Closed Bug 1111042 Opened 9 years ago Closed 9 years ago

bad UA sniffing for Windows 10 (when loaded in IE tech preview or Chrome); says Firefox not supported

Categories

(www.mozilla.org :: Bedrock, defect)

Production
x86_64
Windows 10
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

VERIFIED FIXED

People

(Reporter: dbaron, Assigned: jpetto)

References

(Blocks 1 open bug, )

Details

Attachments

(1 file)

https://twitter.com/gregwhitworth/status/543525391160193024

Hey @firefox, when going to your dev edition on Windows10 in Chrome Canary or IETP you get the following error https://pic.twitter.com/CosQPZIyXq

https://twitter.com/gregwhitworth/status/543525627094003712

@firefox you'll want to upgrade your UA sniffing to account for the NT 10
We appear to be doing UA sniffing for the download button, from talking with ben, which triggers the "unsupported-download". Windows 10 (which shows as NT 10 in the UA) is the likely culprit.
Will start working this first thing Monday 12/15.
Assignee: nobody → jon
Several of us on the team that work on www.mozilla.org have tried to replicate this; so far without success. Running the "IE11 on Windows 10" VM I just downloaded from https://www.modern.ie/en-us/virtualization-tools#downloads I was able to download from both https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/developer/ and https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/#aurora from both IE11 and a fresh install of Chrome Canary.

Here are the navigator.userAgent strings:

Chrome Canary on Windows 10:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.4; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/41.0.2248.0 Safari/537.36

IE11 on Windows 10:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.4; WOW64; Trident/7.0; .NET4.0E; .NET4.0C; rv:11.0) like Gecko
Due to the difficulty we're having replicating, I've asked @gregwhitworth via twitter if he would comment here with the userAgent strings on the specific browsers he was using in case there is some difference on his machine.
Component: Pages & Content → Bedrock
You need to use either the IE technical preview or Chrome Canary to replicate. They use the new UA.
While this is being addressed, can we consider never, ever blocking the download link and merely giving an advisory that their machine may not meet the minimum system requirements? Preventing people from getting what they're looking for feels like the wrong thing, particularly if we're relying on UA sniffing (which is something we might be famous for advocating against).
(In reply to Josh Mize [:jgmize] from comment #4)
> Due to the difficulty we're having replicating, I've asked @gregwhitworth
> via twitter if he would comment here with the userAgent strings on the
> specific browsers he was using in case there is some difference on his
> machine.

As Kev stated you have to be on the Win10 preview to see it. On Chrome Canary the UA is as follows: 

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/41.0.2249.0 Safari/537.36
Attached file GitHub Pull Request
Have not been able to reproduce locally (do not have Win 10 preview), but I believe I've found the regex bug & fix.
Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock

https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock/commit/49d90abb247907fe3f692786fb20c48fbce12ac7
Update platform detect regex to account for Windows NT 10.0.
Bug 1111042.
Let's ping stephend or rbillings if you think webQA would be helpful with this one.
I've pushed the fix from comment #9 to production. Greg, would you mind verifying that it's now working on your copy of the the Windows 10 TP?
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
Flags: needinfo?(gwhit)
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Yep, it looks good in both IE and Chrome on Windows 10!! Thanks!
Flags: needinfo?(gwhit)
(In reply to Greg Whitworth from comment #12)
> Yep, it looks good in both IE and Chrome on Windows 10!! Thanks!

Thank you, too!
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
(In reply to Kev Needham [:kev] from comment #6)
> While this is being addressed, can we consider never, ever blocking the
> download link and merely giving an advisory that their machine may not meet
> the minimum system requirements? Preventing people from getting what they're
> looking for feels like the wrong thing, particularly if we're relying on UA
> sniffing (which is something we might be famous for advocating against).

We discussed this during the last bedrock meeting and everyone agreed with your points, :kev. The plan is to follow up on that in a separate bug. :ckprice, do you have the bug # for that?
Flags: needinfo?(cprice)
(In reply to Kev Needham [:kev] from comment #6)
> While this is being addressed, can we consider never, ever blocking the
> download link and merely giving an advisory that their machine may not meet
> the minimum system requirements? Preventing people from getting what they're
> looking for feels like the wrong thing, particularly if we're relying on UA
> sniffing (which is something we might be famous for advocating against).

Hi :kev, thank you very much for your input. As Josh mentioned above, we wholeheartedly agree that this process needs to be reconsidered.

Bug 1112403 has been opened to track the discussion and implementation of changes to this page.
Flags: needinfo?(cprice)
Awesome. Thanks all!
Please note the correct bug is bug 1112417.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: