Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > uk.comp.sys.mac > #181844 > unrolled thread

Anyone know anything about Firefox?

Back to article view | Back to uk.comp.sys.mac

Contents

  Anyone know anything about Firefox? Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> - 2025-09-06 17:48 +0000
    Re: Anyone know anything about Firefox? Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> - 2025-09-06 18:13 +0000
      Re: Anyone know anything about Firefox? Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-09-06 23:07 +0100
        Re: Anyone know anything about Firefox? Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> - 2025-09-07 06:54 +0000
          Re: Anyone know anything about Firefox? Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-08 12:27 +0000
            Re: Anyone know anything about Firefox? Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> - 2025-09-09 06:53 +0000
              Re: Anyone know anything about Firefox? Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> - 2025-09-09 08:06 +0000
                Re: Anyone know anything about Firefox? Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-09-09 11:27 +0200
                Re: Anyone know anything about Firefox? Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-09-09 14:07 +0100
                  Re: Anyone know anything about Firefox? Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> - 2025-09-10 11:17 +0000
    Re: Anyone know anything about Firefox? WolfFan <akwolffan@zoho.com> - 2025-09-06 17:26 -0400
    Re: Anyone know anything about Firefox? Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-09-07 11:21 +0000
      Re: Anyone know anything about Firefox? Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-09-07 16:58 +0200

#181844 — Anyone know anything about Firefox?

As Subject:

I have Sequoia 15.6.1 and Firefox 128.14 (I've been an inveterate Mozilla user
since before Firefox was born). 

 (Like half the world) "my" (I'm retired) University, has been strongarmed
into standardising on Teams for meetings.

We had our first Teams meeting on Friday. I used the Website version (and was
surprised at how easy and attractive evertyhing looked).  But my camera
wouldn't work. (the mike worked fine). I checked the Mac's Camera settings,
and Firefox is permitted to use the camera (as it should be, because it asked
me and I said yes).

I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
permsission?

I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
there".

Cheers
John

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#181845

On 2025-09-06, Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:
> As Subject:
>
> I have Sequoia 15.6.1 and Firefox 128.14 (I've been an inveterate Mozilla user
> since before Firefox was born). 
>
>  (Like half the world) "my" (I'm retired) University, has been strongarmed
> into standardising on Teams for meetings.
>
> We had our first Teams meeting on Friday. I used the Website version (and was
> surprised at how easy and attractive evertyhing looked).  But my camera
> wouldn't work. (the mike worked fine). I checked the Mac's Camera settings,
> and Firefox is permitted to use the camera (as it should be, because it asked
> me and I said yes).
>
> I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
> and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
> NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
> permsission?
>
> I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
> there".

I tried the Teams test site and it declared Firefox to be an unsupported 
browser. I then tried Safari and it was accepted, so maybe try Safari 
next time. Also on 15.6.1 here. The test site in case you don't know is:
<https://devicetest.teams.microsoft.com/>

-- 
Cheers, Alan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181848

Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 2025-09-06, Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
> > and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
> > NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
> > permsission?
> >
> > I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
> > there".
> 
> I tried the Teams test site and it declared Firefox to be an unsupported 
> browser. I then tried Safari and it was accepted, so maybe try Safari 
> next time. Also on 15.6.1 here. The test site in case you don't know is:
> <https://devicetest.teams.microsoft.com/>

On (Ubuntu) Firefox, I ran that test and was told FF wasn't supported.

Then I installed the User Agent Switcher extension:
https://webextension.org/listing/useragent-switcher.html?version=0.6.5.1&type=install

and switched my Firefox User-Agent to Edge on Windows.

Suddenly the Teams test site reported my browser passed all the checks and
was fully compatible.

Funny that.

Theo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181849

On 2025-09-06, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2025-09-06, Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
>> > and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
>> > NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
>> > permsission?
>> >
>> > I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
>> > there".f
>> 
>> I tried the Teams test site and it declared Firefox to be an unsupported 
>> browser. I then tried Safari and it was accepted, so maybe try Safari 
>> next time. Also on 15.6.1 here. The test site in case you don't know is:
>> <https://devicetest.teams.microsoft.com/>
>
> On (Ubuntu) Firefox, I ran that test and was told FF wasn't supported.
>
> Then I installed the User Agent Switcher extension:
> https://webextension.org/listing/useragent-switcher.html?version=0.6.5.1&type=install
>
> and switched my Firefox User-Agent to Edge on Windows.
>
> Suddenly the Teams test site reported my browser passed all the checks and
> was fully compatible.

