8 ms·

Note that this issue is specifically about microsoft-edge:// links (used in some internal Windows features). Not http/https. I do wish they used a more generic

Note that this issue is specifically about microsoft-edge:// links (used in some internal Windows features). Not http/https. I do wish they used a more generic/portable solution, but this is for Windows-specific features, so it would require them to think through an open, stable & forever-supported API...

dang 5y ago
I've adjusted the title to include this information. Thanks!
hmrr 5y ago
Yes and no. I suspect the main feature this is used for is the start menu search feature to push traffic to bing. This appears to be unavoidable and really pisses me off on a regular basis. I can’t think of another reason in the windows UI to disable this. I’m sure there are some but at no point should those should require Edge. It’s a web page dammit! This is basically devolving into the 90s again.
solarkraft 5y ago
If only there was a more generic/portable solution for opening links ...
- selfhoster11 5y ago
  We could even call them "protocol handlers", or something.
  - chessmango 5y ago
    Don't think it'll catch on
dmitrygr 5y ago
> stable & forever-supported API You mean like RFC1738?
JTon 5y ago
So some MS apps are calling Edge specifically instead of the user's default browser. This seems less egregious than many users here are suggesting. Am I wrong?
- taco_emoji 5y ago
  yeah this is nearly a non-story
  - decremental 5y ago
    It's a complete non-story because what many of the other commentors are failing to consider is that various browsers have subtle incompatibilities. Additionally, things that worked previously can break in future releases. It would become necessary for Windows developers or whichever team is responsible to then conduct extensive compatibility testing across a variety of browsers in perpetuity for the lifetime of the OS. If you want to use a browser other than Edge that's fine. Most of us do. But that's on you, not the Windows team. Microsoft has a long history of caring deeply about compatibility even when they aren't the party responsible for breaking something. Perception is everything to the average user.
    - shawnz 5y ago
      The same argument could be made to block any kind of third-party app that could replace a native feature. Why is it so unreasonable to expect a platform vendor to test compatibility with third party software running on their platform? It is the primary reason why the platform exists!
    - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
      If I search for something in the start menu, and the OS insists on giving me a Bing search, it seems completely reasonable to expect that Bing, which is already supported in other browsers, can open in other browsers.
    - tyingq 5y ago
      It just isn't what you're describing at all. Clicking on something in the weather widget, for example, opens a public page like this one, with Edge. https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/today/ https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/today/ That page has to work with browsers other than Edge because it's a public page. Someone else is dealing with that requirement already. MS is forcing Edge in places where none of what you're calling out is true.
jkaplowitz 5y ago
This is specifically an apparently intentional regression from build to build that breaks this specific use case (and no others) of a pre-existing API for managing URL scheme associations, not a need for a new careful API to be designed.
ajmurmann 5y ago
This did be the top comment. This being limited to explicitly calling Edge turns this from front-page-worthy to perfectly reasonable.
mongol 5y ago
What kind of links are those? Ate they still using http underneath?
- pseudalopex 5y ago
  Yes.
websap 5y ago
Sounds like some high level product manager from Edge forced this decision on the Windows team. It makes no sense why they wouldn't respect a user's default settings. People configure a multitude of addons and customizations in their default browser, to completely bypass that seems like a poor customer experience.
- FridayoLeary 5y ago
  Sounds plausible. It can't be a fun job making a crappy spin- off of Chrome. And knowing that no one cares less about what you do and the whole purpose of your project is so that MS can say "we do that too". Edge exists to promote MS, not to serve customers, so it's not surprising if the Edge team don't care about UX or even the reputation of Windows itself.
  - websap 5y ago
    I wouldn't install Chrome on any of my devices. Google's approach to building a browser has been probably the most devious plan of the last decade. They started with these good intentions, but have completely destroyed my faith in browsers.
  - tiernano 5y ago
    It's a bit of a pain, but having used new chromium based edge for a while, it does work well, and it's not got Google crap in it... Yes, Microsoft replaced Google with theirs, but it's not a bad browser...
    - dontblink 5y ago
      Would you recommend it (if so why)? Not particularly jazzed about MS given their anti-user behavior with Windows. Is Chromium the way to go?
      - briffle 5y ago
        Why not firefox? have you used it in the last few years? its dramatically faster than anything else, and actually respects privacy.
tyingq 5y ago
>but this is for Windows-specific features, so it would require them to think through an open, stable & forever-supported API... Maybe there's some I haven't seen, but what I do see is stuff like opening a web page from a weather widget. There's nothing MS-specific about it, and the EdgeDeflector thing worked a few days ago. Clicking on html files in MS Explorer still opens Chrome, so I assume they know what to do.
- LorenPechtel 5y ago
  What he's saying is that Microsoft went in and hardcoded around edge deflector. That deserves an elephant-stomp from the regulators.
jechamt 5y ago
Your comment: > this is for Windows-specific features, so it would require them to think through an open, stable & forever-supported API seems to directly disagree with the author's analysis: > These special links only exist to force users into using Microsoft Edge. They serve no other purpose than to circumvent the user’s default browser preference to promote a Microsoft product. Why do you suggest these are for Windows-specific features?
- pierrebai 5y ago
  It's not an analysis, it's an opinion. There is no possible analysis: there is a behavior, you choose how to interpret it. It's not like you decompile the code and the machine code spells out "screw you".
- daemin 5y ago
  For that first quote I thought they were being sarcastic since http:// http:// and https:// https:// are exactly an open, stable, and forever supported API.
raxxorrax 5y ago
> it would require them to think through an open, stable & forever-supported API... Where only would we find such a unicorn? I copied Firefox to %programfiles(x86)%\Microsoft\Edge\Application and renamed its executable to msedge.exe. It confuses Firefox whether it set as standard browser or not at first, but otherwise works like a charm. Will probably be killed through the occasional update, but what isn't these days.

