7 ms·
Microsoft finally made a browser which renders websites as expected, is up-to-date regarding security and features, and (most) people actually don't have the ne
by watermelon0 5y ago
Microsoft finally made a browser which renders websites as expected, is up-to-date regarding security and features, and (most) people actually don't have the need to replace it with anything else.
I will never understand why they NEED to ruin this. It's baffling.
- ocdtrekkie 5y agoThey copied a browser which renders websites the same way as the browser they copied from. Value add, whether you like their choices or not, is arguably the only reason one would pick their browser over the browser they copied.
- tempfs 5y agoIt is a for profit company, the reason is always profit.
- globalise83 5y agoIf you simply subtract some estimate of damage to their multi-billion dollar brand, it far outweighs any conceivable revenue from this creepy feature. It is not as if buy-now-pay-later is not already widely available on most merchant checkout pages. This will just be one option among many.
- Barrin92 5y agoI'm honestly not sure how much profit a 2 trillion dollar company is supposed to generate from an interest free pay later browser bloatware feature Even if you're Scrooge McDuck that sounds not worth it
- FredPret 5y agoThe winning play for them is to make genuinely the best browser, gain market share, and then start their shenanigans. Like Google did
- Mikeb85 5y agoWhat shenanigans do you think Google is pulling? There's nothing equivalent in Chrome...
- kevin_thibedeau 5y agoExtension manifest V3.
- Mikeb85 5y agoCare to explain why you think it's a bad thing? Seems like it's mostly deprecating old JS ways of doing things and introducing new JS features and a better security policy.
- kevin_thibedeau 5y agoIt's an underhanded way to limit blocking capabilities that they can sell as a benefit.
- coolso 5y agoMost of Chrome’s shenanigans happen on the backend, like with Google in general.
- Mikeb85 5y agoNice non-answer.
- MomoXenosaga 5y agoGoogle is an advertising company. That's what they make their money from. And they are the biggest internet advertising company. Everything they do is aimed at gathering more data for more lucrative ads.
- Mikeb85 5y ago
- ffhhj 5y agoThe goal is per team, Edge team must find new ways to generate profit, how much they make doesn't really matter, but the goal is to keep increasing this profit.
- watermelon0 5y agoWhat profit did legacy Edge bring them? Considering all the development efforts, I'd believe it was more of a money sink than anything else.
- themitigating 5y agoWhat about WSL?
- squarefoot 5y agoThere is zero proof that it will remain interest free forever; also their main goal here is to engage as much people as possible, so that each purchase click will generate profits indirectly through users profiling etc.
- greyhat 5y ago> While the service is being promoted as ‘interest-free’, some were quick to point out that all transactions are subject to a “$4 flat fee”.
- slimsag 5y agoAs another said, the goal to increase revenue is per team. The Edge team must likely find proof for how they will drive revenue in the future. Suddenly you've got a full browser engineering team trying to figure out how to monetize a browser - tough sell. So they can't come up with anything, that's fine because a product manager is the owner of this task anyway. They propose a myriad of different ways to monetize Edge in the future: * A "Edge Pro" subscription $10/mo where you get ad-blocking and no tracking (we'll need to block third-parties from offering this) * A built in way to pay people online, we take a cut. Hey maybe we finance big purchases and that's a unique selling point? * Premium apps/websites, web page authors can give access only to users with an Edge subscription and in return they get a cut of the profits. They discuss these options as a team, and decide which one is least likely to cause backlash and is least difficult to "try out" and they land on what we're seeing here.
- scj 5y ago"The peripheral drivers team needs to increase it's revenue."
- chocolatkey 5y agoThat team doesn't need to, device manufacturers already do that by only making drivers for Windows for certain devices, increasing lock-in
- noisy_boy 5y ago"View this ad to continue using your mouse"
- meesterdude 5y agoThis is a pretty good breakdown of how it likely came to be, but leaves out the satanic rituals and incantations that also (seemingly) play a big part in how microsoft makes decisions.
- adrr 5y agoSell the default search provider to bing for a few billion dollars. Same way Firefox makes money.
- BbzzbB 5y agoOf all the FAAMG out there, Microsoft arguably has the most diverse revenue streams, I don't see what's surprising with them going after another market (let alone payments). It's just another layer for monetization and doesn't prevent them pursuing their other business lines (it's arguably different teams anyway). Nothing's ever worth it if you take the approach of "It's already worth/earning 100x, adding 1x isn't worth the effort". P.s.: I don't mean to defend BNPL, IMO it is shark loaning disguised behind late fees. I forgot the exact number but when I did the (ballpark) math for Afterpay you were capping at like 30% in late fees within 3/4 months.
