MaximumOverflow

I'm unfortunate enough to be in both camps, depending on the situation... and find myself in the wrong one every single time.

One day you'll find yourself alone, ignored by any decent human being around you, abandoned by all that became tired of being with someone whose entire purpose in life is spreading hate and hurting innocent people around them for their pleasure. On that day, I want you to look in the mirror and ask yourself who the mentally ill freak really is.

I've had so many issues with Ubuntu in the last few years compared to other distros that honestly I wouldn't feel comfortable recommending it as a beginner distro anymore.

What a sad world we live in

I think you meant "concerning"?

Sorry but I don't see anything particularly egregious in there. It's all fairly common stuff, any sufficiently big company is going to face some lawsuits of that sort at some point. Also, remember that anyone can file a lawsuit, it doesn't mean that the recipient is guilty of what it describes or that the filer isn't just exploiting technicalities.

Nothing there blatantly screams "bad company" from what I can see.

Look, this is going nowhere, I give up. If you aren't going to be reasonable, I'm not gonna waste my time discussing this. If you don't want to listen, fine. Stick to your uninformed and unreasonable opinions and be happy.

Tell that to the victims of the Therac-25

They'd disclose it to Mozilla and the Firefox team if they knew. It would make no sense for them not to. Why are you so obstinate when it comes to this exploit theory, it's the least likely reason you could pick for them not to support it.

You really don't want to lose this argument do you? As a software engineer myself, I can assure you that that's complete bullshit.

Teams is nothing special, it doesn't intrinsically require any functionality only available in Chromium. It isn't some weird magical piece of software that can't be made work strictly using standard web protocols and features, something that, apparently, it already does because it does work if you trick it. It's not even cutting edge, chat and video conferencing web apps have been around for ages at this point, many were implemented years back with only a fraction of what's available today. They worked everywhere and still do. Microsoft is perfectly capable of making it work, because it can.

And If there was a known security exploit, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN PATCHED. It doesn't matter if it's on Microsoft's end or Firefox's end.

The only reason they don't make it work on Firefox by default is because they don't want you to use it on Firefox, that's it.

If there was a known security exploit, it would have been patched. Everything works, so nothing essential is missing. The way I see it, it's yet another attempt to manipulate users into switching away from open standards.

Also, it's a multi billion dollar company, can they really not afford to put a couple of devs to work on changing a few lines of code to fix whatever small incompatibility there may be?

Firefox implements everything the various web standards require. There are a few non standard features that Chromium implements that certain websites take advantage of, but the fact that their code isn't portable is not Firefox's fault. As for Teams... Microsoft's just being a dick: if you change the user agent it works just fine.

I "let people be" when their religion doesn't harm them or other people.

And I don't care if "not all Muslims think of women that way". Their decisions/opinions make them better people, they don't make Islam a better religion.

This is, of course, not limited to Islam.