Friend bought me her iPad complaining that links to websites fail with:

"Your browser is no longer supported".

Details of iPad:
Description: = Apple iPad Mini 2
Model Number: = ME277B/A
Version = iOS 12.5.7

It says it is up to date.

(But my own Apple iPad Air 2 : model A1567is at iOS 15.7.7)

The website that fails is of the form:

https://<name>.wixsite.com/<name>/

.... so is this a failure of the site builder?

Can I force her iPad to get a more modern version of iOS?

Or is there a more modern browser that will work on it?

TIA

--
Graham J

In article <u93usp$1addl$1@dont-email.me>,
Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:

> Friend bought me her iPad complaining that links to websites fail with:
>
> "Your browser is no longer supported".
>
> Details of iPad:
> Description: = Apple iPad Mini 2
> Model Number: = ME277B/A
> Version = iOS 12.5.7
>
> It says it is up to date.
>
> (But my own Apple iPad Air 2 : model A1567is at iOS 15.7.7)
>
> The website that fails is of the form:
>
> https://<name>.wixsite.com/<name>/
>
> ... so is this a failure of the site builder?
>
> Can I force her iPad to get a more modern version of iOS?
>
> Or is there a more modern browser that will work on it?
>
> TIA

Brave may we worth a try.

<https://www.brave.com>

--
Cheers, Alan

In article <u93usp$1addl$1@dont-email.me>, Graham J
<nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:

> Friend bought me her iPad complaining that links to websites fail with:
>
> "Your browser is no longer supported".
>
> Details of iPad:
> Description: = Apple iPad Mini 2
> Model Number: = ME277B/A
> Version = iOS 12.5.7
>
> It says it is up to date.

it is up to date. that's the last version of ios that will run on it.

> (But my own Apple iPad Air 2 : model A1567is at iOS 15.7.7)

that's a newer ipad, which ends at ios 15.

> The website that fails is of the form:
>
> https://<name>.wixsite.com/<name>/
>
> ... so is this a failure of the site builder?

it's not a failure.

supporting older browsers is not worth the effort since there aren't
very many people still using them, and more importantly, they lack
security measures needed and useful features.

it's basically the same as requiring a certain version of ios, mac os
or windows.

> Can I force her iPad to get a more modern version of iOS?

nope.

> Or is there a more modern browser that will work on it?

maybe, but not for long.

Alan B wrote:
> In article <u93usp$1addl$1@dont-email.me>,
> Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Friend bought me her iPad complaining that links to websites fail with:
>>
>> "Your browser is no longer supported".
>>
>> Details of iPad:
>> Description: = Apple iPad Mini 2
>> Model Number: = ME277B/A
>> Version = iOS 12.5.7
>>
>> It says it is up to date.
>>
>> (But my own Apple iPad Air 2 : model A1567is at iOS 15.7.7)
>>
>> The website that fails is of the form:
>>
>> https://<name>.wixsite.com/<name>/
>>
>> ... so is this a failure of the site builder?
>>
>> Can I force her iPad to get a more modern version of iOS?
>>
>> Or is there a more modern browser that will work on it?
>>
>> TIA
>
> Brave may we worth a try.
>
> <https://www.brave.com>
>

No, needs iOS 15

--
Graham J

On 17 Jul 2023 at 18:48:04 BST, "Graham J" <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:

> Or is there a more modern browser that will work on it?

At iOS 12, only Safari is allowed to be the browser. All "other"
browsers were actually just wrappers around a Safari view, so you'll
probably get the same rejection from the websites that are picky about
these things.

(I think it's still true in 16 too actually... maybe changing soon?
There was some noise about that)

Cheers - Jaimie
--
boy, n.
1. Noise with dirt on it.

