24 ms·

Microsoft broke a Chrome feature to promote Edge

432 points by adrian_mrd 3y ago

nashashmi 3y ago
An overreacting ad. Nothing more. Calling it a 1990s behavior is like calling the entire internet behavior of dark patterns monopolistic.
- snapcaster 3y ago
  I'm struggling to understand your comment, both of those claims seem valid to me
  - nashashmi 3y ago
    I agree it is an overreacting ad, and it is like a dark pattern. But it is not monopolistic like the article alludes to. Dark patterns are not monopolistic.
    - snapcaster 3y ago
      Right, but I think what people mean when they say that is that dark patterns are being leveraged to further monopolistic goals
junaru 3y ago
How is this Microsoft fault? Google presumably made their browser go around the usual interface for changing default browser( via some sneaky api manipulation?). Microsoft patched it to require more than a single click. The only reason Edge or whatever Microsoft is pushing these days didn't trigger the issue is because their browser didn't make the API call on every new window event and not because of some sinister plan to increase their market share. Back in the day trying to do things as silently as possible was reserved for malware.
- we_never_see_it 3y ago
  Lately HN reminds me of Slashdot. Everything in the universe is MS' fault. Chrome is an adware. It tried to use a bug in Windows to sneakily install itself as the default browser. MS is looking out for its users and suddenly MS is the evil guy.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - JonChesterfield 3y ago
    Not suddenly the evil guy, historically.
  - AlexandrB 3y ago
    > MS is looking out for its users Yes, installing Candy Crush and a version of solitaire filled with IAP or filling the start menu with MSN news cruft is really looking out for its users. The only entities that Microsoft gives half a shit about is their shareholders.
  - IntrepidWorm 3y ago
    So far, I've seen nothing in these comments promoting Chrome, or Google more generally. They (Google and Microsoft) are both the tech equivalent of boogeyman, but this article focuses on specific anticompetitive behaviour from Microsoft. I think it's safe to generalize and say that nobody here thinks Google a saint.
- lozenge 3y ago
  Chrome does not automatically set itself as the default browser.
- mjr00 3y ago
  According to the article this does not seem to be the case: > Gizmodo was able to replicate the problem. In fact, we were able to circumvent the issue just by changing the name of the Chrome app on a Windows desktop. It seems that Microsoft threw up the roadblock specifically for Chrome, the main competitor to its Edge browser. > Mozilla’s Firefox has its own one-click default button, which worked just fine throughout the ordeal. so no, this doesn't appear to be about an app using a backdoor API, it's specifically targeted at Chrome.
McDev 3y ago
After what I think was the same Windows 10 update last month I noticed a giant Edge search bar planted in the middle of my desktop which I did not ask for. I've since rolled back the update and group policy disabled Windows Updates entirely
- jackbrookes 3y ago
  Disabling updates in a recipe for malware - you can remove the search bar in 4 clicks.
  - retrocryptid 3y ago
    You can remove windows in quite a few more clicks, but it's ultimately worth it. Though I wouldn't put it past Canonical to add ads to the default desktop at some point.
    - zgk7iqea 3y ago
      Hey did that in the past with the amazon integration
  - Karunamon 3y ago
    At some point it's going to be worth calculating whether malware (the vast majority of which is mitigated by not running as admin) or the latest update is going to be more disruptive to your workflow. At least on the systems I manage, workstation updates have been responsible for a lot larger share of the same kind of problems (data loss, availability loss, etc.) that I am starting to get questions that I don't have very convincing answers for.
  - pritambaral 3y ago
    > you can remove the search bar in 4 clicks. On every major update. It's just a nag.
  - anon3242 3y ago
    I would rather have malware ---- at least it happened under my control. However, I really wonder what kind of attack surfaces I may have, if I have zero exposed ports, never plug in any drive from untrusted sources, and always double and triple check any program before running? I haven't used any antivirus(including windows defender) since I got my first computer and never got any virus, also I monitor my running processes frequently and have an adequate knowledge of windows internals. Malwares are not like COVID-19...
moss2 3y ago
"Antitrust: Commission fines Microsoft for non-compliance with browser choice commitments", European Commission 2013: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_13_196 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_13_... We need more legislation it seems.
- acdha 3y ago
  That’s how the headline spins it but reading the article suggests the opposite: this is Google trying to avoid using the standard browser choice interface put into place in response to those legal requirements, which is rather less sympathetic.
  - tinus_hn 3y ago
    It is Google allowing the user to set the default browser using its own interface, using the API Edge uses to allow the user to set the default browser using its own interface. Microsoft loves to complain about applications doing things it doesn’t like, while its own applications are doing those exact same things. According to Microsoft the rule is that the rules just don’t apply to Microsoft Office and Microsoft Edge. Microsoft likes to pretend they play fair. But when they can’t win by playing fair, the facade quickly drops.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - nr2x 3y ago
      Please, Google has explicitly made their products not work correctly in other browsers for years. This is totally playing fair, it’s just Google getting back what they give.
      - tinus_hn 3y ago
        So Microsoft gets to use their monopoly powers to play the standards judge, jury and executioner?
PlutoIsAPlanet 3y ago
Applications should not be able to register themselves as the default handler for file and uri types. Google should be forced to open the system settings panel that allows users to change the default browser, not do it for them. If this window unfairly favours one browser over another, I'd say that would be anti-competitive, but requiring to go through said window is not.
- simula67 3y ago
  > Google should be forced to open the system settings panel that allows users to change the default browser, not do it for them. Why is it not enough that the user clicked on the button to change the default browser? > If this window unfairly favours one browser over another, I'd say that would be anti-competitive, but requiring to go through said window is not Making it harder for users to switch from the default browser to another browser unfairly favours the default browser over non-default browsers.
  - fwlr 3y ago
    > Why is it not enough that the user clicked on the button to change the default browser? It’s a button in Chrome, intuitively it should only be able to affect things inside Chrome. If you want to affect system-wide (user-wide…) defaults, that should be done in System, not Chrome. A analogy might be “turning your house lights’ dimmers to maximum brightness shouldn’t also set your car’s headlights to high-beam”.