dang 5y ago

I've adjusted the title to include this information. Thanks!

hmrr 5y ago

Yes and no. I suspect the main feature this is used for is the start menu search feature to push traffic to bing. This appears to be unavoidable and really pisses me off on a regular basis. I can’t think of another reason in the windows UI to disable this. I’m sure there are some but at no point should those should require Edge. It’s a web page dammit! This is basically devolving into the 90s again.

solarkraft 5y ago

If only there was a more generic/portable solution for opening links ...

selfhoster11 5y ago
We could even call them "protocol handlers", or something.
- chessmango 5y ago
  Don't think it'll catch on

dmitrygr 5y ago

> stable & forever-supported API You mean like RFC1738?

JTon 5y ago

So some MS apps are calling Edge specifically instead of the user's default browser. This seems less egregious than many users here are suggesting. Am I wrong?

taco_emoji 5y ago
yeah this is nearly a non-story
- decremental 5y ago
  It's a complete non-story because what many of the other commentors are failing to consider is that various browsers have subtle incompatibilities. Additionally, things that worked previously can break in future releases. It would become necessary for Windows developers or whichever team is responsible to then conduct extensive compatibility testing across a variety of browsers in perpetuity for the lifetime of the OS. If you want to use a browser other than Edge that's fine. Most of us do. But that's on you, not the Windows team. Microsoft has a long history of caring deeply about compatibility even when they aren't the party responsible for breaking something. Perception is everything to the average user.
  - shawnz 5y ago
    The same argument could be made to block any kind of third-party app that could replace a native feature. Why is it so unreasonable to expect a platform vendor to test compatibility with third party software running on their platform? It is the primary reason why the platform exists!
  - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
    If I search for something in the start menu, and the OS insists on giving me a Bing search, it seems completely reasonable to expect that Bing, which is already supported in other browsers, can open in other browsers.
  - tyingq 5y ago
    It just isn't what you're describing at all. Clicking on something in the weather widget, for example, opens a public page like this one, with Edge. https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/today/ https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/today/ That page has to work with browsers other than Edge because it's a public page. Someone else is dealing with that requirement already. MS is forcing Edge in places where none of what you're calling out is true.

jkaplowitz 5y ago

This is specifically an apparently intentional regression from build to build that breaks this specific use case (and no others) of a pre-existing API for managing URL scheme associations, not a need for a new careful API to be designed.

ajmurmann 5y ago

This did be the top comment. This being limited to explicitly calling Edge turns this from front-page-worthy to perfectly reasonable.

mongol 5y ago

What kind of links are those? Ate they still using http underneath?

pseudalopex 5y ago
Yes.

websap 5y ago

Sounds like some high level product manager from Edge forced this decision on the Windows team. It makes no sense why they wouldn't respect a user's default settings. People configure a multitude of addons and customizations in their default browser, to completely bypass that seems like a poor customer experience.

FridayoLeary 5y ago
Sounds plausible. It can't be a fun job making a crappy spin- off of Chrome. And knowing that no one cares less about what you do and the whole purpose of your project is so that MS can say "we do that too". Edge exists to promote MS, not to serve customers, so it's not surprising if the Edge team don't care about UX or even the reputation of Windows itself.
- websap 5y ago
  I wouldn't install Chrome on any of my devices. Google's approach to building a browser has been probably the most devious plan of the last decade. They started with these good intentions, but have completely destroyed my faith in browsers.
- tiernano 5y ago
  It's a bit of a pain, but having used new chromium based edge for a while, it does work well, and it's not got Google crap in it... Yes, Microsoft replaced Google with theirs, but it's not a bad browser...
  - dontblink 5y ago
    Would you recommend it (if so why)? Not particularly jazzed about MS given their anti-user behavior with Windows. Is Chromium the way to go?
    - briffle 5y ago
      Why not firefox? have you used it in the last few years? its dramatically faster than anything else, and actually respects privacy.

tyingq 5y ago

>but this is for Windows-specific features, so it would require them to think through an open, stable & forever-supported API... Maybe there's some I haven't seen, but what I do see is stuff like opening a web page from a weather widget. There's nothing MS-specific about it, and the EdgeDeflector thing worked a few days ago. Clicking on html files in MS Explorer still opens Chrome, so I assume they know what to do.

LorenPechtel 5y ago
What he's saying is that Microsoft went in and hardcoded around edge deflector. That deserves an elephant-stomp from the regulators.

jechamt 5y ago

Your comment: > this is for Windows-specific features, so it would require them to think through an open, stable & forever-supported API seems to directly disagree with the author's analysis: > These special links only exist to force users into using Microsoft Edge. They serve no other purpose than to circumvent the user’s default browser preference to promote a Microsoft product. Why do you suggest these are for Windows-specific features?

pierrebai 5y ago
It's not an analysis, it's an opinion. There is no possible analysis: there is a behavior, you choose how to interpret it. It's not like you decompile the code and the machine code spells out "screw you".
daemin 5y ago
For that first quote I thought they were being sarcastic since http:// http:// and https:// https:// are exactly an open, stable, and forever supported API.

raxxorrax 5y ago

> it would require them to think through an open, stable & forever-supported API... Where only would we find such a unicorn? I copied Firefox to %programfiles(x86)%\Microsoft\Edge\Application and renamed its executable to msedge.exe. It confuses Firefox whether it set as standard browser or not at first, but otherwise works like a charm. Will probably be killed through the occasional update, but what isn't these days.