17 ms·

This infuriates me insanely. By what right does Microsoft think it is ok to manipulate a third party software by injecting their own code?! This is outright mal

This infuriates me insanely. By what right does Microsoft think it is ok to manipulate a third party software by injecting their own code?! This is outright malicious. Malware. I hope the EU fines them and forces Microsoft to stop such actions (as they forced them to stop bundling IE with Windows a couple of years ago). It's time these big corporations get broken up. It really is. Stop f*cking with my hardware and the web.

tr4cker 7y ago
Agreed
mister_hn 7y ago
True, but we forget how also Chrome attempts to set itself automatically as standard browser in Linux _WITHOUT_ asking. That is also a malicious behavior, isn't?
- chithanh 7y ago
  Spare me the whataboutism to justify Microsoft's actions. If Chrome did that it would be objectionable too.
  - mcny 7y ago
    Exactly. Imagine if Google changed your windows installation to point shortcut to win word to point to a new chrome window in kiosk mode that opens docs.new...
    - bgdnyxbjx 7y ago
      Chrome literally did something like this. When the user searched the web from the Windows search box, it used to open their default browser to bing.com. Chrome started to inspect the url and redirect to Google.com. So Microsoft changed it to open Edge to block this bs.
      - dontblink 7y ago
        I would argue the inverse. I set my preference in Chrome. Why is Windows forcing me to use Bing if I use the search box in Windows 10?
  - behringer 7y ago
    Like making Google search the default?
  - Milner08 7y ago
    It doesn't sound like he is trying to justify it. He's suggesting that the popular alternative is just as bad. In no way does that make Microsoft's action any better.
- EasyTiger_ 7y ago
  Why are you trying to change the conversation to Chrome?
  - tomrod 7y ago
    Can't speak for OP, but tu quoque arguements are common!
    - mister_hn 7y ago
      Because the "don't be evil" in this case doesn't apply, speaking of browsers
    - anoncake 7y ago
      And unproductive. We should judge each company by each own demerits, not excuse Microsoft's behaviour with Google's and vice versa!
      - paulnechifor 7y ago
        It doesn't sound like mister_hn is excusing Microsoft's behaviour. It's just that, if people think Google is the "victim" here, they are completely wrong. They both have little regard for a user's preference.
        lhopki01 7y ago
        People think the end users are the victim here. This equally applies if my default search engine is something else. Bing is still going to override it.
      - tomrod 7y ago
        Hear here!
  - mister_hn 7y ago
    Not trying to change the conversation, but also Chrome has malicious behavior without consent. IMHO, browsers from Big Corps shouldn't be trusted at all. If someone likes to use Chrome, should try to go for Chromium or a de-Googled version of it. About Microsoft, don't use Office then, move to something else, the world has plenty of alternatives (LibreOffice or SoftOffice are really good ones)
lorec0re 7y ago
Agreed
badrabbit 7y ago
By what right does google set the search engine to begin with? They use their browser's popularity for a competitive advantage and that's legal. Now, your comment is popular because of the hype train but nobody complains when a linux distro has a non-google default search for chrome or firefox. Microsoft(or any OS maker) has a competitive advantage also by dominating the desktop OS market like Chrome dominates the browser market,the installer gets to configure the browser. Anyone has the right to bundle 3rd party software and make n installer that configures the software a certain way,even if the config gives them a competitive advantage. I don't disagree with your comment about corps getting broken up but I disagree with this being your reason. Think of it the other way "It is now illegal to make installers that change default settings of the publisher" that would sound as more of a reason to get worked up over to me.
- Longhanks 7y ago
  Of course this is also true. Chrome should be forced to offer a selection of search engines when it first runs. This is something for example Android is now forced to do (in the EU). I tremendously disagree with software being allowed to modify other software installed by me. A proper app sandbox model would never ever allow this. This is one of the things I really love about iOS, no app from wherever it came from can ever modify other software on the system without my permission. (iOS is not perfect either, this is just one area where I would wish desktop OSes would catch up with.)
  - badrabbit 7y ago
    So, even with my permission, a program shouldn't be allowed to manipulate other programs? So debuggers that modify a program's memory should be disallowed? security products shouldn't scan for insecure/bad settings/bugs and fix them? Adblockers shouldn't mess with ads in a different application? I can tell you, the last thing I want is android/ios like app sandboxing if that means I can't interfere with what apps are doing/configuring. I prefer to have control or finao say about inter-app interaction since it is my device
    - 7y ago
psv1 7y ago
> It's time these big corporations get broken up. Or you can create and enforce laws that apply when they abuse their monopolies. Breaking up a company because it's above an arbitrary size threshold is a dangerous precedent, and most likely it won't even address the problem at hand.
threatofrain 7y ago
To me this was always why Google's position was weak and why they absolutely needed Android -- Apple and Microsoft could kill Google as a default move for users. Users only have so much energy to micro-manage the parameters of their devices and they depend on sensible defaults.
- dr-detroit 7y ago
  There so much money in search referrals they could afford to send someone to your house and configure it
ocdtrekkie 7y ago
The irony here is that Google mostly got its market share by paying companies like Adobe to pack the Google Toolbar in their installers which would hijack IE's default search and change it to Google. (Chrome later came out of a fear Microsoft might block the Google Toolbar in IE.) Don't get me wrong, it's trashy behavior. But it's hardly a new one.
rpvnwnkl 7y ago
MS is implementing this in one of their ‘business tools’, and leveraging their position as an enterprise software provider to raise the status of some of their products that aren’t classic Office. They did a similar thing with Teams (to what seems like some success) and like Teams they are offering IT admins some tools to stop this change for their users (see https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/deployoffice/microsoft-search-bing https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/deployoffice/microsoft-sear...). Personally, I think the change will be positive here only because it might help introduce some people to a web that is not google.com. So many people cannot conceive of a web search or address that isn’t done through google.com that I’m continually surprised by it. This will be a test for enterprise IT admins: can they control this change’s level of disruption for their users, will they communicate it to their users, and will they stick with Microsoft?
lern_too_spel 7y ago
The user is the business that administers the machines. They want this. If not, they would disable it.
gsich 7y ago
I hope they do. And in the process do the same for Android.
JohnTHaller 7y ago
Chrome often installs itself maliciously, so perhaps turnabout is fair play. Google has done pay-for-install with Adobe Flash updates, Java updates, 'Free' Windows antivirus vendors, etc, and all used dark patterns to trick users into installing Chrome and setting it as the default. https://i.imgur.com/hNZLbmL.jpg https://i.imgur.com/hNZLbmL.jpg https://i.imgur.com/Uldw6X3.png https://i.imgur.com/Uldw6X3.png I've seen some installers that didn't even use a dark pattern, just installed it.