Running FF 142.0.1 (aarch64) on my M1 MBP under macOS 15.6.1 and after 
installing User Agent Switcher, the Teams tester site states all is well 
when, as you say, switched to User Agent  = Edge for Windows. Hopefully 
this would work on John's Mac. Thanks for the info :)

-- 
Cheers, Alan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181853

Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 2025-09-06, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2025-09-06, Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
>>>> and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
>>>> NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
>>>> permsission?
>>>> 
>>>> I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
>>>> there".f
>>> 
>>> I tried the Teams test site and it declared Firefox to be an unsupported 
>>> browser. I then tried Safari and it was accepted, so maybe try Safari 
>>> next time. Also on 15.6.1 here. The test site in case you don't know is:
>>> <https://devicetest.teams.microsoft.com/>
>> 
>> On (Ubuntu) Firefox, I ran that test and was told FF wasn't supported.
>> 
>> Then I installed the User Agent Switcher extension:
>> https://webextension.org/listing/useragent-switcher.html?version=0.6.5.1&type=install
>> 
>> and switched my Firefox User-Agent to Edge on Windows.
>> 
>> Suddenly the Teams test site reported my browser passed all the checks and
>> was fully compatible.
> 
> Running FF 142.0.1 (aarch64) on my M1 MBP under macOS 15.6.1 and after 
> installing User Agent Switcher, the Teams tester site states all is well 
> when, as you say, switched to User Agent  = Edge for Windows. Hopefully 
> this would work on John's Mac. Thanks for the info :)

Just did a test call through FF 142.0 and it worked just fine. No user
agent switcher required. 

I typically use Teams daily via the desktop app and works great. 

On a side note it's very disappointing we've regressed 20 years and need to
revert to using user agent switcher again. Sad days. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181856

On 2025-09-08, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2025-09-06, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>> Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 2025-09-06, Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
>>>>> and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
>>>>> NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
>>>>> permsission?
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
>>>>> there".f
>>>> 
>>>> I tried the Teams test site and it declared Firefox to be an unsupported 
>>>> browser. I then tried Safari and it was accepted, so maybe try Safari 
>>>> next time. Also on 15.6.1 here. The test site in case you don't know is:
>>>> <https://devicetest.teams.microsoft.com/>
>>> 
>>> On (Ubuntu) Firefox, I ran that test and was told FF wasn't supported.
>>> 
>>> Then I installed the User Agent Switcher extension:
>>> https://webextension.org/listing/useragent-switcher.html?version=0.6.5.1&type=install
>>> 
>>> and switched my Firefox User-Agent to Edge on Windows.
>>> 
>>> Suddenly the Teams test site reported my browser passed all the checks and
>>> was fully compatible.
>> 
>> Running FF 142.0.1 (aarch64) on my M1 MBP under macOS 15.6.1 and after 
>> installing User Agent Switcher, the Teams tester site states all is well 
>> when, as you say, switched to User Agent  = Edge for Windows. Hopefully 
>> this would work on John's Mac. Thanks for the info :)
>
> Just did a test call through FF 142.0 and it worked just fine. No user
> agent switcher required. 

Well this is rather odd! I've tried this several times now and on my 
MBP, Firefox is deemed unsupported unless I use the switcher.
 
> I typically use Teams daily via the desktop app and works great.

Never tried it. I'm able to use FaceTime with the people I chat with via 
live video.
 
> On a side note it's very disappointing we've regressed 20 years and need to
> revert to using user agent switcher again. Sad days. 

Yep :(

-- 
Cheers, Alan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181857

On 9 Sep 2025 at 07:53:50 BST, "Alan B" <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid>
wrote:

