Do they really expect people who go through the effort of installing a third party browser and setting it as default to switch back to Edge because of the grand experience they had with it when Windows opened some help article in it?
How much money do they make of the 0.000001% of users who do the above?
How much money do they lose because of the reputation damage and increased regulator attention because of it?
I cannot think of any scenario where, money wise, this is a net positive for MS.
Microsoft is very consistent in aggressively promoting their own stuff at every turn. Ever noticed how the "what application you wanna use for this file type?" dialog pop ups every time any application is installed that can handle that type? Ever noticed how this dialog always has Microsoft's option at the top of the list? Ever noticed this dialog pops up after some updates because the Microsoft option has been updated so it's a Totally New Experience that You Really Ought To Try Now? Ever noticed how every few months you'll get a giant screen filling modal pop-up on login telling you to create a Microsoft account Right Now or Else? Ever noticed how Windows 10 shows a full-screen "Leave everything to us" banner during installation? Ever noticed the FOMO ads on the lock screen ("Windows brings you closer to what you love in life", "Don't miss any European soccer!")? Ever noticed the cringy "Just one more thing" and "Let's get you set up" system modals? Ever noticed how you have to lie to the setup wizard in order to not have a Microsoft account ("I don't have internet")?
The entire messaging of this OS is dystopian corpo garbage and then people are shocked, SHOCKED I tell you, that it's a monopolistic shitpile kicking your civil rights in the nuts at every turn.
This is what drove me over the edge to another operating system, I gotta imagine others as well.
Having ads at the OS level is just mind boggling, I get people can get used to anything but I really hoped there'd be a line where people just left in swarms.
But but, "Microsoft isn't the same anymore!" VSCode is open! And good!
The narrative has really pulled in Microsoft's favor and I think that's not too our advantage. Every conversation I have with them is about how they "used to be bad but are great for open source now".
> The entire messaging of this OS is dystopian corpo garbage and then people are shocked, SHOCKED I tell you, that it's a monopolistic shitpile kicking your civil rights in the nuts at every turn.
The funny thing is, they're doing it for more than decade, and people believe that one day they won't do it. On the contrary, it'll get more and more aggressive.
I lied the wrong way. I gave them a totally bogus email address instead of saying that I don't have internet. Now they keep telling me that "there's a problem with your Microsoft account" that I need to fix...
Luckily with the advent of Proton and actual anti-cheats being supported by Linux, the last thing keeping me on this utterly disgusting platform will be gone.
I won't miss Windows one second. Now just to find the right distribution environment...
No. I must be doing something differently. To be fair, Edge is not forced upon me, as I am using Firefox, but the only thing I do not like is that Windows 10 is updating itself whenever it wants.
Ah, and I installed Windows 10, that does not use Microsoft account(you might had to disconnect internet cable for that), so it might be the main problem.
> How much money do they lose because of the reputation damage and increased regulator attention because of it?
Unfortunately I doubt they lose very much at all based on a move like this. To sophisticated users this is a huge red-flag, but I would imagine a vast majority of computer users barely know what browser they use.
Probably they use edge by default until they're cajoled into installing Chrome as their default browser by their google services, and then they're confused why certain things from chrome don't work when they've been led to a website from the search bar.
That's an absolutely atrocious result from a UX point of view. And it really makes you wonder about the incentive structures in the industry to contemplate the collective frustration suffered by hundreds of millions or billions of users just so some PO's can get a raise for hitting their KPI targets this or that quarter.
This is clearly not true. Firefox has higher desktop browser usage than edge[1].
> they're cajoled into installing Chrome as their default browser by their google services. And do you really think 80% of the destop users clicked to install chrome because they click anything on the net?
I thought they removed the ad for chrome in google services.
It’s peanuts enough to not affect that many users, but loud and clear to send the message that Windows is no longer users’. It’s Microsoft’s.
If you step back a little, there is a clear pattern. Starting with the mandatory telemetry and forced updates in W10, cross-signing requirements for any kernel code, unyielding push for using web accounts for local logins and all the way up to the mandatory hardware TPM in W11 (which literally has no other major differences from W10) - the proverbial garden is getting all walled up whether anyone likes it or not.
An iteration or two more and the OS will be locked completely, with the only way in through the AppStore.
> Do they really expect people who go through the effort of installing a third party browser and setting it as default to switch back to Edge because of the grand experience they had with it when Windows opened some help article in it?
No they don't, otherwise they wouldn't be trying to undermine the whole concept of "default browser" like this.
I think what they expect is that those people will keep using Edge "on accident" - because various bits of essential OS chrome will just keep opening it, no matter what.
After some time, those users will grow tired of manually copy-pasting the link into Firefox or whatever and just keep using Edge for those tasks.
They may just like the telemetry benefit of users accidentally opening Edge occasionally, versus any uptick in people actually choosing Edge. The "Edge Only" links tend to be to Microsoft properties. Like the weather widget opens an msn.com link.
This happens to me periodically, because I rarely use bookmarks or persistent tabs. Edge will open because Microsoft, I'll start browsing, and it'll be a few minutes before I notice that I've been scammed again.
It is very much worth it or they won't make it so hard.
https://backlinko.com/bing-users
>Microsoft generated $8.53 billion in search advertising revenue in the 2021 fiscal year.
I don't think they're doing this for money. I think they're doing it ostensibly for security reasons, with the idea being:
If the unsophisticated user performs a search with the OS, and the links get clickjacked by a cracked browser and the user ends up installing malware as a result, they're not going to blame Firefox, or the malware-writer. They're going to blame Microsoft, because they were just using the OS. What's more the vulnerability won't be something MS can fix because it will be the fault of 3rd party software. So to prevent that possibility MS want end-to-end control over the search results.
Having said that I think a lot of the recent bad will toward MS is self-inflicted. One easy thing they could do is allow the paid versions (Pro and up) of Windows to have an "expert" mode that lets the user configure their OS the way they want, including removing all the telemetry and making all unessential apps/tools entirely optional, including Edge of course.
This was more along the lines of my thinking too. A more reasonable explanation here is that they this gives them control over UI and security which from MS's perspective may make sense if people are likely to attribute any UI / security issues to MS. It could also be something to do with the analytics they're able to collect.
Also when you have a company the size of MS talking about a small decision like this as if the whole company is onboard and actively engaged in the decision making process is naive. It was most likely a decision made by a few people at MS. Not saying that excuses it, but often individuals in companies have their own misaligned incentives and make certain decisions for their own benefits.
> Do they really expect people who go through the effort of installing a third party browser and setting it as default to switch back to Edge because of the grand experience they had with it when Windows opened some help article in it?
A lot of people don't understand what different browsers are, for them there is just "the Internet". I can tell my parents to just install and use Firefox. But they will then happily use a random Edge screen that was last visible to do their next search and be none the wiser. Meanwhile Microsoft will be raking in all their user data and advertisement space.
I can imagine that there's some contorted logic that goes like this:
* MS (used to) allow the user to choose default programs in the spirit of "openness" (because they were legally told to).
* The default settings in programs have never been legislated...
* ...therefore do dark patterns in programs and set the default search in Edge to be Bing...
* ... and make it even harder (impossible? dunno, not using Windows) to change Bing to Google in Edge and drive all Windows users to Bing, and drive ad revenue.
"There's nothing that can't be solved with an extra layer of indirection".
No, this way they can build the search experiance (and others) without cross browser testing. I'm not defending it though, it's an abandonment of the open web. Rather than work to right the ship, they choose to force everyone on a tiny lifeboat and pray they make it ashore. Nevermind that they left half the crew behind.
I don't think it's too difficult to understand.. they want a supported method to open their own apps using their own browser, guaranteeing any QA done on those apps will cover any potential onslaught of bug/support workload due to third party browsers.
I'd prefer it if these things opened in Firefox, but I can just as easily see how from an engineering perspective they want this mechanism and are willing to defend it. From that perspective, Firefox is intentionally fucking around with OS internals in a way that could create costs for their support org.
(edit: please don't shoot the messenger. I'm an affected user too)
Microsoft’s reasoning is that features like search is an end to end experience. That’s odd to me — it just opens a web page. Is there anything special about it being in Edge that we don’t notice?
I mean, obviously it’s BS, but are there PMs who actually think it’s better for the user to override the default browser for things like this? A side note: one frustrating aspect of this problem is that my browser extensions are never installed in Edge. So things like password autofill in a lot of the MS auth flows (which appear to be web-based, as far as I can tell) just don’t work
Well obviously they lose telemetry when you leave the ms ecosystem, so the user journey has effectively ended at that point /s
> things like password autofill in a lot of the MS auth flows (which appear to be web-based, as far as I can tell) just don’t work
Cynically I could believe this is partly by design. If they manage to get you into edge often enough, sooner or later you'll set up your workflows in edge as well out of annoyance. Maintaining two separate browser environments is a burden, and sooner or later a lot of people will give up and stick to the browser you have to use in many cases.
