From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

As Subject:

I have Sequoia 15.6.1 and Firefox 128.14 (I've been an inveterate Mozilla user since before Firefox was born).

(Like half the world) "my" (I'm retired) University, has been strongarmed
into standardising on Teams for meetings.

We had our first Teams meeting on Friday. I used the Website version (and was surprised at how easy and attractive evertyhing looked). But my camera wouldn't work. (the mike worked fine). I checked the Mac's Camera settings,
and Firefox is permitted to use the camera (as it should be, because it asked me and I said yes).

I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive permsission?

I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been there".

Cheers
John
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

On 2025-09-06, Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:

As Subject:

I have Sequoia 15.6.1 and Firefox 128.14 (I've been an inveterate Mozilla user
since before Firefox was born).

(Like half the world) "my" (I'm retired) University, has been strongarmed into standardising on Teams for meetings.

We had our first Teams meeting on Friday. I used the Website version (and was surprised at how easy and attractive evertyhing looked). But my camera wouldn't work. (the mike worked fine). I checked the Mac's Camera settings, and Firefox is permitted to use the camera (as it should be, because it asked me and I said yes).

I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
permsission?

I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been there".

I tried the Teams test site and it declared Firefox to be an unsupported browser. I then tried Safari and it was accepted, so maybe try Safari
next time. Also on 15.6.1 here. The test site in case you don't know is: <https://devicetest.teams.microsoft.com/>
--
Cheers, Alan
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

On Sep 6, 2025, Another John wrote
(in article <Rt_uQ.4053$rZP6.2767@usenetxs.com>):

As Subject:

I have Sequoia 15.6.1 and Firefox 128.14 (I've been an inveterate Mozilla user
since before Firefox was born).

the current version of Firefox is 142.01. Given that it works on macOS 12.7.6 I suspect that it will work on 15.6.1. Is there a reason why yourCOre using 128.14?

(Like half the world) "my" (I'm retired) University, has been strongarmed into standardising on Teams for meetings.

We had our first Teams meeting on Friday. I used the Website version (and was surprised at how easy and attractive evertyhing looked). But my camera wouldn't work. (the mike worked fine). I checked the Mac's Camera settings, and Firefox is permitted to use the camera (as it should be, because it asked me and I said yes).

I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
permsission?

I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been there".

I suspect that something doesnrCOt like a very old version of Firefox.

I futher suspect that if you download the free copy of Teams from the MS
site, it will work. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-teams/free you can also get it if you have certain versions of MS Office. MS wants everyone to use Teams. I think that Teams is worse than either Facetime or Zoom.

Warning: Microsoft, for reason of theyrCOre idiots, has two versions of
Teams, the rCypersonalrCO version and the rCyprofessional/businessrCO
version. For most people not in large orginizations there is no major difference. People in large orgs will notice a diff. Yes, you can have both versions installed at the same time, on both Mac and Windows; guess how I
know this. Yes, the two versions can be configured differently; guess how I know this. Yes, this is breathtakingly stupid, even for MS.

The Teams web app is designed around Edge, which MS says is the best web browser for Windows. (News flash: no, itrCOs not. Firefox for Windows is much better, not least because I can use my fav ad-blocker, no longer available on Chrome or Edge) Because Edge is warmed-over Chrome, it is possible that
Chrome works better than Firefox. MS also has a version of Edge for Mac. I have no idea how well either work as they are not installed on my Macs and never will be.

Good luck.

Cheers
John

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-09-06, Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:

I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
permsission?

I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been there".

I tried the Teams test site and it declared Firefox to be an unsupported browser. I then tried Safari and it was accepted, so maybe try Safari
next time. Also on 15.6.1 here. The test site in case you don't know is: <https://devicetest.teams.microsoft.com/>

On (Ubuntu) Firefox, I ran that test and was told FF wasn't supported.

Then I installed the User Agent Switcher extension: https://webextension.org/listing/useragent-switcher.html?version=0.6.5.1&type=install

and switched my Firefox User-Agent to Edge on Windows.

Suddenly the Teams test site reported my browser passed all the checks and
was fully compatible.

Funny that.

Theo
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

On 2025-09-06, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-09-06, Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:

I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
permsission?

I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
there".f

I tried the Teams test site and it declared Firefox to be an unsupported
browser. I then tried Safari and it was accepted, so maybe try Safari
next time. Also on 15.6.1 here. The test site in case you don't know is:
<https://devicetest.teams.microsoft.com/>

On (Ubuntu) Firefox, I ran that test and was told FF wasn't supported.

