[shaqbert]

The battle for control of the user. The pressure to create/preserve market share seems to be rising.

When e.g. you look how aggressively Google is trying to switch me to Chrome from my Firefox on all of their properties, a new low was set. But from my insider buddies at Google, that strategy is working well.

This here from MSFT dials it up another notch. With the anti-trust cases in the EU, they probably will be able to geo target this feature so that from the EU all will be fine and dandy, but the rest of the world will get scared into switching to Edge.

[JohnTHaller]

I wish Mozilla would include a default content blocker to block Google's attempts to steal Firefox users. But then I also wish Windows blocked automated Google Chrome installs that steal default browser included as bundleware with free antivirus apps, Java, etc. I'm tired of walking a parent through uninstalling Google Chrome (that they have no idea how it was installed) and getting Firefox set as their default browser again.

[apostacy]

I hate to be negative, but that will never happen with the current leadership at Mozilla.

They are simply no longer willing to disrupt the status quo, even to help their users. They are far more motivated to be "popular", and have a big "audience", and a respected "brand", than about sticking up for their users. The fact that they even think about software development in terms of "building an audience(?)" shows that they are way off course. The most important software we use that is actively developed is made by people who are primarily concerned with making good software, not with this pseudo public relations cargo cult corporate speak.

Hint: Go back and look at what Firefox used to be like 10 years ago, and notice the difference in culture.

The fact is, if Mozilla took a proactive stand against Google Apple and Microsoft, that would greatly increase their popularity.

The old Firefox was "irresponsible" by including a popup blocker by default, and upset a lot of people. Firefox also refused to support any of Microsoft's early web DRM. People said that not supporting DRM would lock users out of content, but it actually probably contributed to the death of those systems.

Google has been slowly clamping down on user freedoms. Just one example, Google removed the option to save html5 video[1] (I'm sure users were begging for that "feature"). I would honestly not be surprised if the UX clowns at Mozilla remove that function from Firefox as well.

How long until they remove the "view source" option because being able to view source is confusing to people who have never used a browser and it is used less than 1% of the time or some other flimsy justification?

There have been people within Mozilla who just want to abandon their own code and simply release a re-branded Chromium. Because they only care about their precious brand and keeping the donations coming, and they are truly terrible stewards of the software they have inherited. Besides, once they stop actually developing their own software, they will have lots of money leftover to give themselves bonuses and throw expensive galas.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14124294

[mconley]

> They are simply no longer willing to disrupt the status quo, even to help their users.

This is just false.

I guess you're not aware of the content blocking work we've been focusing on lately?: https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/30/17800714/mozilla-firefox-...

Disclosure: I work for Mozilla on Firefox. I can say, without hesitation, that we definitely give a damn about protecting the user and protecting the health of the web.

[Endy]

Do more to show it then. Firefox has consistently been clamping down on user freedom and aping Chrome as closely as possible, instead of actually focusing on doing the right thing. Google is not the health of the web. Helping Google is contributing to the largest walled-garden that exists.

[tim1994]

> Firefox has consistently been clamping down on user freedom

Can you give an example? While I personally don't agree with everything Mozilla has done in the last couple of years (like the native pocket integration for example) I do not agree with that statement.

[Endy]

That's a recent part of it. Pocket integration, removal of about:config entries, moving to WebExtensions so that the user has less control over their browser both in terms of appearance and function, changing the appearance in a way the user has little way of altering to a more functional display, now removing Bookmark Descriptions, using random non-user-audited data transmitted from random Firefox installs to determine the focus and goals of the browser, etc.

[dandellion]

The removal of the description field in the bookmarks in the most recent version would be another example of how little they care about us users sometimes.

I read the issue where it was discussed and a few suggestions to handle it in a way that didn't break bookmarks for people who used the description feature were pretty much ignored by the developers. The only reason I could infer from the detractors is that it was inconvenient to implement. As a long time supporter of Firefox the way they disregard us users shown in that thread altered my opinion of Mozilla significantly.

