643
submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by yoz@aussie.zone to c/mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 175 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

As if they needed to check for ""compatibility"" at all - just let the users try their makeshift coded-in-a-weekend browsers, or their 2008 version of IE.

The better question is why some websites even bother checking for the browser when the vast majority of people uses mainstream options that follow web standards and self-update.

Checking the browser version kind of made sense 15 years ago when updating the browser depended on the user's awareness and willingness of doing so, and the lack of standards across browsers was blatant. Nowadays that's pretty much useless. The maximum these sites should be doing is displaying a banner letting the user know their browser might be incompatible (because it's likely not in a way that prevents usage), then fuck off.

[-] RegalPotoo@lemmy.world 85 points 9 months ago

I had a client once who used to be obsessed with this. By his logic, if a potential customer visited the website and had a bad experience because the site didn't work properly in their browser, they'd think the company was unprofessional and wouldn't come into the store and we'd lose them as a customer forever. Analytics showed that 99+% of people would visit in one of the big three, and he wouldn't pay for someone to test the site on the less popular browsers, instead he insisted on fingerprinting logic that broke all the time and probably caused more bounces than any possible rendering quirks from niche mobile browsers would have caused

[-] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 97 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

It's ridiculous some people even consider blocking a browser completely and having a near 100% chance of turning away the customer that uses it instead of just letting the user browse and have a significant chance of nothing bad happening.

People are not going to change browsers to visit this website unless they absolutely have to - in which case they'll hate this company for it.

[-] BetterDev@programming.dev 31 points 9 months ago

Oh my god, you get it. Thank you for your continued existence. Keep going!

[-] dan@upvote.au 21 points 9 months ago

Checking the browser almost never makes sense these days.

Sites should be using feature detection instead. Rather than checking the browser version, instead check if the browser supports the features they require.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Pacmanlives@lemmy.world 16 points 9 months ago

Time for OP to install a User Agent Switcher plugin

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Emerald@lemmy.world 98 points 9 months ago

"We're a very inaccessible and hostile webpage. Turn back now."

[-] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 18 points 9 months ago

Abandon all hope ye who enter here

[-] Zacryon@feddit.de 95 points 9 months ago

If it's a website which only works with a specific browser, it's a shitsite.

[-] LazaroFilm@lemmy.world 87 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Companies like chrome because it’s the most used browser. So if they develop for it, and only for it without caring of compatibility on others, then it’s cheaper. And since they don’t want you to use another browser and complain that their site is broken, the just block you.

[-] invertedspear@lemm.ee 41 points 9 months ago

Which is kind of dumb, because if you target Firefox you are writing to a standards compliant browser that means your code should work on all other browsers. Chrome came when IE still owned the internet and their goal was to offer a faster browser that still worked, so now chrome has a bunch of hacks coded into it.

[-] sysadmin420@lemmy.world 23 points 9 months ago

Sometimes the president or CEO just doesn't give a shit even when devs tell them otherwise.

Devs don't always get a lot of choice when the upper management thinks chrome is better

It's why baracuda only really advertised in airport terminals everywhere.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Arfman@aussie.zone 29 points 9 months ago

Shouldn't they just commit to follow the web standards? Most modern browsers strive to follow those standards.

[-] Black616Angel@feddit.de 29 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Well chrome should, yes. But they don't.
Then some JavaScript framework developers think "well this non-standard feature is neat, let's use that everywhere" and then companies who use their framework (or a framwork dependent on it) can't support all browsers.

It's a multilayered problem (as always) with lots of individually decisions that make sense, but don't work out in the end (as always).

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Snoopy@jlai.lu 79 points 9 months ago

Ads and tracking ? Browser with the largest market share ? Well, we are back to IE6 monopoly. :(

[-] mp3@lemmy.ca 18 points 9 months ago

Largest marketshare to check for compatibility, while ignoring all the other browsers.

[-] huginn@feddit.it 15 points 9 months ago

It's almost certainly market share. Easier to just slap a "use chrome" check on it than to spend any dev time supporting the others.

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.world 76 points 9 months ago

Weird, I see "You will need to use a different service/company"

[-] watson387@sopuli.xyz 24 points 9 months ago

Exactly what I saw. A giant nope.

[-] Seigest@lemmy.ca 65 points 9 months ago

I found a bug once in our content that only affected Firefox. Old versions of articulate whouldnt start properly. Not somthing I could fix on my own as i meeded anyoher department. I brought it to the attention of the managers. They didn't want to fox it as apprently Google analytics showed only .4% of our user base was using Firefox. I manged to convince them its part of our user commitment to ensure that we work consistently across all browsers, but it was a pain.

[-] Moonrise2473@feddit.it 33 points 9 months ago

That's the main issue of using analytics and telemetry on something that's used by power users: most of them disable/block them, so the real reported usage is much lower

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 30 points 9 months ago

Google analytics showed only .4% of our user base was using Firefox.

