Skype teases "next version", promises all browser support, forgets Firefox icon
Microsoft revealed its future plans for Skype, the communication service that it acquired in 2011 for $8.5 billion. The next version of Skype will be "improved, faster, reliable, and super modern-looking" according to Microsoft.
Skype's Web version will support all browsers, according to Microsoft. Skype for the Web does not support several web browsers currently, including Mozilla Firefox.
When you visit https://web.skype.com/ right now in Firefox or another unsupported browser, you get the the "browser not supported" prompt and the suggestion to either use Microsoft's own Edge browser or use Skype for the desktop.
The new Skype will support "all browsers" according to Microsoft. Skype's team does not mention browsers specifically in the announcement, but it lists four browser icons on the page.
These are Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, Safari, and Opera.
At Skype we've always tried to serve our users on whatever device or platform they use. But even though Skype works on a lot of browsers today, we still have some gaps. We are going to change that!
We believe the Skype experience should be seamless, accessible, and reliable no matter what browser or device you are using, so we are adding support for all browsers. We would like to make sure that no matter which device, platform, or browser you're using, Skype will always give you a great experience.
The most notable browser that is missing from the list is Mozilla's Firefox web browser. Will the new Skype support the Firefox web browser? If you take the text at face value, Skype for the Web will support Mozilla's Firefox web browser. The icons on the other hand may indicate that Firefox may not be supported after all.
All Chromium-based browsers are supported by Skype or will be, even if not listed.
The future Skype
Microsoft's announcement on the official Skype blog is a long read. Here are the most important changes coming to the next version of Skype:
- Familiar interface with a modernized look. Theme refreshes.
- Skype users find themselves on the main view during calls.
- All participants will be visible, even if they don't share video.
- Performance improvements: 30% on the desktop, 2000% on Android.
- Options to disable video stream and to hide audio-only participants in the calling stage.
- Upgraded chat headers, group avatars, fluent icons.
- Meet Now integration to create and join Skype calls without need to sign-in, create an account or have the Skype app installed.
- Previews of join links.
- Office Lens functionality on Android and iOS.
- TwinCam feature to add other devices as secondary cameras to Skype.
- Customization of notification sounds.
- In-call reactions redesign and support for "super reactions".
Now You: haver you used Skype in the past? What is your take on the future version? Will it support Firefox?
Wow. The comments! It seems we’ve turned to twitter level in the sarcasm in the comments. Firefox is obviously being left apart by Edge due to Firefox reverse engineering it’s way as default browser in Windows 11.
As for the future of Mozilla, I wish the current ceo and the team of sycophants to go and à proper team get in to focus on the core of what makes Mozilla and Firefox great
Skype has fallen into the same kind of MS development-hell (very slow development, introducing half-baked features and sometimes forcing own unpopular choices onto users, distance with the product’s user-base and not responding to competitors fast/enthusiastically enough, devs not using their own product as main driver etc.) just like their Windows Phone OS was.
I have no good experience using teams…
Skype is the friendly tool for remote work.
That’s good enough for me, and I’m not interested in teams at all.
Also don’t care for Chrome… I’m a Firefox user…
“Meet Now integration to create and join Skype calls without need to sign-in, create an account or have the Skype app installed.”
Already too late, now people just use Zoom or Google Meet.
By some miracle One Drive and Skype were not installed when I bought my desktop 2 years ago. Only the setup files. well done whoever did this, that’s two less MS bloatware. To this day MS does not recognize that I miss these vital MS wonders.
I don’t know why people even bother to mention skype being more popular than X web browser when Skype comes preinstalled with windows. I mean if Bonzi buddy made a comeback and came preinstalled in windows would that make it a fantastic piece of software and far better and more popular than X browser too.
These foolish comparisons are not only useless but just highlights the very nature of anti-competitiveness that exists, the very same that many have been fighting to strip away for many years now.
Microsoft should never have been allowed to buy Skype, it has clearly gone to shit since and I suspect this more “modern” garbage they speak of will just be like windows 10, some absurd trash that hides away many options and features behind convoluted trash.
There are several alternatives to Skype these days, Jami being one of many that should probably be considered.
So masking your user agent string bypasses this… this suggests to me that Microsoft is willfully being a jerk to push their choice of browser… HA! What a surprise. Smells like IE all over again. It’s as if they have learned nothing at all.
For the record I think all browsers are garbage these days and none of them hit that sweet spot.
Firefox needs to change hands because their current direction or lack there of isn’t doing them any favors.
Chrome will always be Chrome and won’t ever change, Google will always do what is best for Google and not anyone in the same way Microsoft and Facebook also do.
I stopped using Skype when Microsoft ended SkypeKit. SkypeKit allowed me to be logged into multiple Skype accounts at once using different programs (one for business, one for personal).
If they add the ability to be signed in to 2 accounts at the same time, I will return. But that’s the only thing that could get me to return.
As for Firefox support, hopefully they pull their finger out, because all chromium based browsers run like absolute crap on my computer. They can’t handle the thousands of tabs I have open at any given time, where as Firefox can.
If it works in Firefox, this may be a way to sign into multiple accounts at once. (One in program, the other in browser).
“We would like to make sure that no matter which device, platform, or browser you’re using, Skype will always give you a great experience.”
More “Oh boy, JELLO!”
OK, Sweetie Pie, How about Sea Monkey? It has a browser; and all those weird Linux sort of browsers? And Blue Moon Cheese or whatever that thing that attracted all the screech monsters is called.
Uhhhhhhhhhhhh…..
Do MS speed freaks even READ any of the glop they publish?
What’s Skype anyway? A project MS weenies thrown off other teams were forced into?
As Firefox, does anyone actually use Skype anymore? Teams is just as bad. Bloated POS and a support nightmare for many system admins. Everyone moved to Zoom, Webex, Discord…
For those complaining about lack of Firefox support consider using an extension like User-Agent Switcher and Manager and set it to one of the supported browsers. I am pretty sure it would work then. Unfortunately I often have to use hacks like this to get websites to work but at least the option exists.
“When you visit https://web.skype.com/ right now in Firefox or another unsupported browser, you get the the “browser not supported” prompt and the suggestion to either use Microsoft’s own Edge browser”
“If you take the text at face value, Skype for the Web will support Mozilla’s Firefox web browser. The icons on the other hand may indicate that Firefox may not be supported after all.”
Microsoft abusing its monopoly as usual to impose its inferior and nefarious products.
But anyway Skype is proprietary and operated by Microsoft, two reasons not to use it.
https://stallman.org/skype.html
(just by looking at his website, it’s no surprise that all the corrupt assholes in the tech world banded together in an attempt to destroy this man, let’s never forget what those did and who they are, they shouldn’t think that they can do such an operation again and get away with it)
@Anonymous
> (just by looking at his website, it’s no surprise that all the corrupt assholes in the tech world banded together in an attempt to destroy this man, let’s never forget what those did and who they are, they shouldn’t think that they can do such an operation again and get away with it)
https://www.fastcompany.com/90618666/mozilla-and-tor-join-calls-to-oust-richard-stallman-from-free-software-foundation
@Iron Heart
And your point is? Stallman’s arguments against Skype are still valid, reasonable, hard to forget just because he might be a pig (#metoo, epstein comments). It’s like every time there is a discussion, a guy comes up and throws hardly relevant stuff.
@m3city
I didn’t say Stallman is a “pig”. Might well have defended a “pig”, but he himself? Don’t think so.
I posted this to underline the fact that the so called open source community have also betrayed him obviously, not just the corporate world that was never fond of him anyway.
@Iron Heart
And I did not say, that you had had used term “pig” :) The thing is, morals, attitude, that 1500 ppl letter have nothing to do with views of RS on Skype presented on aforementioned page.
the only pig here is brave, and it wears lipstick
look, they can’t even protect their farblewarblegargling properly because they are an advertising company masquerading as a browser, they couldn’t patch and engineer their way out of a wet paper bag, it’s been two years and their fingerprinting protection is still absolutely pig shit
https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/18251
I am one who still uses Firefox for privacy. I’m quite satisfied with it. I don’t use Skype so for me it’s a non-issue whether or not MS makes Skype work with FF. I use Edge as a backup browser if necessary but that’s extremely rare. I think this whole issue is just blown way out of proportion. We have choices. No one is right or wrong so just use whatever browser/Skype works for you.
