Discussion on:
View:
Show:
If you try to log on with Firefox you get an error saying "The Security Server Web console does not support this browser. Please use Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 or later to access the Web console"
If, for example you are having issues with your wireless network, BT will ask you to download a widget to allow their engineers to troubleshoot. However, the widget won't work on any flavour of Linux and so the advice given to me was to use another PC with Windows or Mac OS running...
Thankfully I managed to fix it myself.
Thankfully I managed to fix it myself.
My accountant uses prosystemfx.com for file sharing. It does not like Firefox. Interestingly, the company appears to have made an effort at making the site available to other browsers, it's just that it has been updated recently. Their browser requirements specify:
IE 5.5 or higher
Netscape 7.0 or higher
Safari version 1.2 or higher
AOL version 7.0 or higher.
One page shows a 2004 copyright, but no contact info for reporting issues (such as the 404 that resluts from the Download Netscape link).
IE 5.5 or higher
Netscape 7.0 or higher
Safari version 1.2 or higher
AOL version 7.0 or higher.
One page shows a 2004 copyright, but no contact info for reporting issues (such as the 404 that resluts from the Download Netscape link).
A top offender with me as well. Due to all the ActiveX components that are installed. Impossible to use a browser other than IE.
"Note to purists: I say Linux, but I am often using it as a term of convenience and including all things open source."
That may be your intent, but it looks like all you're addressing is web browsers. Are there other open source OS or apps affected by these companies? If there are, how?
This is a good subject for discussion, but I wish you'd call it what it is: organizations that don't support open source browsers. Failing to support a browsers isn't indicative of a failure to support open source collectively or Linux individually. Many of these same companies that don't support non-IE browsers are probably running Linux servers on the back end.
The terms 'Linux', 'open source', and 'Firefox' are NOT interchangeable. Using them this way contributes to the public's confusion on the subject.
That may be your intent, but it looks like all you're addressing is web browsers. Are there other open source OS or apps affected by these companies? If there are, how?
This is a good subject for discussion, but I wish you'd call it what it is: organizations that don't support open source browsers. Failing to support a browsers isn't indicative of a failure to support open source collectively or Linux individually. Many of these same companies that don't support non-IE browsers are probably running Linux servers on the back end.
The terms 'Linux', 'open source', and 'Firefox' are NOT interchangeable. Using them this way contributes to the public's confusion on the subject.
My intent was actually to get feedback on other kinds of Linux resistance (say from consultants who find unreasonable refusals to implementing Linux servers or desktops, using proprietary software when a better Linux-based alternative is available, etc.,), but since browsers are the first and most annoying barrier people meet, it becomes primarily a conversation about browsers. I'll try to make it more clear in the follow-up. Thanks.
If I have a choice, I choose not to do business with them. Voting with dollars is more powerful than all the blogs and reasoning.
There is no compelling security risk to being a multi-browser site so motivate them by just taking your business to another competitor.
There is no compelling security risk to being a multi-browser site so motivate them by just taking your business to another competitor.
I read the blog and it looked like there was a lot of confusion. Now if this is truly the dawn of the web based world. Why would it matter what OS your running? Isn't the whole point of things being web based to be platform independent. I figured for sure what the blogger meant was browsers. And, the problem isn't limited to open source browser. So the entire entry is slanted and biased to the point where it is basically a tabloid. I hope the follow up is better.
I was trying to download the beta of Office 2010 last night and it didn't mater how many times I clicked the download link, nothing happened. I switched from FF to IE and it worked like a charm. Okay, I understand MS makes IE but to make the download not work in FF is pretty lame. Shame-shame-shame! *waggles finger toward Redmond*
I haven't decided if I'll actually install it, yet.
Apparently my isp throttled my bandwidth sometime after 2 am, because when I got up at 6 I was still downloading.
In the ISP's defense I was also downloading a 2 gig file, as well.
Apparently my isp throttled my bandwidth sometime after 2 am, because when I got up at 6 I was still downloading.
In the ISP's defense I was also downloading a 2 gig file, as well.
Most of my problems with various websites are browser problems. Refusal to accept FF or Opera.
Bite me, I say to those sites.
Bite me, I say to those sites.
As soon as I find an app that prints online postage like stamps.com, I'm ditching windows completely in my business.
Investor custody systems; no support for non-IE browsers, the pages just don't work at all.
I'm about to build several W7 drive images. In preparation, I spent a few hours yesterday using Firefox 3.5 downloading drivers from Dell's web site without any problem.
I used it not 20 minutes ago. No need to use IE Tab, it just works with Firefox 3.5.5.
We spend a lot of time making sure our site is browser agnostic. It's not easy, and the problem browser is ALWAYS Internet Explorer (pick a version - it's seperate code for each one). Any company that limits access to their services deserve all the bankruptcy they get. AND the laughter that ensues...
