Visit about:compat in your firefox. I find it insane that these exist.

Edit: I’ve learned that this is part of the webcompat system addon developed by Mozilla and other contributors. I see why this is beneficial default behavior, since FF has no chance of getting enough market share to matter more if things are broken.

However, this behavior is too intrusive for my taste. For example this injection: https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/file/8a4afb4d34f8/browser/extensions/webcompat/injections/js/bug1472075-bankofamerica.com-ua-change.js is basically just to silence annoying user reports.

Also, Every site FF pretends to be a different UA on is artificially reducing FF market share data.

  • mvirts@lemmy.worldOP
    1·
    2 months ago

    I don’t know if it’s objectively stupid, but the surprise I experienced discovering that my browser has a bunch of hacks built in to fix external website problems lowers the trust I have in Firefox.

    • Vik@lemmy.worldEnglish
      16·
      2 months ago

      they’re trying to ensure an acceptable UX with their browser.

      I suppose the root of the issue is developers specifically targeting and testing on chrome.

      I don’t understand how this would make Firefox look bad unless you’re pointing at the dire browser share situation.

    • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
      9·
      2 months ago

      Lol, you do realise that chrome does many more. They were recently discovered to allow extra access to google meet over competitors. So not just creepy, but anticompetitive.

      I think a more aggressive approach would be better for sites that dont offer compatibility with Firefox.

      Do a pop up that asks the user to help make chsnge. First few users to encounter the site could be asked to see if they could find the contact details to let the site know about the problem. Once that is correct, following users could be asked to message them to let them know its a problem.

      Keep upping the volume with bad publicity about their website not following standards and bekgn deficient and they will change.

      • just another dev@lemmy.my-box.devEnglish
        5·
        2 months ago

        I like the thought, but I can’t imagine that most people will enjoy getting even more popups when they load up a site, especially when they come from the browser itself.

        Just take a look at OP here. If they responds this way to settings that are there for their actual benefit - just imagine how much they’ll like those popups.

        • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
          1·
          2 months ago

          Yes but thats the point. You could offer the option. This site is trying to block open standards. We can apply a fix to correct it. Would you like to Tell site to fix it/Apply fix/Leave unsafe site

          Then you have all options.

            • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
              1·
              2 months ago

              Yep, but with consent. I’m already happy they don’t his. OP is not. FOSS should aim for ideal behaviour to show non Foss software how its done right.

              This shoudlnt come at the expense of user experience, so its always a balance.

      • mvirts@lemmy.worldOP
        2·
        2 months ago

        This is closer to what I would be happy with. Firefox could offer an official compatibility extension for each site.

        • just another dev@lemmy.my-box.devEnglish
          4·
          2 months ago

          How about, if you want a broken version of Firefox, you compile it yourself, rather than let everyone else suffer?
          Like, the vast majority of browser users don’t even know what an extension is, let alone install one.