Maybe it was that low because the site didn't work properly on Firefox...

[-] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago

Exactly. When the planes come back from battle, you put armor on all the places where the bullet holes aren't, because that's where the planes that didn't make it back were shot.

[-] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 25 points 9 months ago

If only being part of the .4% was like being part of "the 1%".

[-] fitgse@sh.itjust.works 63 points 9 months ago

🍻here’s to all the developers out there who makes sure there site works great not only with Firefox, but also with ublock origin and piholes!

It is always shocking to me how many sites or apps completely fail to load if you dare block google analytics!

[-] tal@lemmy.today 51 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/mobile/worldwide

According to this:

On the desktop, Firefox has about 6% marketshare, and Edge, the Windows default, about 11%.

On mobile, however, Firefox is at 0.5%, and Edge at 0.3%.

A lot of people only browse the Web on a mobile platform. And the ones using those tend to use the default browser bundled with their phone; if what they have out-of-box works, they're not going to install anything else. Apple bundles Safari, and Google bundles Chrome, so that's what gets used.

[-] SpaceXplorer_8042@lemmy.zip 48 points 9 months ago

That's why I started setting Firefox as the default browser on my family's phones. They were too annoyed by ads and almost got scammed once. With Firefox and uBlock Origin it's like magic for them. Plus they don't visit any non-mainstream websites so they'll never encounter such a screen.

A small step to a better web-browsing experience for all of us.

[-] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 17 points 9 months ago

The point of a commercial website is that it is accessible from everywhere at every time.

It does not make sense to exclude an entire customer base just because you don't want to support multiple platforms.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Venator@lemmy.nz 17 points 9 months ago

It still doesn't explain all the extra work of detecting and intentionally blocking firefox...

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] maxwisecracks@lemmy.world 49 points 9 months ago

for the love of god, charge your phone

[-] Dragster39@feddit.de 24 points 9 months ago

4%, absolute madman, probably only had time to make this post and can't answer comments anymore

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] reddig33@lemmy.world 48 points 9 months ago

Because they hire cheap developers who don’t know what the fuck they are doing?

[-] rustymitt@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago

This is the correct answer

[-] xia@links.hackliberty.org 18 points 9 months ago

I would sooner blame the management, that would even think of excluding "untested" or "unsupported" browsers, like some kind of technofacist dictator, instead of choosing a helpful "if you're having problems with our shit site, use chrome" message... or even literally doing nothing... everything is broken these days, and a half-functional site is better than an intentionally-broken one.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] DesertMagma@lemmy.world 38 points 9 months ago

Well good thing my employer runs a script every 15 min to set the default browser to Edge.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 36 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Standardization is nice for people who make sites and people who use them.

[-] Lemzlez@lemmy.world 67 points 9 months ago

Which is why we have HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript, supported by all major browsers.

Unless you're doing something outrageously non-standard, there is no reason to block specific browsers.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SaltyIceteaMaker@iusearchlinux.fyi 33 points 9 months ago

Spoofed user agent goes brrrr

[-] Kbin_space_program@kbin.social 32 points 9 months ago

Because Firefox has better XSS detection than Chrome and will block adware sites from injecting tracking that Chrome completely allows.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 31 points 9 months ago

I don't know, works on my browser.

-Devs, probably.

[-] AceFuzzLord@lemm.ee 28 points 9 months ago

I absolutely hate this. Ordered something last night that refused to work on Firefox or Firefox based browsers. Switched to my emergency Fulguris and checkout worked like police working for a white rich man.

[-] LavaPlanet@lemmy.world 25 points 9 months ago

I'm doing a course for cyber security at my local tafe, and thier website only works on Chrome. Go. Figure.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 25 points 9 months ago

Don't use that website if you can

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] IIII@lemmy.world 22 points 9 months ago

Time for some user agent spoofing

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago

It used to be the same way with Internet Explorer.

[-] mariusafa@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Because Google Chrome setups a good framework from the moment you open it to track, collect data, basically free market your internet life. Companies like to work the less possible using the least money, if Google already gives them all that setup for a fee then it's more profitable than having to pay programmers to track you in other browsers.

So they deliberately are saying to your face: "I only let you use my stuff if you enter as naked as possible". They are not even shy about it.

Someone like this only deserves a spit in the face and a domain ban. Basically. They can fuck off.

Notes: Most of what I said is not exactly all the true. Most companies just reuse webpage code that it's only tested form chromium, so they only let you use that. Because they are lazy AF, they don't care about customers, they only care about money.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2024
643 points (100.0% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

35438 readers
473 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...


7. Content should match the theme of this community.


-Content should be Mildly infuriating.

-At this time we permit content that is infuriating until an infuriating community is made available.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.


-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense


Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS