I know I can spoof my useragent, it’s just ridiculous that such a massive app doesn’t support an equally massive browser.
Try the user agent switcher add-on. The volume of times I’ve changed my agent to chrome and had a site work perfectly is infuriating.
They said they know about that, but it’s ridiculous.
My problem was that CloudFlare refused to validate me when I have it enabled. I could have stock FF UA, but if my user agent switcher addon isn’t disabled then I didn’t get to use Crunchyroll and a few other sporadic sites.
I still doesn’t work even if I have changed user agent to chrome. I guess they have some other mechanism to find the browser.
I don’t understand why Firefox doesn’t have a button for that
it does
That’s okay, I use Firefox and don’t support Snapchat.
You should submit something to the webcompat website. It would help and they’ll contact Snapchat and see what they can do.
As @denschub@schub.social always emphasises: make sure to file a report at https://webcompat.com!
We ask everyone to file their reports, because all reports are really useful. Even if we don’t respond to every single thing you report, it’s a signal that we’re processing in many different ways. (…) please, keep reporting all issues you see, because every single blip counts!
https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1de7bu1/comment/l8ghtr2/
never knew about this but I’m definitely going to start using it
I didn’t even know that there was a Snapchat for web
I’m just surprised people still use it.
I’ve never used Snapchat on mobile, so I didn’t bother checking if it works on web. It’s neat, but I still don’t care.
Fuck every form of this. Website: you deliver the document, and I decide if it works.
You are supposed to do feature detection, not user agent detection since it is easily spoofed, isn’t realiable, & doesn’t account for literally all the alternative UAs that can support it. This is bad/lazy practice.
Fx doesn’t always have all the features you need, but often it usually does & where I have seen this as being deployed is management saying it isn’t worth the effort to support. Just having one person on the team running Fx is usually enough to catch the game-breaking bugs.
FYI navigator.platform and friends will still return Linux, even in Tor Browser… so it’s still trivially easy to detect your OS, Browser etc. and block that even without the user agent.
That’s still not feature detection & is in the exact same sniffing category
what’s even the advantage in this?
Something marketing and having your service not appear dysfunctional or buggy to the stupid, stupid enduser
Also avoids firefox privacy
Snapchat has a web client? :o
you can’t snap, can only messageedit: im wrong you can snap now.doesnt that kind of defeat the point ?
Dunno never saw the appeal anyway
what even is the point of snapchat?
well it was sending nudes at first, before people realized that nothing really got erased
I would simply not use the service. Capitalism says good services are rewarded for being good, the inverse would be they dont get to make money off of you for a bad service
doesn’t it utilize some fancy camera APIs or whatever? last time I tried it on firefox with a spoofed user agent there were errors in the console
yeah it just won’t let me in on firefox at all, i had to use chr*mium 🤮 in a vm to get in
holy shit stop using snapchat
That’s the real story here. That someone’s still using Snapchat in 2024
It actually works just fine if you change your user agent. BTW Snapchat likes to break support for Firefox or re-enable support all the time. Don’t know what their issue is but whatever.
Doesn’t for me for some reason… I change to chrome on windows and just get an “Oops something went wrong…” I think it might be because I forgot my password and tried like 10 of them so it locked me out, however.
based sway user
How can you tell? Looks like either i3 or sway, and that’s coming from another sway user lol
You could also get xmonad or dwm or something to look like this as well.
i3 you mean…
… Snapchat for web??? Wtf
I just want to say, this is less bad than websites requiring that you use internet explorer.
Those were dark days.
It’s just slightly less bad cause it requires a chromium based browser
Oh yeah, I’m not saying it’s good, just less bad.
Now instead of being crammed into a single option, you get the “choice” of several (probably equally bad) options.
Honestly, everything should just conform to standards, and it’s up to the browser to support those standards. If your browser doesn’t support it, well, good luck.
Not this bullshit of “your browser isn’t compatible with this website”. Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.
Can you get away with a change of the “User Agent”?Edit (: Reading is hard. I only read the title and looked at the screenshot, without reading the body text of the post. So my question is answered. Sorry for wasting time.)Just another feature imo