Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.comp.software.firefox > #13326
| Message-ID | <6817eca1@news.ausics.net> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| From | not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) |
| Subject | Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? |
| Newsgroups | alt.comp.software.firefox |
| References | (2 earlier) <vv6j9n$10umt$2@dont-email.me> <vv7lg6$1un1k$1@dont-email.me> <vv8ao8$2hqeg$2@dont-email.me> <e7okelxn36.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <vv8hv8$2ogdf$2@dont-email.me> |
| Date | 2025-05-05 08:39 +1000 |
| Organization | Ausics - https://newsgroups.ausics.net |
Sailfish <NIXCAPSsailfish@nixcapsunforgettable.com> wrote: > Carlos E.R. graced us with on 5/4/2025 11:28 AM: >> Curious. I am using Firefox daily (in Linux) and I don't have currently >> sites that do not open in it. >> > Most times the sites that are problematic open but don't render fully or > don't display video. Ahh, that's why I don't have such compatibility problems (usually the issues I do have are due to my about:config settings). I never want Firefox displaying video and deliberately disable that. I always download and watch video with a separate player program, and if I can't download, I don't watch. I do have trouble with some sites blocking me or sending me into captcha hell because they think I'm a "bot". It seems to be more than just using Firefox behind that though - it's some fatal combination of IP address, OS, browser, and browser configuration that changes week by week. -- __ __ #_ < |\| |< _#
Back to alt.comp.software.firefox | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? Sailfish <NIXCAPSsailfish@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> - 2025-05-03 11:14 -0700
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-05-03 17:26 -0400
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2025-05-04 00:24 +0200
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? Sailfish <NIXCAPSsailfish@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> - 2025-05-03 19:27 -0700
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-05-04 08:11 -0400
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? Sailfish <NIXCAPSsailfish@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> - 2025-05-04 11:13 -0700
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-04 20:28 +0200
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? Sailfish <NIXCAPSsailfish@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> - 2025-05-04 13:16 -0700
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-04 23:04 +0200
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-05-05 08:39 +1000
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-05-08 03:12 -0400
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? Rob Nolan <robert@invalid.invalid> - 2025-05-04 19:50 +0000
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-04 23:01 +0200
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-05-04 20:05 -0400
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? jetjock <jetjock@unkown.com> - 2025-05-05 09:55 -0500
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-05-05 16:12 +0100
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? jetjock <jetjock@unkown.com> - 2025-05-05 13:17 -0500
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-05-08 03:22 -0400
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? Nobody <jock@soccer.com> - 2025-05-05 08:47 -0700
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-05 23:45 +0200
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? jetjock <jetjock@unkown.com> - 2025-05-06 09:43 -0500
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-05-08 03:17 -0400
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-05-08 03:09 -0400
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-05-08 06:58 -0400
Re: Death of Fx not with a bang but with a whimper? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-03 18:56 -0500
csiph-web