nospam wrote:
> In article <u93usp$1addl$1@dont-email.me>, Graham J
> <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Friend bought me her iPad complaining that links to websites fail with:
>>
>> "Your browser is no longer supported".
>>
>> Details of iPad:
>> Description: = Apple iPad Mini 2
>> Model Number: = ME277B/A
>> Version = iOS 12.5.7
>>
>> It says it is up to date.
>
> it is up to date. that's the last version of ios that will run on it.
>
>> (But my own Apple iPad Air 2 : model A1567is at iOS 15.7.7)
>
> that's a newer ipad, which ends at ios 15.
>
>> The website that fails is of the form:
>>
>> https://<name>.wixsite.com/<name>/
>>
>> ... so is this a failure of the site builder?
>
> it's not a failure.
>
> supporting older browsers is not worth the effort since there aren't
> very many people still using them, and more importantly, they lack
> security measures needed and useful features.
>
> it's basically the same as requiring a certain version of ios, mac os
> or windows.
>
>> Can I force her iPad to get a more modern version of iOS?
>
> nope.
>
>> Or is there a more modern browser that will work on it?
>
> maybe, but not for long.
>

That's very sad. The device is very clean and has been well looked
after. The hardware has lots of life in it yet.

Is there a version of Unix that can be installed on it to replace iOS?

Alternatively, can it be recycled in an environmentally friendly way?

--
Graham J

In article <u9490u$1bgd8$1@dont-email.me>, Graham J
<nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:

> >> Friend bought me her iPad complaining that links to websites fail with:
> >>
> >> "Your browser is no longer supported".
> >>
> >> Details of iPad:
> >> Description: = Apple iPad Mini 2
> >> Model Number: = ME277B/A
> >> Version = iOS 12.5.7

> That's very sad. The device is very clean and has been well looked
> after. The hardware has lots of life in it yet.

not really. the ipad mini 2 was released in late 2013, making it almost
10 years old.

it will certainly continue to work, however, web browsing is going to
be limited. some sites will want a more recent browser, but not all.

the rest of the apps will mostly work unless they connect to an
external resource, which requires a newer version of the app, which
needs a newer version of ios.

> Is there a version of Unix that can be installed on it to replace iOS?

nope.

> Alternatively, can it be recycled in an environmentally friendly way?

apple stores will accept it (along with other electronics) for
recycling, possibly other companies too.

another option is sell it on ebay, although it won't get much and might
not be worth the hassle.

Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
> That's very sad. The device is very clean and has been well looked
> after. The hardware has lots of life in it yet.

Planned obsolescence, innit. Apple want you to buy something newer.

> Is there a version of Unix that can be installed on it to replace iOS?

No, because Apple won't allow people to run alternative OSes on iPads or
iPhones.

It seems there are jailbreaks, using Chimera:
https://ios.cfw.guide/installing-chimera/
or Freya:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRwCAl-lq4Q
(other videos available, may be less annoying)

I haven't looked into what JBing would get you though, as I haven't tried it
myself. There are tools to let you change the default browser away from
Safari, but since there aren't any non-Safari browsers on non-JB iOS I'm
not sure if any exist purely for the JB community. So I don't think it
would allow you to install an more up to date browser.

Ah, scratch that, it seems like there is a backport of new Safari to
jailbroken old iOS:
https://github.com/UInt2048/CyberKit
and a release 3 days ago added support for iOS 12:
https://github.com/UInt2048/CyberKit/releases

(while TrollStore can be used to install it on non-JB devices, it
appears TS only works on iOS 14-15)

> Alternatively, can it be recycled in an environmentally friendly way?

Numerous recycling places exist. Your local council recycling depot for
one. Apple will also recycle it for free.

Theo

In article <H9j*cVwlz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, Theo
<theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

> Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
> > That's very sad. The device is very clean and has been well looked
> > after. The hardware has lots of life in it yet.
>
> Planned obsolescence, innit. Apple want you to buy something newer.

it's not planned obsolescence.

the device is 10 years old. its actually beyond its useful life.

it's no longer supported, not just by apple, but by web designers and
app developers largely because newer features require more up to date
hardware, and also because number of such devices still in active use
is too small to justify bothering to support it anymore

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <u93usp$1addl$1@dont-email.me>, Graham J
> <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Friend bought me her iPad complaining that links to websites fail with:
>>
>> "Your browser is no longer supported".
>>
>> Details of iPad:
>> Description: = Apple iPad Mini 2
>> Model Number: = ME277B/A
>> Version = iOS 12.5.7
>>
>> It says it is up to date.
>
> it is up to date. that's the last version of ios that will run on it.
>
>> (But my own Apple iPad Air 2 : model A1567is at iOS 15.7.7)
>
> that's a newer ipad, which ends at ios 15.
>
>> The website that fails is of the form:
>>
>> https://<name>.wixsite.com/<name>/
>>
>> ... so is this a failure of the site builder?
>
> it's not a failure.

