MozillaZine

Camino 2.1 and iCloud.com Compatibility

Talk about the native Mac OS X browser.

Moderator: Camino Developers

scullymulder
 
Posts: 3
Joined: December 4th, 2011, 11:27 am

Post Posted December 4th, 2011, 11:30 am

It appears Camino 2.1 is not compatible with iCloud.com
When I go there using Camino, a page pops up saying my browser is not supported.
Is there a fix coming soon?

phiw13
 
Posts: 2777
Joined: November 7th, 2002, 1:00 am
Location: Japan

Post Posted December 5th, 2011, 1:00 am

Sadly, Apple developers have decided to only support a limited number of browsers :-( Not much we can do about it. As a user of iCloud, could you complain to Apple ?

Uncle Asad
Camino Developer

User avatar
 
Posts: 3957
Joined: July 24th, 2004, 1:38 pm
Location: بين العالمين

Post Posted December 5th, 2011, 2:04 pm

Note that if you spoof your user agent as Firefox 5, iCloud will let you get to the login screen; it's unclear whether everything will work properly or not, though.

As phiw13 said, this is all on Apple's end; sadly, there's nothing we can do about it, but iClould users can complain.
Mac OS X 10.3.9 • PowerBook G4 17" 1.33 GHz | Mac OS X 10.5.x • MacBook Pro 15" 2.2 GHz
Snow7's Camino Forum FAQSearch the Forum  Camino. HelpTroubleshoot Camino

scullymulder
 
Posts: 3
Joined: December 4th, 2011, 11:27 am

Post Posted December 6th, 2011, 8:26 am

Thanks for the info. That's unfortunate as I visit iCloud.com often.

dmnelson

User avatar
 
Posts: 104
Joined: December 8th, 2007, 11:57 am

Post Posted December 15th, 2011, 11:25 am

For what it's worth, I think it's actually looking for a certain version of Gecko, rather than failing to identify Camino in particular.
It doesn't complain if I go there in SeaMonkey, which is in sync with Firefox 8.

phiw13
 
Posts: 2777
Joined: November 7th, 2002, 1:00 am
Location: Japan

Post Posted December 15th, 2011, 4:22 pm

dmnelson wrote:For what it's worth, I think it's actually looking for a certain version of Gecko, rather than failing to identify Camino in particular.
It doesn't complain if I go there in SeaMonkey, which is in sync with Firefox 8.

No, iCloud is looking for 'Firefox/5' or higher in the UA string. If you look at the UA string of your SeaMonkey, you'll see something like this: (like Firefox/8)

You can check on this page, under navigator.userAgent

dmnelson

User avatar
 
Posts: 104
Joined: December 8th, 2007, 11:57 am

Post Posted December 16th, 2011, 1:35 am

We're saying the same thing. Yes, Gecko-based browsers now include Firefox in their user-agent. The point was that it's checking for a version number, not simply the existence of the word "Firefox". Whether it's looking at the stated Firefox version or the Gecko version is beside the point.

cflawson

User avatar
 
Posts: 4721
Joined: December 26th, 2004, 2:54 pm
Location: Flying over your house in a red, white, and blue jet

Post Posted December 16th, 2011, 6:51 am

dmnelson wrote:Whether it's looking at the stated Firefox version or the Gecko version is beside the point.


No; that's *entirely* the point (and directly contradicts what you said above). Neither Seamonkey nor Camino should have to put anything referring to "Firefox" in the UA string in the first place, but Web authors are clearly idiots.

cl

phiw13
 
Posts: 2777
Joined: November 7th, 2002, 1:00 am
Location: Japan

Post Posted December 16th, 2011, 7:32 am

What cl said. Camino and SeaMonkey have been forced to add that silly (like firefox/) to gain compatibility with the web at large. Nowadays yes, Firefox and Gecko are synonyms. There is only One Application That Matters, according to MoCo.

(Just try with SeaMonkey, remove the (like firefox/) through about:config; quite a few big sites break in small or bigger ways. cough, cough google.com)

dmnelson

User avatar
 
Posts: 104
Joined: December 8th, 2007, 11:57 am

Post Posted December 16th, 2011, 7:53 am

I'm not disagreeing with anything that either of you are saying but I don't think I have explained it very well. From the standpoint of how things should be in an ideal world of web development, you're absolutely right and I agree with you.

Should they be sniffing the Firefox version? No. But since Camino does identify a Gecko version as well as a related Firefox app version, they technically could sniff for either one. And they would get a valid, definitive answer either way. If they looked at the Gecko version instead the answer would still be that the software under the hood does not meet their requirements.

In my original message I said I thought it's looking for a specific version of Gecko rather than failing to identify Camino in particular. I still stand by that but I will clarify what I meant: I wasn't specifically trying to nitpick about whether it was identifying the Firefox portion of the user-agent vs the Gecko version. My intent was to express that the block comes not from a failure to identify Camino, but rather from a success in identifying that Camino is based on an unsupported version.

As I understand it, Camino lagging behind is a symptom of something that's not really Camino's fault anyway... it's because the organization's focus on Firefox has led it to drop embedding support from Gecko 4 and up, which put the skids on Camino's ability to update...

Return to Camino


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests