• jol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    What I’m scared is publishers taking this as a reason to simply start banning Firefox and other browsers.

      • Fashim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah I’ve got an extension for it, it just changes the user-agent string.

        I use it on YouTube because for some totally not suspicious reason Firefox won’t play videos but when I spoof it to Chrome everything works fine.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Not always doable as they could be relying on non-standard features that are only in Chrome.

        Not exactly the same thing, but my employer requires us to use Chrome for all internal stuff, as they’re using Chrome Enterprise Premium as part of their endpoint security solution, and of of course that only works in Chrome.

      • jol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        It takes more than changing your user agent to msk which browser you use. It’s trivial to know which browser you’re really using if they really want.

        • madcaesar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          I’m pretty sure it’s much easier to mask your browser than detect the correct browser. In the end you’re just hitting a server for data, you fully control the call that is made.

          • jol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            There are things you can’t do with extensions alone, like change how certain JS and CSS internals work.

      • jol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        Publishers don’t care about traffic thay only costs them money.

    • WhatYouNeed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      An ecom site decides to block 5% of web traffic and potential sales?

      Now tell the marketing team you are turning away 1 in 20 potential customers because (well, not really sure why) and see what they have to say.

    • Jarmer@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      There’s already plenty of business web apps that require chrome. I specifically use a business focused web app that not only requires Chrome, but ONLY CHROME ITSELF and no chromium derivatives. That’s the first time I’ve come across that. I had previously seen chrome requirements, but they worked just fine on ungoogled chromium. Not this one, nope. Regular Google Chrome and nothing else. wtf is that garbage.

      • jabjoe@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        You can get past these with a user agent, lying about which browser it is. However, they aren’t testing for other browsers, so their site maybe as buggy as hell. As yet Firefox doesn’t do a WINE and match Chrome, bug for bug, so sites work as intended. Google have cause IE6’s return.

        • Jarmer@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          It was indeed buggy, which was when I reached out to support. They immediately asked if I was using not Google Chrome itself, but a Chromium offshoot like Brave or Vivaldi. I was using ungoogled chromium, so they told me it won’t work. I switched to regular google chrome and it worked great. I wonder what on earth they’re using that’s part of Google Chrome that makes it work and not part of any other chromium projects.