4 ms·

People like having agency. Being forced to constantly refuse Edge feels like their losing agency, which doesn't help Edge's brand image.

FirmwareBurner 3y ago
Agreed. But then what's the point of building a better and faster browser if all users are just gonna install the "slower" Chrome anyway out of habit? Clearly "build it and they will come" doesn't work organically once a competing player has an entrenched monopoly plus a strong brand image, regardless of how much better your product now is. Sometimes marketing and brand beats technical superiority and innovation. Not defending Microsoft's attempts to shove "better-Edge" down your throat as the solution to user growth, just asking a serious question on how else they could have convinced Chrome users to switch back to "better-Edge" the "nice way". We've all been there when we had a better solution/idea which didn't go through because nobody cared about it and the worse solution was pushed through.
- hashtag-til 3y ago
  I agree with your points, just trying to build on that. If Edge had some feature that is impossible to miss (I guess like Chrome integration with google stuff), then people would feel more compelled to use it? Apart from that, if it is only a marketing issue, they should start by doing better marketing, perhaps.
  - em-bee 3y ago
    If Edge had some feature that is impossible to miss (I guess like Chrome integration with google stuff) then everyone here would cry foul that microsoft is using their dominating market position to create a dependency for edge. the real argument against edge should not be that it would be worse. i would not use it even if it were 10 times better. the argument should be that it is owned by a company that dominates the desktop market. the only way to justify the existence for edge is to make it an independent product that is not owned by microsoft. the same goes for chrome
- crop_rotation 3y ago
  > But then what's the point of building a better and faster browser if all users are just gonna install the "slower" Chrome anyway out of habit? They do better on marketing, get more comparative studies published. Just because MSFT feels their product is better, they should not get a free reign to force it down the throat of their users. > just asking a serious question on how else they could have convinced Chrome users to switch back to "better-Edge". The answer is simple and yes there is no shortcut. If they believe their product is better then do better on marketing, brand building, demonstrating that, instead of taking shortcuts like using one existing monopoly to drum up newer products.
- eptcyka 3y ago
  I do not know what would compel normal users, but clearly the point at which people change browsers is when they get a new machine. Get it to have good integration to get bookmarks off of one's Google account (there are APIs for that). Get it to have features that the techy people will want to use and deem it necessary to talk about them to their circle of non-techy friends. This is how I saw chrome take over - lots of techy people teaching their friends that chrome works better. My mom won't use anything but chrome unless I tell her otherwise, for instance. As far as features that techy people appreciate, it has no tab containers, and it probably has too much telemetry for my taste, so I won't be recommending Edge over Chrome to anyone, I'll staunchly defend the dwindling marketshare of Firefox. Also, marketing has got nothing to do with exploiting one dominant product to shove another down the users throat, that's just an evolution of a blind by-the-numbers guided marketing strategy that was A/B tested against all other solutions. Chrome didn't get to where it's at by doing this, they did so by doing actual marketing.

FirmwareBurner 3y ago

Agreed. But then what's the point of building a better and faster browser if all users are just gonna install the "slower" Chrome anyway out of habit? Clearly "build it and they will come" doesn't work organically once a competing player has an entrenched monopoly plus a strong brand image, regardless of how much better your product now is. Sometimes marketing and brand beats technical superiority and innovation. Not defending Microsoft's attempts to shove "better-Edge" down your throat as the solution to user growth, just asking a serious question on how else they could have convinced Chrome users to switch back to "better-Edge" the "nice way". We've all been there when we had a better solution/idea which didn't go through because nobody cared about it and the worse solution was pushed through.

hashtag-til 3y ago
I agree with your points, just trying to build on that. If Edge had some feature that is impossible to miss (I guess like Chrome integration with google stuff), then people would feel more compelled to use it? Apart from that, if it is only a marketing issue, they should start by doing better marketing, perhaps.
- em-bee 3y ago
  If Edge had some feature that is impossible to miss (I guess like Chrome integration with google stuff) then everyone here would cry foul that microsoft is using their dominating market position to create a dependency for edge. the real argument against edge should not be that it would be worse. i would not use it even if it were 10 times better. the argument should be that it is owned by a company that dominates the desktop market. the only way to justify the existence for edge is to make it an independent product that is not owned by microsoft. the same goes for chrome
crop_rotation 3y ago
> But then what's the point of building a better and faster browser if all users are just gonna install the "slower" Chrome anyway out of habit? They do better on marketing, get more comparative studies published. Just because MSFT feels their product is better, they should not get a free reign to force it down the throat of their users. > just asking a serious question on how else they could have convinced Chrome users to switch back to "better-Edge". The answer is simple and yes there is no shortcut. If they believe their product is better then do better on marketing, brand building, demonstrating that, instead of taking shortcuts like using one existing monopoly to drum up newer products.
eptcyka 3y ago
I do not know what would compel normal users, but clearly the point at which people change browsers is when they get a new machine. Get it to have good integration to get bookmarks off of one's Google account (there are APIs for that). Get it to have features that the techy people will want to use and deem it necessary to talk about them to their circle of non-techy friends. This is how I saw chrome take over - lots of techy people teaching their friends that chrome works better. My mom won't use anything but chrome unless I tell her otherwise, for instance. As far as features that techy people appreciate, it has no tab containers, and it probably has too much telemetry for my taste, so I won't be recommending Edge over Chrome to anyone, I'll staunchly defend the dwindling marketshare of Firefox. Also, marketing has got nothing to do with exploiting one dominant product to shove another down the users throat, that's just an evolution of a blind by-the-numbers guided marketing strategy that was A/B tested against all other solutions. Chrome didn't get to where it's at by doing this, they did so by doing actual marketing.