Then I installed the User Agent Switcher extension: https://webextension.org/listing/useragent-switcher.html?version=0.6.5.1&type=install

and switched my Firefox User-Agent to Edge on Windows.

Suddenly the Teams test site reported my browser passed all the checks and was fully compatible.

Running FF 142.0.1 (aarch64) on my M1 MBP under macOS 15.6.1 and after installing User Agent Switcher, the Teams tester site states all is well
when, as you say, switched to User Agent = Edge for Windows. Hopefully
this would work on John's Mac. Thanks for the info :)
--
Cheers, Alan
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:

As Subject:

I have Sequoia 15.6.1 and Firefox 128.14 (I've been an inveterate Mozilla user
since before Firefox was born).

(Like half the world) "my" (I'm retired) University, has been strongarmed into standardising on Teams for meetings.

We had our first Teams meeting on Friday. I used the Website version (and was surprised at how easy and attractive evertyhing looked). But my camera wouldn't work. (the mike worked fine). I checked the Mac's Camera settings, and Firefox is permitted to use the camera (as it should be, because it asked me and I said yes).

I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
permsission?

I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been there".

Any reason why you don't want to use the native Teams app?

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

Am 07.09.25 um 13:21 schrieb Chris:

Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:

As Subject:

I have Sequoia 15.6.1 and Firefox 128.14 (I've been an inveterate Mozilla user
since before Firefox was born).

(Like half the world) "my" (I'm retired) University, has been strongarmed >> into standardising on Teams for meetings.

We had our first Teams meeting on Friday. I used the Website version (and was
surprised at how easy and attractive evertyhing looked). But my camera
wouldn't work. (the mike worked fine). I checked the Mac's Camera settings, >> and Firefox is permitted to use the camera (as it should be, because it asked
me and I said yes).

I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy >> and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
permsission?

I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been >> there".

Any reason why you don't want to use the native Teams app?

Teams = $Microsoft$ = Total Distrust

Why the hell should anyone install Microsoft-software on a Mac for
infrequent use if the mission can be accomplished with the native browser?

That was easy!
--
"Roma locuta, causa finita" (Augustinus)
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-09-06, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-09-06, Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:

I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
permsission?

I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
there".f

I tried the Teams test site and it declared Firefox to be an unsupported >>> browser. I then tried Safari and it was accepted, so maybe try Safari
next time. Also on 15.6.1 here. The test site in case you don't know is: >>> <https://devicetest.teams.microsoft.com/>

On (Ubuntu) Firefox, I ran that test and was told FF wasn't supported.

Then I installed the User Agent Switcher extension:
https://webextension.org/listing/useragent-switcher.html?version=0.6.5.1&type=install

and switched my Firefox User-Agent to Edge on Windows.

Suddenly the Teams test site reported my browser passed all the checks and >> was fully compatible.

Running FF 142.0.1 (aarch64) on my M1 MBP under macOS 15.6.1 and after installing User Agent Switcher, the Teams tester site states all is well when, as you say, switched to User Agent = Edge for Windows. Hopefully
this would work on John's Mac. Thanks for the info :)

Just did a test call through FF 142.0 and it worked just fine. No user
agent switcher required.

I typically use Teams daily via the desktop app and works great.

On a side note it's very disappointing we've regressed 20 years and need to revert to using user agent switcher again. Sad days.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

On 2025-09-08, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-09-06, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-09-06, Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:

I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
permsission?

I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
there".f

I tried the Teams test site and it declared Firefox to be an unsupported >>>> browser. I then tried Safari and it was accepted, so maybe try Safari >>>> next time. Also on 15.6.1 here. The test site in case you don't know is: >>>> <https://devicetest.teams.microsoft.com/>

On (Ubuntu) Firefox, I ran that test and was told FF wasn't supported.

Then I installed the User Agent Switcher extension:
https://webextension.org/listing/useragent-switcher.html?version=0.6.5.1&type=install

and switched my Firefox User-Agent to Edge on Windows.

Suddenly the Teams test site reported my browser passed all the checks and >>> was fully compatible.

Running FF 142.0.1 (aarch64) on my M1 MBP under macOS 15.6.1 and after
installing User Agent Switcher, the Teams tester site states all is well
when, as you say, switched to User Agent = Edge for Windows. Hopefully
this would work on John's Mac. Thanks for the info :)

Just did a test call through FF 142.0 and it worked just fine. No user
agent switcher required.

Well this is rather odd! I've tried this several times now and on my
MBP, Firefox is deemed unsupported unless I use the switcher.

I typically use Teams daily via the desktop app and works great.

Never tried it. I'm able to use FaceTime with the people I chat with via
live video.

