24 ms·

Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control

497 points by ndesaulniers 11y ago

slg 11y ago
Am I reading this right that the problem is that during an OS upgrade the default browser is reset back to the default OS settings? While that is certainly an inconvenience, I find it hard to really expect an OS upgrade to carry over every user setting. Isn't all the user has to do after the upgrade is open Firefox (which is still installed) and click yes to "make this default" question?
- jroblak 11y ago
  No, users now have to go to a settings page to change their default applications. Ostensibly this is for user protection (so apps can't trick users into setting defaults they don't want)
- nyrulez 11y ago
  Did you read the letter ? It answers your question. It's a short letter.
  - bargl 11y ago
    >Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- reubenmorais 11y ago
  Windows has a history of carrying over user settings like that since the DOS times. You can literally upgrade from DOS through every version of Windows and end up with the same desktop background/widget colors/etc. I'm obviously biased because I work on a browser (specifically a browser that isn't made by Microsoft), but to me this is clearly about trying to capture the users who stopped using IE over the years.
  - slg 11y ago
    >to me this is clearly about trying to capture the users who stopped using IE over the years. But those users never used Edge ;) A cynical person could say preserving the previous choice is just Firefox's fear that once a user tests the new Microsoft browser they won't jump back to Firefox. It also shows that Firefox doesn't have the greatest opinion of their users if it thinks all it takes for them to stop using Firefox is for it to require twice the number of mouse clicks to set it to default.
    - emn13 11y ago
      Having just installed windows 10: disabling the browser change is well hidden. There's no customize "button" or link, there's a bit of text with no decoration or underline that's lighter and appears greyed out that says "customize" on a screen filled with text. The chances of a user discovering this unless they're actively hunting for this (like I was) are close to zero.
    - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
      Some will like Firefox enough to change back. Some won't. But why should they have to? I got really sick of Microsoft trying to force me to do what they wanted back in the 1990s. In the 2000s, they seemed to change for the better. (Maybe that was due to the antitrust settlement.) Now here they are back to their old ways.
- DannyBee 11y ago
  "Isn't all the user has to do after the upgrade is open Firefox (which is still installed) and click yes to "make this default" question?" No. This API for settings defaults deliberately does not work anymore.
- balls187 11y ago
  > I find it hard to really expect an OS upgrade to carry over every user setting True. However that default browser/file extension handlers preferences should be a priority to carry forward. It may be easy to set your new default browser, but it's one more thing I have to do to personalize my computer, instead of using my computer to do the tasks at hand. It's a fundamental difference between MSFT and AAPL's philosphy (and why I made the switch a while back). Everytime I upgrade OS X, my settings carry forward, so there is less time spent doing things like setting up my computer, and more time spent using my computer to solve problems that I care about.
  - wlesieutre 11y ago
    > True. However that default browser/file extension handlers preferences should be a priority to carry forward. Especially when you've previously been in antitrust lawsuits over abusing your position as the OS developer to take over the browser market. > It may be easy to set your new default browser, but it's one more thing I have to do to personalize my computer, instead of using my computer to do the tasks at hand. They moved it into the settings app, so this is no longer just "Open Firefox, click 'set as default'" anymore. Changing it in the Settings app is easy for us, but incomprehensible to less proficient users. I understand why they changed that, but it makes forcing Edge as default a huge dick move on MS's part.
    - balls187 11y ago
      > but it makes forcing Edge as default a huge dick move on MS's part. I suspect its a far less sinister reasoning for the change.
      - wlesieutre 11y ago
        I don't mean to attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence, I'm just saying it's a huge dick move regardless of whether they did it on purpose. You'd have to ask someone inside MS if you want to know what they were thinking.
    - mynameisvlad 11y ago
- irq-1 11y ago
  Maybe you don't remember what a huge deal it was that Microsoft leveraged its desktop monopoly to gain market share for its internet browser. Bill Gates declaring that the browser is 'part of the OS' and can't be removed. The anti-trust trial in the US, the changes demanded by the EU... The "Default Programs" control has very few settings; very few settings that need to be imported, but somehow Microsoft ignored the settings that just happen to give them an advantage. Mozilla is spot on here.
  - slg 11y ago
    That issue has been perverted over the years. Even though the punishment was providing other possible defaults, the initial problem wasn't really about the system default. It was that IE was ingrained in Windows as part of the system. That prevented other browser from competing on an even playing field.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
- BinaryIdiot 11y ago