I just checked the link with edge and I’ve got the same result : “Browser not supported” :)
Suggest searching ‘Project Chess’ to ease brain/typing flatulence.
Content to say, I’ve not used skype that’s also not supported in Midori
It’s a fucking kindergarten here again. Don’t you have a life?
The obsession with FF (for and against) is baffling.
Your favourite browser/not your favourite browser, does it have to be a constant feature in threads such as this when Skype is the main topic.
Stupid guys at M$ (as usual).
So now Opera is more used than Firefox?
Not by me…
And what is the importance of Skype today? Skype for Business has just been retired.
And they are pushing everybody to use Teams…
Oh well…
@albresc
Opera = Chromium = the technical basis 80% of the web population relies on.
No extra work needed for supporting Opera, extra work needed for supporting Firefox.
“No extra work….. blah blah blah.”
It works in Firefox by changing user-agent which can be done through add-on. As @shadowed said above, it is not a technical decision from Microsoft’s part, it would’ve been if changing user-agent would’ve no impact.
@Yash
The WebRTC implementations of Firefox and Chromium are different from each other, which has caused compatibility issues already on various communication services when Firefox was used. User agent switching may work or may not work. It may also be temporary fix since the Skype relaunch is still in beta phase and subject to change.
If you get your browser to work by mimicking Chrome’s UA, which I doubt will work for long, you should be happy about it and you would have no real reason to complain just because Firefox doesn’t feature among the listed logos (LOL). FF still isn’t a product Microsoft officially supports, and may be subject to future breakage due to diverging WebRTC implementations, is my point.
1. “The WebRTC implementations of Firefox and Chromium are different from each other.”
2. “If you get your browser to work by mimicking Chrome’s UA, which I doubt will work for long, you should be happy about it and you would have no real reason to complain just because Firefox doesn’t feature among the listed logos (LOL).”
3. “User agent switching may work or may not work. It may also be temporary fix since the Skype relaunch is still in beta phase and subject to change.
“FF still isn’t a product Microsoft officially supports, and may be subject to future breakage due to diverging WebRTC implementations, is my point.”
1. Well spotted, nobody knew that before.
2. Me complaining? Try reading my comment properly with your eyes next time.
3. Again well spotted, Firefox is not part of Microsoft, Eureka.
If a service which wasn’t working previously can be made to work by just switching user-agent, then it shows speaks volumes about the service provider which in this case is Microsoft. That was the main point which you totally missed, which deserves a shoutout.
@Yash
We’ll talk again if some UA tinkering will be enough long term to make it work. Just because it works now doesn’t mean that it will work in the future.
> Again well spotted, Firefox is not part of Microsoft, Eureka.
Huh? Do you have heavy reading comprehension issues? I never claimed that Microsoft OWNS Firefox, I said that Firefox is not OFFICIALLY SUPPORTED by Microsoft, which is not the same thing. For their online services, Microsoft supports some competitor products like Chrome, Opera, or Safari.
“> Again well spotted, Firefox is not part of Microsoft, Eureka.”
This line was written in response to you saying Microsoft doesn’t support FF. And so I was basically saying – yeah as if this is something new.
On second thought that line can be modified as – Firefox is not part of Microsoft’s plans, Eureka – to make things clear.
and what about version for GNU/Linux?
I am not using Skoopee, so no problemo.
They didn’t forget, dear Martin. It is the daily reminder for Firefox users that their browser is too irrelevant to be supported. 3% market share, wholly different engine = not worth bothering.