Why would businesses get behind something that only alienates a portion of their potential market? Were I a business, I wouldn't want to alienate ANY portion of my potential market. An excellent case in point would be any site that uses Silverlight to present multimedia content. Or a site that requires a user to use a specific browser (IE), especially when that browser is the LEAST secure browser in the marketplace (IE). Using either (Silverlight or IE) exclusively limits your potential market, since those who do not use those "technologies" are not able to view/utilize/visit your site. What about those who use Macs? Linux? BSD? Do you not want their business and $$$?
Admittedly, I am a Linux user. Virtually any business (web portal, hardware manufacturer, content provider, etc.) that makes an earnest effort to support Linux users will gain a faithful following of users. Granted, we may be a small fraction of potential customers, but why would you endorse platforms and technologies that alienate even a fraction of your potential market, when making earnest efforts to include them has so much more potential to develop a loyal following.
It's only a matter of time before Microsoft goes the way of the monolithic, monopolistic Ma Bell. IMHO, anyone who hitches their ride to the Microsoft "star" are hitching their ride to a falling star, and will burn up in the atmosphere of discontent as Microsoft's falling star descends lower and lower, faster and faster, into the atmosphere during its decline. Microsoft has become too large, just as AT&T did before its divestiture, and just like AT&T, has become too out of touch and "too large to care" what its customers really want. Those failings are typically replaced by a "rah-rah-sis-boom-bah" fanboi attitude that focuses on hype and not reality.
Admittedly, I am a Linux user. Virtually any business (web portal, hardware manufacturer, content provider, etc.) that makes an earnest effort to support Linux users will gain a faithful following of users. Granted, we may be a small fraction of potential customers, but why would you endorse platforms and technologies that alienate even a fraction of your potential market, when making earnest efforts to include them has so much more potential to develop a loyal following.
It's only a matter of time before Microsoft goes the way of the monolithic, monopolistic Ma Bell. IMHO, anyone who hitches their ride to the Microsoft "star" are hitching their ride to a falling star, and will burn up in the atmosphere of discontent as Microsoft's falling star descends lower and lower, faster and faster, into the atmosphere during its decline. Microsoft has become too large, just as AT&T did before its divestiture, and just like AT&T, has become too out of touch and "too large to care" what its customers really want. Those failings are typically replaced by a "rah-rah-sis-boom-bah" fanboi attitude that focuses on hype and not reality.
Again, this isn't a Linux issue. It's a browser issue. I'm not defending these companies, but ALL users of non-IE browsers are affected. This includes those of us who run Windows but use non-IE browsers.
But I am annoyed by the number of companies that offer alternatives to MS products that ignore all other OSs than windows. Specifically Serrif comes to mind here. Great software, but only if you run MS.
Not every company can afford to produce and test applications that run on multiple platforms -- especially when they're not looking to give away the apps for free.
Trying to sell apps to a market that generally expects those apps for free is quite counter productive.
-ASB: http://xeesm.com/AndrewBaker
Trying to sell apps to a market that generally expects those apps for free is quite counter productive.
-ASB: http://xeesm.com/AndrewBaker
After racial discrimination, religious discrimination, sexual discrimination, sexual-orientation discrimination, disabled people discrimination, smokers discrimination, and many others, now we have "Linux discrimination".
What a sack of crap.
What a sack of crap.
No support for Firefox when trying to access account (except for webmail). Only IE and Opera (Mac only) can be used. When I have called them about adding support for additional browsers and Linux all I got was the usual "We're working on it" spiel. It appears they're going belly-up here so hopefully someone will take over and make it right.
Natwest in UK wont allow me on in Linux. What a set or merchant bankers...
You are completely off-base about Linux/FOSS use within the DOD.
I worked as a civilian employee of the Department of the Navy in various IT positions (including management) from 1993 until 2006, and since 2006, I have worked as an IT contractor at DOD sites (my current one is that big five-sided building near the Washington Monument). Let me give you a brief history of my experiences:
1. In 1996, I compiled and installed Samba on an HP 9000 system (running HP-UX 10) to allow specific file directories to be shared with Windows NT serves and workstations on a Navy network. This gave access to critical text file to admin personnel *directly* from the Unix system.
2. At that same site, I set up Linux systems for various back-room utility, including network monitoring and file sharing.
3. At my next post (1998-2006), I ran Slackware Linux systems as web servers, firewalls (replacing crippled Windows boxes), mail gateways and DNS servers. I used Fedora for workstations, and experimented with a hot new distribution called Ubuntu. A major weather data system at that site used Red Hat on multiple Dell rack servers to perform massive data and graphics crunching...these were developed by a commercial company. All my internal websites (which I built and coded) ran on Apache, MySQL, Perl and PHP.