  > I find it hard to really expect an OS upgrade to carry over every user setting Why? Everything should always be carried over. Someone purposefully setup their environment and now because you upgrade their software they now have to re-setup N number of things? No thanks. You need to eliminate as much friction as possible in all of the experiences you create. Even installations / upgrades / rollbacks.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > Am I reading this right that the problem is that during an OS upgrade the default browser is reset back to the default OS settings? No, while that's part of the problem, the main problem is that the facility for changing the setting has been made less convenient, takes more steps, and is more cumbersome, which is clearly a design choice focused on frustrating those who attempt to switch and discouraging switching.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- DasIch 11y ago
  How so? They don't matter on mobile but they still have effectively a monopoly on the desktop with more than 90% marketshare.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
mmastrac 11y ago
Is the anti-trust monitoring still ongoing at Microsoft? This seems like something they'd be interested in.
- manicmonad 11y ago
  No, the oversight seems to have ceased in 2012. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
ripberge 11y ago
What if that default browser was IE and they're obviously trying to get people off of that because it's now legacy? Should they only change the default browser to edge if it was IE before? Doesn't seem fair to them...
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > Should they only change the default browser to edge if it was IE before? There is a plausible argument for doing so in that case if Edge is a same-vendor, intended-replacement for IE. > Doesn't seem fair to them... How is it not fair to them that they should only their own bundled software as a replacement for bundled software from earlier versions of Windows, and not for third-party software that the user had to deliberately choose to replace their bundled software with? What possible conception of fairness could their be where this claim even makes sense?
- Zelphyr 11y ago
  It would be fair to them because it would switch the customer from one Microsoft browser to another Microsoft browser which benefits both Microsoft and the customer. Rather than switching the customer from the browser of their choice to one of Microsoft's choice, which only benefits Microsoft.
com2kid 11y ago
I just installed IE, I clicked on a URL in an email, I was asked which browser I wanted to use. IE was on top, but I do not remember what my previous default was. I was however asked to choose. I am not sure what other user experiences exist around this.
- BinaryIdiot 11y ago
  When I upgraded my default changed from Chrome to Edge. When I clicked on my first URL, also in an email, it did not give me any choices which was kinda frustrating. Opening Chrome also didn't give me the whole "Chrome is not your default; do you want it to be?" dialog.
  - arihant 11y ago
    Go to settings. There is an entire section to set all your default apps.
    - BinaryIdiot 11y ago
      Oh I'm aware as that's where I had to change it (chrome didn't give me a "make default" button which makes me wonder if that's not possible in Windows 10).
      - makomk 11y ago
        It's not possible. Microsoft intentionally removed the API that allowed web browsers to offer that option in Windows 10.
  - Freaky 11y ago
    When I upgraded it gave me a page showing me the new defaults it was about to apply, and gave me the option to skip it and keep what I was using before. Went with the latter option and indeed, it's still all MPC-HC, foobar2000 and Opera. Maybe it's because I was upgrading from 8 you were upgrading from 7? I recall some changes to how defaults were handled between them.
cwyers 11y ago
> These changes aren’t unsettling to us because we’re the organization that makes Firefox. I'm not sure I believe you.
BinaryIdiot 11y ago
I was pretty surprised when I installed Windows 10 and it changed to another default for my web browser. Even worse was it didn't reset the "do you want me as the default" in all of the other web browsers so I had to go and manually change settings. Microsoft Edge is pretty nice especially compared to IE but this default to Edge should have only occurred if your current default is IE.
- maratd 11y ago
  To be fair, they reset all defaults. For images, video, everything. Google Chrome pops up a bar that takes you directly to the settings. It's literally two clicks to change it back. Microsoft should have preserved the defaults, but I think Google's solution is preferable to a complaint letter.
  - emn13 11y ago
    How is that fair? Note that this isn't a technical choice (you can preserve the previous defaults, that's just a well-hidden non-default option during the upgrade process) - it's using your monopoly position to make life hard on other software manufacturers. How reasonable would it be if a chrome install had a light-grey disabled-looking customize word hidden amongst a wall of text that if you didn't find and click it would replace windows with chrome os? This sounds like a power-grab.
  - BinaryIdiot 11y ago
    > To be fair, they reset all defaults. For images, video, everything. For what it's worth I'm not a fan of upgrades working that way. Granted I could see where that is ideal but web browsers not so much. > Google Chrome pops up a bar that takes you directly to the settings. It's literally two clicks to change it back. See, Google Chrome never popped up a bar for me. I had to go into the Chrome settings which took me into the Windows 10 settings where I could then change the default app. I wonder why I didn't get that bar.
  - simoncion 11y ago
    > To be fair, they reset all defaults. For images, video, everything. Oh god. Kubuntu's KDE4->KDE5 transition did that to me. I really don't want to go through that again on my video game machine. :( I guess I'll wait a month or so to see if MSFT changes their mind about the value of their "Replace the user's preferences with our defaults." position.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
