Mayayana wrote:

"VanguardLH" wrote

|
| It was a quick and very easy way to determine if the client supported
| functionality the site needed, or would prefer to use, to present the
| content how they wanted....

I think you need to get out more, V. You go on and on
with these arguments. And what are you arguing about?

Seemed you intended to insult me with my mention of [disabling]
extensions, yet you never did show what troubleshooting steps you would
take to start working on the problem (when it was present) for the OP.

As for spoofing the UA header, the only reason it got deprecated was due
to abuse by users. However, the history of the UA header had web client
authors abusing it first, so users saw that and wanted it, too, to lie
to a server what client was visiting them. Instead of using a
compatible client, they continue to use a deficient one and pretend it's
something else.