Well, no, it's not just opening a web page. It's opening a search engine, see, and that's completely different.
/s
But I think that is in fact the difference. It's not that Microsoft wants you to use Edge for that so much, it's that they want you to use Bing for that. Edge is just so they can drive you to Bing.
>> We’ll have to wait and see how this plays out in the future, but it makes Edge look bad, which is a shame because it’s not a terrible browser at all.
No, it's just evil. An axe is just a tool unless wielded by a dark clown. Edge would probably be a reasonable browser in the hands of literally anyone other than microsoft.
Regardless of whether this is anti-competitive enough to be illegal, I'm surprised that Microsoft are going anywhere near this issue given their history of legal trouble with giving preferential treatment to their own browser.
After all, all of their legal troubles amounted to a financial slap on the wrist and the browserchoice requeriment which they managed to actually profit from (auctions), then dropped entirely when they saw fit.
By the time the government gets to slapping them again with another non-consequential fine, edge will have already managed to extract as much market share as they could with these techniques anyway.
Not sure if they profited but early on it was filled with dozens of trident(IE) skins and a broken random shuffle that put IE first most of the time. So they didn't loose anything with it.
Every time people bring up the 30 years of systematic abuse of the computing world engineered by Microsoft, there's a dogpile of people who say that was years ago and they've changed.
They haven't changed. They can't change. If you're at Microsoft or working with Microsoft because you think they will? Run.
How would campaign contributions help in the EU? The people they would need to pay off are all unelected judges and prosecutors. The elected officials do not how much power to affect anything.
What trouble? Also for reference, Apple and Google both do the same for their operating systems - iOS, macOS, ChromeOS and many Android flavours.
Edit: My point being, in this case it's an end-to-end experience, it's not a question of being able to configure anything. You get Windows with whatever Microsoft decides you can do with it. If that's not what you intended, then another vendor's defaults or an open operating system are a better choice.
> Also for reference, Apple and Google both do the same for their operating systems - iOS, macOS, ChromeOS and many Android flavours.
No, they don't. iOS, macOS, Android (not sure about ChromeOS) all allow you to set a default browser and then the OS sticks to that default. In macOS, if I do a google search from Spotlight, it opens in Firefox. Clicking a link inside Mail on iOS opens in my default browser.
I am so happy to have switched to Pop OS around two years ago. I’ve just become completely immune to random updates, shutdowns, and all evil Microsoft news.
I never quite understood what kind of difference it makes, but my computer feels like it’s my own again.
Anyway, on topic, yeah, eventually they’ll get antitrust slapped again.
I put this on par with Google automatically signing you in to Chrome when you log into any one of its services, or even the mandatory Windows Online account that you need to install Windows 11 (and to a lesser extent 10).
Just user hostile actions in the name of "convenience" (for the product owner / business).
This is only for links using the microsoft-edge protocol, which is used by internal things like whatever this "News and Interests" widget is they have on the taskbar now. Regular web links will open in your default browser, Firefox or otherwise.
I'm ok with that. I doubt Microsoft wants support calls about how someone clicked on their widget and the resulting page didn't render properly because user was on X browser. As long as this is redirection for built-in OS things only, I'll give them a pass.
So, if you want to override the users choice of browser, it's acceptable if you first replace "https://" with "microsoft-edge://" ? They're doing the exact same behavior, just with two steps instead of one.
I guess I'm somewhat OK with protecting microsoft-edge:// links, maybe an argument for security could be made for application-specific protocols.
But they absolutely should not use https:// for links that just open Bing and MSN. After all, those are just normal websites and work perfectly fine in Firefox, and of course in Chrome or Opera as well.
Why would you be ok with this? There is no conceivable reason for below-average web browsers to be propped up by polluting and bastardizing URLs like this.
> I doubt Microsoft wants support calls about how someone clicked on their widget and the resulting page didn't render properly because user was on X browser.
It's not "X browser", it would be just Firefox with its workaround. And it's common practice to design websites with support for major browsers, so it shouldn't be such a huge burden letting users pick a browser.
Yeah but this story is about them making a change that blocks EdgeDeflector a tool that only exists for specifically those users that want to go far out of their way to override this behavior, so it's not like it's going to innocently snare someone who didn't ask for it.