    - 015a 3y ago
      I agree with this take, at a theoretical, hypothetical, utopian level. But I think its only the right path when we can trust that the vendors of the operating system are neutral stewards; when they act to at least a useful degree in the service of their customers, both the users and the application developers, versus their own network effect self-interests. Unfortunately, the majority of operating system developers out there are everything except neutral. In the absence of this utopia, you have to ask if its a better world that Microsoft retains unilateral control over its users' ability to set a default browser (or, any other decision of a similar caliber). I'd rather no one have control; that it just be some file content on the disk that any program can edit, and I'll adopt the responsibility of trying to make sure the programs I install can be trusted with that power. The alternative smells more like Apple's Security Dystopia than a utopia. Microsoft has already proven to be a bad steward of this functionality: there was a time (which may still be the case, I don't know) where changing the default browser would prompt you to "give Edge another shot" no short of three times. There was a time when even Googling "Chrome" in the Edge browser would re-write the HTML to list the Edge website first (I'm pretty sure they've removed this). Click on a link in any of Windows 11's useless widgets will always open Edge, even if you've overridden the default browser. The better analogy is possibly: Turning your house's lights to maximum brightness maybe should also set your car's headlights to high beams, if the car manufacturer prompts you to install their own more expensive, worse headlights every time you adjust their brightness in the car.
crazygringo 3y ago
Wow, this is much worse than I assumed: > In fact, we were able to circumvent the issue just by changing the name of the Chrome app on a Windows desktop. It seems that Microsoft threw up the roadblock specifically for Chrome, the main competitor to its Edge browser. From the beginning of the article, I was led to believe Microsoft had changed an API around checking/setting the default browser to show Microsoft's dialog instead. Which doesn't seem great to change an API without warning, but maybe you can make an argument that it ensures a "neutral" choice rather than apps pushing the choice on users. But this shows it's specifically against Chrome. Regardless of whether it's legal or not, it's unforgivably anti-competitive behavior. It's a truly shameful tactic.
- Paul-Craft 3y ago
  It looks like they're going back to the days of "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run," alright. Very shady.
  - runlevel1 3y ago
    There was a post on here about that phrase a few years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10432608 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10432608 Lots of interesting discussion in there, even if the phrase didn't come out of Microsoft as the article anecdotally suggests it didn't.
- nr2x 3y ago
  Given that Chrome is aggressively pursuing privacy sandbox, which is roundly rejected by everybody in the web privacy community, is aggressively user hostile, and designed solely as a means to leverage chrome’s (current) dominance to support google ad business, it’s fair to start treating chrome as malware.
  - AlexandrB 3y ago
    What part of this description of privacy sandbox doesn't apply to what Microsoft has been doing with Windows? I think it's time to treat Windows 11 as malware as well.
codeflo 3y ago
The year is 2023. Everyone who believes either Microsoft or Google are the good guys here is either not paying attention, or works for either of the companies (not so unlikely on Hacker News). Both companies use every imaginable dark pattern to trick users into agreeing to whatever tracking bullshit they added last week. With one company controlling the OS and the other the browser, the question is just which dark patterns preempt the other company's dark patterns in the battle for user attention and data in the advertisement wars. I long for the days where I was able to pay for a piece of software. The nature of the transaction ensured that the software did what I as a user wanted it to do, and served no hidden agenda. But those days are gone, possibly forever.
- davey48016 3y ago
  The way Google released "experimental" features behind prefixes instead of configuration for years always seemed like a way to get developers to break their sites in non-Chrome browsers as much or more than a way to test features. I assume that Google's takeaway from the Internet Explorer anti-trust case was that they needed plausible deniability for their non-standard browser features.
  - waboremo 3y ago
    Judging by Google's sloppy handling of evidence related to their antitrust suit, it seems your assumption is entirely on the money.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > The way Google released "experimental" features behind prefixes instead of configuration for years always seemed like a way to get developers to break their sites in non-Chrome browsers as much or more than a way to test features. Apple, Mozilla, Microsoft, and Opera all were doing that before Google even had a browser; there never even was a Chrome-specific prefix, all of the features included in Chrome this way were -webkit- prefix and, IIRC, implemented in the WebKit shared codebase.
  - madeofpalk 3y ago
    > The way Google released "experimental" features behind prefixes instead of configuration This was not a "Google" thing - vendor prefixes were a common practice in the industry. Webkit was using -webkit- prefix before Google was using it. Many years ago the harm of this was recognised and browsers did move these to configuration/feature flags instead. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Vendor_Prefix https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Vendor_Pre...
16bitvoid 3y ago
On one hand, Microsoft has been ridiculously scummy lately in regards to Windows and Edge (e.g., dark patterns everywhere) and I downright abhor what Edge has become. On the other hand, programs probably shouldn't be able to silently change a user's default programs. But back to the first hand, it seems like this was targeting Chrome specifically rather than actually improving the API, so more scummy nonsense from Microsoft. While Chrome included a button to ask users beforehand, they could've just as easily changed the default browser without asking. I'm not saying Google would do that, but maybe they shouldn't have the ability to do so regardless of intention.
- linster 3y ago
  I wonder if the workaround you mentioned in your second paragraph is bait Microsoft left for Google PMs?
- Pxtl 3y ago
  That sounds like it should be up to the OS to prompt with a confirmation when the software tries to change a global setting. That's what mobile devices do.
- tracker1 3y ago
  I'm not sure what to switch to at this point... disabling the shopping suggestions, fine.. but this bing sidebar and the giant button, even if you disable the ever-present mode is annoying to say the least. I really liked edge, but that didn't last long... I'm trying to minimize the Google in my life as well, beyond search which is less and less useful itself. Not sure what to use. Keep seeing Vivaldi mentioned, and I do use Brave on my phone. And no, I don't find Firefox "good" ... I do like having bookmarks and plugins sync'd though. Anyone have an extension that syncs bookmarks... I keep my passphrases in Bitwarden, not the browser as it is.
