I'm not sure if these are examples of dropped support, but I run into issues on websites that prevent me from doing something I really need to do:
- I could not unsubscribe from amazon prime yesterday using firefox. The page where you select the option was not rendering correctly. It was white for half the page vertically and the link/button I need to press was absent.
- about 6 months ago I could not sign into apple id on apples site on firefox. (or something like this, I forget exactly what I was trying to do).
- about 6 months ago I could not sign into nintendo's site to cancel a subscription.
So it's not super frequent, but every few months there are important things I can't do in firefox.
In my experience, problems like that are almost always a matter of cookie/cache sticking around when it shouldn't or plugin interference. The only sites I ever have have blocking trouble with in FF are shitty web interfaces for local device configuration, old automatically generated webpages like from MS Access or some other super old enterprise abomination. I worked on a team of web developers that generally developed using FF and then tested heavily in chrome-- everything from simple pages augmented with JS to complex SPAs-- and the differences were pretty minimal.
Yeah, with one exception it has always been dark reader that caused a page to render wrong in Firefox. The exception was some misconfigured oauth stuff that didn't work.
It's sad that there are specific browser-oriented websites (and development processes, obviously) instead of the standards-oriented ones.
(Sure, it's Chrome-oriented ones. We've seen similar previously with IE, by the way.)
We have standards for the web. Real ones: the docs, which are discussed and approved in the industry. We have them for a long time!
So if some browser does not comply to the standards, it's really not the best strategy to adapt a site to the browser instead of the standards.
We are in the situation when (effectively) one company (Google/Alphabet) can lead anything to the whole market, step by step (even when changes contradict the web standards that are in place). The market is not the browsers market, of coyrse, but the internet ads through browsers control, which brings the most money to Google. By projecting its power to each and any aspect of it, Google ensures the uninterrupted market control for years ahead. So Google will continue to do. In the long run, we need to rely on standards instead of specific browsers. Otherwise it's just the monopoly of Google and web tech "market" is just their own backyard. That will bite us all hard.
MikeSchurman|2 years ago
So it's not super frequent, but every few months there are important things I can't do in firefox.
chefandy|2 years ago
javajosh|2 years ago
It's a very clear trade-off in the hands of the user, which is correct.
galangalalgol|2 years ago
ptato|2 years ago
whitemary|2 years ago
https://honda.americanhondafinance.com
zx8080|2 years ago
(Sure, it's Chrome-oriented ones. We've seen similar previously with IE, by the way.)
We have standards for the web. Real ones: the docs, which are discussed and approved in the industry. We have them for a long time!
So if some browser does not comply to the standards, it's really not the best strategy to adapt a site to the browser instead of the standards.
We are in the situation when (effectively) one company (Google/Alphabet) can lead anything to the whole market, step by step (even when changes contradict the web standards that are in place). The market is not the browsers market, of coyrse, but the internet ads through browsers control, which brings the most money to Google. By projecting its power to each and any aspect of it, Google ensures the uninterrupted market control for years ahead. So Google will continue to do. In the long run, we need to rely on standards instead of specific browsers. Otherwise it's just the monopoly of Google and web tech "market" is just their own backyard. That will bite us all hard.
adwn|2 years ago
zawaideh|2 years ago