You're running on a Chromebook. Unfortunately, Chromebook/ChromeOS is not a (directly) supported platform for DTVN even with the right version of Chrome. There were a couple of theories why (either the supplied browser ID string was one that the server didn't like, or the lack of Silverlight, which was thought to be necessary) and a couple of workarounds that were reported to work (spoof the browser ID with one that it did like, or use the Play Store - which supposedly works on Chromebooks with the latest ChromeOS - to get the Android DTVN app, which was claimed to work). All this was from early in the year - I haven't seen much about it since. However, here is a to a somewhat more recent article about using the Android app on Chromebook. If that doesn't work for you, you can search the forums for 'chromebook' - you should find amongst the articles that turn up one or more about changing the browser ID string to see if that still works. I don't think it is for no reason.
I changed the UA line for current Edge to match that for my working Chrome. The site starts and successfully displays the guide, but when it tries to display a stream, it starts and then fails on an error 40. (I agree that it's not due to Silverlight, as I uninstalled it and Chrome continued to work fine.) And I agree that writing the site purely using HTML5 and standard extensions - so that any modern, standards compliant browser could display it - would be ideal, but unfortunately, the standards aren't standard enough. Descargar Baidu Pc Faster here. (Note that getting DRM protected multimedia to stream is a more complex task than most web sites - the standards are good enough for most things, and much less dependence on UA strings would be desirable.) EME (newly a standard) defines a framework, but doesn't define the actual CDMs (and the same ones don't meet everyone's needs), and the needed one may or may not exist in any given browser/system. Similarly MSE doesn't define the required audio and video formats (with same caveat), so the necessary codecs may or may not be present. This would seem to get you back to the evil world of plugins (under a different name), and browsers that don't permit that (like Edge) or have restrictions that make it problematic (like Firefox) have problems. (Even without, it is problematic.) You could (try to) force developers/providers to standardize on what Edge happens to provide - that would get you coverage on Win 10 (and maybe XBox).
MS really likes that idea - putting in (proprietary) features and extensions (rather than adopting standards when they existed) and encouraging their use was how they operated for much of IE's existence (hence companies that still run XP and IE 7) - and even though Edge is much more standards compliant, as I noted, that doesn't solve the problem, at least in this case. Regardless, MS's choices don't work for everyone, and letting MS effectively act as the standards body for everyone else doesn't work for anyone except MS. So - your claim that Edge should work if Chrome works is demonstrably untrue - for whatever reason - and whether it could be made to work is not clear, especially with the current state of things. I don't know what facilities the existing web access uses, or what the issues are that are causing them to drop (currently working) IE and Safari. But I would agree with them that if there is a need to standardize on a single browser (at least for the time being), choosing Chrome makes sense - it runs on all the needed platforms and the others don't.