  - eep_social 3y ago
    I found the same recommendation. While I haven’t gotten to daily-driving yet, I am pleased and impressed with the settings Vivaldi exposes and the reasonable defaults included out of the box.
retrocryptid 3y ago
Looking at the comments, it's clear other people read a completely different article than I did. I recently canceled my LinkedIn account as LI refused to allow me to upload images when using Firefox. I have no desire to live in the MSFT-centric world of the 90s they seem to be re-creating.
fwlr 3y ago
Trying to set yourself as the default handler for anything should pop up a system preferences box. Beating a dead horse perhaps but in the Apple world this works quite well: there are various permissions like “read folders”, “capture keyboard input”, “access location” and so on. When a programs wants to use these, all it can do is put in a request, and pop up a dialog box offering to take you System Preferences. When you’re in System Preferences you can look at e.g. “read folders” permissions and see all the programs that have requested this, and you can check or uncheck each program to decide its access. This is how default handlers should work, too (although it doesn’t in MacOS at the moment, probably because they couldn’t solve the UI issue of having a list of every possible file type, each with a sub list of every program that can open it). If that was what Windows was intending, and Google found a way around it with sneaky automatic API calls, and Windows fixed the exploit which then resulted in those sneaky calls popping open Settings every time, that would be fine and Google would be the bad guy. Sounds like that was not what happened here, Windows did some ugly hack (up to and including ‘relying on a Chrome.exe process name’, like, come on) and in fact doesn’t even have a “make request then approve in Settings” workflow, so yeah Windows is the bad guy here. Google is still a little bit bad - you’re fucking up my UI by forcing a self-promotion button into my tab bar, that’s not cool - but overall this situation is a point against Microsoft. (Personally I’m glad the extent of browser wars for Mac is some apps doing some trick to make you choose between “Chrome”, “Safari”, or “the default browser [Safari]” every time you click a link. I want to use the default option every time automatically, that’s what default means.)
- nr2x 3y ago
  Eh, iOS doesn’t allow any alternative rendering engines, which isn’t exactly user choice.
  - zamnos 3y ago
    Ah yes, the Henry Ford of user choices. "Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black". -Henry Ford, My Life and Work (1922)
    - 3y ago
pmarreck 3y ago
Hey, I heard there are open-source OS'es where this bullshit is not possible because it would be out in the open ::looks at penguin::
dataf3l 3y ago
If 123.exe then fail
- esafak 3y ago
  Can you cite a source? I got the reference but failed to corroborate it. How did it fail?
- garganzol 3y ago
  This is exactly how some "anti-virus" products behave.
qumpis 3y ago
Offtopic, but I started using Edge because of Bing integration, which turned out to be terrible (just give me exact gpt4-based copilot, not the watered-down version), but stayed for the side-tabs: sticky permanent tabs that allow to quickly reach you popularly use. I haven't found a browser that offers this functionality either natively or as a well-supported plugin. I'd love to ditch Edge, any recommendations?
- Alifatisk 3y ago
  Vivaldi, arc browser or the new Opera
- skellera 3y ago
  I think edge is doing the most interesting customer focused features for browsers that I’ve seen in a long time. I get that some might feel it’ll get bloated but most are configurable. It’s not for everyone but it’s interesting to see someone trying new things.
- ogurechny 3y ago
  If you mean side-by-side split screen, The Old Opera had multiple document interface. If you mean opening (mobile/full) site in a side panel, The Old Opera had side panels. If you mean vertical tabs, The Old Opera had vertical tabs. Browser that follows the path of The Old Opera exists, and is called Vivaldi.
- lostmsu 3y ago
  Can you share a screenshot of the feature you are talking about?
atesti 3y ago
I tried to read all the links, but there are still some questions: So Google has a button to make it the standard browser and a group policy to do that automatically. This computes the userchoice hash based on the SID, obfuscated formulas, the create time of the registry key (minute only, retrying when the minute has changed while writing). Now MS publishes an update which breaks this (But how?). Gizmodo says it only happes to "chrome.exe". Google implemented the userchoice hash algorithm, but now they disabled "the experiment". And now? When will Google come up with another solution? Does the group policy still work? What exactly did the update from MS change? Did the userchoice algorithm change somehow? Does the button in Chrome to set the default even still work? Here's how userchoice is or was implemented: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/0dfc676a46a7e14778e6801bc1c0bafdce835729%5E%21/ https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/0dfc676a46a... https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/58e203f9ba97826f98c414faf4eea289fb4d436e%5E%21/ https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/58e203f9ba9...
- fsfod 3y ago
  I thought the whole point of the hash was it could change arbitrarily with windows updates to stop programs reverse engineering it and then setting file associations or browser choice directly in the registry. Although not sure if it has ever changed before though just by quickly scanning the change log for this app people were using to set it https://kolbi.cz/blog/2017/10/25/setuserfta-userchoice-hash-defeated-set-file-type-associations-per-user/ https://kolbi.cz/blog/2017/10/25/setuserfta-userchoice-hash-...
bogwog 3y ago
Consumers never win.
hooby 3y ago
> “For information on this, please see this blog post about Microsoft’s approach to app pinning and app defaults in Windows. Microsoft has nothing further to share,” said Miranda Davis, a Microsoft spokesperson. The post describes the company’s “long-standing approach to put people in control of their Windows PC experience.” There's a little typo in there. They wrote in - but what they actually meant was under our. Common mistake. The keys are right next to each other.
dur-randir 3y ago
Like google never did the same to other browsers on gmail/main search page? Who're they're trying to fool?
- rhaway84773 3y ago
  Which would be a good reason to chastise Google when they do such things. It’s no response to MS’s anti competitive behavior.
ogurechny 3y ago
> Chrome is, it bears repeating, the world’s preferred internet browser I see that journalism remains second oldest profession.
tarimbreazeaim 3y ago
[dead]
NotYourLawyer 3y ago
Chrome and Edge are both hot garbage. Install Firefox and never look back.
cutler 3y ago
"Party like it's 1999"
wly_cdgr 3y ago