- slimsag 5y ago> Of all the FAAMG out there Of all the MANGA* out there FTFY
- jaredsohn 5y agoMAMAA
- Shared404 5y agoNot the commenter above, but I don't really want to support Facebook's attempt to dodge bad press with a name change. I'll stick with FAAMG.
- BbzzbB 5y agoI'm not too political/ideological about it, but Alphabet kept it's G in the acronym, Meta will keep it's F. I may revisit once they don't get >90% of their revenue from Google Services and Facebook + IG. But I do think if we're gonna be pedantic about Meta, we should be the same with Alphabet.
- scrollaway 5y agoThe Scrooge McDuck from the Ducktales remake (which I heartily recommend watching; it's a wonderfully funny cartoon for adults that pokes fun at plenty of adult things including silicon valley and mark zuckerberg) actually talks a bit about making money the smart way rather than being a penny-pincher. Which is a nice departure from the old persona.
- FredPret 5y agoBut their thinking is flawed. The reason is of course profit, but the result will not be profit.
- derekjdanserl 5y agoThe ultimate result is never profit. https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Tendency_of_the_rate_of_profit_to_fall https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Tendency_of_the_rate_of_profit_to...
- hvgk 5y agoIt’s not profit. It’s monumentally stupid dick sucking promo hunting product managers. I’ve watched several products ruined by these people over the years. The engineers walk and they become the majority of opinion. Next thing you know your sleek well engineered product looks like a Mumbai train at rush hour. It’s imperative you stop using a product when this happens so that the higher up stakeholders see the damage they do.
- siproprio 5y agoChrome doesn't do this.
- hiddencost 5y agoData
- Mikeb85 5y agoBecause Microsoft's raison-d'être is to extract as much money as possible from computer users. No matter how much they try to not be evil, no matter how many overtures they make to developers, it won't change the fact that Microsoft is basically just a hostile entity out there to extract as much money as possible from the computing scene.
- lytedev 5y agoBecause in the long run you make money best by providing customers valuable services and/or products. If you're screwing over your customers in any way, that is counterproductive to that goal.
- Mikeb85 5y agoMaybe that's true, but these kind of actions are Microsoft's MO. It's how they grew, it's what they'll forever do. I almost thought they had changed when they seemingly shifted to be friendlier when they were trying to attract developers to Azure and embracing Linux and OSS, but obviously not. MS just can't not be evil. Kind of like Oracle.
- cutler 5y agoM$ "embracing" Linux was like The Wicked Witch Of The West embracing Dorothy considering how soon it followed their evil Linux patent racket and funding of SCO's baseless UNIX lawsuit. Beware The Borg, all you who are too young to remember M$'s glory days.
- thow-01187 5y agoHaven't the past past 10 years been a complete refutation of this belief? Money made by hype, fraud, market power abuse or regulatory arbitrage dwarfs profits made by providing value, no longer how long the time horizon. Especially since it's clear that the US establishment's policy is not to prosecute and punish white-collar crime
- judge2020 5y agoI imagine some MBA saw a way they could augment the payment card feature to extract money, and bringing that to their manager is a good permanent gain for them (since they most likely won’t have to answer to the PR team).
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- MomoXenosaga 5y agoI do understand. Look at Firefox: they are barely hanging on.
- Oddskar 5y agoOnly because the Mozilla foundation spends their money doing all kinds of dumb things that no one wants.
- encryptluks2 5y agoTheir password program was an example of this.
- seoaeu 5y agoThat is not the "only" reason that Mozilla is struggling. There are vanishingly few companies their size who manage to remotely hold their own against Google for over a decade, let alone in a market segment that Google has invested on the order of billions of dollars in engineer time and advertising cost (some of it in the form of "free" advertising on the google.com homepage). That Mozilla has to contend with Google also being basically the only one willing to purchase search deals with them just makes it even more difficult.
- _iziv 5y agoAs long as economics 101 is: "Hello capitalism!" ... What do you expect?
- SahAssar 5y agoThe previous edge (at least the latter versions) weren't that bad. I had about the same amount of issues with safari and the edgeHTML edge, but the big difference for me was that at least I could test edge legally on a non-windows machine while I cannot for safari. I also ran into some issues of corporate policies holding back updates, which seems like a "unique" "feature" of windows. Not being able to legally, without paying, test safari compatibility is crazy to me.