If course it is. Writing websites for specific browsers is contrary to the
open web. All you need to read a standard website is a standard browser.
Browser checking is just bullshit.

You can guarantee if you could change the User Agent string the page would
work just fine.

> supporting older browsers is not worth the effort since there aren't
> very many people still using them, and more importantly, they lack
> security measures needed and useful features.

Then they shouldn't write browser-specific websites.

> it's basically the same as requiring a certain version of ios, mac os
> or windows.

Not at all.

Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>> In article <u93usp$1addl$1@dont-email.me>, Graham J
>> <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Friend bought me her iPad complaining that links to websites fail with:
>>>
>>> "Your browser is no longer supported".
>>>
>>> Details of iPad:
>>> Description: = Apple iPad Mini 2
>>> Model Number: = ME277B/A
>>> Version = iOS 12.5.7
>>>
>>> It says it is up to date.
>>
>> it is up to date. that's the last version of ios that will run on it.
>>
>>> (But my own Apple iPad Air 2 : model A1567is at iOS 15.7.7)
>>
>> that's a newer ipad, which ends at ios 15.
>>
>>> The website that fails is of the form:
>>>
>>> https://<name>.wixsite.com/<name>/
>>>
>>> ... so is this a failure of the site builder?
>>
>> it's not a failure.
>>
>> supporting older browsers is not worth the effort since there aren't
>> very many people still using them, and more importantly, they lack
>> security measures needed and useful features.
>>
>> it's basically the same as requiring a certain version of ios, mac os
>> or windows.
>>
>>> Can I force her iPad to get a more modern version of iOS?
>>
>> nope.
>>
>>> Or is there a more modern browser that will work on it?
>>
>> maybe, but not for long.
>>
>
> That's very sad. The device is very clean and has been well looked
> after. The hardware has lots of life in it yet.
>
> Is there a version of Unix that can be installed on it to replace iOS?
>
> Alternatively, can it be recycled in an environmentally friendly way?

There are trade in options which could give you/her money off a new one.
With something that age, it won't be much unfortunately.

In article <u94c00$1bqb9$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:

> >> ... so is this a failure of the site builder?
> >
> > it's not a failure.
>
> If course it is. Writing websites for specific browsers is contrary to the
> open web.

they're not writing for specific browsers.

what they're doing is using new web technologies and/or new security
protocols that don't exist in older browsers.

if the browser being used is old and doesn't implement that, then the
site won't work.

> All you need to read a standard website is a standard browser.
> Browser checking is just bullshit.

if all you want is a generic site with minimal functionality, sure.

some web developers want to take advantage of the latest technologies
because it makes for better web sites and also is less work to do it.

> You can guarantee if you could change the User Agent string the page would
> work just fine.

there is no such guarantee.

that won't work if the site requires functionality not available in the
browser.

> > supporting older browsers is not worth the effort since there aren't
> > very many people still using them, and more importantly, they lack
> > security measures needed and useful features.
>
> Then they shouldn't write browser-specific websites.

that's not what they're doing.

> > it's basically the same as requiring a certain version of ios, mac os
> > or windows.
>
> Not at all.

yes it is.

all software has minimum system requirements and anything that doesn't
meet those requirements will not work.

in some cases, it might be able to hack something to get it to work,
but that is usually a lot of effort and brings a lot of compromises.

in this case, the minimum system requirement for the website is a newer
browser.

On 17/07/2023 18:48, Graham J wrote:
> Friend bought me her iPad complaining that links to websites fail with:
>
> "Your browser is no longer supported".
>
> Details of iPad:
> Description:    = Apple iPad Mini 2
> Model Number:    = ME277B/A
> Version        = iOS 12.5.7
>
> It says it is up to date.
>
> (But my own Apple iPad Air 2 : model A1567is at iOS 15.7.7)
>
> The website that fails is of the form:
>
> https://<name>.wixsite.com/<name>/
>
> ... so is this a failure of the site builder?
>
> Can I force her iPad to get a more modern version of iOS?
>
> Or is there a more modern browser that will work on it?