They are allowing a Trojan horse application on their platform two of the main purposes of which are to convert paid MS Office users to paid Google Suite users, and to convert Windows users to ChromeOS users. I think Microsoft is being quite generous, patient, and tolerant, if anything (although to a large degree probably because they are required to act in this way by naive, ignorant, and/or Google-funded regulators).
- elaus 3y ago
  We live in dark times if we unironically talk about Microsoft "allowing" certain executables in Windows.
cute_boi 3y ago
I love browser wars. Google is getting taste of its own medicine. They also have endless message "Install google chrome" when we go to google.com or youtube.com. I think Microsoft should do more to Google. Meanwhile, I am happy with Firefox.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
jds-67 3y ago
One more reason not to use Windows if possible.
asdajksah2123 3y ago
Microsoft gonna Microsoft.
garganzol 3y ago
"What a convenient coincidence. Mind you, it was absolutely uncorrelated. Everybody knows that everything <a big corp> does is for better security." - a typical bitter sarcasm nowadays.
RadixDLT 3y ago
sabotage?
thewebcount 3y ago
I'm no more a fan of this than I was of Google trying to shove Chrome in my face any time I used to visit any of their properties with a different browser. These 2 deserve each other. For now I just avoid both of their products.
everyone 3y ago
Funny cus edge is chrome anyway right?
- DANmode 3y ago
  Privacy-wise, yes. Upstream source is Chromium.
neonsunset 3y ago
Where were all the commenters when YouTube was silently breaking (old, Trident-based) Edge, Firefox and Safari with user-agent detection completely ignoring actually supported browser capabilities? Somehow they are able to get away with this while other companies don't.
- Someone1234 3y ago
  Can you link to what you're referring to? Firefox has always worked fine for me on YT, in fact I'm using it right now.
  - deely3 3y ago
    One example that I personally remember is when Gmail and Youtube is stopped working on Opera browser. But if you customize user agent to any other browser (like Firefox) it suddenly start to work. [1] It happened decade ago tho.. Now Google is practically leader in web standards so there no need to use this practice anymore. 1. https://www.reddit.com/r/operabrowser/comments/e6e7x/google_constantly_blocking_opera/ https://www.reddit.com/r/operabrowser/comments/e6e7x/google_...
- dahwolf 3y ago
  Where? How about right here and on every tech site?
- ilyt 3y ago
  I've seen them on every tech site I visited. Were you under a rock ?
- snvzz 3y ago
  Whataboutism.
dahwolf 3y ago
It's unsurprising that they try, it's surprising that they get away with it. Blatant market manipulation by several big tech players with zero consequences. Which then emboldens them to go even further.
mynonameaccount 3y ago
It's all a game to Microsoft and you are just the product
asldkfjaslkdj 3y ago
Are we just going to ignore the time Google was caught slowing firefox with useless loops (well, actually turning on a client side noise reduction algo IIRC) in google meet and docs to make it look like chrome was faster? could also be 'fixed' by changing user agents to chrome. ...countdown to downvotes and replies asking for source for something that is easy to find online.
- DangitBobby 3y ago
  I don't doubt that it happened, I just don't understand why you're bringing it up.
  - psnehanshu 3y ago
    It's a reminder that both of them are the bad guys.
jokoon 3y ago
Also it seems that associating a file type with a program also change its icon, you cannot have separate icon and file association. For example, I want a separate icon for .txt .py .cpp, and all open them with sublime text. I tried many things, but I just gave up. Once I associate with ST again, it sets to another icon. There are really few things holding me back to windows, really.
- retox 3y ago
  It's definitely possible, IrfanView lets you customize the icons for each file or at least at the icon 'pack' level and have all the images open with IrfanView. For instance PNG files can have the IrfanView logo with PNG written across it.
ubermonkey 3y ago
How many people remember the days of "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run"?
meepmorp 3y ago
Windows ain't done till Chrome won't run!
hot_gril 3y ago
"Not Ballmer's Microsoft anymore, they're good now." I never believed that from the start.
sylware 3y ago
doesn't that what happen between blink and geeko/webkit?
mensetmanusman 3y ago
All I know is that my work windows computer now has ads in the start menu. Edge should not be bundled with windows.
UberFly 3y ago
This is an honest question: What does Microsoft gain from a user on Windows using Edge over Chrome? Market share muscle driving browser direction?
- kurtoid 3y ago
  Tracking, ad dollars, and influence over web standards
jacquesm 3y ago
Ok, so par for the course, absolutely nothing has changed since the previous round of the browser wars. But what really, and I mean really surprises me is that the open source movement so far hasn't taken a much harsher stand against Microsoft acquiring GitHub. Google is capable of defending itself just fine but with GH Microsoft has essentially acquired all of the open source code stored there irrespective of the license it is shipped under because somehow magically their TOS seems to supersede the GPL and they can do what ever they please with the code. That doesn't sit right with me, no matter how many goodwill parties Nadella & company attend.
albert_e 3y ago
Is it also possible that MS has a "budget" to promote Edge as the default/only option among its enterprise customers -- you know, supplying the IT departments with marketing material, mailers, talking points, and all sorts of "incentives" for adoption. I ask because we saw a huge campaign by our corporate IT (large 50,000+ userbase) recently to eliminate Chrome for all company assets -- with mailers touting the superior security features of Edge. If they simply said we cannot / donot want to support multiple browsers -- it would be forgivable. But the mailers seemed to be rather persistent in justifying why Edge -- sounding like PR from MS.
fowl2 3y ago
Looks like someone in Windows land has had enough: A principled approach to app pinning and app defaults in Windows (windows.com) [1] [1] https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2023/03/17/a-principled-approach-to-app-pinning-and-app-defaults-in-windows/ https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2023/03/17/a-pri... * Insert comic of different parts of Microsoft pointing guns at each-other *
cratermoon 3y ago
Remember: since the Reagan era, the law has said that monopolies are A-OK as long as consumers don't pay higher prices.
indymike 3y ago
Rough edges like this are what make people like the experience better on other operating systems. Edge is a nice browser. But I want to use something else, and these kinds of things make me not want your software. As a developer, I just stop using the OS's "open url" call and add a setting to select the app to use to open links. At my company, we're Mac for everything not engineering and linux for engineering. Every new hire at first hates the new thing, but after a few months, I'll ask them if they'd like to switch to Windows... and the answer is usually something between "no" and "for the love all that is good and wholesome, no!" The issue with Windows is lots of tiny spikes and sharp edges that interrupt your workflow.

