Google Play Store: Browsing with Firefox is no longer supported on Android

Post by _ea1k » Tue, Feb 10, 2015, 7:36 PM UTC

fluidcruft wrote: post #148

tuxone wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point here is that it's not a lack of feature but a lack of user experience. Android Intent Filters [0] should work like that: the user starts an action and the system executes the default behavior (or prompt a choice list). Think about the average user, both ways you described seem poorly user friendly. Sure Google solution is crap, right now following a link to a Play Store app generates this [1], you really ne…

Google made the intent system annoying in Lollypop. Previously you could just touch (well, double touch) the icon of the app you wanted and it would open using that without setting any preference. Now if that app happens to be the top-most one you have to squint at the small light-green-on-white buttons as if a touchscreen were some sort of precision input device. Honestly, the intent system really sucks for the use…

Post by jimktrains2 » Tue, Feb 10, 2015, 8:12 PM UTC

johnkpush wrote: post #180

jimktrains2 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Anyone who slaps a ‘this page is best viewed with Browser X’ label on a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web, when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another computer, another word processor, or another network.” – Tim Berners-Lee (in Technology Review, July 1996)

It's browser vendors that are bearing the torch of interoperability and standards compliance. Unfortunately, most vendors are companies with their own agenda. To add to that, all companies and people interpret standards differently. Given this, it's no wonder we don't see consistent api implementation and behaviors between browsers. The aftermath of all of this falls on the developer's shoulders, which is why so many…

Post by eginhard » Tue, Feb 10, 2015, 8:22 PM UTC

andreastt wrote: post #99

For reference, this is being tracked by Mozilla's webcompat group in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1131601 .

Post by scholia » Tue, Feb 10, 2015, 8:40 PM UTC

higherpurpose wrote: post #119

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weren't we all applauding some startup that had a douche-bagy "We dont support IE" message on their site and everyone here was so excited about it. Now that the bell is tolling for Firefox, its a different story, eh? There's been this largely ridiculous "revenge of the geeks" after the IE6 days. Now we've fed so much fuel into that fire, that casually telling people to use different browsers is the norm. I'm not sayi…

There were good reasons for not supporting IE because they weren't adhering to standards. That's not the case with Firefox. That was closer to saying "we shouldn't support Chrome because it breaks standards" than "we shouldn't support Firefox because it has small market share". The main reason for not supporting IE was its anti-standards stance, not its market share. I think that's a perfectly valid reason, just like…

Post by vxNsr » Tue, Feb 10, 2015, 9:20 PM UTC

cdr wrote: post #197

vxNsr wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to take a moment to focus on that last point: Chrome has become the memory hog that caused us all to leave firefox but for the much more egregious reason of trying to be something it's not. Now when I close chrome it wants to stay open like an over eager registry cleaner that hopes to hide behind the always on functionality and thus obscure that fact that it's done nothing, only Chrome's reason is the slight…

For me, Chrome uses half the memory of Firefox for the same number of tabs. If you're having memory issues with a browser, your problem is almost certainly extensions - the #1 culprit being AdBlock [Plus]. Give µBlock a try. (The reason why my Firefox uses more memory per tab is in fact almost certainly extensions.)