Improvement requests :  K-Meleon Forum
Use this forum to talk about a feature you're missing.  
Posted by: bmoskover83
Date: May 05, 2010 02:24AM

Facebook is one of the...most...popular...websites ever....,KM doesnt handle it perfectly... even with the user agent enabled on Fire Fox but compatibility with Facebook is what I think KM needs to brush up on...

The chat never works, only for a few seconds when you log on then its disabled

The profile pictures keep getting lower and lower, everytime you click to see the next picture you have to scroll down to see them

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/05/2010 02:21PM by bmoskover83.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: facebook
Posted by: disrupted
Date: May 06, 2010 07:47AM

i don't see any differences between k-meleon in the ff ua and ff itself but i'm not a facebook user so maybe there are features specific to gecko 1.9.. in that case you can try km 1.6 alpha.

whatever bugs/annoyances in km with facebook is due to problems with facebook code itself where it 'prefers' firefox..there is nothing that km devs can do to make facebook work better and other gecko users like seamonkey have reported problems with facebook as well which obviously means that the bugs lie in facebook itself.

kmeleon uses the gecko engine..that means it renders pages and interprets code exactly like firefox so whatever problems that you face with websites(whether facebook or others) in kmeleon yet they work properly or better in firefox means that the website code has bugs detecting gecko browsers

it doesn't make any sense that km devs have to fix their code for a specific website when the rendering engine is mozilla's gecko.. in other words, the gecko engine is developed by mozilla, kmeleon adapts in winapi interface..they don't develop or do any changes to the engine itself to make it not work with facebook

think of it like a fish sarnie.. it's a cod offered in french bread in firefox but in kmeleon that same cod fillet comes in pita bread. it's still cod and it's still fish but facebook doesn't see the frenchbread it just thinks it must be a hotdog(ie) that's because instead of properly asking what's inside that sandwich, they just see the bread outside and judge if it isn't french bread then it can't be gecko because to them, gecko can only come in french bread(ff)

send them an email and tell them to look for the fish

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: facebook
Posted by: caktus
Date: May 08, 2010 08:15PM

It seems that FB adamently requires IE to function as it should. I too have written them. Perhaps if enough of us make it habit of emailing every site (at least once) that does this, perhaps they will begin to realize that it is costing them a lot of traffic and business.


~~If it ain't broke, why screw it up?~~

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: facebook
Posted by: slayer
Date: May 08, 2010 09:35PM

What could happen if you create a FB group about this problem? Will be there enough people to shout there?

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: facebook
Posted by: disrupted
Date: May 09, 2010 01:36PM

there's a kmeleon facebook has like 100 members, don't think that would create enough noise besides i think facebook deliberately make the sniffer work that way to force people into using firefox..if they wanted to fix it all they have to do is change 1 word in their sniffer..gecko instead of's that easy

bmxskater, i just tested facebook and they have changed how the sniffer works..previously, they checked the browser everytime you open their page or open a new page but that changed now, they only sniff once when you first log in and the browser is set with the cookie so it doesn't matter if you change the ua after you have already logged with the default will still be crippled out so the agent switcher is now kinda pointless with facebook

you need to change the ua before logging in and it doesn't even matter if you change back to default once your facebook cookie has been set with a firefox browser

clear your cookies, change ua to firefox and login..or leave your ua set to firefox all the time

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: facebook
Posted by: guenter
Date: May 09, 2010 05:06PM

you will still be crippled out so the agent switcher is now kinda pointless with facebook

Add a useful default?

p.s. I never added myself to farcebook or any of the other social data collectors nets - maybe I should add myself and join K-Meleon fan page - no data needed since all know guenter grinning smiley

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/09/2010 05:08PM by guenter.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: facebook
Posted by: panzer
Date: May 29, 2010 05:03PM

Opera has no problem to open messages in FB. Disrupted, what does FBsp/Opera do then? FBsp means FB special, right?

I think we could use this to when we have to venture inside FB also. Or not?

Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2010 05:35PM by panzer.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: facebook
Posted by: disrupted(unlogged)
Date: May 29, 2010 05:29PM

tested here without problems even with default us, doesn't really need ff ua for this
it could be some privacy setting or policy manager zone..also test by enabling cookies from all (accept all cookies), it's quite likely that face book sets more than one cookie and since the website is and they have many other domains like, kmeleon will regard that as an external server and block the cookie

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: facebook
Posted by: disrupted
Date: May 29, 2010 07:49PM

you should check cookie settings or js, cause i tested sending and recieving messages without any problems both with default ua and ff ua so it has to do with your privacy defaults

the opera ua is not really recommended f[r gecko. at one time, facebook decided to block features from firefox 2 so it was used temporarily hence 'fb' but it has serious bugs with gecko like displaying icons and images and other visual that time it fixed the wall and 'chatbox' for facebook users but a week after facebook restored functions for ff2 so the original switch was used again.