On a side note it's very disappointing we've regressed 20 years and need to revert to using user agent switcher again. Sad days.

Yep :(
--
Cheers, Alan
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

On 9 Sep 2025 at 07:53:50 BST, "Alan B" <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-09-08, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-09-06, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

Alan B <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-09-06, Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:

I later checked FF itself and it has its own permissions within its Privacy
and Security settings, where it will permit individual websites. But there are
NO sites listed there: does the website have to be active, in order to receive
permsission?

I'm floundering around, so this is just a vague hope that someone has "been
there".f

I tried the Teams test site and it declared Firefox to be an unsupported >>>>> browser. I then tried Safari and it was accepted, so maybe try Safari >>>>> next time. Also on 15.6.1 here. The test site in case you don't know is: >>>>> <https://devicetest.teams.microsoft.com/>

On (Ubuntu) Firefox, I ran that test and was told FF wasn't supported. >>>>
Then I installed the User Agent Switcher extension:
https://webextension.org/listing/useragent-switcher.html?version=0.6.5.1&type=install

and switched my Firefox User-Agent to Edge on Windows.

Suddenly the Teams test site reported my browser passed all the checks and >>>> was fully compatible.

Running FF 142.0.1 (aarch64) on my M1 MBP under macOS 15.6.1 and after
installing User Agent Switcher, the Teams tester site states all is well >>> when, as you say, switched to User Agent = Edge for Windows. Hopefully
this would work on John's Mac. Thanks for the info :)

Just did a test call through FF 142.0 and it worked just fine. No user
agent switcher required.

Well this is rather odd! I've tried this several times now and on my
MBP, Firefox is deemed unsupported unless I use the switcher.

I typically use Teams daily via the desktop app and works great.

Never tried it. I'm able to use FaceTime with the people I chat with via
live video.

On a side note it's very disappointing we've regressed 20 years and need to >> revert to using user agent switcher again. Sad days.

Yep :(

Well! You fellas have got me thoroughly confused now! (Sorry: first I should say THANKS for all he helpful replies!)

First, WolfFan said "the current version of Firefox is 142.01" and people seem to agree with that.
My Firefox tells me it's up to date at 128.14. "Extended Support Release".....

So I asked Google, which produced an answer in the Apple Forums which explains
that there are more versions of FF than I can shake a stick at: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/256075694?sortBy=rank

I have exactly that iMac which is mentioned: 2019 Retina. I have no idea why I'm using 128.14/ESR, but I do have faith in Mozilla and Firefox giving me the correct version.

Not sure what my next step is, but Alan B's suggestion of "maybe try Safari next time" is the most sensible and possibly the least time-wasting!

Thanks again, all!

..............[Aside] ................................................ Particular thanks to J||rg for his answer to Chris's question of why don't I install MS's own Teams app. J||rg's swift reply being: "Teams = $Microsoft$ = Total Distrust"

I started using Apple in about 1991. Since then I've frequently wondered how many COUNTLESS BILLIONS of person hours have been lost to the human race by PC users (and businesses) having to wrestle with MS products, on both the micro and on the macro scale.
For me, Apple always meant "human intuition"; MS have re-defined "human intuition" for all their billions of PC users.
Which is a longer way of saying "What J||rg said."

By the way in IMVHO Apple started drifting away from human intuition after
they introduced OSX. But that doesn't mean I'd like to go back to my Mac SE30! --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

On 09.09.25 10:06, Another John wrote:

..............[Aside] ................................................ Particular thanks to J||rg for his answer to Chris's question of why don't I install MS's own Teams app. J||rg's swift reply being: "Teams = $Microsoft$ = Total Distrust"

And btw: Teams is not free.

I started using Apple in about 1991. Since then I've frequently wondered how many COUNTLESS BILLIONS of person hours have been lost to the human race by PC
users (and businesses) having to wrestle with MS products, on both the micro and on the macro scale.

Remember https://www.wired.com/story/crowdstrike-outage-update-windows/

For me, Apple always meant "human intuition"; MS have re-defined "human intuition" for all their billions of PC users.
Which is a longer way of saying "What J||rg said."

By the way in IMVHO Apple started drifting away from human intuition after they introduced OSX. But that doesn't mean I'd like to go back to my Mac SE30!

If macOS fails I use Linux like I do at the moment I write this.
(But I do not do it because macOS fail at the moment).
--
"Roma locuta, causa finita."
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:

On 9 Sep 2025 at 07:53:50 BST, "Alan B" <alanrichardbarker@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

Well! You fellas have got me thoroughly confused now! (Sorry: first I should say THANKS for all he helpful replies!)