solidangle 11y ago
It's absurd that you have to press on a button called 'Customize' (which is really scary sounding for non-experts) to get any privacy in Windows 10. If users are brave enough to press this button they get a list of nondescript options that barely explain what kind of data is sent to Microsoft. Microsoft should show always show all the privacy options to users and they should explain the pros and cons for each setting. Explain them that Cortana won't work anymore if they don't enable something, but also explain them that the NSA will be getting all their keystrokes if they do enable it. Here in Europe we are not protected by US law against the NSA (although there seem to be all sorts of loop holes in the US too), so we should expect here that all the data that Microsoft collects is directly sent to the NSA. It's unacceptable that they offer a one click 'share everything with the NSA'-button when there is no matching 'keep all my data private'-button. But the absolute worst thing ever is that they seem to throw away old settings after some updates. So even when I make sure that my parents computers are properly protected against Microsoft or even the NSA spying on them, I still can't expect that they will stay that way in the future.
- DanBC 11y ago
  To be fair if your attacker is the NSA you're fucked no matter what MS does. Most people need better security to protect them from the US companies slurping all their data.
  - TallGuyShort 11y ago
    If the NSA is a targeted attacker, then yes, the James Mickens "Mossad / Not Mossad Duality" applies. To paraphrase, "either your attacker is or is not the Mossad. If your attacker is not the Mossad, you can use strong passwords and avoid shady websites and you should be okay. If your attacker is the Mossad, there's nothing you can do and you are definitely going to die". However, the average citizen is not a target of the NSA. They can tap all sorts of public infrastructure and record it, etc. But much of my activity is spread out over many networks, and is encrypted in ways that may still not be super-convenient for the NSA to constantly crack. The problem with these privacy settings is they're causing WAY more stuff to go over infrastructure easily targeted by the NSA than before.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- rhaps0dy 11y ago
  Well then, Netscape would exist. Which was pretty neat.
  - scholia 11y ago
    It certainly was, for a while. But not for some time before it was sold to AOL and then died.... Mozilla has been a much better influence on the web, I think.
  - jd3 11y ago
    yeah, perhaps I worded that I bit strangely. I was just commenting on how Microsoft's monopolistic behavior caused Netscape to open-source and eventually get bought out by AOL, thus forming Mozilla through the open-source release.
    - scholia 11y ago
      AOL open-sourced Netscape because it lost, for a wide range of different reasons. They included trying to charge for browsers while giving away free betas, not letting PC magazines distribute the code, not letting ISPs customize the branding, discontinuing Netscape and replacing it with Commander (? this is all from memory), buying a whole bunch of server companies (thinking it could use its client to sell server software), behaving with extreme arrogance to the rest of the web industry, using Netscape to feed users ads on its home page, various bits of really crap marketing and a lot of crap code. I could go on. Netscape was really badly run. Apart from all that, Microsoft just outsmarted them by rewriting IE in parallel (ie two project teams) to componentize the code, and by making IE more standards compliant than Netscape, and by some really good marketing. Did you know that AOL continued to distribute IE even after it bought Netscape? In fact, Microsoft had more and better programmers and just out-iterated and out-distributed Netscape in a fast-moving market. Netscape didn't have a clue until it was too late. When Netscape was the best browser, it had an 80% market share even while Microsoft was bundling IE. It really wasn't the bundling that killed it.
JustSomeNobody 11y ago
Love the hubris in using the CEO's first name.
- username 11y ago
  I'm guessing Chris knows Satya on some personal level.
  - JustSomeNobody 11y ago
    Maybe. And I get that as CEO's they can be regarded as peers, but if you're going to call this a "letter", I think it would have been better to use either full name (which is how it's signed BTW), or Mr.
- mentat 11y ago
  This is not some random guy but another CEO.
  - JustSomeNobody 11y ago
    Who used HIS full name in the signature. At the very least he should have use MS CEO's full name.
    - ashmud 11y ago
      I confess that I use this same pattern frequently for work emails outside the company. Inside the company, I only sign with my given name. [GivenName], [Body] [Closing], [FullName]
    - mentat 11y ago
      Usually people use their full name in signatures. Still don't see what the issue is.
- myth_buster 11y ago
  It's quite common in US to refer to people by their first name perhaps an attribute of low context culture. I particularly like it having come from a high context culture as it reduces friction and gives people the confidence to voice their opinions irrespective of their social strata.
jacquesm 11y ago
Foxes will change their coats but not their ways.
arihant 11y ago
