4 ms·

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

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.
    - mrguyorama 3y ago
      >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 You are running on Microsoft's operating system, they will always outrank you in decision making. Even if they expose an API for you to use, nothing can stop them from perverting that API if they want to harm you. You can only hope that the users prefer that they have final say, which at least used to be Microsoft's policy.
    - int_19h 3y ago
      It used to be possible for apps to just say "I'm gonna be the default for this, kthxbye" on Windows in the past. It did not go well in practice. Most users aren't going to be able to muck around ACLs on some config file; they'll just have their defaults silently hijacked, in the worst case by outright malware. The sensible approach here is 1) a stable API to allow the app to request this, 2) a sane UX provided by the OS that makes it clear to the user what's going on and requires their explicit and definite consent, and 3) a legal crackdown on all abuse of market-dominant position - such as those injected Edge banners.
- madeofpalk 3y ago
  You can give browser vendors an API to throw up system UI to make it "just as easy".
  - iforgotpassword 3y ago
    That's literally how you're supposed to do it, Google just doesn't and instead fumbles with Windows internals directly.
bdw5204 3y ago
On Windows, it is normal for applications to set themselves as the default for whatever files they open. The honest ones ask for user consent first. The dishonest ones just hijack file types. I don't see anything anti-competitive about Windows coming with a Microsoft browser or Microsoft setting it as the default as long as we're able to download other browsers and go to the system settings to change the default. Pretty much the first thing everybody does after installing Windows is use Edge to install Chrome although that's probably not necessary these days since Edge is just a Chrome reskin that is integrated with the Microsoft ecosystem instead of the Google ecosystem.
- int_19h 3y ago
  It was normal, like 10 years ago. But, precisely because some apps would do it silently, the corresponding APIs were removed. The problem here is that the new APIs - to open the UI to let user manage stuff - as well as that UI itself, keeps changing in various unhelpful ways.
yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
That's fine, if Edge has to do the same.
crazygringo 3y ago
But it makes sense contextually for users to set defaults from within the app they're using, that's when they're thinking about it. It's more intuitive UX. The best solution is a system permissions dialog to confirm the change, so an app can't change anything silently. Because using a control panel for all handlers isn't a particularly user-friendly experience, scrolling through 60 file types to hunt down the one you're looking for and then locate the appropriate .exe file. I mean the panel should exist but for power users.
- meindnoch 3y ago
  It should work exactly as camera and microphone permissions work. No 3rd party app should have write access to system configurations.
  - tarimbreazeaim 3y ago
    [dead]
- fwlr 3y ago
  It is most convenient by far to set defaults from within the app, but I don’t think it makes the most sense, it produces too much “spooky action at a distance” where e.g. because you clicked a button in Edge, now when you’re in Chrome and click on a pdf, Edge opens up, or vice versa.
- whoopdedo 3y ago
  The natural time to ask to set a default browser is: - The user attempts to open a link in the default browser and it isn't set. - The user installs a new browser. - The user uninstalls a browser that is set as the default. Inside the app there is no way to tell the difference between wanting to use that particular app for this one specific task, or preferring this app above all others. (An adaptive UX could notice that the user has manually opened an app many more times than others and suggest setting it as default.) The problem here is Microsoft gives no way to uninstall Edge. So the only way to know if the user wants to stop using it as default, if they didn't switch when installing another browser, is for the 3rd-party app to reach in and claw back the default setting.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
RobotToaster 3y ago
Some programs, like 7zip, handle dozens of file extensions, I don't want to have to manually change all of them.
- SCLeo 3y ago
  Another example is mpv. It also handles a very significant amount of extensions. Maybe unpopular opinion, but I actually like how even batch scripts are able to register default apps for file extensions.
shultays 3y ago
What about photoshop and .ps files Perhaps we should add "for unregistered file types" there but if I am installing a software, I am probably wanting it to associate themselves for relevant files and I wouldn't want to go through settings to find all relevant files The proper ux is peovably a "this application wants to open these file types" system pop up
- sensanaty 3y ago
  Lots of applications (specifically dev-oriented ones to be fair) will have a part in the Windows Installer where you can tick a box that says something like "open .xyz with APP_GETTING_INSTALLED". Some better ones give you a list of file extensions that you'd like to open with the installing app. Been a while since I've seen the WinRAR install screen, but pretty sure it does exactly what I described
  - bombcar 3y ago
    I can see an argument for a warning if your new app is taking over a file type that an old app was handling; but if you have no app to handle it I don't see it matters much. The reality is nobody makes ad revenue from WinRAR opening .ZIP files so nobody cares.
gnicholas 3y ago
I get the risk here. But it has to be balanced against the downside of the OS being able to say: "Oh, you'd like to change the default file handler for X? Sure, just follow this 7-step process to make that happen." If applications can't change this, then an OS with a competing application can just implement a high-friction process that discourages most people from completing the switch.

