No, Firefox doesn't have bugs with your store. Your store has bugs.
"Morningwitch"
"Firefox's privacy features interferes with our trackers"
Classy to blame Firefox for bugs in their code :)
If devs write code for Chrome, yeah, maybe then it doesn't work in Firefox guys....
We had exactly this situation in the 90s with internet Explorer.... But new devs need to relearn lessons of course.
It was different in the case of IE though. It was actually atrocious and not standards compliant in many many ways.
Today, chrome and FF both support standards fairly well and when things don't work in FF it's usually either that you wrote fragile code, or there's a slight difference from chrome that technically isn't a standards compliance issue. Testing in both of those browsers isn't hard and should be the norm. I've had projects where I had to test in IE, chrome windows, chrome android, FF, safari Mac, safari iPad OS, and safari iOS all at the same time. And yes there are differences between those last two, because apple makes a shitty web browser.
If you can't test in two browsers, you're just a bad web developer...
Absolutely this, nothing but pure laziness. I had a really weird specific issue on iOS Safari with one of my projects, and I own literally nothing Apple. Instead of just accepting shits fucked on iOS, I got my hands on a borrowed Mac so I could use xCode and actually find the issue.
...then again, that project ended up dead in the water at like 95% completion and I never got paid for the work I'd already finished, so maybe the joke IS on me and I should've been a lazy fuck.
It could be they were using new features chrome added which Firefox had as experimental when they wrote it. Firefox recently promoted those features to stable.
It could be but then it's even worse judgement. They basically don't care if Firefox users can view their web site, and that's one thing, but blaming it on Firefox is kind of rich, instead of taking responsibility for their decision. :)
It's probably all the new generation of programmers/management - you would think they would listen to the lessons passed down but.... Nope.
firefox has a lot of bugs with our store
Well, I think you got that backwards.
At least they seem to be working on it. Directing Firefox users to use a different browser in the mean time, temporarily, seems reasonable even if the language on that popup is a bit imprecise.
I did try adding a shirt to the cart and yeah, it added the wrong size. I'd have to switch to chrome to successfully complete an order at the moment. It's unfortunate, but as long as they're trying to fix it I don't see any point in feeling outraged.
I did try adding a shirt to the cart and yeah, it added the wrong size. I’d have to switch to chrome to successfully complete an order at the moment. It’s unfortunate, but as long as they’re trying to fix it I don’t see any point in feeling outraged.
As a software developer, if just trying to add a single item to a cart is buggy, then that's definitely something to feel outraged about, software development wise (not literally outraged, but definitely a strong "WTF!?" response).
It's actually really amazing that a bug would manifest in one browser and not another, when just adding an item to a cart. You have to work really hard to make something like that not work correctly.
I wouldn't feel safe entering my credit card information into a site that can't even support Firefox, those are just the bugs they're willing to tell you about...
Qewl, that's actually a lot better than not even addressing it.
How is a function like adding an item to an array failing from one browser to another??
The bug is they can't track you well enough
Firefox has a "bug" that makes our tracking code not work. Please switch to Chrome so we can track you.
I use my separate pr0n browser for this kind of sites. It's set up to completely reset every time.
That doesn't prevent them from tracking you, it just removes local history and cached stuff.
That disclaimer announcement just screams lazy IT, or general management by your side.
My bet is that FF has some privacy and/or adblocking features that this company doesn't like.
There are a few features that FF doesn't have that chrome does, but it mostly involves video streaming. Adblocking is likely the reason though.
Source: am front end dev
It's not super difficult to just make a standards compliant website. I always wonder how in this day and age people manage to create professional websites with browser specific bugs.
There's likely zero bugs, but Firefox has more ways to block ads and trackers from affecting you, which is likely to real reason they don't want it being used.
There are quite a lot of quirks with how browser (or rather rendering engines) interpret CSS, and in quite a few places the spec is ambiguous. So there is no "correct" way of implementing it.
But, this is either just them being lazy or bad mangement.
Do you have an example of a quirk where Chrome and Firefox treat something in the spec differently? I haven't seen that in a while.
I've had to debug a PDF viewer on a site once. Getting that to work across multiple versions of multiple browsers was a nightmare and I never managed to figure it out. Latest versions are mostly fine (except for mobile safari), but even 1yo versions of browsers are just broken.
Maybe I'm missing something, but it got bad enough that one of the "potential solutions" I was considering involved figuring out how to compile a C based pdf renderer thingy into WASM and embedding it in the app.
This was about 7 months ago.
I agree though, add to cart should NOT behave differently across browsers in 2024.
It makes sense for webapps like the one I work on (lots of custom 2d canvas stuff, with layers upon layers of libraries).