> On 2025-09-08, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2025-09-06, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-09-06, Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
>>>>>> and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
>>>>>> NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
>>>>>> permsission?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
>>>>>> there".f
>>>>> 
>>>>> I tried the Teams test site and it declared Firefox to be an unsupported
>>>>> browser. I then tried Safari and it was accepted, so maybe try Safari
>>>>> next time. Also on 15.6.1 here. The test site in case you don't know is:
>>>>> <https://devicetest.teams.microsoft.com/>
>>>> 
>>>> On (Ubuntu) Firefox, I ran that test and was told FF wasn't supported.
>>>> 
>>>> Then I installed the User Agent Switcher extension:
>>>> https://webextension.org/listing/useragent-switcher.html?version=0.6.5.1&type=install
>>>> 
>>>> and switched my Firefox User-Agent to Edge on Windows.
>>>> 
>>>> Suddenly the Teams test site reported my browser passed all the checks and
>>>> was fully compatible.
>>> 
>>> Running FF 142.0.1 (aarch64) on my M1 MBP under macOS 15.6.1 and after
>>> installing User Agent Switcher, the Teams tester site states all is well
>>> when, as you say, switched to User Agent  = Edge for Windows. Hopefully
>>> this would work on John's Mac. Thanks for the info :)
>> 
>> Just did a test call through FF 142.0 and it worked just fine. No user
>> agent switcher required.
> 
> Well this is rather odd! I've tried this several times now and on my
> MBP, Firefox is deemed unsupported unless I use the switcher.
> 
>> I typically use Teams daily via the desktop app and works great.
> 
> Never tried it. I'm able to use FaceTime with the people I chat with via
> live video.
> 
>> On a side note it's very disappointing we've regressed 20 years and need to
>> revert to using user agent switcher again. Sad days.
> 
> Yep :(

Well! You fellas have got me thoroughly confused now!  (Sorry: first I should
say THANKS for all he helpful replies!)

First, WolfFan said "the current version of Firefox is 142.01" and people seem
to agree with that.
My Firefox tells me it's up to date at 128.14. "Extended Support Release".....
 
So I asked Google, which produced an answer in the Apple Forums which explains
 that there are more versions of FF than I can shake a stick at:
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/256075694?sortBy=rank

I have exactly that iMac which is mentioned: 2019 Retina. I have no idea why
I'm using 128.14/ESR, but I do have faith in Mozilla and Firefox giving me the
correct version.

Not sure what my next step is, but Alan B's suggestion of "maybe try Safari
next time" is the most sensible and possibly the least time-wasting!

Thanks again, all!

..............[Aside] ................................................
Particular thanks to Jörg for his answer to Chris's question of why don't I
install MS's own Teams app. Jörg's swift reply being: "Teams = $Microsoft$ =
Total Distrust"

I started using Apple in about 1991. Since then I've frequently wondered how
many COUNTLESS BILLIONS of person hours have been lost to the human race by PC
users (and businesses) having to wrestle with MS products, on both the micro
and on the macro scale.   
For me, Apple always meant "human intuition"; MS have re-defined "human
intuition" for all their billions of PC users.
Which is a longer way of saying "What Jörg said."

By the way in IMVHO Apple started drifting away from human intuition after
they introduced OSX. But that doesn't mean I'd like to go back to my Mac SE30!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181858

On 09.09.25 10:06, Another John wrote:
> ..............[Aside] ................................................
> Particular thanks to Jörg for his answer to Chris's question of why don't I
> install MS's own Teams app. Jörg's swift reply being: "Teams = $Microsoft$ =
> Total Distrust"

And btw: Teams is not free.
> I started using Apple in about 1991. Since then I've frequently wondered how
> many COUNTLESS BILLIONS of person hours have been lost to the human race by PC
> users (and businesses) having to wrestle with MS products, on both the micro
> and on the macro scale. 

Remember https://www.wired.com/story/crowdstrike-outage-update-windows/
> For me, Apple always meant "human intuition"; MS have re-defined "human
> intuition" for all their billions of PC users.
> Which is a longer way of saying "What Jörg said."
> 
> By the way in IMVHO Apple started drifting away from human intuition after
> they introduced OSX. But that doesn't mean I'd like to go back to my Mac SE30!

If macOS fails I use Linux like I do at the moment I write this.
(But I do not do it because macOS fail at the moment).


-- 
"Roma locuta, causa finita."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181859

Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 9 Sep 2025 at 07:53:50 BST, "Alan B" <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid>
> wrote:
> 
> Well! You fellas have got me thoroughly confused now!  (Sorry: first I should
> say THANKS for all he helpful replies!)
> 
> First, WolfFan said "the current version of Firefox is 142.01" and people seem
> to agree with that.
> My Firefox tells me it's up to date at 128.14. "Extended Support Release".....
>  
> So I asked Google, which produced an answer in the Apple Forums which explains
>  that there are more versions of FF than I can shake a stick at:
> https://discussions.apple.com/thread/256075694?sortBy=rank
> 
> I have exactly that iMac which is mentioned: 2019 Retina. I have no idea why
> I'm using 128.14/ESR, but I do have faith in Mozilla and Firefox giving me the
> correct version.