Probably not. I see some have mentioned alternative browsers, of which
there are a few available, but they all use the Apple browser engine to
operate, so it's unlikely any of them will be much different (if you can
even find one that will work - third party browsers are quite a recent
addition anyway).

It might be possible to jailbreak the thing, and force later OS onto it.
But that's just as likely to brick it too.

I would suspect the best option might be to pass it on, you might get a
little from one of the gadget resellers (Envirofone, CEX, etc.). They
can sometimes surprise you with what they offer for cash, or get a
voucher to put it towards a newer model - both of those have decent
returns policies, and I've often ended up with better than expected
items. I know Envriofone have no issue with changing batteries in the
warranty period (from experience).

Cheers.

--
Andy H

In article <u94f45$1c4gl$1@dont-email.me>, Andy Hewitt
<thewildrover@icloud.com> wrote:

> > Or is there a more modern browser that will work on it?
>
> Probably not. I see some have mentioned alternative browsers, of which
> there are a few available, but they all use the Apple browser engine to
> operate, so it's unlikely any of them will be much different (if you can
> even find one that will work - third party browsers are quite a recent
> addition anyway).

nope. third party browsers go back to the earliest versions of ios.

what's changed recently is being able to set a different browser as a
default.

however, you're correct in that it likely won't make a difference if
webkit (the browser engine) lacks the necessary functionality for the
web site.

In message <170720231803403348%nospam@nospam.invalid>
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <u94c00$1bqb9$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > > > ... so is this a failure of the site builder?
> > >
> > > it's not a failure.
> >
> > If course it is. Writing websites for specific browsers is contrary to
> > the open web.
>
> they're not writing for specific browsers.
>
> what they're doing is using new web technologies and/or new security
> protocols that don't exist in older browsers.
>
> if the browser being used is old and doesn't implement that, then the
> site won't work.
[snip]

Tim Berners-Lee would be turning in his grave if he weren't still alive.

In article <mpro.rxysp6003rtiw010i.fred@[127.0.0.1]>,
<fred@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:

> > > > > ... so is this a failure of the site builder?
> > > >
> > > > it's not a failure.
> > >
> > > If course it is. Writing websites for specific browsers is contrary to
> > > the open web.
> >
> > they're not writing for specific browsers.
> >
> > what they're doing is using new web technologies and/or new security
> > protocols that don't exist in older browsers.
> >
> > if the browser being used is old and doesn't implement that, then the
> > site won't work.
> [snip]
>
> Tim Berners-Lee would be turning in his grave if he weren't still alive.

no he wouldn't. he's glad technology continues to advance, well beyond
what he developed 30 years ago.

In message <170720232037176270%nospam@nospam.invalid>
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <mpro.rxysp6003rtiw010i.fred@[127.0.0.1]>, <fred@[127.0.0.1]>
> wrote:
>
> > > > > > ... so is this a failure of the site builder?
> > > > >
> > > > > it's not a failure.
> > > >
> > > > If course it is. Writing websites for specific browsers is
> > > > contrary to the open web.
> > >
> > > they're not writing for specific browsers.
> > >
> > > what they're doing is using new web technologies and/or new security
> > > protocols that don't exist in older browsers.
> > >
> > > if the browser being used is old and doesn't implement that, then
> > > the site won't work.
> > [snip]
> >
> > Tim Berners-Lee would be turning in his grave if he weren't still
> > alive.
>
> no he wouldn't. he's glad technology continues to advance, well beyond
> what he developed 30 years ago.

Technology, sure. Principals?

In article <mpro.rxyw7i004gnkb0157.fred@[127.0.0.1]>,
<fred@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:

> > > Tim Berners-Lee would be turning in his grave if he weren't still
> > > alive.
> >
> > no he wouldn't. he's glad technology continues to advance, well beyond
> > what he developed 30 years ago.
>
> Technology, sure. Principals?

unlike you, he had several.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <mpro.rxyw7i004gnkb0157.fred@[127.0.0.1]>,
> <fred@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>
> > > > Tim Berners-Lee would be turning in his grave if he weren't still
> > > > alive.
> > >
> > > no he wouldn't. he's glad technology continues to advance, well beyond
> > > what he developed 30 years ago.
> >
> > Technology, sure. Principals?
>
> unlike you, he had several.