[jimmy1]

> Helping Google is contributing to the largest walled-garden that exists.

They can't outright come out and take an adversarial position against google -- they rely on them for hundreds of millions of dollars. Mozilla would not exist if Google did not pay them to be their default search. Donations account for 5% of their revenue, maybe.

[Endy]

I disagree. Cutting away from, and taking an adversarial stance toward, Google is probably the only thing that would keep Firefox relevant in the future. If Mozilla Corp didn't exist as-is, I believe that Firefox, SeaMonkey, Thunderbird, and other related programs would honestly be stronger and have more market share among users who are not the lowest common denominator, because they would be supported by a strong community making democratic decisions, not clamped down by whatever choices some marketing suit makes about a "brand" which is now almost meaningless.

Pale Moon is proof enough of that - the platform is viable, and people care about it. If Firefox were to discard the wrongheaded choices, I'm pretty sure sure that the PM community would fold back in. Rather than saying, "oh maybe there's a reason Mozilla Corp's not using the money for real advertising", users would still be going out like we did in the early '00s and building word-of-mouth to support a product worth supporting.

Corporations do not exist to "play nice". They exist to overtake, consume, and ultimately to destroy. Google has almost fully overtaken the Web for corp backers. Mozilla needs to develop the guts to take it back for the users.

[nanna]

Thank you for all the work you and everyone at Mozilla do. Without you the web would be... oy gevalt.

[shrimp_emoji]

>oy gevalt.

There's no reason for this kind of dog whistling.

[stephenhuey]

Keep up the good work! I’m upset that Firefox is blocked in the corporation when I work, but glad you have some fighting spirit yet.

[a_imho]

So what's been stopping moz://a for the last few years from integrating ~ubo into the browser like it did with Pocket?

[bryanrasmussen]

I'm guessing time is money and developer time is lots of money.

[a_imho]

Not convinced, as following the links in GP leads to some sub par (as in the end user experience) home grown solutions.

Further, we are not exactly talking rocket surgery here, this is an extension anyone can install with a few clicks and as many can attest this is some serious bang for the buck all across the board (performance, privacy, security). Not to mention in the meantime they had the resources to auto install addons like Looking Glass

[dblohm7]

Mozilla employee here.

> There have been people within Mozilla who just want to abandon their own code and simply release a re-branded Chromium.

Citation needed.

Here's my quote: we're committed to Gecko.

[seabrookmx]

I believe you, and honestly with the latest improvements with Quantum I can see why.

I _am_ curious about the motivation behind Firefox Focus though. I use vanilla Firefox on Android and really enjoy it.. what was the motivation for using a Webkit base for Focus? Seems like the stripped down, privacy focused experience would have worked fine based on Firefox proper?

[cpeterso]

Firefox Focus first launched on iOS, where Apple's WebKit is the only web engine permitted. Focus on Android followed a similar approach using Android's WebView so the Focus team could focus ;) on the app's user experience and privacy features instead of the web engine.

However, Focus (on Android) is now moving to "GeckoView", Firefox for Android's Gecko engine repackaged into a WebView-like component. GeckoView will be available for app developers (Mozilla or others) to build new browsers. Watch Mozilla's Hacks blog for news coming soon! :)

Here are instructions for test driving Focus+GeckoView now:

https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/focus-android/wiki/Release...

[cpeterso]

The Mozilla Hacks blog post about Firefox Focus and GeckoView is now live:

https://hacks.mozilla.org/2018/09/focus-with-geckoview/

[gsnedders]

> I _am_ curious about the motivation behind Firefox Focus though. I use vanilla Firefox on Android and really enjoy it.. what was the motivation for using a Webkit base for Focus? Seems like the stripped down, privacy focused experience would have worked fine based on Firefox proper?

I'm pretty sure the answer is quite simple, which is that the Gecko embedding story has been diabolical for a long time (i.e., it's hard to put Gecko in a new product), whereas the majority of WebKit ports and Chromium (through its Embedding Framework, or to a somewhat lesser extent its Content API) are designed to be easily embedded in new applications.

