- cross-posted to:
- firefox@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- firefox@lemmy.ml
Teams also doesn’t support multiple “work” accounts, so I had to boot up a laptop to accept the call. 🤷
You must log in or register to comment.
I works for me without a user agent change if I enter through the Microsoft 365 teams workspace and not a teams share link.
Reason?
- Firefox does not support Microsoft Teams
- Microsoft disabled support for Firefox
- Problem for a specific computer/account
2 but not because of missing features in Firefox. They just hate competition.
Yeah, as far as I know it’s not some browser chauvinism, but Firefox not supporting some multimedia protocols, that doesn’t mean it’s Firefox fault though, I’d install some chrome fork just for this kind of interactions
Have you tried changing your user agent string to Chrome? I know it can sometimes sidestep these types of “errors”. It can be changed manually through about:config under general.useragent.override, or there exists plenty of addons to switch it more easily.
Try changing your user agent to a Chrome one (e.g.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36). Works a treat!Feels like we’re back to 2007 again when spoofing firefox user agent to IE would fix websites not working properly, only now we spoof it to chrome instead.
Sidenote:
HTTP user agents have become absolutely bonkers over the years.
Not really. The example listed above is perfectly readable.
Knowing the versions of webkit, browser version, etc. is important due to inconsistencies, new features, mossing features, and deprecated features. Sure it can be faked, but that is on the end user.
Chrome doesn’t use Webkit, and the referenced Webkit version is probably 10 years old at this point. The user agent is full of stuff for backwards compatibility. That’s why it’s being deprecated in favour of a better API (client hints)
You can use private mode or a different browser to login with multiple Teams accounts.
yet
Pfft!
Works fine for me in Firefox.
Im sure if you swap user agent to chrome the wouldn’t give a fuck
It crashes right after a call starts.
Everything else works fine though.
Jitsi is better
Just change your Useragent, Microsoft is a bunch of dummies and didn’t even bother to code it in a way that makes sense as a DRM lmfao.
Microsoft made their minecraft website complete in functional for Firefox. You can’t even download the launcher without chrome… And I don’t understand why. What in the world do they need chrome features that Firefox hasn’t?
I read this whole thread and didnt find a single person who uses teams inside ferdium like me.
Teams also doesn’t support multiple “work” accounts
Firefox lets you have completely separate profiles with separate accounts (URL:
about:profiles, it can’t be linked to for security reasons) and also an official extension to have another layer of profiles on a per-tab basis (containers).Also no idea what he is talking about, I have 4 work accounts in Teams. Ever since they rebuilt their frontend to the “New Teams” multiple accounts have been working just fine.
In the past I had multiple Team instances as PWA for different work accounts, nowadays it’s all in one app and works pretty good.
Not to defend Teams, it’s total shit, a lot of shit straight up doesn’t work half of the time, including important shit like notifications for new messages and content. But it has come a long way from the days including any image in chat would crash Teams for all participants. It isn’t perfect and the amount of resources it used to do what it does is awful, but compared to most modern apps it’s pretty good.
Just don’t tell a Teams dev Microsoft Messenger did 99% of the same stuff and ran super fast on a Pentium 3 333mhz with 64MB of ram, they’ll cry and you’ll be called out for being a bully.
This is likely legacy code. Firefox used to have a lot of issues with WebRTC, so practically all video conferencing systems blocked it. Teams probably instead has some “block Firefox because it doesn’t work properly” check that was written 5+ years ago and none of the current developers are even aware of its existence.
Well-coded ones did feature detection instead of checking the user-agent, meaning they automatically started allowing Firefox as soon as it implemented all the required features.
Feature detection is usually the way to go. If your website / webapp depends on a particular feature, check if that specific feature exists, rather than checking for particular browsers. Browser checks are still needed in some cases, for example Safari sometimes reports that it supports particular features but it really doesn’t (or they’re so buggy to the point where they’re unusable), but that’s relatively rare.
This is tough to implement when the feature is present, but implemented wrong. Or, even worse, when it’s implemented right, but the most popular browser implements it wrong and almost everyone else follow suit for compatibility reasons, except for one that takes the stance of following standards. I know safari is notorious for this, think pale moon had those issues, too, and there are still echoes from the past from pre-chrome internet explorer, thank god it’s finally dead.
Chrome is the new Internet Explorer.
At least Chrome is mostly standards-compliant and doesn’t do anything too weirdly. I’d say Safari is the new IE - lots of weird bugs that no other browser has, and sometimes you need hacks specific to Safari.
I couldn’t say that it is. Chrome team’s usual approach is to make and release stuff first, write specifications later. By the time the other browsers come along, there’s already both market adoption and bunch of dumb decisions set in stone as a standard. Most notable examples of this would be QUIC and WebUSB
That’s fair. I meant that more in terms of using market dominance to shape the browser market, and not in entirely good ways.
I’ll rue the day that every website insists it only works with Chrome because of some user-privacy degrading feature that Google insists is a core web technology.
This is tough to implement when the feature is present, but implemented wrong
Sometimes it’s doable if you can call the API and check that the result is what you’d expect. For example, a long time ago some browsers incorrectly handled particular Unicode characters in JSON.parse. Sites could check for the incorrect behaviour and shim JSON.parse with a version that fixes the output.
I’ve never worked with WebRTC but I imagine it might be difficult to do that with some of its APIs given they require camera or microphone access (meaning you can’t check for the bug until the user actually tries to use it).
Teams used to have more features on Firefox. Microsoft has intentionally started stripping off shit to move people to edgium
