Firefox 29 not recognized as a browser in TC

I also saw this one...

Tanya,

My understanding is that each browser releases a beta version prior to release. Is there a possibility of getting your team to download and ensure the beta versions are working prior to their release? This is a real problem for us if we can't run automated tests on the latest browser updates as they come out.

Colin,

I was able to disable auto updates for Chrome in the past by disabling the Google Update Service from the services console and by removing the scheduled tasks "GoogleUpdateTaskMachineCore" and GoogleUpdateTaskMachineUA" via the Task Scheduler.

I agree.  It would be really great if we could all get ahead of the game by running beta browsers with beta TestComplete patches to know whether our users are going to have issues with the latest release /before/ it is actually released to the public.

I can understand that some release versions may not be the same as beta versions, but as a standard this should not be the case. Obviously you can't account for bad development practices of certain browsers, but I still believe that having the beta versions working with Test Complete is a no-brainer. Saying you aren't going to plan ahead because of some past incident where an official release didn't match the beta version doesn't really sell me on this idea nor does that excuse work for me when I try to explain this to my boss.

I'm wondering if this really works...

In our case it's no good because we have no control on wich version of the browser people are using and we need to make sure it works on the most updated, especially if chrome and firefox are updating every 3-4 weeks or so...

Seems to me that the general trend in browsers now is for updates to be done frequently and automatically. Companies cant really ask users of  web applications to stick at a specific version of browser. It becomes a futile exercise for support teams to a. constantly check what version people are running and b. help them get the correct version installed and hold at that version.

It makes more sense as Ryan mentioned to test a product frequently against the development and Beta builds, be it a testing tool or a web app.Thats exactly what those versions are provided for.

 

The story with Chrome updates seems to become a never-ending one and most probably we will not come to some mutual agreement...



My understanding of the situation:

a) Google completely ignores end-users and forces them to do what they need instead of giving an option; and

b) End-users themselves, on their own will, are putting them into the risk and must clearly understand this.



As for a):

-- Google forces updates of the *platform* without prior notification, without providing versions compatibility and without list of changes. If these are security patches, then this might tell about poor development approach as they need to patch holes frequently without preserving compatibility. If they provide a new functionality, then why they force me to use it? I well might not need it at all. And it is my understanding that nobody guarantees or even promises that any Beta will function like the final release.



As for b):

-- Why do end-users update? Don't they understand that update is their sole risk? Are they aware what they are getting with every new update? (And please, don't tell me that I must search Google myself to find out what was changed in this or that version of the browser. :) ) Isn't the frequency of updates looks suspicious? Do they really need the changes introduced with every new update? Did they need these changes so that they were not able to perform their business activities without them? Finally, don't they think that they might appear in the situation when they need to do some quite critical activity using their browser (I don't know, maybe confirm flight check-in in the airport or provide a doctor with some information...) but will not be able to do this because Google has decided to update their browser (which is, actually, a platform for web applications) and this update broke compatibility with the previous version?



Big organizations never apply OS patches for their production servers without prior testing with their specific environment. Why should we update our web platform by just believing that Google made everything correctly for our exact needs? Do we have any reason to believe in this?



Making parallels: it looks like if cell providers patch or update protocols without worrying if the change preserves compatibility with existing phones. Good change or not, but if the problem that it solves is not critical for me, I should be able to still use my equipment / environment without forcing it to be updated.



P.S. Excuse me for this post, I understand that the majority of regular end-users do not worry what foreign people do on and with their computers... I also understand why businesses of e-shops and similar sites worry about this problem, but I really don't see any *good for me* reason in what Google does.