I recently was asked to evaluate a 3rd party package for possible use. With Firefox my default browser (I don't even have Chrome installed), I tried running their demo of the software but immediately received an alert like notification that it will not work at all with Firefox. And that's the end of evaluating that package. Next?

Spoke directly to the devs, and they are aware of the one specific method which nullifies Firefox's use. They are working to eliminate the use of that one method, so at least they are not complacent with just accepting Chrome or bust.

How much you wanna bet "that one specific method" winds up being one of Chromes adware tools.

Unless this is a very low level package, I find it hard to believe it just doesn't work with Firefox in 2023, at least if we are referring to the basic browser APIs for rendering, interpreting, sandboxing, etc.

In other words, if they aren't doing something systems level that exposes significant differences in the underlying browser APIs, then what's the cause of the issue?

Most application level differences (with the exception of the adware) are very very minor. That didn't used to be the case, but it certainly is today. I.e. you would have to put some effort in/intentionality is usually required to break something in Chrome but not Firefox and vice versa as a standard user program. Its not recommended, but I rarely see front end folks doing the same kind of browser tests that used to be industry standard these days, because it simply isn't an issue and if it is, it's because you are knowingly using a non-standard feature (which is usually adware related). The fact that they figured out the cause so quickly implies it's something like that. Systems level issues would require significant time to investigate and probably the involvement of experts in modern browser implementations.

Just my two cents as an ex front end guy.

it's some method for updating canvas data or some such. i have a distrust of Googs too, but maybe not as much as you

>Just my two cents as an ex front end guy.

There's no such thing as an ex, just one in recovery

> What is sad is more and more common websites simply don't work in Firefox anymore (chase.com), so it's literally back to the days of running in IE6 or nothing, but Chrome is now that pestilence.

I am used to accessing my Chase bank account through Firefox. I just checked, and I am still able to log in fine, including with a variety of privacy-enhancing extensions that break many other sites. What problems do you encounter?

I also have no issues with Chase, and exclusively use their website in Firefox.

Their ultimate rewards side was broken for a bit last year, only in Firefox. But I also have had no other issues recently.

Same here. It stops working if I turn off referer, which is understandable, but works if I turn it back on.

Chase will give you a scare dialogue if you try logging in with Firefox.

But all they’re doing is user-agent parsing.

Just lie about your user agent (using an extension) and chase will let you login, their site works fine with Firefox.

IIRC you can use the general.useragent.override flag to do the same thing without an extension.

I find it comical that people keep recommending Firefox around here. This is the same company that has the following turned on by default:

Allow Firefox to send technical and interaction data to Mozilla

Allow Firefox to make personalized extension recommendations

Allow Firefox to install and run studies

Allow Firefox to send backlogged crash reports on your behalf

But, let's give them a pass because they're not based on Chromium.

All that stuff is shared directly with Mozilla. The Chrome stuff is shared with everyone with the money to pay for it.

So you'd let the perfect be the enemy of the good and go all-in on Chrome? The way I see it, whatever its imperfections, it's the source of the only non-Safari, non-Chromium browser with basically any market share, and has its derivatives you can choose from. I've seen LibreWolf mentioned several times. And frankly, Mozilla's narrower market scope, to say nothing of their market share, when compared with the behemoth that is Alphabet, make all this immaterial. I can turn all those settings off quite easily. My irritation stems from the unique download identifiers and the occasions when they also make stupid alterations, like that Firefox View thing (which got disabled, of course).

Chrome is made by and funded by an ad company.

It seems to me Safari is the new IE6. It has so many bugs compared to every other browser.

It wasn't (initially) the broken-ness of IE6. It was "We build the page the Microsoft way or it doesn't work for 90% of web users".

As much as I hate monopolies, I also hate having to write an application 5 times because Apple, Mozilla, or some ReactJS based browser like Vivaldi can’t be asked to implement a spec… or insist on creating their own names and prefixes for methods or properties identical to the ones in the spec. If browsers would just be standard compliant instead of inventing their own DSL and pretending like I both have time to learn 10 of them, and don’t mind littering my code with branches to check what planet I’m on every time I need to do something more advanced than the intro-to-html page on W3 Schools, you’d likely be able to log into your bank.

I've never had any issues with Chase and Firefox combo. Not the Chase is anything more than the garbage heap of banking so maybe it rejecting FF would be a blessing.