Not sure why you're on ESR but note that FF does move users on older MacOSes
to ESR releases so they can drop support for those OSes in the current
release version.  Last article I can see about that refers to 10.14 and
FF115:
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-users-macos-1012-1013-1014-moving-to-extended-support

But maybe if you had been running an older OS for a while before you
upgraded, maybe that would be enough for you to end up on the ESR channel. 
I don't think this is likely to be the source of your problems though.

> Not sure what my next step is, but Alan B's suggestion of "maybe try Safari
> next time" is the most sensible and possibly the least time-wasting!

Makes sense.

> Thanks again, all!
> 
> ..............[Aside] ................................................
> Particular thanks to Jörg for his answer to Chris's question of why don't I
> install MS's own Teams app. Jörg's swift reply being: "Teams = $Microsoft$ =
> Total Distrust"

Teams is an Electron app, so it's effectively the Chrome browser engine with
some wrapping.  IMHO it's better to open a new tab in the browser you are
already running, rather than incur the memory costs of running a whole new
browser just to run one web page (which is what Teams is).

> I started using Apple in about 1991. Since then I've frequently wondered how
> many COUNTLESS BILLIONS of person hours have been lost to the human race by PC
> users (and businesses) having to wrestle with MS products, on both the micro
> and on the macro scale.   
> For me, Apple always meant "human intuition"; MS have re-defined "human
> intuition" for all their billions of PC users.

IMHO 'intuitive' is just technobabble for 'looks like something I've seen
before'.  If you already know how to use a knife then you can work out how
to use a spoon because many of the principles are the same.  Apple favours
consistency of design while MS tends to be a randomly glued collection of
bits.  Apple at it's worst is when there is no consistency to fall back
upon, or the design becomes a straightjacket (it is fine to break some
rules, as long as not too many).

Unfortunately, Apple has a habit of periodically blowing their consistency
out of the water, as with iOS 7's abandonment of skeumorphism (in that case,
consistency with physical objects).  It looks like Liquid Glass might be
another one of those times.

Theo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181865

On 9 Sep 2025 at 14:07:16 BST, "Theo" <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
wrote:

> Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Well! You fellas have got me thoroughly confused now!  (Sorry: first I should
>> say THANKS for all he helpful replies!)
>> 
>> First, WolfFan said "the current version of Firefox is 142.01" and people seem
>> to agree with that.
>> My Firefox tells me it's up to date at 128.14. "Extended Support Release".....
>> 
>> So I asked Google, which produced an answer in the Apple Forums which explains
>>  that there are more versions of FF than I can shake a stick at:
>> https://discussions.apple.com/thread/256075694?sortBy=rank
>> 
>> I have exactly that iMac which is mentioned: 2019 Retina. I have no idea why
>> I'm using 128.14/ESR, but I do have faith in Mozilla and Firefox giving me the
>> correct version.
> 
> Not sure why you're on ESR but note that FF does move users on older MacOSes
> to ESR releases so they can drop support for those OSes in the current
> release version.  Last article I can see about that refers to 10.14 and
> FF115:
> https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-users-macos-1012-1013-1014-moving-to-extended-support
> 
> But maybe if you had been running an older OS for a while before you
> upgraded, maybe that would be enough for you to end up on the ESR channel.
> I don't think this is likely to be the source of your problems though.

By golly Theo, you have gone and done it again!   

In April I migrated my older 27" iMac (10.14) to my newer one (2019 27"
Retina, Sequoia, now 10.16.1).

So ... to MacOS, Firefox is just another "application downloaded from the
Internet", and the fact that it was an old ESR version is totally irrelevant.
 But also to FF itself ...

I didn't know (until 2 days ago in this group) that Firefox has "n" different
versions: I simply assumed that when FF next updated itself with the next
appropriate version, it would look around and say to itself "hey - I'm in a
newer Mac system!", and _upgrade_ itself accordingly.

So now I know what ESR means (what the acronym means, and also what the
ramificaions are). 

