this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2024
179 points (97.9% liked)

Firefox

5729 readers
2 users here now

A community for discussion about Mozilla Firefox.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A Mozilla employee recently released a Firefox addon to change the user agent to Chrome on sites the user enables it on.

top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 72 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

You shouldn’t have to do this. I blame W3C org and their ilk for putting the rendering engine, browser brand, and browser version in the response header. All your browser should be telling the site is the versions of html, css, and JavaScript it supports and whether it’s mobile or desktop.

[–] stinerman@midwest.social 21 points 1 year ago

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

versions of html, css, and JavaScript it supports

Given the level of support a browser has for something is basically the browser's version (there's no such thing as a version number for JavaScript or CSS for example, there's a spec that's kinda versioned, but browsers don't implement everything the same), you've basically just described user agent strings

We have feature detection approaches today that make UA based browser detection generally unnecessary but the horse has already bolted on that now

[–] IHawkMike@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

The evolution of the user-agent string isn't exactly the W3C's fault.

https://webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string-history/

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 43 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If only web standards were a thing

[–] weker01@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If anything we have too many web standards.

[–] nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Someone should really make a unifying standard.

[–] nek0d3r@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Situation: There are 15 competing standards.

[–] LostXOR@fedia.io 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[–] derpgon@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Who knows what janky hidden state is hiding behind that button click? I'm copying and pasting 5 strung together commands all day over clicking a button!

[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Hmm had no idea this existed, thanks for sharing

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I believe the screenshot has a typo lol. The mask would be off if Firefox looks like Firefox.

[–] silverbowling@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

the screenshot shows them installing it on chrome, somehow. It doesn’t seem to exist for chrome. But if it did, off would be chrome and on would be firefox, which is what’s shown

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

So the mask is on in the screenshot? Like, a mask on the mask? This is so meta wtf

[–] lnxtx@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago

Like a dusty Internet Explorer mask.