[Bug] QuickSupport app on macOS does not support teamviewer8 URL scheme

thtempelmann

Hi,

This is a bug report about the TeamViewer QuickSupport.app for macOS (I'm a Mac app developer, meaning I know what I'm talking about, and I don't need help).

The QuickSupport app (15.2.2756) does not work with the quicksupport.me link to launch the already installed app because it does not register the URL scheme as it should.

I mean the link titled "Launch application":

The proof for the bug can be found in the app's Info.plist, where the entry CFBundleURLTypes is missing. The full app contains it, so if the full app is installed, the teamviewer8://instantsupport/?sid=… links work.

Please confirm and have this fixed. Thank you.

MoreCoffee

Thanks for your detailed feedback, @thtempelmann. I'll forward it to the responsible team.

MoreCoffee

Hi @thtempelmann,

Thanks for your report. This link is intended for users who already have the full TeamViewer client installed on their Mac and therefore do not need to download TeamViewer QuickSupport.

If TeamViewer QuickSupport were also to register this URL scheme, users who have both the full TeamViewer client installed, as well as one or more copies of TeamViewer QuickSupport on their Mac, would experience undefined behavior as the link might no longer open their installed TeamViewer client.

Hope this answers your questions. Let me know if I can help you further.

thtempelmann

I think that you're still providing a bad user experience the way this works now, even if intentionally.

Here's why:

1. This is (probably) used by those who are new to TeamViewer, e.g. when, like in my case, I want to help a friend out and then have them sent the quicksupport.me link to get them started. These users only need the QS app and may choose to install it for that reason.
2. If the user only has QS installed, the link leads to a confusing error msg for the user, and if they're the kind that need help from a fellow Mac user, it's likely they have no clue what's wrong. Which causes more grief for me, the one who wants to help.
3. While the text says "Already … TeamViewer app", that's the product and brand name - a new user (or even me who used both apps occasionally for years, thank you for that) will not figure out that this means the TV app but not the QS app. So, at LEAST this text needs to be made clearer.
4. Someone who knows what both TS and QS are and yet have both installed for inexplicable reasons, would if both support the scheme, at worst get the QS app launched even if they wanted to use the TV app. But what's the damage here? Both accomplish the indended task when clicking this link, i.e. both can act as the host, which was the intention when I'd send the link, don't they? And if they want the other, they can simply launch the other first - scheme links always prefer a running app, and only if none of the apps that support the scheme are running, a random one is picked (actually, it's the one "installed" last, IIRC).

So, where's the actual harm in supporting the scheme in the QS app as well, as opposed to the bad UX the current scenario often offers for new users?

MoreCoffee

Thanks for your detailed feedback, @thtempelmann. I'll forward it to the responsible team.