432 points by adrian_mrd 3y ago

An overreacting ad. Nothing more. Calling it a 1990s behavior is like calling the entire internet behavior of dark patterns monopolistic.

snapcaster 3y ago
I'm struggling to understand your comment, both of those claims seem valid to me
- nashashmi 3y ago
  I agree it is an overreacting ad, and it is like a dark pattern. But it is not monopolistic like the article alludes to. Dark patterns are not monopolistic.
  - snapcaster 3y ago
    Right, but I think what people mean when they say that is that dark patterns are being leveraged to further monopolistic goals

junaru 3y ago

How is this Microsoft fault? Google presumably made their browser go around the usual interface for changing default browser( via some sneaky api manipulation?). Microsoft patched it to require more than a single click. The only reason Edge or whatever Microsoft is pushing these days didn't trigger the issue is because their browser didn't make the API call on every new window event and not because of some sinister plan to increase their market share. Back in the day trying to do things as silently as possible was reserved for malware.

we_never_see_it 3y ago
Lately HN reminds me of Slashdot. Everything in the universe is MS' fault. Chrome is an adware. It tried to use a bug in Windows to sneakily install itself as the default browser. MS is looking out for its users and suddenly MS is the evil guy.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- JonChesterfield 3y ago
  Not suddenly the evil guy, historically.
- AlexandrB 3y ago
  > MS is looking out for its users Yes, installing Candy Crush and a version of solitaire filled with IAP or filling the start menu with MSN news cruft is really looking out for its users. The only entities that Microsoft gives half a shit about is their shareholders.
- IntrepidWorm 3y ago
  So far, I've seen nothing in these comments promoting Chrome, or Google more generally. They (Google and Microsoft) are both the tech equivalent of boogeyman, but this article focuses on specific anticompetitive behaviour from Microsoft. I think it's safe to generalize and say that nobody here thinks Google a saint.
lozenge 3y ago
Chrome does not automatically set itself as the default browser.
mjr00 3y ago
According to the article this does not seem to be the case: > Gizmodo was able to replicate the problem. In fact, we were able to circumvent the issue just by changing the name of the Chrome app on a Windows desktop. It seems that Microsoft threw up the roadblock specifically for Chrome, the main competitor to its Edge browser. > Mozilla’s Firefox has its own one-click default button, which worked just fine throughout the ordeal. so no, this doesn't appear to be about an app using a backdoor API, it's specifically targeted at Chrome.

McDev 3y ago

After what I think was the same Windows 10 update last month I noticed a giant Edge search bar planted in the middle of my desktop which I did not ask for. I've since rolled back the update and group policy disabled Windows Updates entirely

jackbrookes 3y ago
Disabling updates in a recipe for malware - you can remove the search bar in 4 clicks.
- retrocryptid 3y ago
  You can remove windows in quite a few more clicks, but it's ultimately worth it. Though I wouldn't put it past Canonical to add ads to the default desktop at some point.
  - zgk7iqea 3y ago
    Hey did that in the past with the amazon integration
- Karunamon 3y ago
  At some point it's going to be worth calculating whether malware (the vast majority of which is mitigated by not running as admin) or the latest update is going to be more disruptive to your workflow. At least on the systems I manage, workstation updates have been responsible for a lot larger share of the same kind of problems (data loss, availability loss, etc.) that I am starting to get questions that I don't have very convincing answers for.
- pritambaral 3y ago
  > you can remove the search bar in 4 clicks. On every major update. It's just a nag.
- anon3242 3y ago
  I would rather have malware ---- at least it happened under my control. However, I really wonder what kind of attack surfaces I may have, if I have zero exposed ports, never plug in any drive from untrusted sources, and always double and triple check any program before running? I haven't used any antivirus(including windows defender) since I got my first computer and never got any virus, also I monitor my running processes frequently and have an adequate knowledge of windows internals. Malwares are not like COVID-19...

moss2 3y ago

"Antitrust: Commission fines Microsoft for non-compliance with browser choice commitments", European Commission 2013: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_13_196 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_13_... We need more legislation it seems.

acdha 3y ago
That’s how the headline spins it but reading the article suggests the opposite: this is Google trying to avoid using the standard browser choice interface put into place in response to those legal requirements, which is rather less sympathetic.
- tinus_hn 3y ago
  It is Google allowing the user to set the default browser using its own interface, using the API Edge uses to allow the user to set the default browser using its own interface. Microsoft loves to complain about applications doing things it doesn’t like, while its own applications are doing those exact same things. According to Microsoft the rule is that the rules just don’t apply to Microsoft Office and Microsoft Edge. Microsoft likes to pretend they play fair. But when they can’t win by playing fair, the facade quickly drops.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - nr2x 3y ago
    Please, Google has explicitly made their products not work correctly in other browsers for years. This is totally playing fair, it’s just Google getting back what they give.
    - tinus_hn 3y ago
      So Microsoft gets to use their monopoly powers to play the standards judge, jury and executioner?

PlutoIsAPlanet 3y ago

Applications should not be able to register themselves as the default handler for file and uri types. Google should be forced to open the system settings panel that allows users to change the default browser, not do it for them. If this window unfairly favours one browser over another, I'd say that would be anti-competitive, but requiring to go through said window is not.