the opera string is now reserved for myspace for a second domains list (badlist2) which completely blocks ff2 and it works quite well with myspace since they don't have the complex js apps as facebook. opera isn't ie but it isn't really 100% standards compliant- though opera fans will argue that fact- opera have their own coding quirks which has nothing to do with w3 standards

it's hard to keep up with the drug addicts working for facebook.. they keep changing things a lot, i don't know if they are testing out code or if it has to do with the purity of their cocaine during that month. of course lucky popular browsers users don't usually notice the shit that's going on but "obscure browsers"(according to an obscure cnet reviewer) hae to cope with that rubbish everytime they decide to change their drug of choice and "update" their useless browser detection js.

for a couple of weeks they attached the sniffer to the login(validation) cookie which rendered the switcher useless because it would only detect browser at initial login, so if the switcher was still set to default before the cookie was set meant that the chat and wall thingies amongst other features wouldn't function even if the switcher changed to ff and you maually was too late and the js already linked your cookie to 'unknown browser'= you will now be served trident internet explorer code... and that further displays their drug abuse, since unknown browsers simply can not be ie shells or clones because they use the ie ua from the registry and add their vendor to the end of it .i.e. they will always be identified as internet explorer(mozilla-compatible)

the fact that it still works with gecko 1.9(km 1.6) doesn't mean they are properly detecting gecko as i once thought, it's only because gecko 1.9.x has more tolerance with ie non-standards- some may regard that as a step-backwards for gecko or mozilla giving up. gecko 1.8 is very strict towards nonstandard code and does not like ie bad code...and that what happens when it gets the facebook trident crap, the wall stops working, the chat box thing and image slides etc

this is the latest detection from the heroine shooters:

this is the part which causes problems

var ua=
firefox:function(){return ua._populate()||this._firefox;},
opera:function(){return ua._populate()||this._opera;},
safari:function(){return ua._populate()||this._safari;},
safariPreWebkit:function(){return ua._populate()||this._safari<500;},
chrome:function(){return ua._populate()||this._chrome;},
windows:function(){return ua._populate()||this._windows;},
osx:function(){return ua._populate()||this._osx;},
linux:function(){return ua._populate()||this._linux;},
iphone:function(){return ua._populate()||this._iphone;}

if they actually do it properly,it'd save them time and code.. if those morons check for engine, they wouldn't need different strings for safari and chrome..such idiots since both are the same and then instead of having 2 strings for safari(pre 5.0) khtml, that will automatically add support for konquerer... and all browsers will function properly and if God forbid, they really decide to use their brains(if they do have any) and sniff for features instead of browser name or engine, all that crap will be reduced to 3 lines.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: facebook
Posted by: slayer
Date: May 29, 2010 09:34PM

That js code looks so <Insert a bad word here>
Is like:
Question: Do you have ff?     'Useful Answer': You have ff!
Question: Do you have Opera?  'Useful Answer': You have Opera!
Is really like that?

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: facebook
Posted by: disrupted
Date: May 30, 2010 11:37AM

yes, that's how it works..and then they go on to check os; which is quite pointless as it doesn't really matter since all browsers will render the same regardless of os unless you use a platform-specific RTL font(arabic-windows or hebrew-windows etc then you will need to change to mac fonts-mac-arabic, machebrew for exmaple on osx/os9) but no body really does that anymore, certainly not on facebook..all RTL languages use unicode.

even if they are utilising browser detection for statistics, then that's still no excuse.. because then you wouldn't link page rendering/display to the browser/os name. you use universal engine/features detection for page display/functionability and then if you want, you can add the browser/os strings after for your statistics data but not for rendering.

check for engine(gecko,webkit,presto,trident)> render page according to engine type> detect browser type and os for stats and gather(not related to page display)

check for supported features-js, css version etc(lesser code since basically all modern engines will use the same code:webkit,gecko or presto except for trident 3.0and below(ie6,7)

if features not supported or old engine version(very old browsers), do not cripple or display get another browser loser, only morons do that like the fucktards so called webdevs who went on a witch-hunt to kill ie6 when it's still widely used, if those users can upgrade they would have and they don't really need your recommendation you idiot, they use old pcs or company computers and updating the browser isn't an option.. what you do then, is

1- redirect to another page with as much features as possible
2- inject different js or css supported by those browsers

this is bullet-proof detection because the page will be error free at rendering and it no longer matters what's the browser ua string which can be easily changed to trick the website and cause problems. the page will be communicating directly with the browser to check exactly what it supports and what it doesn't support..the ua string will be confined to statistics data and that's exactly its job and not for rendering.