Readit News
Microsoft to Block Windows 11 Browser Workarounds - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29201027 - Nov 2021 (105 comments)
You can no longer bypass microsoft-edge:// links using apps like EdgeDeflector - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29191244 - Nov 2021 (171 comments)
This is a lot more obvious once we change the URL from the submitted one (https://www.howtogeek.com/768727/microsoft-calls-firefoxs-br...) to the article it's copying.
Do they really expect people who go through the effort of installing a third party browser and setting it as default to switch back to Edge because of the grand experience they had with it when Windows opened some help article in it?
How much money do they make of the 0.000001% of users who do the above?
How much money do they lose because of the reputation damage and increased regulator attention because of it?
I cannot think of any scenario where, money wise, this is a net positive for MS.
The entire messaging of this OS is dystopian corpo garbage and then people are shocked, SHOCKED I tell you, that it's a monopolistic shitpile kicking your civil rights in the nuts at every turn.
Having ads at the OS level is just mind boggling, I get people can get used to anything but I really hoped there'd be a line where people just left in swarms.
The narrative has really pulled in Microsoft's favor and I think that's not too our advantage. Every conversation I have with them is about how they "used to be bad but are great for open source now".
The funny thing is, they're doing it for more than decade, and people believe that one day they won't do it. On the contrary, it'll get more and more aggressive.
I won't miss Windows one second. Now just to find the right distribution environment...
Ah, and I installed Windows 10, that does not use Microsoft account(you might had to disconnect internet cable for that), so it might be the main problem.
Unfortunately I doubt they lose very much at all based on a move like this. To sophisticated users this is a huge red-flag, but I would imagine a vast majority of computer users barely know what browser they use.
Probably they use edge by default until they're cajoled into installing Chrome as their default browser by their google services, and then they're confused why certain things from chrome don't work when they've been led to a website from the search bar.
That's an absolutely atrocious result from a UX point of view. And it really makes you wonder about the incentive structures in the industry to contemplate the collective frustration suffered by hundreds of millions or billions of users just so some PO's can get a raise for hitting their KPI targets this or that quarter.
> they're cajoled into installing Chrome as their default browser by their google services. And do you really think 80% of the destop users clicked to install chrome because they click anything on the net?
I thought they removed the ad for chrome in google services.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers
It’s peanuts enough to not affect that many users, but loud and clear to send the message that Windows is no longer users’. It’s Microsoft’s.
If you step back a little, there is a clear pattern. Starting with the mandatory telemetry and forced updates in W10, cross-signing requirements for any kernel code, unyielding push for using web accounts for local logins and all the way up to the mandatory hardware TPM in W11 (which literally has no other major differences from W10) - the proverbial garden is getting all walled up whether anyone likes it or not.
An iteration or two more and the OS will be locked completely, with the only way in through the AppStore.
Fun times ahead. Mark my words.
No they don't, otherwise they wouldn't be trying to undermine the whole concept of "default browser" like this.
I think what they expect is that those people will keep using Edge "on accident" - because various bits of essential OS chrome will just keep opening it, no matter what.
After some time, those users will grow tired of manually copy-pasting the link into Firefox or whatever and just keep using Edge for those tasks.
Never underestimate the power of friction.
I have set Firefox as deault web browser, but Teams still opens urls in Edge. And I could not find a way to fix it, or identify why Teams is doing it?
Deleted Comment
If the unsophisticated user performs a search with the OS, and the links get clickjacked by a cracked browser and the user ends up installing malware as a result, they're not going to blame Firefox, or the malware-writer. They're going to blame Microsoft, because they were just using the OS. What's more the vulnerability won't be something MS can fix because it will be the fault of 3rd party software. So to prevent that possibility MS want end-to-end control over the search results.
Having said that I think a lot of the recent bad will toward MS is self-inflicted. One easy thing they could do is allow the paid versions (Pro and up) of Windows to have an "expert" mode that lets the user configure their OS the way they want, including removing all the telemetry and making all unessential apps/tools entirely optional, including Edge of course.
How is this even a case? moreover the fact that MS is claiming it is for benefit of Users is itself suspicious
How often do unsophisticated users identify where malware came from correctly?
Also when you have a company the size of MS talking about a small decision like this as if the whole company is onboard and actively engaged in the decision making process is naive. It was most likely a decision made by a few people at MS. Not saying that excuses it, but often individuals in companies have their own misaligned incentives and make certain decisions for their own benefits.
