I held off on Windows 10 for as long as I could until Adobe, and therefore my job, required it. Now this nonsense. I hope this isn’t the start of them joining on the web DRM bandwagon.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      18·
      1 year ago

      I bet it would because Firefox supports pretty much everything Chrome supports. Sometimes a little better.

      • meseek #2982@lemmy.ca
        17·
        1 year ago

        The Adobe message has nothing to do with the technical limitations of your browser and everything to do with their monopolistic nature as a company.

        • antimidas@sopuli.xyz
          2·
          1 year ago

          Well, in this case it might even be a technological limitation, which can be solved with a workaround but leads to a poor user experience.

          Firefox, for security reasons, doesn’t allow opening local files for writing. That means, it’s not possible to make a web application that can autosave to your machine after you open a file, meaning you have to download a new version of the file every time you save. You can get around this issue by importing the files in question to the browser’s local storage, or by using cloud storage via an API, but local saving is a feature that people have come to expect and missing it will lead to complaints from the users.

          The missing API is called File System Access API and has been available on Chrome for years. I’ve personally had to write my web apps around this limitation multiple times, since I want to support Firefox. By no means is this a valid reason to exclude Firefox in my opinion, but I can also easily see why a company would want to not bother with user feedback on ctrl+s not working in their web application.

      • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
        1·
        1 year ago

        Reminds me to how Google Meet does not support background blur in Firefox, but magically support it when you fake the user agent to chrome. Like, wtf?!