tr4cker 7y ago

Agreed

mister_hn 7y ago

True, but we forget how also Chrome attempts to set itself automatically as standard browser in Linux _WITHOUT_ asking. That is also a malicious behavior, isn't?

chithanh 7y ago
Spare me the whataboutism to justify Microsoft's actions. If Chrome did that it would be objectionable too.
- mcny 7y ago
  Exactly. Imagine if Google changed your windows installation to point shortcut to win word to point to a new chrome window in kiosk mode that opens docs.new...
  - bgdnyxbjx 7y ago
    Chrome literally did something like this. When the user searched the web from the Windows search box, it used to open their default browser to bing.com. Chrome started to inspect the url and redirect to Google.com. So Microsoft changed it to open Edge to block this bs.
    - dontblink 7y ago
      I would argue the inverse. I set my preference in Chrome. Why is Windows forcing me to use Bing if I use the search box in Windows 10?
- behringer 7y ago
  Like making Google search the default?
- Milner08 7y ago
  It doesn't sound like he is trying to justify it. He's suggesting that the popular alternative is just as bad. In no way does that make Microsoft's action any better.
EasyTiger_ 7y ago
Why are you trying to change the conversation to Chrome?
- tomrod 7y ago
  Can't speak for OP, but tu quoque arguements are common!
  - mister_hn 7y ago
    Because the "don't be evil" in this case doesn't apply, speaking of browsers
  - anoncake 7y ago
    And unproductive. We should judge each company by each own demerits, not excuse Microsoft's behaviour with Google's and vice versa!
    - paulnechifor 7y ago
      It doesn't sound like mister_hn is excusing Microsoft's behaviour. It's just that, if people think Google is the "victim" here, they are completely wrong. They both have little regard for a user's preference.
      - lhopki01 7y ago
        People think the end users are the victim here. This equally applies if my default search engine is something else. Bing is still going to override it.
    - tomrod 7y ago
      Hear here!
- mister_hn 7y ago
  Not trying to change the conversation, but also Chrome has malicious behavior without consent. IMHO, browsers from Big Corps shouldn't be trusted at all. If someone likes to use Chrome, should try to go for Chromium or a de-Googled version of it. About Microsoft, don't use Office then, move to something else, the world has plenty of alternatives (LibreOffice or SoftOffice are really good ones)