This is not rolling back the clock. Here are some important points to the debate: 1. Windows 10 users are upgrading from 7 and 8.1, these versions were heavily shipped with bloatware. If it took away default browsing from Firefox, it also took away volume control from OEM Volumizer 2010. 2. Your browsers like IE, Mozilla and Chrome might have Malware toolbars installed. Nobody can deny that it is far too common on Windows PCs. If it opened the infected browser the first thing after update, how secure is your PC now? 3. Microsoft has taken deliberate steps to make Firefox the default browser easier. The is an entire section now in Settings that lists 8-10 typical apps like browsers and one can easily set Firefox to default from there. It is not like old days when you had to go fidget with individual settings of each browser. 4. If you were savvy enough to put FF as default on Win 7, you are savvy enough to change it on Win 10. People not as savvy need a robust unbreakable solution. 5. The XYZ browser you were using might not be fully Windows 10 compatible. It is absolutely weird to expect default apps to remain same after a major upgrade. The cannot give individual vendors like Mozilla or Google special treatment here, nor can they take responsibility for their development cycles. 6. It's not bad for users. They aren't defaulting on IE7. Edge is fantastic. 7. In 2015, browsing should be considered a core OS feature that cannot be broken for upgrading users. 8. Microsoft had a weird history of over preserving user settings. It didn't leave them any place good. They still remain the most backwards compliant in any aspect. 9. Windows 10 does preserve old settings for extensions it doesn't support out of the box. But the biggest point left out in this debate is that Microsoft has made it as easy as mobile to change default apps. I fail to see how this will not help Mozilla.
- Spivak 11y ago
  > They aren't defaulting on IE7. Edge is fantastic. I really don't know where to start. I tried out edge for a few days and although the browser itself is pretty and functional it completely falls flat compared to existing players, including IE. I don't care what features they've announced for the future that may never happen. As the browser currently stands it's a toy and isn't the "browser for doing." I had hoped that that tagline would mean it would be a browser for power users but what we got was a gimped "mobile" browser. No add-ons, no real settings, gimmicky features that you'll use twice and then never touch again, no customization, and designed with touch given priority over mouse and keyboard. Any browser, as long as it has sane defaults, would be fine for causal users but it's like they don't understand what people who care about such things actually do with a browser.
verusfossa 11y ago
Mozilla hasn't made me very happy lately with their "choice" tactics. Resetting people's default search engine to Yahoo of all things on update was very opaque. Also the AMO signing fiasco, Pocket and Hello. Feels like an "It's only okay when we do it" kind of thing.
- madars 11y ago
  Changing search engine for existing users was a very unfortunate bug, which got fixed (https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1041571#answer-677594 https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1041571#answer-6...). Of course, changing the default for new users is nothing to be ashamed of.
  - Spivak 11y ago
    I mean, it should be but it seems as though most people have accepted it.
- oso2k 11y ago
  I agree. And I extend that sentiment to their approach to Web Standards a few years ago too, like WebSQL [0] and NaCl [1], Dart [2]. That felt like NIH [3] or some other non-collaborative or ultra-competitive motivation on their part. Not a place of "speak for the Web". IMO, the choice of IndexedDB over WebSQL set the Web back 20 years. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_SQL_Database https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_SQL_Database [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Native_Client https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Native_Client [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dart_(programming_language) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dart_(programming_language) [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here
  - Lazare 11y ago
    > IMO, the choice of IndexedDB over WebSQL set the Web back 20 years. Yep. I recognise that this may not have been a winnable fight, but I absolutely judge the people who were on the other side. WebSQL was a much better tech than IndexedDB. Was the dependence on Sqlite problematic? Sure. But Mozilla had the resources to make a pretty good try at fixing it; instead they refused to even implement it and gave us the relatively terrible IndexedDB instead. Which, in turn, Apple has refused to implement[1], and now here we are. Thanks Moz[2]. (I'm less concerned about NaCL and Dart, because it's less clear to me that these were obviously superior technologies that obviously needed cross-browser adaption. You're certainly right that the pattern is suggestive though.) [1]: Yeah, I know, they claim to have implemented it. Anyone who's tried to use their implementation will recognise this claim as a subtle joke. On us. [2]: Their blog post justifying themselves[3] has not aged well. I especially love the bit where they say IndexedDB is better than WebSQL because it has better "developer aesthetics", as if anyone is actually casually coding against IndexedDB without using some sort of wrapper or compatibility layer. Or as if anyone actually likes the IndexedDB syntax and API. [3]: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/06/beyond-html5-database-apis-and-the-road-to-indexeddb/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/06/beyond-html5-database-apis...
dguido 11y ago
Doesn't Firefox make a dozen HTTP requests the first time you open it? And have ads on the start page? And have the only modern browser without a sandbox? This emperor has no clothes.
brokentone 11y ago
Total aside -- Interesting how Satya Nadella doesn't seem to have the recognition yet to stand alone, but calling him "Microsoft's CEO" is the most descriptive way to identify him for the purposes of this writing.
- nacs 11y ago
  Probably because this is directed at Microsoft in general instead of saying Satya Nadella was directly responsible for the changes.