And SO... I have just upgraded to version 142 of FF, and will proceed to
discover what the consequences will be. I _hope_ that one of them will be that
next time I try a Teams meeting with colleagues, my camera will work (which is
what kicked all this off).

THANK YOU, All! In particular Theo who phrased his response so that an alarm
bell rang in my tiny brain.

AJ

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181847

On Sep 6, 2025, Another John wrote
(in article <Rt_uQ.4053$rZP6.2767@usenetxs.com>):

> As Subject:
>
> I have Sequoia 15.6.1 and Firefox 128.14 (I've been an inveterate Mozilla user
> since before Firefox was born).

the current version of Firefox is 142.01. Given that it works on macOS 12.7.6 
I suspect that it will work on 15.6.1. Is there a reason why you’re using 
128.14?
>
>
> (Like half the world) "my" (I'm retired) University, has been strongarmed
> into standardising on Teams for meetings.
>
> We had our first Teams meeting on Friday. I used the Website version (and was
> surprised at how easy and attractive evertyhing looked). But my camera
> wouldn't work. (the mike worked fine). I checked the Mac's Camera settings,
> and Firefox is permitted to use the camera (as it should be, because it asked
> me and I said yes).
>
> I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
> and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
> NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
> permsission?
>
> I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
> there".

I suspect that something doesn’t like a very old version of Firefox.

I futher suspect that if you download the free copy of Teams from the MS 
site, it will work. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-teams/free you 
can also get it if you have certain versions of MS Office. MS wants everyone 
to use Teams. I think that Teams is worse than either Facetime or Zoom.

Warning: Microsoft, for reason of they’re idiots, has two versions of 
Teams, the ‘personal’ version and the ‘professional/business’ 
version. For most people not in large orginizations there is no major 
difference. People in large orgs will notice a diff. Yes, you can have both 
versions installed at the same time, on both Mac and Windows; guess how I 
know this. Yes, the two versions can be configured differently; guess how I 
know this. Yes, this is breathtakingly stupid, even for MS.

The Teams web app is designed around Edge, which MS says is the best web 
browser for Windows. (News flash: no, it’s not. Firefox for Windows is much 
better, not least because I can use my fav ad-blocker, no longer available on 
Chrome or Edge) Because Edge is warmed-over Chrome, it is possible that 
Chrome works better than Firefox. MS also has a version of Edge for Mac. I 
have no idea how well either work as they are not installed on my Macs and 
never will be.

Good luck.
>
>
> Cheers
> John

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181850

Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:
> As Subject:
> 
> I have Sequoia 15.6.1 and Firefox 128.14 (I've been an inveterate Mozilla user
> since before Firefox was born). 
> 
>  (Like half the world) "my" (I'm retired) University, has been strongarmed
> into standardising on Teams for meetings.
> 
> We had our first Teams meeting on Friday. I used the Website version (and was
> surprised at how easy and attractive evertyhing looked).  But my camera
> wouldn't work. (the mike worked fine). I checked the Mac's Camera settings,
> and Firefox is permitted to use the camera (as it should be, because it asked
> me and I said yes).
> 
> I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
> and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
> NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
> permsission?
> 
> I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
> there".
> 

Any reason why you don't want to use the native Teams app?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181851

Am 07.09.25 um 13:21 schrieb Chris:
> Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> As Subject:
>>
>> I have Sequoia 15.6.1 and Firefox 128.14 (I've been an inveterate Mozilla user
>> since before Firefox was born).
>>
>>   (Like half the world) "my" (I'm retired) University, has been strongarmed
>> into standardising on Teams for meetings.
>>
>> We had our first Teams meeting on Friday. I used the Website version (and was
>> surprised at how easy and attractive evertyhing looked).  But my camera
>> wouldn't work. (the mike worked fine). I checked the Mac's Camera settings,
>> and Firefox is permitted to use the camera (as it should be, because it asked
>> me and I said yes).
>>
>> I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
>> and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
>> NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
>> permsission?
>>
>> I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
>> there".
>>
> 
> Any reason why you don't want to use the native Teams app?

Teams = $Microsoft$ = Total Distrust

Why the hell should anyone install Microsoft-software on a Mac for 
infrequent use if the mission can be accomplished with the native browser?

That was easy!


-- 
"Roma locuta, causa finita" (Augustinus)

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | uk.comp.sys.mac

csiph-web