4. At my current site, I am transitioning a number of Windows-based web servers to Red Hat systems, transitioning from ASP-based sites with tons of static content to completely automated systems built in PHP and XML. A number of commercial applications are currently running in our back room on Linux boxes. None of this is trivial; this organization provides global support for critical DOD applications.
Admittedly, the DOD is still heavily Windows-dependent, but the move to open source, while gradual, has picked up in pace in recent years and will continue in the future. Components of the DOD have established active open source portals, and all IT projects requiring new development are now takes with studying open source solutions.
Change is hard in an organization as gigantic as the DOD. But they are making serious and forward strides.
I worked as a civilian employee of the Department of the Navy in various IT positions (including management) from 1993 until 2006, and since 2006, I have worked as an IT contractor at DOD sites (my current one is that big five-sided building near the Washington Monument). Let me give you a brief history of my experiences:
1. In 1996, I compiled and installed Samba on an HP 9000 system (running HP-UX 10) to allow specific file directories to be shared with Windows NT serves and workstations on a Navy network. This gave access to critical text file to admin personnel *directly* from the Unix system.
2. At that same site, I set up Linux systems for various back-room utility, including network monitoring and file sharing.
3. At my next post (1998-2006), I ran Slackware Linux systems as web servers, firewalls (replacing crippled Windows boxes), mail gateways and DNS servers. I used Fedora for workstations, and experimented with a hot new distribution called Ubuntu. A major weather data system at that site used Red Hat on multiple Dell rack servers to perform massive data and graphics crunching...these were developed by a commercial company. All my internal websites (which I built and coded) ran on Apache, MySQL, Perl and PHP.
4. At my current site, I am transitioning a number of Windows-based web servers to Red Hat systems, transitioning from ASP-based sites with tons of static content to completely automated systems built in PHP and XML. A number of commercial applications are currently running in our back room on Linux boxes. None of this is trivial; this organization provides global support for critical DOD applications.
Admittedly, the DOD is still heavily Windows-dependent, but the move to open source, while gradual, has picked up in pace in recent years and will continue in the future. Components of the DOD have established active open source portals, and all IT projects requiring new development are now takes with studying open source solutions.
Change is hard in an organization as gigantic as the DOD. But they are making serious and forward strides.
I have a family member in the DOD, and we've had conversations about how they're moving various systems to Linux.
I have not had any problems with the dfas.mil myPay Web Site. I did have problems early with myTRICARE.com site as they would not even allow Firefox, but useragentswitcher got me by that, then they switched their site to Open Source and now everything works. I have also been on some DOD Navy sites without any problems.
You might want to check out the FAQ and New Users Guide:
http://techrepublic.com.com/1200-10871-5757160.html
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/techofalltrades/?p=152
There are a lot of veterans (and active duty) here; another is always welcome.
http://techrepublic.com.com/1200-10871-5757160.html
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/techofalltrades/?p=152
There are a lot of veterans (and active duty) here; another is always welcome.
The DoD mention was from one of my posts.
It's not internal usage of Linux/FOSS that I identified. It's the public face via MyInvoice and WAWF. These systems only work with IE.
https://wawf.eb.mil/setupmachine.htm
It's not internal usage of Linux/FOSS that I identified. It's the public face via MyInvoice and WAWF. These systems only work with IE.
https://wawf.eb.mil/setupmachine.htm
We've spent $700,000 and counting on something called "MyIT" which is a glorified time track system for some of the IT staff.
I was curious, since all things here are IE. Not one of the other browsers works right [and some, not at all] with the application. Firefox, Opera, Safari all had problems. Try to expand, let's say, Journal Entries and, well, either you can't see the "+" for expanding it, or you try to click on it and it goes nowhere and does not expand.
I've pointed this out to management without nary a word back, but, then, we don't care because we don't have to: Everything is Windows and IE as a standard.
Except for the VM and Linux on the Developer's desktops.
Your tax dollars at work.
I was curious, since all things here are IE. Not one of the other browsers works right [and some, not at all] with the application. Firefox, Opera, Safari all had problems. Try to expand, let's say, Journal Entries and, well, either you can't see the "+" for expanding it, or you try to click on it and it goes nowhere and does not expand.
I've pointed this out to management without nary a word back, but, then, we don't care because we don't have to: Everything is Windows and IE as a standard.
Except for the VM and Linux on the Developer's desktops.
Your tax dollars at work.
Don't expect to find Pepsi machines in the Atlanta City Hall, either.
I haven't tried Blackboard Vista Course Management Software with Linux, but that program complains when I try to use Firefox from Windows XP. Until they get with the program, I'm stuck with two browsers. Too bad as I really prefer the Firefox.
