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


Groups > alt.comp.software.firefox > #13237

Re: An annoying state of affairs

From VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH>
Newsgroups alt.comp.software.firefox
Subject Re: An annoying state of affairs
Date 2025-04-30 19:57 -0500
Organization Usenet Elder
Message-ID <1dq652bscolmc.dlg@v.nguard.lh> (permalink)
References <5c15d17484dnews@triffid.co.uk>

Show all headers | View raw


Dnews <dnews@triffid.co.uk> wrote:

> Good day folks,
> An annoying state of affairs has presented itself for my dear wife.
> 
> She's been using Firefox on MS Windows for many years, and recently a
> couple of sites she uses will not work with firefox.
> 
> She's communicated with them and they say their sites have been tailored
> to work with 'MS-Edge or Google Chrome for a smoother and better
> experience for the users', and so she should use one of them.  :-(  (Crap).
> 
> I have a vague recollection there is a setting in About:config Preferences
> to spoof/make Firefox appear to be another browser, like Edge.  :-(
> 
> Is there a setting I can use to fix this for her?

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-reset-default-user-agent-firefox

This used to work more successfully in the past when web sites were
merely detecting which web client connected to them, and using decision
blocks to decide which code to use with which web browser.  However, as
web sites have adopted more advanced HTML and scripting, and because the
User-Agent header is deprecated (sites are supposed to test what the web
client supports instead of assuming their feature set from what the web
client purported it was), this trick has gradually become ineffective.

The about:config setting you are looking for is:

  general.useragent.override
  
Its value is what gets put in the User-Agent header sent by the web
client to the web server.  As to what you specify for its value depends
on which web client you are trying to pretend is Firefox.  A list of UA
strings can be found at:

https://useragentstring.com/pages/useragentstring.php

You probably want to use one for Chrome.  However, you need to use a UA
string that reports a recent version of the web client.  Web sites will
also place restrictions on visiting them with too-old web clients.  If
you use a UA string reporting an old version of a web client, the web
site may figure that is really what you are using, but they don't
support back that version; i.e., they require a later version.

Unfortunately spoofing the User-Agent header won't work if the problem
is the site using code that doesn't run well or at all under Firefox.
My ISP's web site runs excrutiatingly slow, because Firefox has a
problem running all the scripts.  Meanwhile, Chromium-based web browsers
(e.g., Brave) run much faster.  The ISP's site is still slow, but I'm
waiting a few seconds in Brave or Edge rather than over 5 minutes in
Firefox.  The lag is so long that usually I figure the site is dead or
otherwise unresponsive.  My health provider's web site won't paint some
screens with Firefox, but work fine with Brave or Edge.  My bank's web
site is not fully usable with Firefox, but works fine in Brave or Edge.  

Changing the User-Agent string only works if the site looks at the
header to decide whether or not to support the purported web client.  If
the code or scripts don't like Firefox, lying that Firefox is Chrome
won't resolve the problems.

Used to be I found about 5 sites in a year that would not work with
Firefox.  Now I'm finding about 1 per month.

Back to alt.comp.software.firefox | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

An annoying state of affairs Dnews <dnews@triffid.co.uk> - 2025-04-30 20:33 +0100
  Re: An annoying state of affairs "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2025-04-30 15:39 -0400
  Re: An annoying state of affairs jjb <jjb@invalid.invalid> - 2025-04-30 22:09 +0200
    Re: An annoying state of affairs candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-05-01 16:00 +0000
  Re: An annoying state of affairs Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-30 17:22 -0400
    Re: An annoying state of affairs "David E. Ross" <nobody@nowhere.invalid> - 2025-04-30 17:23 -0700
      Re: An annoying state of affairs NFN Smith <worldoff9908@gmail.com> - 2025-05-01 12:56 -0700
    Re: An annoying state of affairs "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-04 15:00 +0200
  Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-30 19:57 -0500
    Re: An annoying state of affairs The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2025-05-04 09:50 -0700
  Re: An annoying state of affairs NFN Smith <worldoff9908@gmail.com> - 2025-05-01 12:48 -0700
    Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-01 22:33 +0000
      Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-01 18:47 -0500
        Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-02 08:00 +0000
          Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-02 05:02 -0500
            Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-03 00:39 +0000
              Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-03 01:51 -0500
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-03 07:43 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-03 10:44 -0500
              Re: An annoying state of affairs Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2025-05-03 08:31 +0100
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-03 07:39 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2025-05-03 09:12 +0100
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-03 22:30 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-03 19:18 -0500
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-04 02:07 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-03 22:48 -0500
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-04 06:40 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-04 05:28 -0500
                Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-04 05:32 -0500
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-04 23:56 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-04 21:43 -0500
                Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-04 21:58 -0500
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-06 22:42 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-05 07:26 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-05 07:28 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-04 21:41 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-04 17:33 -0500
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-04 23:20 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-04 15:02 +0200
                Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-04 12:44 -0500
                Re: An annoying state of affairs "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-04 20:11 +0200
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-04 21:36 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-04 17:34 -0500
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-04 23:20 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-04 21:48 -0500
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-05 07:29 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-05 05:11 -0500
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-06 22:44 +0000
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2025-05-07 08:58 -0700
                Re: An annoying state of affairs VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-03 10:53 -0500
                Re: An annoying state of affairs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-05-03 22:33 +0000
    Re: An annoying state of affairs Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-05-02 17:36 +0000
      Re: An annoying state of affairs sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> - 2025-05-02 14:32 -0500
        Re: An annoying state of affairs "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2025-05-02 17:08 -0400
  Re: An annoying state of affairs Dnews <dnews@triffid.co.uk> - 2025-05-04 07:17 +0100
    Re: An annoying state of affairs Dave Royal <dave@dave123royal.com> - 2025-05-04 07:59 +0100
    Re: An annoying state of affairs Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-05-04 08:20 -0400

csiph-web