Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Teams is blocking Firefox Nightly

teams.live.com

111–120 of 316 posts

Re: Microsoft Teams is blocking Firefox Nightly

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine being a malicious actor in this world of ours, where as long as you could make it look like a potential mistake, you can get away with whatever, and people on the internet will simply say "Sounds like Hanlon's Razor" and you're basically in the clear :shrug:

Imagine being someone who made a simple mistake, and people on some weird internet forum with no identity verification said "Oh, that guy must be malicious!" and you lose your job. How would you feel? It's justified, if I understand the point you're trying to make, right? Which is worse? Edit: Not that I expect much from here, but since there are a number of child(ish) replies, I might as well clarify this for the re…

You don't have to invent imaginary scenarios when the one before us does quite well on its own. We are not talking about an individual, we are talking about a faceless megacorp with a storied history of bad faith.

Just being a faceless megacorp is reasonable grounds for losing the benefit of the doubt, but one with their history? Ascribing anything other than malice first is plain and simple naïveté.

Re: Microsoft Teams is blocking Firefox Nightly

#112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like Hanlon's razor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor

Imagine being a malicious actor in this world of ours, where as long as you could make it look like a potential mistake, you can get away with whatever, and people on the internet will simply say "Sounds like Hanlon's Razor" and you're basically in the clear :shrug:

There should be consultants who specialize in Hanlon's Razor, coming up with ways to make future plans look like stupid mistakes. Or maybe more usefully, they could discover profitable mistakes based on current conditions and events e.g. "Those two labels could be confused with each other; is there any way to make money from claiming that we confused them?"

Re: Microsoft Teams is blocking Firefox Nightly

#113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Looks like someone made a boo-boo it’s simply based on the user agent, w/e string matching they do is too strict they aren’t checking for actual JS/WebASM compatibility or anything like that. Microsoft has repeatedly engaged in malicious anticompetitive behavior. Without any additional information, I therefore think it's rational to place a high prior probability on this being malicious anticompetitive behavior. Th…

[flagged]

More like "this guy has a long history of bullying others by pretending that they're out of spec, and now hes' saying someone is out of spec; what are the odds that it's an honest mistake?"

Re: Microsoft Teams is blocking Firefox Nightly

#114

Looks like someone made a boo-boo it’s simply based on the user agent, w/e string matching they do is too strict they aren’t checking for actual JS/WebASM compatibility or anything like that. Chrome stable with a non standard user agent doesn’t work on via the windows live url but works through the O365 corporate one, same with Safari Mobile without any user agent modification. This to me looks like stupidity more th…

Sounds like Hanlon's razor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor

Never attribute to incompetence that which can be attributed to laziness.

Re: Microsoft Teams is blocking Firefox Nightly

#115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This is what I see on Windows 11 + Firefox: https://imgur.com/a/aqzU2jr Seems to be recommending Edge to me, or Chrome.

Okay. So Microsoft is now being anticompetitive by not recommending a minor browser. But it is recommending it’s biggest competitor?

Re: Microsoft Teams is blocking Firefox Nightly

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine being a malicious actor in this world of ours, where as long as you could make it look like a potential mistake, you can get away with whatever, and people on the internet will simply say "Sounds like Hanlon's Razor" and you're basically in the clear :shrug:

Imagine being someone who made a simple mistake, and people on some weird internet forum with no identity verification said "Oh, that guy must be malicious!" and you lose your job. How would you feel? It's justified, if I understand the point you're trying to make, right? Which is worse? Edit: Not that I expect much from here, but since there are a number of child(ish) replies, I might as well clarify this for the re…

> and you lose your job.

You're making up stuff to make your case stronger. Also, it's totally legitimate to fire people for making mistakes, it's not an injustice.

edit: Instead, imagine being fired for making a mistake when you were actually told to ignore something by a supervisor.

Re: Microsoft Teams is blocking Firefox Nightly

#117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1 for stupidity

Stupidity is only ever acceptable when it agrees with business objectives. Malice is the sensible default assumption when money is on the line.

Money isn't on the line w.r.t. to Firefox Nightly. I don't even think real money is on the line w.r.t. to Firefox entirely.

We may love it, but Firefox is a big fat nobody in the browser space of 2023.

Re: Microsoft Teams is blocking Firefox Nightly

#118
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft is very heavily lobbying organizations to use edge as a standard browser right now. They're doing the same to us. It's really annoying. They're hell-bent on increasing marketshare no matter what.

It would be interesting if Google tweaked their Chromium licensing so that Edge couldn't use it. Then Microsoft wouldn't have a browser at all.

Microsoft could just keep an independent fork—just match features at a slower pace. Google can't change the license of Blink, their renderer, since it's a fork of KDE's LGPL renderer.

Re: Microsoft Teams is blocking Firefox Nightly

#120

It's 2023. Why are we still doing user agent detection? We're supposed to do feature detection. userAgent is deprecated. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Navigator/u...

Does using `window.navigator.userAgent` still work? Does it still return the actual user-agent? Yes, and because it does, people will use it. You (or standards) bodies can scream from the top of the mountains that it's deprecated, but it won't matter, because if it's there, it will be used.

but Microsoft should understand why this is an issue, they had to rename their windows from 9 to 10 because applications did check based on os name string and just exit after detecting it contains "windows 9" as it suppose to match windows 95 and windows 98
Post reply on HN