AIUI, the fact this led to this ridiculous situation is part of the reason for the renewed interest in embedding Gecko (and the emergence of GeckoView).

[mncolinlee]

Firefox Focus developer here. Recent improvements in Geckoview (the componentized version of Gecko) mean that it will be much easier to integrate into your own browser projects. We have a whole suite of Android components being developed just for building browser-like software.

The work to make GeckoView offer a full set of functionality in Focus should also help other apps.

[andrewshadura]

Also, don't forget that when Focus was released, Firefox on Android was very very slow. Despite myself being a fan of Firefox, I was using Chrome on Android for purely practical reasons. When Focus appeared, I switched to it, and then at some point to Firefox proper when it's performance became acceptable again. I guess for many users Focus (despite not using Gecko) could've paved road to Firefox.

[mook]

roc did, supposedly, in late 2007. See https://robert.ocallahan.org/2018/01/ancient-browser-wars-hi...

It dates from back when Mozilla seemed to be losing quickly, and actually rebranding Chrome (with their own changes) might have made sense. I'm glad they didn't, of course.

I have no reason believe he, or anybody else at Mozilla, currently thinks that way.

[gsnedders]

Obviously by 2013 his views had changed:

See https://robert.ocallahan.org/2013/02/and-then-there-were-thr... on Presto's demise (except it lives on after death in Opera Mini, to this day!)

And https://robert.ocallahan.org/2013/04/blink.html on the Blink fork.

[andrewshadura]

According to the developers of Opera, they have actually switched to Blink for Opera Mini pretty soon.

[fabrice_d]

Gecko these days is pretty good, but that's only half of the story unfortunately. This is a web runtime with no successful product to power anymore. Firefox Desktop is still declining despite the Quantum work, and on Mobile Mozilla products are not registering on any chart.

Ironically, the only successfully growing Gecko-based product is KaiOS (see http://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/mobile/india) but the current MoCo+MoFo leadership killed the upstream support a while ago to focus on Desktop. Maybe they will see the light...

[abeyer]

> Firefox Desktop is still declining despite the Quantum work

Despite? I'd say because of. The last of my primary reasons for using FF over chrome were killed with Quantum.

[hsribei]

>The last of my primary reasons for using FF over chrome were killed with Quantum.

Which?

[Endy]

Mozilla was also committed to a good browser experience that looked and felt like something that was not Chrome or Safari. Then Australis happened. And Mozilla was committed to XUL. Then WebExtensions happened. Mozilla is committed to Gecko today. Tomorrow, Blink/Chromium will happen.

[dblohm7]

I'd suggest that you read my colleague's comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15696184 to understand just how much friction the legacy addon ecosystem was creating. It just wasn't sustainable.

[Endy]

As a user of some of those "legacy" addons, I sincerely don't care about the upstream friction. I care that Mozilla has tried to cut my user experience off at the ankles more than once. The burden of having a thriving community & ecosystem is the responsibility of stewardship over that ecosystem. Mozilla has abrogated that implicit stewardship responsibility toward their community.

[Rapzid]

What IS going on with DRM? Edge is the only windows 10 browser that will play 1080p Neflix and possibly Amazon..

[Fnoord]

DRM being DRM, see [1].

[1] https://github.com/truedread/netflix-1080p/issues/15#issueco...

[rebolek]

> I'm tired of walking a parent through uninstalling Google Chrome

That's why I installed Linux Mint on my parent's computer, it runs Firefox, Skype and Google Earth just fine, can download photos from camera, copy DVDs and that's basically all. No shitty antiviruses they can download and I can SSH to the machine to check what's going on. Nothing, if you're interested.

[inetknght]

If you value privacy and usability, I highly suggest you to replace Skype with something else.

[rebolek]

It's not for me, it's for my father and Skype is where his friends are.

[reaperducer]

And probably Google Earth. If it's not already logging data, it will eventually.

[tomc1985]

Isn't the Linux build set to be sunset soon anyway?

