cvs.com site does not support opera

cvs.com site does not support opera

I tried cvs.com with opera9.5beta did not work. they stated that they don't support opera. masking as firefox and IE works.

need to take action. I wrote(clcik on contact us and choose email), hope you write to them too.

I contacted them too. I also offered my services if they needed a competent web dev.

great. The mroe we contact them, the higher the chance of getting opera support.

http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=46768
http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=60192
http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=122403
http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=157765

they seems like not interested in opera support or simply too dump to do that.

I was a bit puzzled by the "upgrade" page. I know some browsers may not support some things, but WTF do they mean by the site doesn't support a browser? And Opera at that! I sent an email asking them to please explain just what it is about Opera that they don't support and offered any assistance I might be able to provide, but no response yet after several days. I too found no problem with the areas of the site I visited after masking, but I guess there might be something somewhere. My intuition tells me that most likely, at worst, the site relies on a vulnerability that isn't present in Opera, at best, the layout relies on ugly CSS hacks. Maybe this??

#contentMain a[href^="/"]:after {
content: " (http://www.cvs.com" attr(href) ") ";
}

but as I said, it looks OK to me when masked. Seeing this bothers me more

document.write('<SCR' + 'IPT LANGUAGE=VBScript\> \n');
...
document.write('</SCR' + 'IPT\> \n'); // break up end tag so it doesn't end our script

AFAIK this concatenation will write the same as if not concatenated, and the only way I've seen it used before is for filter evasion.

And they still use a "browser sniffer" script, how backwards.

A very old problem, we should just mask in UA.ini to make it work since they don't seem to intend to change the site.

Originally posted by hallvors:

A very old problem, we should just mask in UA.ini to make it work since they don't seem to intend to change the site.

very old yet growing problem of site developers lack of interest to consider other browsers. AAA site was also recently reported where simply masking works.

Now UA.ini'ed. We should simply get faster at responding with patching/spoofing. It's just silly to let issues like this linger for years, even though it's nowhere near our fault..

thanks.Its a work around to mask as firefox but the problem need to be addressed from the source(cvs). Have you guys writtent o them on opera's behalf for supporting opera?

Could you please look at other similar(may be) site issues like capitalone, aaa and chase ?

This is a widespread epedemic. It's not just a handful of sites. Its the majority of sites really. Some work because of ua.ini and browser.js hacks. Some we haven't even discovered yet.

Opera has contacted them several times. I've nagged David again so I'm sure CVS will get another letter shortly..

and operafan2006: I've had a look at those threads too, should get someting done shortly.
The AAA was very complex though so I'll take care of a couple of Y!Mail issues and some internal stuff first :-)

Originally posted by hallvors:

and operafan2006: I've had a look at those threads too, should get someting done shortly.
The AAA was very complex though so I'll take care of a couple of Y!Mail issues and some internal stuff first :-)

I really appreciate your interest in this and the fact that you seem to understand the urgency of user inconvenience. We, opera users in this forum, can get away with some fixes but vast majority of potential users will have no clue and will only have a misconception that opera is not good enough to handle those sites. Anyway, thanks again.

Just a sidenote on the '</scrip' + 't>' issue.

That is probably due to visual studio 6.0 syntax highlighting, not any real functionality.

If you do not split the script tags the highligting breaks making a mess of the highlighting and intellisence for the rest of the document.

(It's actually because if a script contains the verbatim string "</script>" the browser will consider that the END of that script - even if it is inside a string. It's not necessary to bother with string concatenation though - simply doing "<\/script>" is enough.)

the site in question uses 'meta refresh' in their index -- so called "a porno site technology". let alone it is also deprecated by W3C and discouraged by Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. such (and alike) sites should rather 'must die', than get supported by the browser vendors.