Lazare 11y ago
Meh. Is this an ideal thing for MS to have done? Fuck, I dunno. Probably not, I guess? But this isn't that bad; the hyperbolic title ("don't roll back the clock on choice!") makes this sound like something actually serious. Or major. Or permanent. It would be the right headline to protest MS making it impossible to use a third party browser, or at least impossible to change the default browser. Instead it's being used to protest...some options being reset when you upgrade your OS? Because heaven knows I've never lost any settings upgrading my OS before... Plus, Mozilla is...mmm. Not my first choice for an organisation to be leading this charge; they've done too much shady shit lately. I have a feeling that Mozilla may be badly overestimating how much goodwill they have among developers right now.
- cottsak 11y ago
  Right. So if you want to be worried about something --serious-- be worried about this https://edri.org/microsofts-new-small-print-how-your-personal-data-abused/ https://edri.org/microsofts-new-small-print-how-your-persona...
  - bryans 11y ago
    This sounds like paranoid cherry picking, at best. Nearly all of these "worrying issues" are the default behavior of every mobile Android and iOS device on the market. Specifically, the sync and Cortana portions are complete non-issues. For example, you need to provide all of that information for a service like Cortana, or Google Now, or Siri to even function properly. And you will find nearly identical verbiage in the Android and iOS user agreements, allowing them to access, transfer, and use your data. Yet, I don't see any of this righteous indignation about the non-Microsoft services.
Animats 11y ago
I am writing to you about a very disturbing aspect of Firefox 38.0.5. Specifically, that the update experience appears to have been designed to throw away the choice your customers have made about the Internet experience they want, and replace it with the Internet experience Mozilla wants them to have. When we first saw the Firefox upgrade experience that strips users of their choice by effectively overriding existing user preferences for the search engine and other apps, and forces the integration of Pocket and Sync, we reached out to your team to discuss this issue. Unfortunately, it didn’t result in any meaningful progress, hence this letter. We appreciate that it’s still technically possible to preserve people’s previous settings and defaults, but the design of the whole upgrade experience and the default settings APIs have been changed to make this less obvious and more difficult. It now takes more than twice the number of mouse clicks, scrolling through content and some technical sophistication for people to reassert the choices they had previously made in earlier versions of Firefox. It’s confusing, hard to navigate and easy to get lost. Sometimes we see great progress, where consumer products respect individuals and their choices. However, with the launch of Firefox 38.0.5 we are deeply disappointed to see Mozilla take such a dramatic step backwards. These changes are unsettling because there are millions of users who love Firefox and who are having their choices ignored, and because of the increased complexity put into everyone’s way if and when they choose to make a choice different than what Mozilla prefers. We strongly urge you to reconsider your business tactic here and again respect people’s right to choice and control of their online experience by making it easier, more obvious and intuitive for people to maintain the choices they have already made through the upgrade experience. It should be easier for people to assert new choices and preferences, not just for other Mozilla products, through the default settings APIs and user interfaces. Please give your users the choice and control they deserve in Firefox.
- brighteyes 11y ago
  Your sarcasm is entertaining, but the big difference is that while neither company/product is perfect, Microsoft still essentially owns the desktop with Windows. While Mozilla's Firefox is just one among several choices of web browser, currently #3 in the rankings. It is extremely easy to switch web browser. It is not easy to switch OS. On a Windows machine, if you are savvy enough, you can install Linux, but otherwise, you need to buy a Mac in order to avoid Windows. And you need to learn a lot in order to drop Windows (easy for us here on HN, hard for 99% of people). It's fine if you dislike some of Mozilla's decisions with Firefox. People have complained and in fact Mozilla has changed some decisions following that criticism. But the situation is just not comparable to Microsoft with Windows. For that reason, I don't see a point to diverting the conversation. The topic here is Windows 10.
amatwl 11y ago
I actually think Microsoft's change is better in regards to user choice. Either way, it still seems simple to me to change the default web browser in Windows 10. Here's a gif I made showing another way to change the default web browser to Firefox: http://i.imgur.com/FbdcfL3.gif http://i.imgur.com/FbdcfL3.gif (In the gif, both Cortana and Bing search is disabled, only standard Windows Search is used) Also, it's kind of embarrassing that Mozilla's official video for this shows an unactivated version of Windows 10.
- callahad 11y ago
  > Also, it's kind of embarrassing that Mozilla's official video for this shows an unactivated version of Windows 10. All pre-release builds of Windows 10 have that watermark. Why is that embarrassing? Edit: I stand corrected; there is an "Activate Windows" watermark distinct from the build identifier, which was added in the later preview builds. There was a window of time where new VMs couldn't be activated, since the Preview keys had been killed but the final release was not yet available. Looks like we recorded this on a fresh VM running a preview build, which can't be activated. Oh well. Cite: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/insider/forum/insider_wintp-insider_install/updated-activate-windows-watermark-on-windows-10/cae92439-f115-45ea-a109-14332c5f56ec http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/insider/forum/insider_win...