[Kliment]

They have a new (and awful) linux build, so if you depend on it for anything I can recommend ghetto-skype, which is like the official linux build but actually works (it's a chromium wrapper around the web skype, with themes, which is exactly what the official one is these days, except the official one is terribly buggy).

[mathw]

Really I do not understand why Skype hasn't imploded yet with the number of awful builds they keep putting out for various operating systems. Surely the opportunity is there for someone with a good implementation of video and audio calling, cross-platform, to step in and take over.

I was looking at Google, but I no longer have any idea what the heck their strategy on Hangouts, Meet, Allo, Duo and whatever else they're producing these days is.

[masklinn]

> I'm tired of walking a parent through uninstalling Google Chrome (that they have no idea how it was installed)

Don't forget the bit where Chrome rams its fucking updater down your throat at every occasion and any way to disable it is only temporary.

And Chromium manages to be even worse at least on OSX: it apparently decides that being quit is unacceptable and relaunches itself hidden in the background.

[vetinari]

The Google Update can be disabled (per product) via Group Policy.

If you want to manage Chrome updates on your own, use the msi installer.

[opencl]

Is there a way to disable it on versions of Windows that lack the Local Group Policy Editor?

[red_admiral]

Group policies are just a UI for certain registry keys I think? I imagine you could do this in regedit, but I can't tell you the exact key name.

[vetinari]

No idea, sorry. There are ways to install gpedit on Windows Home, but the articles I've seen include some shady download.

[cm2187]

For something that needs to be as air tight in term of security as a browser, I think it is irresponsible to disable automatic updates.

[anyzen]

Just to show how absurd such practice is - if Mozilla wanted to do the same, they should intercept requests for Google.com and Bing.com, advising users to use Mozilla's search engine instead. I doubt Google would keep paying them if they did that though.

[wongarsu]

Which is the real problem with Mozilla being dependent on money from Google. Google can do whatever they want against Firefox, but Mozilla is very limited in its response because they can't risk upsetting Google too much.

[rrdharan]

I don't Mozilla is limited:

https://www.alexkras.com/firefox-launches-marketing-offensiv...

[wongarsu]

Hasn't Windows 10 essentially solved that problem by not letting any application change the default browser setting, instead only letting them open the correct settings panel? Or is there now a way around that?

[rayiner]

That doesn’t solve the problem of Google properties constantly prompting you to install Chrome (and vice versa for Edge).

[kijin]

It helps to some extent. But then again, Windows itself keeps changing my default media player and image viewer back to the Microsoft defaults, so I don't trust those settings to be as immutable as I would like them to be.

[morganvachon]

> Windows itself keeps changing my default media player and image viewer back to the Microsoft defaults

Same here, and it's maddening. That kind of bullshit, along with OneDrive ads in the freaking file browser, and now the subject of this article, have pushed me completely off of Windows.

Now that Steam Play exists and works with every Windows-only game I've thrown at it, I have absolutely nothing holding me to Windows on my gaming PC and workstations at home. I still have to deal with WSE 2016 and Windows 7 Pro at work, but that decision is not up to me and even if it were, we'd still have to stay with Windows for some of our software. The owner would absolutely love to make us a Mac house all the way but she understands why we can't make that move.

[fbelzile]

And the default PDF viewer... Apparently some Windows updates change the user-defined PDF viewer to Edge.

[cmurf]

Yes, I've seen this on Windows 10 Pro since 1803. Hilariously, it fails to open PDF's on an SMB share, says the file can't be found while listing its path. And the Microsoft Store is still so shady that I don't trust installing anything from a non-recognized vendor, so I ended up going to Adobe's web site to get Acrobat Reader which can open PDFs whether local or on that same SMB share.

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

It's because "Feature Updates" are actually in-place OS upgrades. They're essentially reinstalling Windows and migrating applications and settings, but also choosing to not migrate some of them.

[maxxxxx]

Is that true? Does that mean that applications with a more complex setup will break with every feature update?

[majewsky]

I would be okay with that if the previous setting is Acrobat Reader.

