Ant wrote:
On 10/19/2020 2:51 PM, NFN Smith wrote:
Ant wrote:
Dave, others and I ran into this back in the end of September 2020 in
"Cannot Access Verizon.com LogIn OR Chase.com SM 2.53.4 W10 Pro"
newsgroup thread in this newsgroup. More and more web sites are
annoyingly doing this. :(
Yep. I find financial institutions in general to have this issue, and
Chase seems to be the most aggressive.
Yeah, I'm seeing more non-financial ones too like
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/ that takes me to
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/unsupported-browser?err=custom-elements,shadow-dom
(at least, it still supports Firefox). I had a specific thread about
this issue in my 9/2/2020 9:38 PM PDT newsgroup post titled
"RottenTomatoes.com rejects SeaMonkey even with fake UAs."
I remember being a part of that discussion. It looks like that site's
scripting is querying something deeper in the browser than the UA.
I went as far as the login screen, and there's the usual drivel about
security issues. Earlier today, I was reading the meeting notes from
Seamonkey devs, and they're pretty current on getting updates backported.
It really comes down to the people at Chase don't want to be bothered
with anything other than Chrome, current versions of Firefox, Safari,
and maybe Edge.
Yep. This had been around when Internet Explorer (IE) was winning the
web browser war before Chrome joined the fight. Now, IE is way down like
Firefox and SeaMonkey with Chrome being the top. Developers are lazy,
don't want to work more, and don't care. Argh. :(
Devs may be lazy, but with financial institutions, it's actually the
problem of the people who do support. Consider the following scenarios:
Me: I'm having problems getting logged into my Chase account from the web.
Chase: What browser are you using?
Me: Firefox 73 on Windows
Chase: Go to the hamburger menu, select Options, and then click on [x and y]
- or -
Me: I'm having problems getting logged into my Chase account from the web.
Chase: What browser are you using?
Me: Mozilla Seamonkey on Windows
Chase: We don't support Seamonkey [dialtone]
It's not just Seamonkey they're doing this to. I'm sure that the same
applies to things like PaleMoon and Waterfox. I haven't heard of it
applying to Chrome derivatives such as Iron, Epic or Opera, but it may
be that their UA is close enough to stock Chrome to not disrupt
interaction. However, if you have problems and talk to tech support,
it's a good guess that saying something that's not "Chrome" will give
you the same figurative dialtone.
I think it comes down to the institution wanting to minimize operator
time spent on customer service, and if they can't tell you what to do
with what they have on their own desks, they're not going to take the
time to try to figure it out. It would not surprise me that Chase has a
corporate standard of clearing customer support calls in less than 5
minutes, and preferably faster, if they can. And once a call goes over
5 minutes, there's real heat on the operators to get the call wrapped
within seconds. And I'll bet there's an internal metric that measures
that very closely.
They're in too big of a hurry to end the call that they have any
patience or willingness to facilitate anything outside of the
mainstream, as they define it.
For what it's worth, I was just at Constant Contact, and they
explicitly complained about Seamonkey, but didn't prevent me from
logging in.
Hmm, we all should complain. Is there a specific contact method you
used? Did they answer back yet?
No direct interaction, just a boilerplate that they pop up after I log in:
Constant Contact does not officially support SeaMonkey.
You may close this message and continue to use Constant Contact with SeaMonkey,
but we cannot guarantee that it will work.
In order to provide you with the fastest, most secure experience,
we encourage you to switch to one of our officially supported browsers.
Although I can get the idea that a UA that identifies itself as Firefox
60 is something they may consider "insecure" if they're not familiar
with Seamonkey, I have yet to see a site (rottontomatoes
notwithstanding) that makes this kind of complaint that doesn't perform
the way that I want it to if spoof a UA. Maybe it's the various
tracking and ad delivery mechanisms that don't work, but I'm aggressive
enough with NoScript that those generally don't run anyway. Yes, I
often have to manually enable the site's own scripting, and things like
googleapis and gstatic (although not google-analytics) and various CDN
and anti-DoS mirrors to get the essential features, but that's still on
me and not the site.
If I really can't wrestle my Seamonkey configs to do what I want, I may
simply use Firefox with minimal tweaking for one transaction.
Smith
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