the same applies to the morons at youtube, they claim they no longer support gecko 1.8, ironically they support the latest that a joke? since gecko 1.8 is way advanced than trident 4; even gecko 1.7 is better than trident 4 when it comes to css rendering and standards

have we seen anything on youtube that really needs gecko 1.9.x? they didn't use advanced technologies like html5 or vorbis(of course not since that will block out ie8) and even if they do use html5, the proper webdeveloping is to use html5 where it's supported and still use flash for browsers where it isn't supported. what has youtube done is a mess, instead of testing their pages for css errors and properly defining propeties like size and placement; they decided to rely on the browsers to rectify their browsers do that, they are better in interpreting bad code..older engines aren't so flexible. that doesn't mean that youtube devs have updated their website for newer engines, it just means they have gone sloppy. the only thing they have used that requires modern engines is the css shadow propety..does that really require abandoning your browser for? to display shadow effects for text?? this is what happens when you hire web devs who are high on ecstasy

now compare those sniffers with the strict rules of the bbc, the company that only hires guru devs instead of college drop-outs who were still in diapers when the www was initiated and still have skid marks in their panties

bbc only sniffs for features for display, the browser ua is detected for statistics only and not to be used to tell you you shouldn't be using this or use's for their own benefit to see if a legacy browser still has enough users meaning they must support it

2. Ensuring availability of JavaScript content for all users

2.1 Scripts MUST NOT cause errors or warnings in level 1 & 2 browsers (see Browser Support Standard).

2.2 The core editorial proposition of the page and core navigation MUST be available to users with JavaScript disabled.

2.3 Users with JavaScript disabled MUST NOT be presented with elements which are non-functioning or appear broken, due to the lack of JavaScript. For example, the user MUST NOT be presented with links that do nothing when clicked. To avoid this, elements which require JavaScript SHOULD always be added to the page via JavaScript.

checking for errors is the first step to make sure your website is supported by browsers, not relying on the browser to correct your sloppy that you have done that, you are half-way through

even with js disabled, the website must be fully accessible..not"enable js to use our website" messages..morons do that, not the bbc
1.2.3. There's nothing wrong with using all the latest bells and whistles to support funky features of newer browsers, but try to do it in a way that still allows users not supporting (or intentionally disabling) these features to access your basic content.

now that's something many idiots at google, ms, yahoo, okrut ,shitface can learn from

# Some licence fee payers do not have the choice of using a popular, modern web browser.
# Some people use accessibility tools - these people benefit greatly from web pages that are standards compliant.

meaning, do not force users to upgrade or display idiotic 'recommendation' messages.. some users simply do not have that luxury
However, on reviewing the major libraries we found that none met our standards and guidelines, with browser support in particular being a major issue.

Our support standards are based on many factors including usage stats and the upgrade paths available to users. For instance, when we had a significant number of users on Safari 1.3, we refrained from asking them to upgrade to Safari 2 as that would require them to buy a new operating system (OSX 10.4).

unlike junkies working for facebook, we do not just copy and paste existing scripts.. we must write our own that accommodates our users best. we will always provide support for very old browsers and the website will be fully accessible as long as there are enough users of that browser.

it's not just the bbc who are like that, many good websites(mostly news corporations) have same guidelines and's not simply move to the latest browser, stop supporting anything that's 6 months old.. that does not mean your website has to be outdated and lacks features, it can still be fully featured and interactive using all the latest technologies but if you don't do drugs, you can always come up with ways to make those features available to older browsers or at least provide certain degree of functionability to make their experience at par with the others.

now anyone who comes buggering kmeleon devs about shitface support can understand what pathetic idiots their web developers are.

report your problems to facebook not to kmeleon bugs

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: facebook
Posted by: Jose Rivera
Date: June 24, 2010 11:37PM

Wow I started on KM today and I love how fast it is and on FB y really fast and not to mention Youtube! but the thing is that I can't write on my wall only I can write on comments and the walls on everybody else but on my wall nothing! please do something about it!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: facebook
Posted by: desga2
Date: June 25, 2010 04:52PM
Options: ReplyQuote
Re: facebook
Posted by: caktus
Date: June 26, 2010 04:29PM

I was just able to write on my wall with KM 1.5.4. I guess FB finally took the hint from the many of us who had been emailing them about the problem, used to be I could not even sign-in. Perhaps it is because I have started using Auto Switcher. My UA shows that it is using Default and Auto Switcher but the Status Bar does not indicate "Stupid site."

I hope the other "Stupid Sites" will get around to taking the hint.


~~If it ain't broke, why screw it up?~~

Options: ReplyQuote

K-Meleon forum is powered by Phorum.