A lot of people don't understand what different browsers are, for them there is just "the Internet". I can tell my parents to just install and use Firefox. But they will then happily use a random Edge screen that was last visible to do their next search and be none the wiser. Meanwhile Microsoft will be raking in all their user data and advertisement space.
Shudder good God, we live in a terrible future.
* MS (used to) allow the user to choose default programs in the spirit of "openness" (because they were legally told to).
* The default settings in programs have never been legislated...
* ...therefore do dark patterns in programs and set the default search in Edge to be Bing...
* ... and make it even harder (impossible? dunno, not using Windows) to change Bing to Google in Edge and drive all Windows users to Bing, and drive ad revenue.
"There's nothing that can't be solved with an extra layer of indirection".
I'd prefer it if these things opened in Firefox, but I can just as easily see how from an engineering perspective they want this mechanism and are willing to defend it. From that perspective, Firefox is intentionally fucking around with OS internals in a way that could create costs for their support org.
(edit: please don't shoot the messenger. I'm an affected user too)
Deleted Comment
I mean, obviously it’s BS, but are there PMs who actually think it’s better for the user to override the default browser for things like this? A side note: one frustrating aspect of this problem is that my browser extensions are never installed in Edge. So things like password autofill in a lot of the MS auth flows (which appear to be web-based, as far as I can tell) just don’t work
> things like password autofill in a lot of the MS auth flows (which appear to be web-based, as far as I can tell) just don’t work
Cynically I could believe this is partly by design. If they manage to get you into edge often enough, sooner or later you'll set up your workflows in edge as well out of annoyance. Maintaining two separate browser environments is a burden, and sooner or later a lot of people will give up and stick to the browser you have to use in many cases.
> Maintaining two separate browser environments is a burden
For my personal use I have 4 distinct browsers (FF, Brave, Ungoogled Chromium and Falkon) but I guess I'm probably an outlier ;)
Deleted Comment
/s
But I think that is in fact the difference. It's not that Microsoft wants you to use Edge for that so much, it's that they want you to use Bing for that. Edge is just so they can drive you to Bing.
Bing has been around for so long now, and it's always been mediocre. Surely it's not a profit center. Anyone have insight about that?
If so, what are they trying to gain? Is it a rogue PM at Bing or Edge or Windows shitting it up for everyone else?
No, it's just evil. An axe is just a tool unless wielded by a dark clown. Edge would probably be a reasonable browser in the hands of literally anyone other than microsoft.
After all, all of their legal troubles amounted to a financial slap on the wrist and the browserchoice requeriment which they managed to actually profit from (auctions), then dropped entirely when they saw fit.
By the time the government gets to slapping them again with another non-consequential fine, edge will have already managed to extract as much market share as they could with these techniques anyway.
When are they going to split the company? Never.
Not sure if they profited but early on it was filled with dozens of trident(IE) skins and a broken random shuffle that put IE first most of the time. So they didn't loose anything with it.
Do you have any sources that show that there were auctions for spots on Microsoft's browser choice screen?
They haven't changed. They can't change. If you're at Microsoft or working with Microsoft because you think they will? Run.
Edit: My point being, in this case it's an end-to-end experience, it's not a question of being able to configure anything. You get Windows with whatever Microsoft decides you can do with it. If that's not what you intended, then another vendor's defaults or an open operating system are a better choice.
No, they don't. iOS, macOS, Android (not sure about ChromeOS) all allow you to set a default browser and then the OS sticks to that default. In macOS, if I do a google search from Spotlight, it opens in Firefox. Clicking a link inside Mail on iOS opens in my default browser.
I never quite understood what kind of difference it makes, but my computer feels like it’s my own again.
Anyway, on topic, yeah, eventually they’ll get antitrust slapped again.
Just user hostile actions in the name of "convenience" (for the product owner / business).
This is only for links using the microsoft-edge protocol, which is used by internal things like whatever this "News and Interests" widget is they have on the taskbar now. Regular web links will open in your default browser, Firefox or otherwise.
I'm ok with that. I doubt Microsoft wants support calls about how someone clicked on their widget and the resulting page didn't render properly because user was on X browser. As long as this is redirection for built-in OS things only, I'll give them a pass.
Deleted Comment
Imagine if Apple tried this. People would riot.
It's not "X browser", it would be just Firefox with its workaround. And it's common practice to design websites with support for major browsers, so it shouldn't be such a huge burden letting users pick a browser.
I won't as long as the built in OS things can't be replaced easily.