  - amatwl 11y ago
    Um, no. Not all pre-release builds of Windows 10 have that watermark. I'm talking about the "Activate Windows" message. Also, the final version of Windows 10 has been released (and the video was recorded after the final version was released), so no reason to use a pre-release version of Windows in the video.
    - hartator 11y ago
      I don't get why you got downvoted, it's indeed not looking really serious to realese a video with this kind of watermark. Sure, well, whatever. I think the whatever has became the new moto at Mozilla.
rasz_pl 11y ago
One of the forced updates in W10 disabled overclocking of g3258 on chipsets not blessed by Intel. http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=441&title=kb3064209-breaks-the-g3258 http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=441&title=kb3064... You have a choice of bios that lets you overclock but W10 will only work on one core, or bios that takes away overclocking and works with forced patch. At least with W7/8 you can block this particular update.
jjzieve 11y ago
linux, problem solved.
kosigz 11y ago
So. Much. Vacuity. Not once was it mentioned that Windows 10 removes Firefox from users' machines.
michaelwww 11y ago
Microsoft has a new browser they'd like people to load up and try out. I don't see the problem with making it the default browser in a free major upgrade of the OS. Small price to pay. I'm not suprised Microsoft ignored his complaints.
BenjiBG 11y ago
What a false and whiny post. Mozilla is collecting the user's browsing history and sells it. All they care for is their own benefit. They are no different than Apple, Google, FB, Amazon and of course Microsoft. But they are false. Like Google telling us "don't be evil" ... ha, ha, ha They all want to make the world a better place. Yes, sure. And Facebook is building large drones to bring the internet to Africa for education. Oh, what a noble act.
vespergo 11y ago
Wow, I learned nothing from reading this letter. Note to CEO, if you want people to read your letters, actually have some content, not just your feelings on something vague.
tkubacki 11y ago
TL;DR Mozilla is complaining because MS is changing default browser to EDGE
- Qwertious 11y ago
  No, that's not what they're complaining about. For people on computers that have had the default actively and specifically changed to some other browser, e.g. Lynx (for a blind person maybe), upgrading that computer to Windows 10 will reset it back to a Microsoft browser, with no regard for your existing choices.
pauldbau 11y ago
Out of interest, how does Win 10 compare with Mac OSX in terms of being able to install and change default browser? Given Apple's penchant for lock down, I'd expect it's much the same as Windows?
- bphogan 11y ago
  OSX has always worked as Windows 8.1 and below did with browsers - the browser pops up and asks if it can be the default and you say either "yes" or "leave me alone." Windows 10 has made that a multi-step process, where the browser now bounces you to the control panel where you have to find the default browser section and make your choice.
reilly3000 11y ago
The core of this all is defaults. If somebody makes an experience with defaults that benefit themselves, that feels like America to be for better or worse. The important part, the crucial part is that they remain choices. While we could and do fight for a web with defaults that don't mean profits to big companies, shouldn't we also work to ensure that we have choices in the first place? When picking a platform are there choices you don't get to make?
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- skrebbel 11y ago
  I'm not sure you completely understand what all this is about. It's not about whether Windows 10 is any good, its about the default privacy and browser settings. I really (really) like Windows 10, but it really annoyed me that the same privacy settings that Windows 8 defaulted to "off" were suddenly defaulted to "on" in Windows 10.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
rasengan0 11y ago
I can't use Firefox on my Chromebook unless i switch to dev mode and use crouton. That said, i enjoy Firefox and the Windows 7 PC at work
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
sangd 11y ago
"Before you start pointing fingers, make sure you hands are clean!"
batrat 11y ago
Seriously Mozilla, get over it. I know I use chrome and everybody I know uses Chrome. This is like a little kid who wants a candy every single day although he doesn't deserve it. Every single time I hear about windows/IE/Edge I hear about Firefox/Mozilla too. What is this? Want a slice of that stake? Work for it.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
typis7 11y ago
The article mentions the difficulty of preserving or changing the privacy settings in Windows. Ironically if you want to prevent Firefox to "phone home", you will have performs many obscure tasks: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/ Some of those require changing the internals of Firefox: about:config. I wish Firefox would just have a big red button, Disable All, instead or requiring me to preform all the tasks listed in the link, when I install Firefox. Or even better, make those choices opt-in, instead of opt-out.
yAnonymous 11y ago
Overriding browser choices, ridiculous privacy defaults... I see a nine-digit fine by the EU in Microsoft's not so distant future.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
avaxzat 11y ago
Mozilla Firefox ships as the default browser with almost every Linux distro. Why is this not a problem? Is that hypocrisy really lost on everyone but me?