[Piskvorrr]

Perhaps you would - but somebody else's form filling just stopped working. Hey, no big deal: MS knows better than the user "where do you want to go today."

[anonymfus]

That usually happens if that media player or image viewer edits registry to associate file types

[wongarsu]

The design is slightly evil in that any unauthorized change of the registry keys doesn't just fail but instead invalidates a hash and makes windows revert to the default.

[anonymfus]

There is no API difference between registry changes made by nonsanboxed user installed and built-in windows executables.

[andrewshadura]

Which is bizarre if you consider that the original purpose of the registry (which appeared in Windows 3.1, I believe) was only to store file associations.

[pxeboot]

Yes, there are ways around that now.

One example: https://kolbi.cz/blog/2017/10/25/setuserfta-userchoice-hash-...

[userbinator]

Looks like the beginning of another cat-and-mouse game... and if I'm reading that correctly, even if I open up regedit myself and edit the association like I am used to doing, if I don't update the hash appropriately it will make it turn to default? WTF.

The fact that his utility received AV false positives is also extremely disturbing --- what more effective a way of forcing your choices on others than to label all workarounds these others find as being malware? AV is like the ultimate in censorship.

[JohnTHaller]

Windows 10 is supposed to block both setting apps as default browser and pinning to taskbar. There are ways around both.

[cm2187]

How often do you click on a link outside of the context of a browser? The default browser setting I think is almost irrelevant.

[michaelmrose]

Email clients, irc clients, terminal, in emacs.

[mark-r]

It happens all the time in Outlook.

[cm2187]

Hum, clicking on links from emails. How that could possibly go wrong?

[zwayhowder]

Try working in an enterprise. I click links from emails to Jira/Confluence/Sharepoint all the time from Outlook. Do I want to use any of these tools? No, but I and tens of thousands of other employees have to on a daily basis in my workplace.

[snaky]

The table of "Combined income of Mozilla Foundation and Mozilla Corporation" with "Proportion derived from Google" is good.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation#Google

[woodrowbarlow]

that's interesting, but it's several year outdated. is more up-to-date information available?

[pbhjpbhj]

Mozilla probably have that info so readily available that it's not worth publishing it on Wikipedia as well, like on a postage stamp under a filing cabinet in a basement in their gran's next-door neighbour's house ...

Perhaps Moz Corp haven't heard of Wikipedia and so couldn't keep that page updated.

Sorry, I'm having a cynicism overload. Carry on.

[boomboomsubban]

The Mozilla Foundation, being a charity, publishes their financial data on a fixed schedule. If they put the last released data on Wikipedia, something forbidden by Wikipedia for them to do, it would show most of their money coming from Yahoo.

[pbhjpbhj]

Wikipedia forbid companies from adding facts to tabular data?

[carapace]

So... Mozilla is like a condom Google wears to frobnicate the internet.

[hutzlibu]

When we are in the land of wishes, I rather wish, that OpenSource OS and software would be standard where the user controls fully what he wants and gets.

[dchichkov]

It would be so lovely, if Microsoft would include a default malware and advertisement filter into the browser. They are not relying on injecting malware into the web pages, so they actually can do it! User's experience without malware and advertisements will be better, this will create healthy competition in user experience, other browsers will have to follow.

[dan0-]

Microsoft doesn't have to make tthe best browser, the inertia of having a "good" browser that is the default and hard to change away from gets many of their customers to use Edge until someone or something prompts them to switch.

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

It is my considered opinion that Microsoft does not care one iota about the user experience. I cite as proof pretty much everything about Windows 10.

[culot]

"I'm tired of walking a parent through uninstalling Google Chrome"

Unchecky works well to prevent that crapware from ever getting installed. It unticks those default 'install my paid crap' offers.

https://unchecky.com/

[noncoml]

“I wish Mozilla would include a default content blocker to block Google”

FTFY

[josteink]

> When e.g. you look how aggressively Google is trying to switch me to Chrome from my Firefox on all of their properties, a new low was set.

