12 points 5 months ago (2 children)
[โ€“] Canadian_Cabinet@lemmy.ca 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

How can you tell? Looks like either i3 or sway, and that's coming from another sway user lol

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[โ€“] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 10 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

~~Can you get away with a change of the "User Agent"?~~ Edit (: Reading is hard. I only read the title and looked at the screenshot, without reading the body text of the post. So my question is answered. Sorry for wasting time.)

[โ€“] DarkSpectrum@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago

Just another feature imo

[โ€“] refalo@programming.dev 8 points 5 months ago (3 children)
[โ€“] Nobilmantis@feddit.it 7 points 5 months ago

On desktop (which is what the website in question is mostly loaded in) is 6,6%. Still isnt huge but definitely more significant.

[โ€“] neomachino@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Wow Firefox just barely beats out Samsung internet and opera???

I knew chrome had the majority but I didn't know even edge was above Firefox in market share.

There's like 30 people at the company I work for. 8 of them use Firefox only, about 10 of them use Firefox half of the time when chrome breaks or hogs every resource possible.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[โ€“] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I just want to say, this is less bad than websites requiring that you use internet explorer.

Those were dark days.

load more comments (2 replies)
[โ€“] Buildout@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Have I ever told you the story of Darth Microsoft Teams? Only Chrome and Edge. Some limited stuff works in Firefox, but it's flaky at best.

[โ€“] DacoTaco@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

As a firefox user... This.
Calls work now, but dont you dare share a screen in the call.

... But meetings work fine, even if you share a screen. Thanks microsoft.

[โ€“] mrvictory1@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

I can reach the login page on FF Mobile with user agent switcher + desktop mode

[โ€“] DeaDvey@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago

Use a user agent switcher, works for me.

load more comments
view more: next โ€บ