DO Not USE: Chrome, Firefox and Edge • Hacker News Board

Re: DO Not USE: Chrome, Firefox and Edge

#11

Post by cordite » Thu, Jul 21, 2016, 9:36 PM UTC

bobajeff wrote: post #2

Followed by "please enable ActiveX Control" and "you need Flash Player 12 or higher to view this content"

Don't forget "And Adobe Acrobat ...", which the VA is dealing with and over 50% of applicants think they need a newer computer to fix the issue.

Re: DO Not USE: Chrome, Firefox and Edge

#12

Post by smacktoward » Thu, Jul 21, 2016, 9:43 PM UTC

Here's one that's even dumber. When I log in to Bill.com on my main workstation (Ubuntu, using Firefox), it sniffs my OS and gives me a big warning that Ubuntu is not a supported operating system.

Supported operating system. For their WEB APPLICATION.

I could understand pitching a fit about what browser I'm using, but operating system? Seriously?

The punchline, of course, is that once I click past the error, everything in the app works fine, because OF COURSE IT DOES, IT'S A WEB APPLICATION AND I'M USING A MODERN BROWSER.

Sigh.

Re: DO Not USE: Chrome, Firefox and Edge

#13

Post by maniacalrobot » Thu, Jul 21, 2016, 9:52 PM UTC

cordite wrote: post #11

bobajeff wrote: post #2

Followed by "please enable ActiveX Control" and "you need Flash Player 12 or higher to view this content"

Don't forget "And Adobe Acrobat ...", which the VA is dealing with and over 50% of applicants think they need a newer computer to fix the issue.

Best viewed at 800x600

Re: DO Not USE: Chrome, Firefox and Edge

#14

Post by citrusx » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 3:05 AM UTC

Translation: We hired a consultant to write this thing 5 years ago, haven't touched it since, and now we can't find the guy so we can update it.

Re: DO Not USE: Chrome, Firefox and Edge

#15

Post by xbmcuser » Sun, Jul 24, 2016, 2:32 PM UTC

tekklloneer wrote: post #4

I'm sure this is causing some people on HN real, excruciating pain. However, this application was built according to the standards of its day, and I don't know that it's so unreasonable to expect them to hire at 6 figures a developer for no "real" benefit. And, the "IE" of today could be the "Chrome" of tomorrow. I don't like this situation (does anyone?). I wonder if for CRUD apps like this, it'd be beneficial to ha…

It was not build suing standard that's the reason its not compatible with today browsers