14 ms·

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 sw

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 8y ago
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.
- anyzen 8y ago
  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 8y ago
    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 8y ago
      I don't Mozilla is limited: https://www.alexkras.com/firefox-launches-marketing-offensive-against-chrome/ https://www.alexkras.com/firefox-launches-marketing-offensiv...
- wongarsu 8y ago
  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 8y ago
    That doesn’t solve the problem of Google properties constantly prompting you to install Chrome (and vice versa for Edge).
  - kijin 8y ago
    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.
    - anonymfus 8y ago
      That usually happens if that media player or image viewer edits registry to associate file types
      - wongarsu 8y ago
        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 8y ago
        There is no API difference between registry changes made by nonsanboxed user installed and built-in windows executables.
        Dylan16807 8y ago
        I don't know exactly how it's implemented, and feel free to tell us, but wongarsu is absolutely correct about the behavior. For a while, whenever I hit the button in firefox to change default browser, suddenly my default browser was edge. Not the old setting, not the attempted new setting. It was very clearly not designed with 'protection' in mind.
- snaky 8y ago
  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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation#Google
  - woodrowbarlow 8y ago
    that's interesting, but it's several year outdated. is more up-to-date information available?
    - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
      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 8y ago
        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 8y ago
        Wikipedia forbid companies from adding facts to tabular data?
        boomboomsubban 8y ago
        You can't edit your own Wikipedia.
        8y ago
- masklinn 8y ago
  > 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 8y ago
    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 8y ago
      Is there a way to disable it on versions of Windows that lack the Local Group Policy Editor?
      - vetinari 8y ago
        No idea, sorry. There are ways to install gpedit on Windows Home, but the articles I've seen include some shady download.
      - red_admiral 8y ago
        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.
  - cm2187 8y ago
    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.
- hutzlibu 8y ago
  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.
- apostacy 8y ago
  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 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14124294
  - mconley 8y ago
    > 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-block-web-trackers-targeted-ads-cookies 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.
- rebolek 8y ago
  > 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 8y ago
    If you value privacy and usability, I highly suggest you to replace Skype with something else.
    - reaperducer 8y ago
      And probably Google Earth. If it's not already logging data, it will eventually.
    - tomc1985 8y ago
      Isn't the Linux build set to be sunset soon anyway?
      - Kliment 8y ago
        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 8y ago
        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.
- dchichkov 8y ago
  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- 8y ago
    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 8y ago
    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.
- noncoml 8y ago
  “I wish Mozilla would include a default content blocker to block Google” FTFY
- culot 8y ago
  "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/ https://unchecky.com/
tjoff 8y ago
> 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 8y ago
  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 8y ago
  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".
nothis 8y ago
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?
- pgsandstrom 8y ago
  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 8y ago
    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 8y ago
      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 8y ago
        And unfortunately for users, it’s wildly profitable.
- rbinv 8y ago
  Bing is probably the default search engine.
- Longhanks 8y ago
mtgx 8y ago
This is what all of that "telemetry" is really about: opportunities to control the user.
CSMastermind 8y ago
If Microsoft really wants to go after Google they should install a default ad blocker into the operating system.
nailer 8y ago
> 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.
com2kid 8y ago
> 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 8y ago
  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?
  - komali2 8y ago
    Good to know, I'm no longer going to be using Microsoft Security Essentials.
  - seabrookmx 8y ago
    > 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 8y ago
    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.
josteink 8y ago
> 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 8y ago
  To be fair, some Firefox-to-Firefox upgrades have been more like switches.
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    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.
bcheung 8y ago
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.
mikepurvis 8y ago
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.

JohnTHaller 8y ago

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.

anyzen 8y ago
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 8y ago
  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 8y ago
    I don't Mozilla is limited: https://www.alexkras.com/firefox-launches-marketing-offensive-against-chrome/ https://www.alexkras.com/firefox-launches-marketing-offensiv...
wongarsu 8y ago
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 8y ago
  That doesn’t solve the problem of Google properties constantly prompting you to install Chrome (and vice versa for Edge).
- kijin 8y ago
  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.
  - anonymfus 8y ago
    That usually happens if that media player or image viewer edits registry to associate file types
    - wongarsu 8y ago
      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 8y ago
        There is no API difference between registry changes made by nonsanboxed user installed and built-in windows executables.
        Dylan16807 8y ago
        I don't know exactly how it's implemented, and feel free to tell us, but wongarsu is absolutely correct about the behavior. For a while, whenever I hit the button in firefox to change default browser, suddenly my default browser was edge. Not the old setting, not the attempted new setting. It was very clearly not designed with 'protection' in mind.
snaky 8y ago
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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation#Google
- woodrowbarlow 8y ago
  that's interesting, but it's several year outdated. is more up-to-date information available?
  - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
    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 8y ago
      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 8y ago
        Wikipedia forbid companies from adding facts to tabular data?
        boomboomsubban 8y ago
        You can't edit your own Wikipedia.
        8y ago
masklinn 8y ago
> 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 8y ago
  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 8y ago
    Is there a way to disable it on versions of Windows that lack the Local Group Policy Editor?
    - vetinari 8y ago
      No idea, sorry. There are ways to install gpedit on Windows Home, but the articles I've seen include some shady download.
    - red_admiral 8y ago
      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.
- cm2187 8y ago
  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.
hutzlibu 8y ago
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.
apostacy 8y ago
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 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14124294
- mconley 8y ago
  > 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-block-web-trackers-targeted-ads-cookies 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.
rebolek 8y ago
> 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 8y ago
  If you value privacy and usability, I highly suggest you to replace Skype with something else.
  - reaperducer 8y ago
    And probably Google Earth. If it's not already logging data, it will eventually.
  - tomc1985 8y ago
    Isn't the Linux build set to be sunset soon anyway?
    - Kliment 8y ago
      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 8y ago
        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.
dchichkov 8y ago
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- 8y ago
  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 8y ago
  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.
noncoml 8y ago
“I wish Mozilla would include a default content blocker to block Google” FTFY
culot 8y ago
"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/ https://unchecky.com/

tjoff 8y ago

> 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 8y ago
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 8y ago
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".

nothis 8y ago

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?

pgsandstrom 8y ago
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 8y ago
  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 8y ago
    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 8y ago
      And unfortunately for users, it’s wildly profitable.
rbinv 8y ago
Bing is probably the default search engine.
Longhanks 8y ago

mtgx 8y ago

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

CSMastermind 8y ago

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

nailer 8y ago

> 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.

com2kid 8y ago

> 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 8y ago
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?
- komali2 8y ago
  Good to know, I'm no longer going to be using Microsoft Security Essentials.
- seabrookmx 8y ago
  > 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 8y ago
  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.

josteink 8y ago

> 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 8y ago
To be fair, some Firefox-to-Firefox upgrades have been more like switches.
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  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.

bcheung 8y ago

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.

mikepurvis 8y ago

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.