But an e-commerce site is simple enough that it really wouldn't be an issue.
if you can't even be arsed to fix your website i certainly can't be arsed to buy from you
Please be aware it is Firefox with the "known bugs" lol
Imagine being this petty.
lmao write your website better then. That popup sure looks like its working
Correction: your store has a lot of known bugs with Firefox
"firefox has known bugs with our store"
it's not my fault you have trouble with designers
also brb bookmarking that site
This is the laziest dev work. And somehow they've convinced the owner that this is fine and got paid.
In a way, you have to admire the grift. At the same time, fuck 'em.
- Just visited the site with FF, and got no such error. It's a Shopify site, and I'm sceptical.
- If it's a typical Shopify SBO, it could easily be a single person - the owner - working out of their house. There is no developer, except those employed by Shopify.
The owner probably populated the store themselves; the entirety rest of their computer experience brobably consists of browsing Wiccan forums, Instagram, and Twitter. And yet, they figured out how to open an online shop and start a business doing something they're passionate about.
Educated guesses, but poking around a bit on the site & following links gives good evidence this person is a person, not a company, and doesn't employ anyone, much less programmers.
And I've never had a Shopify site pop up a message like this. I think OP hit a fluke, or a MITM, or (most likely) has a virus.
I just visited with FF and got the error. Looking at the console, Firefox complains about some cookies misusing specific site attributes and actively rejects some cookies from that website entirely. That might be the source of the issue with the site's "developer."
Makes you wonder had the owner even managed to get enough code together to check the UA for Fx detection that launches a dialog window as I doubt Shopify has any built-in UA detection tools like this.
I remember thinking "hah, business majors, don't they know everything is gonna be ruled by tech?" And then it turns out the tech nerds just work for the business majors still.
@tocopherol Reminds me of the Northwestern University football cheer, “We don’t cry, we don’t fuss. Someday you’ll all work for us!”
That's a very weird of saying "we use a lot of non-standard code practices in our software".
"We haven't figured out how to violate Firefox user privacy protocols yet, so just go ahead and switch to the browser we can easily exploit. K? That cool?"
It’s time to get rid of the part of user-agent strings that identifies which browser you’re using. It should only include things like mobile/desktop, version of html supported, and JavaScript version supported.
There is no uniform "HTML version", "JavaScript version" or "CSS version" that describes which web APIs are implemented. Browser engines support some features that others don't support and vice versa.
Maybe that’s the problem though. W3C and their ilk needs to define which markup and features are part of a specific html version (5.0, 5.1, etc.) or CSS or JavaScript release. Lock that down and move to the next version. Declare your supported version in the agent string instead of wanting a specific browser engine like Chrome. Relying on Chrome is like the Internet Explorer debacle all over again.
If the app doesn’t the render the declared version properly, then that’s on the app. If the dev uses out of spec or experimental features, that’s on the dev.
I’d much rather see an alert that says “This site requires HTML 5.0.1 or higher” than “This site doesn’t work in Firefox.”
It's not that simple. A lot of browser "standards" are standards in that they achieve the same end result, but for whatever reason they take a different approach to getting to that result, so you often end up needing browser specific code. This is especially the case with CSS, which is why so many "standard" CSS properties still need a "-moz" or a "-webkit" version as well, decades in. The only way the website can know if they're running the correct code for that browser is if they know what browser is being used, hence user agents. This is the reason that pop ups like this exist at all; sure they were lazy as fuck to not properly support Firefox, absolutely, but they wouldn't have needed to support Firefox specifically at all if browsers could just get their shit together and fix the "standards".
I would fucking cry tears of joy if browsers could standardize enough that writing browser specific code and needing the user agent was a thing of the past, but I really don't see it happening any time soon.
Definitely not.
I have to version check to workaround Chrome, FireFox and Safari bugs. Some things they fix and I can flag around version (eg: FF113 has buggy focus detection with Web Components), but some just have never been fixed (eg: Firefox does not support animated styles with CSS variables in Web Components).
That's not to pick on FireFox. Chrome doesn't support scrolling two elements simultaneously which breaks any type of fancy horizontal scrolling in horizontal tabs. Safari has some buggy implementation with ARIA tags for Web Components and
[type=range]doesn't follow spec formin.If we were going to just not support new features because browsers are buggy, we'd never get any new features. It's better to feature detect and that includes knowing what versions need workarounds.
"Hey there, we can't build a functional website, but just go ahead and give us your email address. MK?"