I am sure Microsoft will be accused of doing this to further “weaken” Firefox or to draw users to Edge, but if that were true, they could also easily lock out Safari (via not supporting WebKit) or other Chromium-based browsers (via user agent), in order to draw users to Edge, but they don’t here. As I said, the reason why Firefox isn’t there is that the developers won’t spend the extra hours on supporting a browser that almost nobody out there actually uses.
You can whine about web standards compliance all you want, the de facto standard is what the overall majority of people out there says that it is. And it’s Chromium, with a significant minority share of Apple / WebKit.
I see idiotic posts already bashing Skype as a service, calling it a “thing of the past” or “irrelevant” when both are even more true for Firefox than they are for Skype. Hilarious coping right there.
Firefox is at “almost nobody” with its 3%. Brave is at “nobody, period” with its 0%.
@Laff
Brave is somebody thanks to being based on Chromium, which 80% of web users use.
Its own market share is irrelevant to the discussion because whatever works in Chrome / Edge / Opera necessarily also works in Brave.
Also, intelligence test failed. Too bad.
“Chromium, which 80% of web users use”.
Hey @Iron Heart, can you back up that claim? I have been googling web browser market share and it looks like you are way off with that percentage. From what I can find Chrome has never had more than 72% market share (back in 2018), and is currently 65%.
(I’m looking at multiple sources. I’m also looking at Desktop, Mobile, and Combined market share. 65% is the most common value, and all values are within a few percentage points of it).
@matthiew
> Hey @Iron Heart, can you back up that claim?
Of course I can. Not only Chrome is based on Chromium, Edge and Opera are based on Chromium as well. Samsung Internet on mobile is also using Chromium as its base.
Firefox (Gecko) and Safari (WebKit) are the only competitor browsers not based on Chromium (aside from a few hobby projects like Otter Browser etc. – not relevant here as they are minuscule).
https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share
As you can see, Safari has 17% – 19% of the market under its belt, Firefox around 3% – 4% – depending on which source one relies. So I’d say roughly 80% of the market (give or take) using Chromium is accurate.
Quote IH:
“Brave is somebody thanks to being based on Chromium”
Thanks for confirming that “Brave is somebody” 100% at Google’s mercy.
@Emil Brausewetter
Genius Emil understands that Brave is based on Chromium. Took you long enough. Are they at Google’s mercy though? They can and do remove or disable user-hostile functionality from the code base, so my guess is NO.
> 100% at Google’s mercy
If Google pulls their funding from Mozilla, Mozilla dead. I guess you Deplatformingfox users speak from experience here.
Quote IH:
“Genius Emil understands that Brave is based on Chromium.”
Remember this ingenius one?
Iron Heart said on April 19, 2021 at 2:49 pm
***LOL. I am sure Google does all the Brave builds! Nothing more to say here.***
https://www.ghacks.net/2021/04/18/mozilla-will-remove-leanplum-tracking-from-firefox-for-android-and-ios/#comment-4491936
With kind regards
@Emil Brausewetter
That was my sarcastic reply to your assertion that whatever Google implements in Chromium is supposedly set in stone, while in reality Chromium-based forks do disable user-hostile features all the time. Out of context quote mining at its finest.
I encourage anyone interested in how you operate to read the thread you linked to. There, readers can see that you always post the same, lame, old, WRONG assertions under my comments and then wonder why I call it trolling by now.
With kind regards
Quote:
“Out of context quote mining at its finest.”
But not my dearest! Now that really wasn’t necessary to publicly acknowledge that your comments are usually completely out of context.
Get well soon!
3% from billions of users is still tens of millions, but 0% is 0.
@Laff
Brave’s technical basis (Chromium, Blink) is used by 80% of the web population. Firefox’s technical basis (Gecko) is used by 3% of the web population. See the difference?
Harping on Brave’s market share is irrelevant for the discussion of web compatibility, whatever works in Chrome / Edge / Opera also works in Brave. Can’t say the same about Firefox.
Since you’re so well informed, I’m sure you know that Firefox market share on desktop is 7-8%, quite comparable to Safari’s. The 3% you rant about is for desktop+mobile, which means it’s not a correct percentage of the user head count, since most people use both mobile and desktop. So, yeah, let’s do the “smart” thing and ignore the population of Germany+Japan (assuming at least half of 4.6 billion internet users use desktop).