497 points by ndesaulniers 11y ago

slg 11y ago

Am I reading this right that the problem is that during an OS upgrade the default browser is reset back to the default OS settings? While that is certainly an inconvenience, I find it hard to really expect an OS upgrade to carry over every user setting. Isn't all the user has to do after the upgrade is open Firefox (which is still installed) and click yes to "make this default" question?

jroblak 11y ago
No, users now have to go to a settings page to change their default applications. Ostensibly this is for user protection (so apps can't trick users into setting defaults they don't want)
nyrulez 11y ago
Did you read the letter ? It answers your question. It's a short letter.
- bargl 11y ago
  >Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
reubenmorais 11y ago
Windows has a history of carrying over user settings like that since the DOS times. You can literally upgrade from DOS through every version of Windows and end up with the same desktop background/widget colors/etc. I'm obviously biased because I work on a browser (specifically a browser that isn't made by Microsoft), but to me this is clearly about trying to capture the users who stopped using IE over the years.
- slg 11y ago
  >to me this is clearly about trying to capture the users who stopped using IE over the years. But those users never used Edge ;) A cynical person could say preserving the previous choice is just Firefox's fear that once a user tests the new Microsoft browser they won't jump back to Firefox. It also shows that Firefox doesn't have the greatest opinion of their users if it thinks all it takes for them to stop using Firefox is for it to require twice the number of mouse clicks to set it to default.
  - emn13 11y ago
    Having just installed windows 10: disabling the browser change is well hidden. There's no customize "button" or link, there's a bit of text with no decoration or underline that's lighter and appears greyed out that says "customize" on a screen filled with text. The chances of a user discovering this unless they're actively hunting for this (like I was) are close to zero.
  - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
    Some will like Firefox enough to change back. Some won't. But why should they have to? I got really sick of Microsoft trying to force me to do what they wanted back in the 1990s. In the 2000s, they seemed to change for the better. (Maybe that was due to the antitrust settlement.) Now here they are back to their old ways.
DannyBee 11y ago
"Isn't all the user has to do after the upgrade is open Firefox (which is still installed) and click yes to "make this default" question?" No. This API for settings defaults deliberately does not work anymore.
balls187 11y ago
> I find it hard to really expect an OS upgrade to carry over every user setting True. However that default browser/file extension handlers preferences should be a priority to carry forward. It may be easy to set your new default browser, but it's one more thing I have to do to personalize my computer, instead of using my computer to do the tasks at hand. It's a fundamental difference between MSFT and AAPL's philosphy (and why I made the switch a while back). Everytime I upgrade OS X, my settings carry forward, so there is less time spent doing things like setting up my computer, and more time spent using my computer to solve problems that I care about.
- wlesieutre 11y ago
  > True. However that default browser/file extension handlers preferences should be a priority to carry forward. Especially when you've previously been in antitrust lawsuits over abusing your position as the OS developer to take over the browser market. > It may be easy to set your new default browser, but it's one more thing I have to do to personalize my computer, instead of using my computer to do the tasks at hand. They moved it into the settings app, so this is no longer just "Open Firefox, click 'set as default'" anymore. Changing it in the Settings app is easy for us, but incomprehensible to less proficient users. I understand why they changed that, but it makes forcing Edge as default a huge dick move on MS's part.
  - balls187 11y ago
    > but it makes forcing Edge as default a huge dick move on MS's part. I suspect its a far less sinister reasoning for the change.
    - wlesieutre 11y ago
      I don't mean to attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence, I'm just saying it's a huge dick move regardless of whether they did it on purpose. You'd have to ask someone inside MS if you want to know what they were thinking.
  - mynameisvlad 11y ago
irq-1 11y ago
Maybe you don't remember what a huge deal it was that Microsoft leveraged its desktop monopoly to gain market share for its internet browser. Bill Gates declaring that the browser is 'part of the OS' and can't be removed. The anti-trust trial in the US, the changes demanded by the EU... The "Default Programs" control has very few settings; very few settings that need to be imported, but somehow Microsoft ignored the settings that just happen to give them an advantage. Mozilla is spot on here.
- slg 11y ago
  That issue has been perverted over the years. Even though the punishment was providing other possible defaults, the initial problem wasn't really about the system default. It was that IE was ingrained in Windows as part of the system. That prevented other browser from competing on an even playing field.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
BinaryIdiot 11y ago
> I find it hard to really expect an OS upgrade to carry over every user setting Why? Everything should always be carried over. Someone purposefully setup their environment and now because you upgrade their software they now have to re-setup N number of things? No thanks. You need to eliminate as much friction as possible in all of the experiences you create. Even installations / upgrades / rollbacks.
dragonwriter 11y ago
> Am I reading this right that the problem is that during an OS upgrade the default browser is reset back to the default OS settings? No, while that's part of the problem, the main problem is that the facility for changing the setting has been made less convenient, takes more steps, and is more cumbersome, which is clearly a design choice focused on frustrating those who attempt to switch and discouraging switching.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