simula67 3y ago
> Google should be forced to open the system settings panel that allows users to change the default browser, not do it for them. Why is it not enough that the user clicked on the button to change the default browser? > If this window unfairly favours one browser over another, I'd say that would be anti-competitive, but requiring to go through said window is not Making it harder for users to switch from the default browser to another browser unfairly favours the default browser over non-default browsers.
- fwlr 3y ago
  > Why is it not enough that the user clicked on the button to change the default browser? It’s a button in Chrome, intuitively it should only be able to affect things inside Chrome. If you want to affect system-wide (user-wide…) defaults, that should be done in System, not Chrome. A analogy might be “turning your house lights’ dimmers to maximum brightness shouldn’t also set your car’s headlights to high-beam”.
  - 015a 3y ago
    I agree with this take, at a theoretical, hypothetical, utopian level. But I think its only the right path when we can trust that the vendors of the operating system are neutral stewards; when they act to at least a useful degree in the service of their customers, both the users and the application developers, versus their own network effect self-interests. Unfortunately, the majority of operating system developers out there are everything except neutral. In the absence of this utopia, you have to ask if its a better world that Microsoft retains unilateral control over its users' ability to set a default browser (or, any other decision of a similar caliber). I'd rather no one have control; that it just be some file content on the disk that any program can edit, and I'll adopt the responsibility of trying to make sure the programs I install can be trusted with that power. The alternative smells more like Apple's Security Dystopia than a utopia. Microsoft has already proven to be a bad steward of this functionality: there was a time (which may still be the case, I don't know) where changing the default browser would prompt you to "give Edge another shot" no short of three times. There was a time when even Googling "Chrome" in the Edge browser would re-write the HTML to list the Edge website first (I'm pretty sure they've removed this). Click on a link in any of Windows 11's useless widgets will always open Edge, even if you've overridden the default browser. The better analogy is possibly: Turning your house's lights to maximum brightness maybe should also set your car's headlights to high beams, if the car manufacturer prompts you to install their own more expensive, worse headlights every time you adjust their brightness in the car.

crazygringo 3y ago

Wow, this is much worse than I assumed: > In fact, we were able to circumvent the issue just by changing the name of the Chrome app on a Windows desktop. It seems that Microsoft threw up the roadblock specifically for Chrome, the main competitor to its Edge browser. From the beginning of the article, I was led to believe Microsoft had changed an API around checking/setting the default browser to show Microsoft's dialog instead. Which doesn't seem great to change an API without warning, but maybe you can make an argument that it ensures a "neutral" choice rather than apps pushing the choice on users. But this shows it's specifically against Chrome. Regardless of whether it's legal or not, it's unforgivably anti-competitive behavior. It's a truly shameful tactic.

Paul-Craft 3y ago
It looks like they're going back to the days of "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run," alright. Very shady.
- runlevel1 3y ago
  There was a post on here about that phrase a few years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10432608 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10432608 Lots of interesting discussion in there, even if the phrase didn't come out of Microsoft as the article anecdotally suggests it didn't.
nr2x 3y ago
Given that Chrome is aggressively pursuing privacy sandbox, which is roundly rejected by everybody in the web privacy community, is aggressively user hostile, and designed solely as a means to leverage chrome’s (current) dominance to support google ad business, it’s fair to start treating chrome as malware.
- AlexandrB 3y ago
  What part of this description of privacy sandbox doesn't apply to what Microsoft has been doing with Windows? I think it's time to treat Windows 11 as malware as well.

codeflo 3y ago

The year is 2023. Everyone who believes either Microsoft or Google are the good guys here is either not paying attention, or works for either of the companies (not so unlikely on Hacker News). Both companies use every imaginable dark pattern to trick users into agreeing to whatever tracking bullshit they added last week. With one company controlling the OS and the other the browser, the question is just which dark patterns preempt the other company's dark patterns in the battle for user attention and data in the advertisement wars. I long for the days where I was able to pay for a piece of software. The nature of the transaction ensured that the software did what I as a user wanted it to do, and served no hidden agenda. But those days are gone, possibly forever.

davey48016 3y ago
The way Google released "experimental" features behind prefixes instead of configuration for years always seemed like a way to get developers to break their sites in non-Chrome browsers as much or more than a way to test features. I assume that Google's takeaway from the Internet Explorer anti-trust case was that they needed plausible deniability for their non-standard browser features.
- waboremo 3y ago
  Judging by Google's sloppy handling of evidence related to their antitrust suit, it seems your assumption is entirely on the money.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > The way Google released "experimental" features behind prefixes instead of configuration for years always seemed like a way to get developers to break their sites in non-Chrome browsers as much or more than a way to test features. Apple, Mozilla, Microsoft, and Opera all were doing that before Google even had a browser; there never even was a Chrome-specific prefix, all of the features included in Chrome this way were -webkit- prefix and, IIRC, implemented in the WebKit shared codebase.
- madeofpalk 3y ago
  > The way Google released "experimental" features behind prefixes instead of configuration This was not a "Google" thing - vendor prefixes were a common practice in the industry. Webkit was using -webkit- prefix before Google was using it. Many years ago the harm of this was recognised and browsers did move these to configuration/feature flags instead. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Vendor_Prefix https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Vendor_Pre...

16bitvoid 3y ago

On one hand, Microsoft has been ridiculously scummy lately in regards to Windows and Edge (e.g., dark patterns everywhere) and I downright abhor what Edge has become. On the other hand, programs probably shouldn't be able to silently change a user's default programs. But back to the first hand, it seems like this was targeting Chrome specifically rather than actually improving the API, so more scummy nonsense from Microsoft. While Chrome included a button to ask users beforehand, they could've just as easily changed the default browser without asking. I'm not saying Google would do that, but maybe they shouldn't have the ability to do so regardless of intention.

linster 3y ago
I wonder if the workaround you mentioned in your second paragraph is bait Microsoft left for Google PMs?
Pxtl 3y ago
That sounds like it should be up to the OS to prompt with a confirmation when the software tries to change a global setting. That's what mobile devices do.
tracker1 3y ago
I'm not sure what to switch to at this point... disabling the shopping suggestions, fine.. but this bing sidebar and the giant button, even if you disable the ever-present mode is annoying to say the least. I really liked edge, but that didn't last long... I'm trying to minimize the Google in my life as well, beyond search which is less and less useful itself. Not sure what to use. Keep seeing Vivaldi mentioned, and I do use Brave on my phone. And no, I don't find Firefox "good" ... I do like having bookmarks and plugins sync'd though. Anyone have an extension that syncs bookmarks... I keep my passphrases in Bitwarden, not the browser as it is.
- eep_social 3y ago
  I found the same recommendation. While I haven’t gotten to daily-driving yet, I am pleased and impressed with the settings Vivaldi exposes and the reasonable defaults included out of the box.