Google Chrome’s user base is bedrock layer, so maybe they are targeting Mozilla, which is hostile to Microsoft’s Edge web browser setup. LOL!
Mozilla reverse engineers Microsoft Edge’s default browser setting behavior – gHacks Tech News
https://www.ghacks.net/2021/09/13/mozilla-reverse-engineers-microsoft-edges-default-browser-setting-behavior/
I have no experience using skype.
“Microsoft Teams” is the designated tool for remote work.
That’s good enough for me, and I’m not interested in skype at all.
@owl
Ah, the “target Mozilla” conspiracy theory again when the actual reason for a lack of support is that Firefox is too irrelevant already to be supported. If it still had a two digit market share percentage, I am sure it would be there. Any other, non-technical motive you come up with without giving sources is pure coping.
If Microsoft were targeting rival browsers, they wouldn’t allow Skype to work correctly in anything but Edge. But they don’t. Look at the supported browsers, all the relevant ones are there, so your claim is absurd.
Iron Heart say’s so logic:
” If it still had a two digit market share percentage, I am sure it would be there.”
Does Opera or Edge have a “two digit market share percentage”? Nah!
Another gem of IH logic:
“If Microsoft were targeting rival browsers, they wouldn’t allow Skype to work correctly in anything but Edge.”
… “allow Skype to work correctly in anything but Edge” means 96,44% of other browsers are ignored. Fact.
Sensational IH statement:
“But they don’t.”
Of course they don’t.
Ignoring 96,44% of potentiell users is bad for MS business, isn’t it?
@Emil Brausewetter
> Does Opera or Edge have a “two digit market share percentage”? Nah!
Supporting Opera and Edge is no additional effort if Chrome is already supported. No idea how often I have to repeat this until the light shines through. Very often, I guess.
> means 96,44% of other browsers are ignored. Fact.
Means that 96.44% of all users would have an incentive to switch to Edge. Not that they would actually risk this, I am just debunking the “Firefox is being sabotaged” conspiracy theory.
> Ignoring 96,44% of potentiell users is bad for MS business, isn’t it?
Which is why they don’t do it.
Classic Emil Brausewetter, pointless post that doesn’t add anything. As expected.
Oh, another gem of Iron Heart’s rhabarber rhabarbarum:
“Means that 96.44% of all users would have an incentive to switch to Edge.”
Just because of Skype?
Why do you even mention this nonsense when you immediately exclude it in the very next sentence:
“Not that they would actually risk this”
@Emil Brausewetter
> Just because of Skype?
Skype users? Yes, of course.
> Why do you even mention this nonsense
In order to debunk conspiracy theories that say that Microsoft actively agitates against your irrelevant browser. They don’t force your towards Edge here.
“In order to debunk conspiracy theories”
I see …
Your every word is an embarrassment, mind you. You only ever blow sentences of circus-like momentum over your intellectual mule bridges in the mad hope of overcoming your own gorge-like ignorance.
@Iron Heart,
so maybe they are targeting Mozilla, which is hostile to Microsoft’s Edge web browser setup. LOL!
It was a light joking expression. …. I’m dumbfounded at the obstinacy and eccentricity of Iron Heart that they can’t even get that through.
And by the way,
I mean it when I say the second sentence !
I have no experience using skype.
“Microsoft Teams” is the designated tool for remote work.
That’s good enough for me, and I’m not interested in skype at all.
@owl
Oh, so your comment was a joke. Good to know that you are in fact aware of the irrelevance of Mozilla, even though you got so worked up over @Dumbledalf’s comment above pointing out said irrelevance, that you had to (rather stupidly, because zero actual impact on web compatibility, which is what the article here discusses) throw shade on the startup Vivaldi for being even smaller than ex-molasses Mozilla. Good to know that your posts have to be understood as comedic whenever you lose an argument. Hahahahahahahahaha. Job done here.
