• kibiz0r@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Firefox doesn’t implement the AudioData API, which is probably necessary for the waveform viewer and cropping tool Discord presents in the soundboard management UI.

    Not everything is about Chrome DRM yall.

    Edited to add screenshot of spoofing user-agent on Firefox and getting an error:

    • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Yet another experimental API only supported by Chrome. Chrome has always been like this, implementing experimental API that hasn’t been finalized yet. You might say they’re innovating to support new technologies, but actually it’s more like they’re doing whatever they pleased, as demonstrated by their removal of jpeg xl support despite web communities plea not to do so (a new more efficient image compression, but not made by Google so screw it), pushing manifest V3 and ad topics, and recent push for web environment integrity API.

  • criticon@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    I tried to use lyft on my computer yesterday to download a receipt for my expense report, it didn’t let me, kept telling me to download the Android app…

    • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Everyone wants to force you to download their app now so they can collect your data, shove notifications down your throat, and push ads.

      In the age of the internet, your attention is the most valuable thing a business can have and it costs them virtually nothing to harass you into giving it to them because people have no spine and won’t hold it against them.

      • Anamana@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        It works better for me as an app. I don’t like my browsers to be cluttered like that. But if it fits your usecase

        • ripcord@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          That’s why I like Chrome’s (and various Chromium browsers’) ability to app-ify sites. Will create a .app in MacOS, .desktop in Linux, etc. Launches as what looks like an independent app with its own dock/launcher icon. Utilizes most of their PWA stuff.

          Sadly, it looks like Chrome has hidden the option completely in the latest version unless you set a flag that will probably go away in a few releases. Edge makes it pretty clear.

          I wish Firefox would bring the feature back. They deprecated it years ago and I use it heavily (only reason/time I use Chromium stuff on most of my machines)

          • Anamana@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            I know it from Android and I was using it quite frequently as well. But in my opinion it’s better as a website alternative, compared to being a complete replacement for apps. Things are less buggy and more smooth for me that way.

        • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          I fail to understand how opening a web site, which is all a browser does, can be defined as ‘cluttered’, but my use case is security while appears yours is to let corpos rummage through your files.

          • Anamana@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            It’s inconvenient and disorganized to have it as an extra tab (taking up tab space) or browser window (same symbols), also it runs smoother for me within the app.

            but my use case is security while appears yours is to let corpos rummage through your files

            I care about UX & seems like I’m not the only one at that. If I would care about privacy and security I wouldn’t use discord, but matrix or sth.

  • FoxBJK@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I’m a little baffled by this one. File upload isn’t exactly some new HTML5.1 feature or anything. There’s no good reason they can’t have this handled properly.

    EDIT - just for some additional context, I’ve never used this feature so I had no idea it was more than a mere file upload. Looks like Discord has chosen a non-standardized API that’s currently only in Chromium, but if it were up to me I’d try to budget some time for a simple fallback in case someone’s using Discord in Safari or FF.

      • tleb@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        They implemented a feature that is only available in Chromium and not part of the web standards yet. It’s no different than websites that would only work on IE 20 years ago because of some proprietary Microsoft thing.

        • wahming@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Except it’s not proprietary, and presumably there’s no other way to do it in the browser, so did discord really have a choice other than not implementing said feature?

          On top of that, their desktop app uses essentially the same website in an internal browser, so unless they handicap themselves by not implementing anything firefox can’t support, I still don’t see how it’s their fault

    • Carlos Solís@communities.azkware.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      With the same critical mass of users that most proprietary social media have, unfortunately. You’ll be lucky to find certain communities on Matrix at all.