lorec0re 7y ago

Agreed

badrabbit 7y ago

By what right does google set the search engine to begin with? They use their browser's popularity for a competitive advantage and that's legal. Now, your comment is popular because of the hype train but nobody complains when a linux distro has a non-google default search for chrome or firefox. Microsoft(or any OS maker) has a competitive advantage also by dominating the desktop OS market like Chrome dominates the browser market,the installer gets to configure the browser. Anyone has the right to bundle 3rd party software and make n installer that configures the software a certain way,even if the config gives them a competitive advantage. I don't disagree with your comment about corps getting broken up but I disagree with this being your reason. Think of it the other way "It is now illegal to make installers that change default settings of the publisher" that would sound as more of a reason to get worked up over to me.

Longhanks 7y ago
Of course this is also true. Chrome should be forced to offer a selection of search engines when it first runs. This is something for example Android is now forced to do (in the EU). I tremendously disagree with software being allowed to modify other software installed by me. A proper app sandbox model would never ever allow this. This is one of the things I really love about iOS, no app from wherever it came from can ever modify other software on the system without my permission. (iOS is not perfect either, this is just one area where I would wish desktop OSes would catch up with.)
- badrabbit 7y ago
  So, even with my permission, a program shouldn't be allowed to manipulate other programs? So debuggers that modify a program's memory should be disallowed? security products shouldn't scan for insecure/bad settings/bugs and fix them? Adblockers shouldn't mess with ads in a different application? I can tell you, the last thing I want is android/ios like app sandboxing if that means I can't interfere with what apps are doing/configuring. I prefer to have control or finao say about inter-app interaction since it is my device
  - 7y ago

psv1 7y ago

> It's time these big corporations get broken up. Or you can create and enforce laws that apply when they abuse their monopolies. Breaking up a company because it's above an arbitrary size threshold is a dangerous precedent, and most likely it won't even address the problem at hand.

threatofrain 7y ago

To me this was always why Google's position was weak and why they absolutely needed Android -- Apple and Microsoft could kill Google as a default move for users. Users only have so much energy to micro-manage the parameters of their devices and they depend on sensible defaults.

dr-detroit 7y ago
There so much money in search referrals they could afford to send someone to your house and configure it

ocdtrekkie 7y ago

The irony here is that Google mostly got its market share by paying companies like Adobe to pack the Google Toolbar in their installers which would hijack IE's default search and change it to Google. (Chrome later came out of a fear Microsoft might block the Google Toolbar in IE.) Don't get me wrong, it's trashy behavior. But it's hardly a new one.

rpvnwnkl 7y ago

MS is implementing this in one of their ‘business tools’, and leveraging their position as an enterprise software provider to raise the status of some of their products that aren’t classic Office. They did a similar thing with Teams (to what seems like some success) and like Teams they are offering IT admins some tools to stop this change for their users (see https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/deployoffice/microsoft-search-bing https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/deployoffice/microsoft-sear...). Personally, I think the change will be positive here only because it might help introduce some people to a web that is not google.com. So many people cannot conceive of a web search or address that isn’t done through google.com that I’m continually surprised by it. This will be a test for enterprise IT admins: can they control this change’s level of disruption for their users, will they communicate it to their users, and will they stick with Microsoft?

lern_too_spel 7y ago

The user is the business that administers the machines. They want this. If not, they would disable it.

gsich 7y ago

I hope they do. And in the process do the same for Android.

JohnTHaller 7y ago

Chrome often installs itself maliciously, so perhaps turnabout is fair play. Google has done pay-for-install with Adobe Flash updates, Java updates, 'Free' Windows antivirus vendors, etc, and all used dark patterns to trick users into installing Chrome and setting it as the default. https://i.imgur.com/hNZLbmL.jpg https://i.imgur.com/hNZLbmL.jpg https://i.imgur.com/Uldw6X3.png https://i.imgur.com/Uldw6X3.png I've seen some installers that didn't even use a dark pattern, just installed it.