First, WolfFan said "the current version of Firefox is 142.01" and people seem
to agree with that.
My Firefox tells me it's up to date at 128.14. "Extended Support Release".....

So I asked Google, which produced an answer in the Apple Forums which explains
that there are more versions of FF than I can shake a stick at: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/256075694?sortBy=rank

I have exactly that iMac which is mentioned: 2019 Retina. I have no idea why I'm using 128.14/ESR, but I do have faith in Mozilla and Firefox giving me the
correct version.

Not sure why you're on ESR but note that FF does move users on older MacOSes
to ESR releases so they can drop support for those OSes in the current
release version. Last article I can see about that refers to 10.14 and
FF115: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-users-macos-1012-1013-1014-moving-to-extended-support

But maybe if you had been running an older OS for a while before you
upgraded, maybe that would be enough for you to end up on the ESR channel.
I don't think this is likely to be the source of your problems though.

Not sure what my next step is, but Alan B's suggestion of "maybe try Safari next time" is the most sensible and possibly the least time-wasting!

Makes sense.

Thanks again, all!

..............[Aside] ................................................ Particular thanks to J||rg for his answer to Chris's question of why don't I install MS's own Teams app. J||rg's swift reply being: "Teams = $Microsoft$ = Total Distrust"

Teams is an Electron app, so it's effectively the Chrome browser engine with some wrapping. IMHO it's better to open a new tab in the browser you are already running, rather than incur the memory costs of running a whole new browser just to run one web page (which is what Teams is).

I started using Apple in about 1991. Since then I've frequently wondered how many COUNTLESS BILLIONS of person hours have been lost to the human race by PC
users (and businesses) having to wrestle with MS products, on both the micro and on the macro scale.
For me, Apple always meant "human intuition"; MS have re-defined "human intuition" for all their billions of PC users.

IMHO 'intuitive' is just technobabble for 'looks like something I've seen before'. If you already know how to use a knife then you can work out how
to use a spoon because many of the principles are the same. Apple favours consistency of design while MS tends to be a randomly glued collection of
bits. Apple at it's worst is when there is no consistency to fall back
upon, or the design becomes a straightjacket (it is fine to break some
rules, as long as not too many).

Unfortunately, Apple has a habit of periodically blowing their consistency
out of the water, as with iOS 7's abandonment of skeumorphism (in that case, consistency with physical objects). It looks like Liquid Glass might be another one of those times.

Theo
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.comp.sys.mac

On 9 Sep 2025 at 14:07:16 BST, "Theo" <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

Another John <lalaw44@hotmail.com> wrote:

Well! You fellas have got me thoroughly confused now! (Sorry: first I should
say THANKS for all he helpful replies!)

First, WolfFan said "the current version of Firefox is 142.01" and people seem
to agree with that.
My Firefox tells me it's up to date at 128.14. "Extended Support Release".....

So I asked Google, which produced an answer in the Apple Forums which explains
that there are more versions of FF than I can shake a stick at:
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/256075694?sortBy=rank

I have exactly that iMac which is mentioned: 2019 Retina. I have no idea why >> I'm using 128.14/ESR, but I do have faith in Mozilla and Firefox giving me the
correct version.

Not sure why you're on ESR but note that FF does move users on older MacOSes to ESR releases so they can drop support for those OSes in the current release version. Last article I can see about that refers to 10.14 and FF115: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-users-macos-1012-1013-1014-moving-to-extended-support

But maybe if you had been running an older OS for a while before you upgraded, maybe that would be enough for you to end up on the ESR channel.
I don't think this is likely to be the source of your problems though.

By golly Theo, you have gone and done it again!

In April I migrated my older 27" iMac (10.14) to my newer one (2019 27"
Retina, Sequoia, now 10.16.1).

So ... to MacOS, Firefox is just another "application downloaded from the Internet", and the fact that it was an old ESR version is totally irrelevant.
But also to FF itself ...

I didn't know (until 2 days ago in this group) that Firefox has "n" different versions: I simply assumed that when FF next updated itself with the next appropriate version, it would look around and say to itself "hey - I'm in a newer Mac system!", and _upgrade_ itself accordingly.

So now I know what ESR means (what the acronym means, and also what the ramificaions are).

And SO... I have just upgraded to version 142 of FF, and will proceed to discover what the consequences will be. I _hope_ that one of them will be that next time I try a Teams meeting with colleagues, my camera will work (which is what kicked all this off).

THANK YOU, All! In particular Theo who phrased his response so that an alarm bell rang in my tiny brain.

AJ
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2