Google no longer serving up Firefox 2 compatible search

2»

Comments

  • Another oddity I just noticed, when I search and click on a link, this search page tacks on a bunch of crap to the URL. It looks like “?sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwixwfrtxKfnAhVum-AKHaRSAncQFjAAegQIAhAB” Some sites like Winworldpc.com seem to correct for this or ignore it, but for others, this causes problems. Specifically I noticed this screws up any searches on vcfed.org for any recent threads that are not yet “archived”.

  • roytam1 has dropped some nt 3.51/win95/vanilla win2k compatible browsers with TLS 1.2 support:

    https://msfn.org/board/topic/180462-my-browser-builds-part-2/?do=findComment&comment=1177052

  • And now with this new "Polymer" pretty much any browser except Chrome will have serious rendering issues. In addition to the performance hit from heavy javascript reliance just to make a flat UI bog standard HTML could do and useless animations.

    The epiphany of poor web design and the ability to flush out competitors.

  • edited February 6

    I knew the search changes were a sign of things to come. I've been getting a notice the past few days that the good version of YouTube is going away.
    ">

  • Even so, YouTube Classic still forces the classic look anyway. I just tested this yesterday the first time I saw it.

  • I would expect to see that break once Google removes it. All that add-on does is tell YouTube to serve up the old version of the site.

  • edited February 7

    The only way is one of those addons that change the page as/when it's loaded.

    Ugh, javascript was never supposed to BE the webpage. It was supposed to supplement it. We were supposed to rely on things like CSS for those animations and other fanciness.

    With all this external framework reliance resulting in dozens, if not hundreds, of scripts required for a webpage that means only the chance of an intrusion increasing. More data breaches and it's unfortunate that this trend will only increase.

  • What's sort of funny is that we have the most complex web pages ever (code-wise), but today's websites are some of the ugliest I've ever seen, with some of the most confusing navigation ever, like news sites that completely get rid of the article you were reading if you scroll down too far, or happen to click anywhere outside of it.

  • edited February 7

    CSS could do all of that (good/bad), and faster.
    It's just "developers" don't want to spend the time to write all the CSS. It's just too 'abstract' and seemingly tedious for them.

    Much of the reason JS is so slow is because developers stick to runtime compiling, taxing the resources of the end-user. There are ways to make JS fast, but most don't want to spend the time to put that effort in balancing precompilation/preparsing and script prioritization. They're already cheaping out relying on JS. I'd wager most "web developers" don't even know they precompile much of their JS aspects. Or even heard of it.

    Over 3/4 of pages have no load optimization whatsoever in the first place. Content should be loaded before all else, but no. Instead you'll find useless garbage loaded before the page has anything useful. Often because the script(s) that holds the content is deep in a sea of scripts. Not to mention a lot of times huge amounts of scripts are dumped in and attempted to load at once, then chaining and loading more. This adds up with all these scripts loading running at once.

    It is largely because of these factors the increase in difficulty of older browsers and machines on modern pages. And if you'll notice, Google spends no seemingly measurable effort trying to improve their site performance.

  • @nick99nack said:
    All that add-on does is tell YouTube to serve up the old version of the site.

    Not unless the developer of it creates a back-up version of the old version and loads that up instead. If supposing the add-on does break, then that's fine, as long as YouTube doesn't cause unnecessary CPU usage when watching a damn video (yet Google Maps used to do that as well but not anymore).

  • edited February 8

    YouTube already causes lots of "unnecessary CPU usage" when watching the damn videos. At times I struggle to watch 360p when a 720p video only uses about 30% of my CPU in WMP9.

    I'm really dreading this Polymer2 shit. Looks like I'll have to rely on the "9xwebhelper" script to watch YouTube in future.

    And I still don't get why they removed annotations, destroying interesting information about 10+ year old videos. **** googol!!! **** googol!!!

  • edited February 8

    update: just realized that this is a duplicate. not sure how this happened. please remove.

  • Almost had a bit of a scare when gmail finally logged me out one of my older web browser. They still have the lightweight and more compatible Gmail theme thankfully, but everything else around it requires scripting to do bullcrap animations and such.

    I had to dig around for a login linked that worked.

    The link: https://mail.google.com/mail/login?hl=en will serve up a proper login page if it detects an older browser. Although if it throws up its verification check, you are screwed.

  • Youtube is also starting to kill the classic layout. Opening the site with a FF42 user agent on my 2012R2 laptop gave me Polymer v1 with a notice that "my browser is no longer supported" but it still gives me the classic layout with the same user agent on Windows 2000.

  • edited March 14

    Typing this from my computer as I'm trying to shift most of my usage back to my computer. I just had trouble logging into this forum on Firefox on my phone. After I logged in, the forum's homepage showed that I was logged in, but it acted weird. When I navigated to "Software", it appeared as if it logged out. When I tried navigating to the first page of that thread, it took me to the second page (showing me logged in)! Then it tried it in Chrome and did not see any of those issues.

    At school, I've noticed on one academic site right after I logged in, it displayed no content at all on IE11 on my math teacher's ThinkPad T430. It worked in Chrome, Edge, and (from what I've been told) Firefox, though. Another academic site (on which I had to take an online test) didn't work on Edge on that same laptop, but worked on Chrome on a Chromebook.

    I agree that we're moving back to a closed web. Chrome is not very customizable (especially the mobile version), very bloated, and at least a little buggy. Oh, and it spies on you. And yet, the majority of people are continuing to use it.

    UPDATE: A few months ago, I've noticed that trying to load Mozilla's website on Firefox 12 on my Windows 2000 VM caused the VM to restart.

Sign In or Register to comment.