FWIW early HTML had its roots in pen-and-paper programmed learning,
such as I was taught with on my initial BBC engineering course in 1968.

I don't say this to denigrate TB-L's excellent efforts in applying those
principles to computing, but just saying.

--
^Ï^. – Sn!pe – <https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

My pet rock Gordon just is.

Am 17.07.23 um 23:13 schrieb Theo:
> Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>> That's very sad. The device is very clean and has been well looked
>> after. The hardware has lots of life in it yet.
>
> Planned obsolescence, innit. Apple want you to buy something newer.

That is not even half the truth and you know that. Just FUD.

--
Prudentia potentia est

Am 18.07.23 um 01:46 schrieb fred@[127.0.0.1]:
> In message <170720231803403348%nospam@nospam.invalid>
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> In article <u94c00$1bqb9$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>> ... so is this a failure of the site builder?
>>>>
>>>> it's not a failure.
>>>
>>> If course it is. Writing websites for specific browsers is contrary to
>>> the open web.
>>
>> they're not writing for specific browsers.
>>
>> what they're doing is using new web technologies and/or new security
>> protocols that don't exist in older browsers.
>>
>> if the browser being used is old and doesn't implement that, then the
>> site won't work.
> [snip]
>
> Tim Berners-Lee would be turning in his grave if he weren't still alive.

Wisenheimer. nospam is correct.

--
Prudentia potentia est

Am 18.07.23 um 03:02 schrieb fred@[127.0.0.1]:
> In message <170720232037176270%nospam@nospam.invalid>
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> no he wouldn't. he's glad technology continues to advance, well beyond
>> what he developed 30 years ago.
>
> Technology, sure. Principals?

Yes. It was never his or anybody's intention to lug around the whole legacy.

--
Prudentia potentia est

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <mpro.rxyw7i004gnkb0157.fred@[127.0.0.1]>,
> <fred@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>
>>>> Tim Berners-Lee would be turning in his grave if he weren't still
>>>> alive.
>>>
>>> no he wouldn't. he's glad technology continues to advance, well beyond
>>> what he developed 30 years ago.
>>
>> Technology, sure. Principals?
>
> unlike you, he had several.

why the need to be rude?

Am 18.07.23 um 08:35 schrieb Chris:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> In article <mpro.rxyw7i004gnkb0157.fred@[127.0.0.1]>,
>> <fred@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Tim Berners-Lee would be turning in his grave if he weren't still
>>>>> alive.
>>>>
>>>> no he wouldn't. he's glad technology continues to advance, well beyond
>>>> what he developed 30 years ago.
>>>
>>> Technology, sure. Principals?
>>
>> unlike you, he had several.
>
> why the need to be rude?

Don't you really understand why?

--
Prudentia potentia est

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <u94c00$1bqb9$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>>> ... so is this a failure of the site builder?
>>>
>>> it's not a failure.
>>
>> If course it is. Writing websites for specific browsers is contrary to the
>> open web.
>
> they're not writing for specific browsers.

You know that explicitly how?

> what they're doing is using new web technologies and/or new security
> protocols that don't exist in older browsers.
>
> if the browser being used is old and doesn't implement that, then the
> site won't work.

What feature is that website using that Safari in iOS 12 doesn't comply
with?

>> All you need to read a standard website is a standard browser.
>> Browser checking is just bullshit.
>
> if all you want is a generic site with minimal functionality, sure.

Which is what these out-of-the-box wix sites are.

> some web developers want to take advantage of the latest technologies
> because it makes for better web sites and also is less work to do it.
>
>> You can guarantee if you could change the User Agent string the page would
>> work just fine.
>
> there is no such guarantee.

Sure there is. That's how HTML/CSS/JS works; there's always some fallback.
It may not look pretty.

> that won't work if the site requires functionality not available in the
> browser.

I can see you handwaving from here.