Opera on a SuSE platform is my preference, but Hotmail rejects my password the first time around and then accepts it the second time (consistently). Further, when I log out, they say I can't, because I have blocked third-party cookies!
Admittedly everything works as it should with Firefox, but I'm still annoyed.
Admittedly everything works as it should with Firefox, but I'm still annoyed.
I had problems with Hotmail a few years ago when I made the switch to Linux - the best thing to do is dump it altogether and start using gmail or gmx (or whatever)- I've never had any problems since
I actually gave Hotmail 'feedback' and threatened to switch to gmail, but that means coping with the task of changing my email address in numerous site-logins (craiglist, techrepublic, etc.).
Turbotax.com and HRBlock.com
I don't recall having any problems with my federal return using Firefox.
I found that using Firefox/Ubuntu Linux I was able to use H&R Blocks TaxCut without any problems. I doubt that their CD version would work with Linux. I am not going to spend the $$ to try it.
I prefer to keep my taxes on my computer and not file on-line. To do this, however, requires that I maintain a legacy copy of Windows. In fact, it must be at least XP+SP2. That really annoys me. If it were not for this, I would be completely Windows-free. I am doubly peeved by the fact that last year, Turbotax seems to have made it impossible even to use Wine or Crossover. Fortunately, I have a VMware installation with Windows on it. Still, how hard would it be for the folks at Turbotax to make their product run on Linux? After all, they have a Mac version. At least they could work to make it work under Wine.
TaxAct, not the website (haven't tried the on-line filing), I use the installed software. No Linux version, only Windows. So I too have to keep an XP VM just to do my yearly taxes. Blah!
Specifically, the drop down ad for Ricoh, can't be closed, when pop-ups are disabled in Iceweasel.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=4606&tag=nl.e019
Damned annoying!
http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=4606&tag=nl.e019
Damned annoying!
For years I have used Citibank.com as a customer, for bill payment and transfers, on Firefox on Windows XP without a problem that I can remember. I have also used Citibank.com on Chrome since Chrome was brand new.
Since June I have used Citibank.com on Firefox on Ubuntu Linux, both versions 9.4 and 9.10, without problem.
Since the Chrome 4 beta was released for Linux, I have used Citibank.com on Chrome on Ubuntu without problem.
I am not saying that others may not have had problems, but I have not.
Since June I have used Citibank.com on Firefox on Ubuntu Linux, both versions 9.4 and 9.10, without problem.
Since the Chrome 4 beta was released for Linux, I have used Citibank.com on Chrome on Ubuntu without problem.
I am not saying that others may not have had problems, but I have not.
Canon, for selling printers with claims they work with Linux, but drivers for which are neither maintained nor supported so that Linux forums are peppered with hapless buyers of Canon printers forlornly trying to get them to work. What a crud of a company.
I know there are a few Canon products that are supported right off the bat (in my case, a flatbed scanner using XSANE) and also a few printers. Some of their ImageCLASS products, doubtless, are really a pain. Others worth a look are some of the Brother products (they have a link for Brother products plus they are also are automatically supported in various Linux distributions (I use principally Fedora and CentOS). HP, by far, is much better at support.
My $0.02 worth plus a few battle scars and the t-shirt.
My $0.02 worth plus a few battle scars and the t-shirt.
for selling printers with claims they work with Linux, but drivers for which are neither maintained nor supported so that Linux forums are peppered with hapless buyers of Canon printers forlornly trying to get them to work. What a crud of a company.
Canon Europe and Japan have about every Canon Driver for Linux made. Of course the Japan site does not translate to English so you need a browser translator to see the drivers. Have no idea why Canon-USA does not support Linux drivers.
I use AT&T with Firefox all the time and on openSUSE so do not know why they are on the list.
I use AT&T with Firefox all the time and on openSUSE so do not know why they are on the list.
Netflix continues to use streaming technology that is not supported on Linux for their online service. I had to go out and drop $100 dollars for a Roku set-top box to stream to my TV due to my media center running ubuntu.
Tell me about it.... I'm "fortunate" (loosely used)to have a M$ XP machine at home so I can stream Netflix but, I too am very disappointed Linux isn't supported. I even installed MS Silverlight (which is what Netflix uses) onto my Ubuntu machine to see if that would work... needless to say, i'm still pulling out the old XP whenever I want to stream Netflix.
Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs (HMRC) operates an export system through which all goods being exported must be registered. It runs only on IE on a Windows PC. Worse, it requires a locally-installed security certificate. Worse still, we are not allowed to have a second certificate on another PC as a backup. Even worse, the time frame for keying in and submitting the records is essentially the length of time it takes for the loaded container to drive to the port - often less than an hour for us.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