I'm still feeling ashamed at Google every time I see they push an ad in my (or my colleagues) face asking me to "upgrade" my browser.

Hey ass-holes! It's not an upgrade. It's a switch! Stop being dishonest about it. Stop intentionally confusing users.

[kazinator]

To be fair, some Firefox-to-Firefox upgrades have been more like switches.

[Dylan16807]

They're on a six week release schedule. Some of them being underwhelming is expected. That's not a counterpoint, even though you're phrasing it like one.

[com2kid]

> When e.g. you look how aggressively Google is trying to switch me to Chrome from my Firefox on all of their properties, a new low was set.

It proved very difficult to keep my mother on Firefox. Chrome kept getting installed, for awhile it was bundled with all sorts of application updates.

Dark patterns, dark patterns everywhere.

[opless]

I remember installing some random utility (but safe source that I'd used umpteen times before - but not recently) and getting chromium installed - without my permission. I forget what is was, or indeed where I got it from, but this is fairly irrelevant.

The effort trying to remove this was immense. The crapware installer also managed to install a scheduled task to a randomly named executable that when I tested it with Microsoft security essentials said it was 'ok' but virus total told me it was some bag of shit malware.

WORSE STILL, Microsoft security essentials USED to pick this up as a quick google of this crapware update engine linked to a microsoft malware page, which no longer exists. Reading further I noted that MS stopped identifying some malware because "users might choose to use the applications that it installs"

No MS. If it's been sneakily installed with dark patterns consent has not been given, and it needs to be destroyed with fire.

Thankfully ClamAV picked it up, so I now regularly scan with that. sigh

WHAT ARE YOU DOING MICROSOFT?

[seabrookmx]

> installing some random utility .. and getting chromium installed

If you mean Chrome proper (not OSS Chromium) SourceForge was doing this for a while and it was all over hackernews. Mostlikely that's where it was from.

[exikyut]

I would really, really like to know what the source was, and the program (and thus installer) was.

I'd also like to see if the Web Archive has a copy of the microsoft malware webpage.

What you're saying would be 1000x as interesting/relevant/headline news if it was citable with screenshots and so forth. I do believe you, but references create lots more momentum.

If you think you might come across the info sometime in the future, posting it here or maybe reddit whenever that is would be awesome.

[pbhjpbhj]

I'm pretty sure Adobe Reader, or CCleaner had that; I was a victim. IIRC it was after EU legislation that made default install of bundleware unlawful.

https://www.google.com/search?q=ccleaner+driveby+install+Chr...

Suggests that CCleaner at least had it, didn't check Reader.

[komali2]

Good to know, I'm no longer going to be using Microsoft Security Essentials.

[mcguire]

Makes you wonder how long it will be before software development drops below used car salesman and lawyer in public opinion.

[ris]

> It proved very difficult to keep my mother on Firefox

Mine's on Debian. Seems to be working out pretty well. When other machines in the house are gunked up with who-knows-what, it's still there working reliably.

[nothis]

Genuine question: In what way does Microsoft benefit from people using Edge? It's a web browser. It's a rather neutral piece of technology. How can they make money out of it?

[rgbrenner]

Make the default search engine bing.. most users don’t change it.

Put shortcuts to your other products. An Xbox bookmark/button is an ad for the Xbox.. increasing Xbox sales, but also reducing the money they need to spend to promote the Xbox

If users decide they want a completely Microsoft platform- they login to windows with their msft online password, use ms office, etc they’ll be more likely to pick a windows phone or other Microsoft products that integrate with the products they already use (saving them setup time, transferring settings, etc).

If they have more information about you, they can make ads in bing more relevant and perform better.. increasing the price of the ads, and the ctr

There are a few ideas off the top of my head.

[exikyut]

You can still get Windows Phone-based devices?!

[sjwright]

> In what way does Microsoft benefit from people using Edge?

Every installation of Chrome on Windows is an opportunity for their most dangerous competitor to siphon off future opportunities. Anything which reduces that number is a fundamental win.