PS: Why even commenting when you don’t care about Skype.
@Iron Heart,
Just to be clear, I am not agreeing with you.
Both Microsoft and Mozilla are immeasurable to an outsider (end user).
It’s just speculation.
It is the ridiculous trolling and agitating that I have a problem with.
> PS: Why even commenting when you don’t care about Skype.
The topic is,
Now You: haver you used Skype in the past? What is your take on the future version? Will it support Firefox?
@owl
OK, what is the more likely reason for Firefox not being supported:
1) Microsoft doesn’t want to sacrifice money and time supporting an engine hardly anyone uses, so made the decision to drop it.
2) Microsoft is dead set on making an irrelevant browser that is in no way a threat to them even more irrelevant, just because.
You expect anyone to believe (2)? Really? That has to be the actual joke here.
> haver you used Skype in the past?
Yes.
> What is your take on the future version?
Stupid redesign, designers have to justify their ongoing employment somehow.
> Will it support Firefox?
LOL, nope.
See, I answered the obligatory questions the kind of which Martin comes up with under every single articles to spark a discussion. But I can also discuss any other point made in the article which includes the exclusion of Firefox based on its irrelevant rendering engine. When I do this, it is not off-topic, since it features prominently in the article. Your definition of “off-topic” is skewed at best.
@Iron Heart,
Even Firefox (78.14.0esr, Nightly 94.0a1) works to Skype perfectly fine if I spoof the user agent.
I’ve removed Edge and can’t (and won’t) confirm that it works, but according to Matthieu
https://www.ghacks.net/2021/09/28/skype-teases-next-version-promises-all-browser-support-forgets-firefox-icon/#comment-4504822
I just checked the link with edge, and I’ve got the same result : “Browser not supported” :)
After all, such a label is a lazy substitute.
In any case, I don’t care if the browser supports it, as I prefer standalone desktop apps to using it in a browser.
Finally,
I point out that “off-topic” is the act of “intruding into other people’s conversations with off-the-wall and derailing topics based on specific keywords that are different from the original intention”.
As long as you post independently and don’t interrupt conversations with others, gHacks will “allow it to be on-topic as long as it is relevant to the article”.
Unlike you, I have no spare time. I cannot spend any more time talking with you. I will now put an end to this.
@owl
I have already conceded that some UA tinkering may yield fixes, however temporary those might be. They don’t want to officially support Firefox so if anything breaks despite the UA tinkering, don’t expect it to work again. I’ll ignore your “I don’t care about Skype because of standalone apps” blah blah assertions because you obviously care enough to comment here.
I won’t further your highly questionable definitions of what can be considered off-topic, because I too have no interest in prolonging this conversation.
Lastly and perhaps as a side note, it is good to see that you haven’t lost your humor yet. You post the longest ass comments of all people here and then assert that you have “no time” when confronted with your nonsense for once. Yes, I can believe that. Comedy indeed.
@Iron Heart,
I see, I could read your true intentions.
So you’re a long-time user of Skype, and it’s your favorite app.
You couldn’t stand the unpopularity of “Skype” in this thread, so you made Firefox the scapegoat.
All you had to do was make an honest comment about “Skype” and it would have been fine, but it looks like your intrusion (expectation) has turned the topic into “Firefox”. Oh, your childish selfishness is disgusting.
I have posted for you many times, clearly and simply, that I am a “Microsoft Team’s user” and have never used or want to use Skype.
Why do you get “bent out of shape” in your replies? Assumption? Or is it arbitrary?
Perhaps you are ignorant of “remote work”? In short, I work from home. While I work from home, I am a “regular worker” and have limited free time. And I am fed up with the stupidity of spending my free time replying to you on “ghacks”.
I am replying to you because “your reply distorts my comment and needs to be corrected”. Please do not conclude my reply by adding your evil reasoning to it.
Oh yeah yeah, you used the phrase “won the argument”, but I have no intention of engaging in any kind of sterile debate with you fanatical, I’m not arguing with you, I’m just encouraging you to correct yourself. Don’t “creation of a story” anything on your own, please.