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.
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    >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 You are running on Microsoft's operating system, they will always outrank you in decision making. Even if they expose an API for you to use, nothing can stop them from perverting that API if they want to harm you. You can only hope that the users prefer that they have final say, which at least used to be Microsoft's policy.
  - int_19h 3y ago
    It used to be possible for apps to just say "I'm gonna be the default for this, kthxbye" on Windows in the past. It did not go well in practice. Most users aren't going to be able to muck around ACLs on some config file; they'll just have their defaults silently hijacked, in the worst case by outright malware. The sensible approach here is 1) a stable API to allow the app to request this, 2) a sane UX provided by the OS that makes it clear to the user what's going on and requires their explicit and definite consent, and 3) a legal crackdown on all abuse of market-dominant position - such as those injected Edge banners.
madeofpalk 3y ago
You can give browser vendors an API to throw up system UI to make it "just as easy".
- iforgotpassword 3y ago
  That's literally how you're supposed to do it, Google just doesn't and instead fumbles with Windows internals directly.

bdw5204 3y ago

On Windows, it is normal for applications to set themselves as the default for whatever files they open. The honest ones ask for user consent first. The dishonest ones just hijack file types. I don't see anything anti-competitive about Windows coming with a Microsoft browser or Microsoft setting it as the default as long as we're able to download other browsers and go to the system settings to change the default. Pretty much the first thing everybody does after installing Windows is use Edge to install Chrome although that's probably not necessary these days since Edge is just a Chrome reskin that is integrated with the Microsoft ecosystem instead of the Google ecosystem.

int_19h 3y ago
It was normal, like 10 years ago. But, precisely because some apps would do it silently, the corresponding APIs were removed. The problem here is that the new APIs - to open the UI to let user manage stuff - as well as that UI itself, keeps changing in various unhelpful ways.

yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago

That's fine, if Edge has to do the same.

crazygringo 3y ago

But it makes sense contextually for users to set defaults from within the app they're using, that's when they're thinking about it. It's more intuitive UX. The best solution is a system permissions dialog to confirm the change, so an app can't change anything silently. Because using a control panel for all handlers isn't a particularly user-friendly experience, scrolling through 60 file types to hunt down the one you're looking for and then locate the appropriate .exe file. I mean the panel should exist but for power users.

meindnoch 3y ago
It should work exactly as camera and microphone permissions work. No 3rd party app should have write access to system configurations.
- tarimbreazeaim 3y ago
  [dead]
fwlr 3y ago
It is most convenient by far to set defaults from within the app, but I don’t think it makes the most sense, it produces too much “spooky action at a distance” where e.g. because you clicked a button in Edge, now when you’re in Chrome and click on a pdf, Edge opens up, or vice versa.
whoopdedo 3y ago
The natural time to ask to set a default browser is: - The user attempts to open a link in the default browser and it isn't set. - The user installs a new browser. - The user uninstalls a browser that is set as the default. Inside the app there is no way to tell the difference between wanting to use that particular app for this one specific task, or preferring this app above all others. (An adaptive UX could notice that the user has manually opened an app many more times than others and suggest setting it as default.) The problem here is Microsoft gives no way to uninstall Edge. So the only way to know if the user wants to stop using it as default, if they didn't switch when installing another browser, is for the 3rd-party app to reach in and claw back the default setting.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

RobotToaster 3y ago

Some programs, like 7zip, handle dozens of file extensions, I don't want to have to manually change all of them.

SCLeo 3y ago
Another example is mpv. It also handles a very significant amount of extensions. Maybe unpopular opinion, but I actually like how even batch scripts are able to register default apps for file extensions.

shultays 3y ago

What about photoshop and .ps files Perhaps we should add "for unregistered file types" there but if I am installing a software, I am probably wanting it to associate themselves for relevant files and I wouldn't want to go through settings to find all relevant files The proper ux is peovably a "this application wants to open these file types" system pop up

sensanaty 3y ago
Lots of applications (specifically dev-oriented ones to be fair) will have a part in the Windows Installer where you can tick a box that says something like "open .xyz with APP_GETTING_INSTALLED". Some better ones give you a list of file extensions that you'd like to open with the installing app. Been a while since I've seen the WinRAR install screen, but pretty sure it does exactly what I described
- bombcar 3y ago
  I can see an argument for a warning if your new app is taking over a file type that an old app was handling; but if you have no app to handle it I don't see it matters much. The reality is nobody makes ad revenue from WinRAR opening .ZIP files so nobody cares.

gnicholas 3y ago

I get the risk here. But it has to be balanced against the downside of the OS being able to say: "Oh, you'd like to change the default file handler for X? Sure, just follow this 7-step process to make that happen." If applications can't change this, then an OS with a competing application can just implement a high-friction process that discourages most people from completing the switch.