retrocryptid 3y ago

Looking at the comments, it's clear other people read a completely different article than I did. I recently canceled my LinkedIn account as LI refused to allow me to upload images when using Firefox. I have no desire to live in the MSFT-centric world of the 90s they seem to be re-creating.

fwlr 3y ago

Trying to set yourself as the default handler for anything should pop up a system preferences box. Beating a dead horse perhaps but in the Apple world this works quite well: there are various permissions like “read folders”, “capture keyboard input”, “access location” and so on. When a programs wants to use these, all it can do is put in a request, and pop up a dialog box offering to take you System Preferences. When you’re in System Preferences you can look at e.g. “read folders” permissions and see all the programs that have requested this, and you can check or uncheck each program to decide its access. This is how default handlers should work, too (although it doesn’t in MacOS at the moment, probably because they couldn’t solve the UI issue of having a list of every possible file type, each with a sub list of every program that can open it). If that was what Windows was intending, and Google found a way around it with sneaky automatic API calls, and Windows fixed the exploit which then resulted in those sneaky calls popping open Settings every time, that would be fine and Google would be the bad guy. Sounds like that was not what happened here, Windows did some ugly hack (up to and including ‘relying on a Chrome.exe process name’, like, come on) and in fact doesn’t even have a “make request then approve in Settings” workflow, so yeah Windows is the bad guy here. Google is still a little bit bad - you’re fucking up my UI by forcing a self-promotion button into my tab bar, that’s not cool - but overall this situation is a point against Microsoft. (Personally I’m glad the extent of browser wars for Mac is some apps doing some trick to make you choose between “Chrome”, “Safari”, or “the default browser [Safari]” every time you click a link. I want to use the default option every time automatically, that’s what default means.)

nr2x 3y ago
Eh, iOS doesn’t allow any alternative rendering engines, which isn’t exactly user choice.
- zamnos 3y ago
  Ah yes, the Henry Ford of user choices. "Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black". -Henry Ford, My Life and Work (1922)
  - 3y ago

pmarreck 3y ago

Hey, I heard there are open-source OS'es where this bullshit is not possible because it would be out in the open ::looks at penguin::

dataf3l 3y ago

If 123.exe then fail

esafak 3y ago
Can you cite a source? I got the reference but failed to corroborate it. How did it fail?
garganzol 3y ago
This is exactly how some "anti-virus" products behave.

qumpis 3y ago

Offtopic, but I started using Edge because of Bing integration, which turned out to be terrible (just give me exact gpt4-based copilot, not the watered-down version), but stayed for the side-tabs: sticky permanent tabs that allow to quickly reach you popularly use. I haven't found a browser that offers this functionality either natively or as a well-supported plugin. I'd love to ditch Edge, any recommendations?

Alifatisk 3y ago
Vivaldi, arc browser or the new Opera
skellera 3y ago
I think edge is doing the most interesting customer focused features for browsers that I’ve seen in a long time. I get that some might feel it’ll get bloated but most are configurable. It’s not for everyone but it’s interesting to see someone trying new things.
ogurechny 3y ago
If you mean side-by-side split screen, The Old Opera had multiple document interface. If you mean opening (mobile/full) site in a side panel, The Old Opera had side panels. If you mean vertical tabs, The Old Opera had vertical tabs. Browser that follows the path of The Old Opera exists, and is called Vivaldi.
lostmsu 3y ago
Can you share a screenshot of the feature you are talking about?

atesti 3y ago

I tried to read all the links, but there are still some questions: So Google has a button to make it the standard browser and a group policy to do that automatically. This computes the userchoice hash based on the SID, obfuscated formulas, the create time of the registry key (minute only, retrying when the minute has changed while writing). Now MS publishes an update which breaks this (But how?). Gizmodo says it only happes to "chrome.exe". Google implemented the userchoice hash algorithm, but now they disabled "the experiment". And now? When will Google come up with another solution? Does the group policy still work? What exactly did the update from MS change? Did the userchoice algorithm change somehow? Does the button in Chrome to set the default even still work? Here's how userchoice is or was implemented: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/0dfc676a46a7e14778e6801bc1c0bafdce835729%5E%21/ https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/0dfc676a46a... https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/58e203f9ba97826f98c414faf4eea289fb4d436e%5E%21/ https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/58e203f9ba9...

fsfod 3y ago
I thought the whole point of the hash was it could change arbitrarily with windows updates to stop programs reverse engineering it and then setting file associations or browser choice directly in the registry. Although not sure if it has ever changed before though just by quickly scanning the change log for this app people were using to set it https://kolbi.cz/blog/2017/10/25/setuserfta-userchoice-hash-defeated-set-file-type-associations-per-user/ https://kolbi.cz/blog/2017/10/25/setuserfta-userchoice-hash-...

bogwog 3y ago

Consumers never win.

hooby 3y ago

> “For information on this, please see this blog post about Microsoft’s approach to app pinning and app defaults in Windows. Microsoft has nothing further to share,” said Miranda Davis, a Microsoft spokesperson. The post describes the company’s “long-standing approach to put people in control of their Windows PC experience.” There's a little typo in there. They wrote in - but what they actually meant was under our. Common mistake. The keys are right next to each other.

dur-randir 3y ago

Like google never did the same to other browsers on gmail/main search page? Who're they're trying to fool?

rhaway84773 3y ago
Which would be a good reason to chastise Google when they do such things. It’s no response to MS’s anti competitive behavior.

ogurechny 3y ago

> Chrome is, it bears repeating, the world’s preferred internet browser I see that journalism remains second oldest profession.

tarimbreazeaim 3y ago

[dead]

NotYourLawyer 3y ago

Chrome and Edge are both hot garbage. Install Firefox and never look back.

cutler 3y ago

"Party like it's 1999"

wly_cdgr 3y ago

They are allowing a Trojan horse application on their platform two of the main purposes of which are to convert paid MS Office users to paid Google Suite users, and to convert Windows users to ChromeOS users. I think Microsoft is being quite generous, patient, and tolerant, if anything (although to a large degree probably because they are required to act in this way by naive, ignorant, and/or Google-funded regulators).

elaus 3y ago
We live in dark times if we unironically talk about Microsoft "allowing" certain executables in Windows.

cute_boi 3y ago

I love browser wars. Google is getting taste of its own medicine. They also have endless message "Install google chrome" when we go to google.com or youtube.com. I think Microsoft should do more to Google. Meanwhile, I am happy with Firefox.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

jds-67 3y ago

One more reason not to use Windows if possible.

asdajksah2123 3y ago

Microsoft gonna Microsoft.

garganzol 3y ago

"What a convenient coincidence. Mind you, it was absolutely uncorrelated. Everybody knows that everything <a big corp> does is for better security." - a typical bitter sarcasm nowadays.