In short, due to your misleading-perverted and inappropriate comments that have been scattered throughout the site, I have simply clarified the areas that need to be corrected out of necessity, and urged you to correct them!
ghacks Tech News is tolerant and seems to be a good playground for you, but stop on distorting threads!
I have tried to be clear and devise a message to you so that you can understand, but I guess you will try to “quibble” and “derail” to justify yourself as you always do. You really are a troublesome “just a kid.”!
I liked skype a lot, and I guess it’s still used. However have not used it for at least two years. It’s sad that MS does not see FF as a viable browser, it reflects market share and it’s probably a lot easier to support chrome based crap (but I don’t know much about it anyway, just an assumption). Good for Microsoft, worse for FF users, but let’s be clear – anyone using windows can use edge from time to time for this purpose, cant they?
Personally I don’t really care as I see skype as a desktop/smartphone app only. And there are web-based communication tools used in business that do support firefox. Isn’t it so that webbased tools serve bussiness and profesionall comunication only or mostly?
A comment on the article: I noticed that there is no distinction between authors paragraphs and citations. Like this one “At Skype we’ve always tried to serve our (…)”. It’s MS wording, not MB’s.
It never used to work in FF, but last time I tested I got it working (maybe a year ago). It’s still a relic of the past and I avoid it where possible.
Skype wasn’t bad before MS bought it and mangled it into Shite For Business. The cloud-based Teams is a godsend for businesses (not to mention their IT staff).
I got it to work from beginning by spoofing user-agent. Once you get past that, it works just fine. Not supporting FF is political decision, not technical one.
people still use skype?
Yes, but they will be moved to Teams when Windows 11 launches.
@Greg
Skype has more monthly active users than Firefox does. Fact.
A typical IH nonsense comparison:
“Skype has more monthly active users than Firefox does. Fact.”
Swallow this:
Micorosoft Office has more monthly active users than Brave. Fact.
@Emil Brausewetter
> Micorosoft Office has more monthly active users than Brave. Fact.
:D
Microsoft Office is a standalone set of applications, and the online version works with Brave.
Saying that nobody uses Skype, coming from FF users, is just hilarious.
No one is still using that piece of crap.
Just follow the web standards
Then its is up to the browser makers to catch up.
Firefox included.
I don’t think they forgot it, it’s just that Firefox is barely used by anyone so no use supporting it.
@Dumbledalf
If FF is so insignificant then why does any mention of it trigger you so much?
Sounds like Mozilla is living rent free in your (and a couple of others’) mind.
Because a multi-billion dollar corporation that got sued over anti-competition can’t afford or justify to write standards compliant code. Right! Seems totally legit.
@John B
They are supporting competitor browsers, look at the bottom picture of the article. They even support a different engine from their own, Safari’s WebKit. But there are limits. You don’t have to support every single irrelevant competitor. What’s next? Pale Moon support (no offense, I use it myself for Tab Mix Plus reasons occasionally, but I don’t expect websites to swallow it as it is small)? Otter Browser support? Firefox users are almost there, don’t complain when website admins stop bothering.
Also, you make it sound as if Firefox is 100% standards compliant across the board, and has no quirks of its own that developers have to work around. LOL, don’t think so.
@Dumbledalf,
You’re always barging in on the subject of Firefox and shouting “anti-Mozilla” at the top of your lungs, but what about your favorite browser, Vivaldi?
In demographics, the world population is the total number of humans currently living, and was estimated to have reached 7,800,000,000 people as of March.
Vivaldi Active Users (and counting): 2,300,000+
https://vivaldi.com/company/
Browser startup Vivaldi says needs 5 million users to turn profit
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-internet-vivaldi-idUSKCN0XC1J6
Initial release April 6, 2016; 5 years ago (Technical Preview released on Jan 27, 2015)
User acquisition is stagnant at around 2.2 million, and the CEO is aware of the business crisis.
Vivaldi is the one that is “in an extremely precarious position”, moreover is not even looked at by anyone (It’s not that they are not known, but that they are too niche and users are leaving because they are disgusted. In other words, even if you get new users, the old ones are leaving, which is the common view of me and other users who were users from Opera).