They also get to direct some percentage of users towards their properties (e.g. Bing) which do make revenue.

Finally there's the opportunity cost of not being in the game: having users in their camp gives them moves which they would otherwise not have. (Similarly Bing—some might call it a relative failure, but it's a roaring success compared to never trying in the first place. It was a good decision.)

[pgsandstrom]

Two parts:

1) Information gathering. This one I think needs no explanation

2) Controlling a platform is incredible powerful in influencing your users. Lets say you control an OS. Then you can nag on your users to also use your browser! If you control the browser, you can nag your users to use you mail system. Perhaps someday they will nag on the users to use their marketplace, their movie distribution system, their whatever.

[eckza]

Adding to 2): Microsoft has tried to embrace / extend / extinguish the open web on more than one occasion.

They're nowhere near striking distance of making that happen; but you can bet your life that if they were, that they'd make a run at it.

[ryandrake]

Newsflash: nearly every major tech company that has a large Internet presence would like nothing more than to extinguish the open web and user choice. Unfortunately for users, ecosystem lock-in is in everyone’s play book.

[eckza]

And unfortunately for users, it’s wildly profitable.

[vxNsr]

The new tab page on Edge is full of ads.

All the other comments here are also true, but this is the main reason. They directly benefit every time you open Edge. I wouldn't be surprised if some ad sales VP made this decision after seeing the numbers broken down by "edge new tab impressions" vs "everything else."

[Longhanks]

The same could be said for operating systems, yet Windows 10 ships with lots of bloatware apps (Candy Crush...).

Also, a browser can track your browsing behavior, data that can be sold.

[mi_lk]

Does MS really sell data to anyone? Seems to me whatever data they collect would be used internally, e.g. to improve products.

[jplayer01]

One problem is that we have no idea with all that data they're able to collect through Windows.

[pbhjpbhj]

I don't use Windows, but surely the GDPR means EU users have a right to know how their data is used and who it is passed to, and how they use it ... so for EU users that info should be public already?

[jakow]

This is an excellent answer to this question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mviTS_cIWXg

[mkirschner]

Very interesting and informative video.

But it is a bit of a bait and switch, making a weird transition toward the very end into an advert for brilliant.org.

That fact doesn't negate the well-done informational portion, and brilliant.org sounds like a cool offering, but what a yucky tactic for such a high-ground video.

[clubm8]

> Genuine question: In what way does Microsoft benefit from people using Edge? It's a web browser. It's a rather neutral piece of technology. How can they make money out of it?

Well for one thing, keeping people away from Google's browser keeps people away from their office suite, one of the biggest moneymakers outside the X-box division for Microsoft.

[rbinv]

Bing is probably the default search engine.

[tjoff]

> But from my insider buddies at Google, that strategy is working well.

Working well in what sense? Is the stated goal to do evil and highly imorral stuff and get away with it?

Maybe they are trying to make life on the PC so miserable that people will switch to android.

[_jal]

For me, Google has recently joined the ranks of FB and a pile of other adtech slimeballs and similar entities in my firewall config. The net is so much nicer when you delete the jerks.

[shaqbert]

Working well in the sense of "the amount of unwitting users switching is > the backlash and heat from being an dark pattern villain and turning some witting users off". Aka "helps browser marketshare".

[mikepurvis]

Google does it with their apps too— clicking on links in Hangouts keeps prompting me to use Chrome instead of Safari. Honestly, I'm shocked Apple tolerates this.

[CSMastermind]

If Microsoft really wants to go after Google they should install a default ad blocker into the operating system.

[mtgx]

This is what all of that "telemetry" is really about: opportunities to control the user.

[nailer]

> With the anti-trust cases in the EU, they probably will be able to geo target this feature so that from the EU all will be fine and dandy

Windows tells me Edge is better when I install Firefox in the EU too.

[bcheung]

Didn't they do stuff like this when they first made IE and it got them into a lot of trouble with an anti-trust lawsuit? Seems like they are doing the EXACT same thing again.