RadixDLT 3y ago

sabotage?

thewebcount 3y ago

I'm no more a fan of this than I was of Google trying to shove Chrome in my face any time I used to visit any of their properties with a different browser. These 2 deserve each other. For now I just avoid both of their products.

everyone 3y ago

Funny cus edge is chrome anyway right?

DANmode 3y ago
Privacy-wise, yes. Upstream source is Chromium.

neonsunset 3y ago

Where were all the commenters when YouTube was silently breaking (old, Trident-based) Edge, Firefox and Safari with user-agent detection completely ignoring actually supported browser capabilities? Somehow they are able to get away with this while other companies don't.

Someone1234 3y ago
Can you link to what you're referring to? Firefox has always worked fine for me on YT, in fact I'm using it right now.
- deely3 3y ago
  One example that I personally remember is when Gmail and Youtube is stopped working on Opera browser. But if you customize user agent to any other browser (like Firefox) it suddenly start to work. [1] It happened decade ago tho.. Now Google is practically leader in web standards so there no need to use this practice anymore. 1. https://www.reddit.com/r/operabrowser/comments/e6e7x/google_constantly_blocking_opera/ https://www.reddit.com/r/operabrowser/comments/e6e7x/google_...
dahwolf 3y ago
Where? How about right here and on every tech site?
ilyt 3y ago
I've seen them on every tech site I visited. Were you under a rock ?
snvzz 3y ago
Whataboutism.

dahwolf 3y ago

It's unsurprising that they try, it's surprising that they get away with it. Blatant market manipulation by several big tech players with zero consequences. Which then emboldens them to go even further.

mynonameaccount 3y ago

It's all a game to Microsoft and you are just the product

asldkfjaslkdj 3y ago

Are we just going to ignore the time Google was caught slowing firefox with useless loops (well, actually turning on a client side noise reduction algo IIRC) in google meet and docs to make it look like chrome was faster? could also be 'fixed' by changing user agents to chrome. ...countdown to downvotes and replies asking for source for something that is easy to find online.

DangitBobby 3y ago
I don't doubt that it happened, I just don't understand why you're bringing it up.
- psnehanshu 3y ago
  It's a reminder that both of them are the bad guys.

jokoon 3y ago

Also it seems that associating a file type with a program also change its icon, you cannot have separate icon and file association. For example, I want a separate icon for .txt .py .cpp, and all open them with sublime text. I tried many things, but I just gave up. Once I associate with ST again, it sets to another icon. There are really few things holding me back to windows, really.

retox 3y ago
It's definitely possible, IrfanView lets you customize the icons for each file or at least at the icon 'pack' level and have all the images open with IrfanView. For instance PNG files can have the IrfanView logo with PNG written across it.

ubermonkey 3y ago

How many people remember the days of "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run"?

meepmorp 3y ago

Windows ain't done till Chrome won't run!

hot_gril 3y ago

"Not Ballmer's Microsoft anymore, they're good now." I never believed that from the start.

sylware 3y ago

doesn't that what happen between blink and geeko/webkit?

mensetmanusman 3y ago

All I know is that my work windows computer now has ads in the start menu. Edge should not be bundled with windows.

UberFly 3y ago

This is an honest question: What does Microsoft gain from a user on Windows using Edge over Chrome? Market share muscle driving browser direction?

kurtoid 3y ago
Tracking, ad dollars, and influence over web standards

jacquesm 3y ago

Ok, so par for the course, absolutely nothing has changed since the previous round of the browser wars. But what really, and I mean really surprises me is that the open source movement so far hasn't taken a much harsher stand against Microsoft acquiring GitHub. Google is capable of defending itself just fine but with GH Microsoft has essentially acquired all of the open source code stored there irrespective of the license it is shipped under because somehow magically their TOS seems to supersede the GPL and they can do what ever they please with the code. That doesn't sit right with me, no matter how many goodwill parties Nadella & company attend.

albert_e 3y ago

Is it also possible that MS has a "budget" to promote Edge as the default/only option among its enterprise customers -- you know, supplying the IT departments with marketing material, mailers, talking points, and all sorts of "incentives" for adoption. I ask because we saw a huge campaign by our corporate IT (large 50,000+ userbase) recently to eliminate Chrome for all company assets -- with mailers touting the superior security features of Edge. If they simply said we cannot / donot want to support multiple browsers -- it would be forgivable. But the mailers seemed to be rather persistent in justifying why Edge -- sounding like PR from MS.

fowl2 3y ago

Looks like someone in Windows land has had enough: A principled approach to app pinning and app defaults in Windows (windows.com) [1] [1] https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2023/03/17/a-principled-approach-to-app-pinning-and-app-defaults-in-windows/ https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2023/03/17/a-pri... * Insert comic of different parts of Microsoft pointing guns at each-other *

cratermoon 3y ago

Remember: since the Reagan era, the law has said that monopolies are A-OK as long as consumers don't pay higher prices.

indymike 3y ago

Rough edges like this are what make people like the experience better on other operating systems. Edge is a nice browser. But I want to use something else, and these kinds of things make me not want your software. As a developer, I just stop using the OS's "open url" call and add a setting to select the app to use to open links. At my company, we're Mac for everything not engineering and linux for engineering. Every new hire at first hates the new thing, but after a few months, I'll ask them if they'd like to switch to Windows... and the answer is usually something between "no" and "for the love all that is good and wholesome, no!" The issue with Windows is lots of tiny spikes and sharp edges that interrupt your workflow.