Recently,
https://www.ghacks.net/2021/09/27/how-to-block-sites-from-requesting-idle-detection-api-permissions-in-chrome/#comment-4504757
You are free to express your opinion on the topic, but it would be “in your shame” to show your face at the beginning of a reply (comment).
@owl
I’m not using Vivaldi anymore, but I’m not using Chrome either, nor Firefox or anything with Gecko Rendering engine.
@owl
You are totally missing the point. Vivaldi is based on Chromium. It can be supported by Microsoft without the devs having to put in any extra work. If it already works in Chrome / Edge / Opera, it also works in Vivaldi.
Of the browsers having a competitor rendering engine, Firefox is by far the smallest (hobby projects aside), it is 5 x smaller than Safari even.
@Iron Heart
I saw you from several years ago, you always complain about firefox.
If you hate it, then just don’t waste your time talking about it.
So when you hate it and write unrelated comment about firefox is small engine, etc is completely trolling behavior.
I love the passion that firefox developers have, i love how much they are working hard to modernize a browser that didn’t had good up to date documents, did had very complex codebase that hards to deal with but they are now here and are shouting to all their haters that they are here.
They are here to challenge every trashy company like Microsoft and opera that ditched their own engine.
They introduced webrenderer for all systems, even my android middle range phone and also brought multi process to android recently.
It is several years that they are trying to reduce project fission RAM overhead so that they can bring strict site isolation to Firefox.
They also did worked many years for multi process and several years for webrenderer so they become production ready and can make the compatible with gecko and put them.
They are rewriting what they can with rust to make their browser more safe, more future proof, and can more efficiently write code because of strict rust security checks specially about many common CVEs in browsers.
With firefox 93, they are shouting to the world that the project quantum, firefox 68 and now with firefox 93 they are completely on par in performance to chromium.
And in the same time they are trying to prevent firefox from dying if google won’t make contract with them.
I don’t like mozilla CEO, mozilla chairmans but i don’t know how much they are really technically are working, so I won’t judge them although i don’t like them, but i love firefox, i love its hard working developers that ignore this much annoyance from trolls.
I love those who stand against mainstream when it is not good.
Yes, chromium is perfect, well documented, well structured, with great talented developer but firefox developers also are working much harder and are as much talented as them.
Yes, the rise of chromium/chrome made firefox to become this mich great.
This is power of competition.
If any of firefox, Chrome/chromium and safari (although i hate apple) goes out of business, then that will be an end to the web.
But probably you don’t care about it.
I don’t care about mozilla, i care about firefox, i care about great developers that working hard, i care about having choice, i care about future, i care about competition.
You also can do what you want
I hope best wishes for you.
Good luck.
@put what name you want here
> “If you hate it, then just don’t waste your time talking about it.”
How is it a waste of time? It’s his time, not yours. Otherwise, perhaps you can heed your own logic:
If you hate Iron Heart’s comments, then just don’t waste your time talking to him.
@Iron Heart,
You are, as usual, a person who is short-sighted, lacks composure, and can’t control off-topic Replies.
There is no doubt that you have an unusual obsession with Firefox and Brave.
I was replying to Dumbledalf’s comment in the opening post, not to anything mention.
Enough with the off-topic trolling!
@owl
How is my reply “lacking composure”? I didn’t insult you at all.
Let’s reconstruct what happened, shall we?
Dumbledalf: Firefox is too irrelevant to be supported.
owl: But, but, Vivaldi is even more irrelevant!!!!
Iron Heart: owl, how does that even matter? Whatever works in Chrome / Edge / Opera also works in Vivaldi, they are all based on Chromium.
owl: That’s short-sighted / lacks composure / is off-topic (even though it isn’t, hahahaha) / obsessed / trolling blah blah blah
The only thing off-topic here was your last reply. I revealed the fallacy of your initial comment already, and you had no rebuttal to this aside from some accusatory blah blah. Job done here I’d say.