"a lot of known bugs"
Our storefront was coded with bloated javascript, runs like shit, and Chrome and Edge are good at hiding how bad it is :)
I've tested Firefox's performance recently and it's gotten super close to Blink/V8 in terms of performance, it even works better than those on my machine. So even if the website is coded like a turd there ain't much reason anymore it wouldn't work perfectly fine on Firefox
Unless you're doing something really fucked with the code that I can't think of right now
Absolutely no capitalization? That always makes me back away. You can't even be bothered to make a proper sentence?
Yeah it's a zoomer thing. Literally saw posts on Reddit about girls freaking out because some guy used that punctuation.
Probably their style. It kind of works
Everyone browse that website and when they see the traffic all using firefox. They will get the message.
Quite the opposite - no one browse that site because it's not standards compliant and/or privacy compliant.
"yeah lets just ask our customers to switch browser instead of fixin our website. That will get the job done" I wonder how they came up with this
"Why spend thousands of dollars on paying someone to fix it when we can pay them hundreds to spend an hour writing a dialog box?" - Some storefront owner
I build websites, and even when we supported Internet explorer 6, my company wouldn't allow us to display a message like this. Anyone who ever developed a website for IE6 would know that if it were ever appropriate to display such a message, it was for IE6. It was atrocious beyond words. They ignored most of the standards and the browser was also just a security nightmare, yet still just on principle alone the idea was always shot down.
That store is hosted on Shopify. I'm quite confident they handle Firefox just fine. The customization(s) the company made to defaults on the other hand...
I would never shop there again. What a joke.
The website looks kinda crappy anyway. It's essentially using a template, but still managed to screw things up with Firefox. If they can't get a templated site working properly cross browser, I don't trust their customer support because they're probably scrimping elsewhere as well.
That's a bit extreme, innit
Give them an inch and without a doubt they'll take a mile. Unless we're all looking forward to a world where sites work exclusively in some browsers and deny others.
I'm having a 90's Internet Explorer flashback.
Put it up on that new dashboard thing they set up
Edit: here it is https://blog.mozilla.org/netpolicy/2024/01/19/platform-tilt/
Great dashboard:
Some gross monopolistic abuses in there… from the Android section alone:
This seems like like a perfect opportunity to visit your competitors website!
It's like saying Linux is bad for games.
That's it, they just lost a prospective customer!
time to bust out user agent switcher.
"... but sign up for our newsletter!"
Using arguments from the 1990s internet to coerce users seems .... gnarly, my dude.
What're you buying there, potions?
Potion seller, give me your strongest potions
Here you go friend: https://www.piped.video/watch?v=7JYJhWIwGUw
I found this site from a blog recommending a few brands. They didn't have what I wanted but the fact I was greeted by this was good enough to screenshot.
I am just happy for you that the Necromancer soon comes.
It's a clothing brand.
Necromancer?
ok
Went there just now and did not get a pop up. Firefox does not detect any trackers.
Tried it just now, didn't get an error either.
Strange, I don't get that pop-up with my Firefox.
Might be because I am from Europe
In the US I didn't see that popup either, just that notice on the page from my other comment.
Hey at least they apologize! 🤣
"We are sorry, as a customer, you don't live up to our standards"
Not really, it's a sorry not sorry kinda apology
No self-respecting witch uses chrome, website sus.
This is annoying, while there are a few things we can do
- Report this issue at https://webcompat.com/
- Change UA to trick this website https://addons.mozilla.org/en-CA/firefox/addon/user-agent-string-switcher/
- Best choice, change another store :)
My only other browser is curl, does it works on that?
This is a site with no competent designers.
If my client asked me to design and implement something like this, I’d quit. No, fix your Firefox bug, amateurs.
I just went there to test it, and I did not see that popup.
Hey would you be willing to pass the site you found this on so we can all studiously avoid it? :)
The URL is in the picture.
I’m sorry Morning Witch but we’ve got standards, y’know.
did they try casting a spell to fix it?
If it were me, I’d try casting the spell, “web standards.”
Remember when shopping sites didn't need 200mb of javascript libraries to work?
Ugly clothes too
User agent extensions go brrrrr 😎
lawls
I just went to the site and didn't get that pop up. Firefox mobile
Use Ublock Origin and remove the banner. Bad banners dont actually block anything.
I see someone wearing that "Necromancer Trench Coat" (when it becomes available) and I'm going to assume they're hiding a shotgun under it and are thinking of undertaking their own Columbine
Hi Karen, 1999 called and they want their “drunk of boxed Franzia Rosé” shock gossip back
Maybe next you can rant about baggy pants being used to hide drugs
Or how if men get their ear pierced on a certain side it means they’re GaY
Oh what would pastor say?
Guess I should have used the /s for you
