No conflict of interest going on here guys
I mean, the fact they rolled it back and didn’t just add an error message telling you to use Chrome is a little surprising.
Not really. They need FF to exist to avert monopoly accusations.
They need FF to exist… But doesn’t necessarily have to work well.
This. It’s more like it existing in name is enough
God forbid they tested across the multiple common browsers out there other than Chrome. Every other software development company creating a web app does that, why doesn’t one of the biggest?
Sadly no, ever web app company definitely doesn’t test under Firefox. I’m at the point where I use Firefox for general web browsing and Chromium for most web apps.
In the last 5 years I’ve run across maybe 1 site that didn’t work properly in Firefox. And another that MIGHT not have worked right, but I was only guessing it was related to FF.
However, since FF dropped PWA support I do use Chrome for a handful of sites that either are PWAs or you can use Chrome’s open as application feature, which is real nice for a few things. Is that what you mean by “Web Apps”?
I still use PWAs with firefox, but as an addon. Works flawlessy so far.
Here is the one I use, just in case: Progressive web apps for FirefoxThanks. I remember trying it about a year ago but it didn’t work well for some reason. Will give it another try now that I hear it’s working well for you.
Interesting find, I haven’t had any issues with opening stuff in Firefox yet but could be handy
No, the PWA thing is a separate annoyance. What I find is that in a lot of web apps, the app mostly works fine but has bugs that break certain things or are seriously inconvenient in Firefox only. Two I’ve experienced recently are Nextcloud Office slideshows (I need to search for/open a bug report honestly) and a web based billing software we use at work.
they should roll back recaptcha off a cliff so i never have to use it again
I develop and test only on firefox
Me too. But I mainly code for myself, nothing mainstream, so it doesn’t usually matter if it works on other browsers. Usually it does anyway, though.
Same, except I’ve been using whatever Tauri packages lately, which on Linux seems to be a webkit browser.
We support only Chrome at work (B2B app), but I mostly use Firefox.
c/foundthedevil ?
Edit: These lemmings i swear look at the users name i replied to i was just making a joke .
I wish Firefox had an large enough market share where websites would work around it
used to be
The script attempted to modify a div’s background color using
document.body.removeChild, but as the script was loaded in the HTML head, the DOM had not loadedIsn’t that how it works/always worked? When i was learning html/js ages ago i had to use some event listener (
DOMContentLoadedi think) or put the script just before</body>(for any code that should run on load and interacts with the DOM).And how do you change the background by removing a child?
And how do you change the background by removing a child?
The removed child could also have a background color, and it could span the entire area of the parent element.
But it’s weird because the quote says “modify a div’s background color”, and this way you don’t actually modify that, but only it’s appearance.Or maybe it’s done with some CSS trickery, looking for a specific child in it’s selector?
Yeah, they should be listening for an event, not just YOLOing it in the head, that’s just racey…
Warning shot fired!
Wait, is that, why PayPal didn’t work and I nearly missed my train? Wow.
And I thought the PayPal devs were stupid, but apparently it was google themselves.
deleted by creator