DasIch 11y ago
How so? They don't matter on mobile but they still have effectively a monopoly on the desktop with more than 90% marketshare.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

mmastrac 11y ago

Is the anti-trust monitoring still ongoing at Microsoft? This seems like something they'd be interested in.

manicmonad 11y ago
No, the oversight seems to have ceased in 2012. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....

ripberge 11y ago

What if that default browser was IE and they're obviously trying to get people off of that because it's now legacy? Should they only change the default browser to edge if it was IE before? Doesn't seem fair to them...

dragonwriter 11y ago
> Should they only change the default browser to edge if it was IE before? There is a plausible argument for doing so in that case if Edge is a same-vendor, intended-replacement for IE. > Doesn't seem fair to them... How is it not fair to them that they should only their own bundled software as a replacement for bundled software from earlier versions of Windows, and not for third-party software that the user had to deliberately choose to replace their bundled software with? What possible conception of fairness could their be where this claim even makes sense?
Zelphyr 11y ago
It would be fair to them because it would switch the customer from one Microsoft browser to another Microsoft browser which benefits both Microsoft and the customer. Rather than switching the customer from the browser of their choice to one of Microsoft's choice, which only benefits Microsoft.

com2kid 11y ago

I just installed IE, I clicked on a URL in an email, I was asked which browser I wanted to use. IE was on top, but I do not remember what my previous default was. I was however asked to choose. I am not sure what other user experiences exist around this.

BinaryIdiot 11y ago
When I upgraded my default changed from Chrome to Edge. When I clicked on my first URL, also in an email, it did not give me any choices which was kinda frustrating. Opening Chrome also didn't give me the whole "Chrome is not your default; do you want it to be?" dialog.
- arihant 11y ago
  Go to settings. There is an entire section to set all your default apps.
  - BinaryIdiot 11y ago
    Oh I'm aware as that's where I had to change it (chrome didn't give me a "make default" button which makes me wonder if that's not possible in Windows 10).
    - makomk 11y ago
      It's not possible. Microsoft intentionally removed the API that allowed web browsers to offer that option in Windows 10.
- Freaky 11y ago
  When I upgraded it gave me a page showing me the new defaults it was about to apply, and gave me the option to skip it and keep what I was using before. Went with the latter option and indeed, it's still all MPC-HC, foobar2000 and Opera. Maybe it's because I was upgrading from 8 you were upgrading from 7? I recall some changes to how defaults were handled between them.

cwyers 11y ago

> These changes aren’t unsettling to us because we’re the organization that makes Firefox. I'm not sure I believe you.

BinaryIdiot 11y ago

I was pretty surprised when I installed Windows 10 and it changed to another default for my web browser. Even worse was it didn't reset the "do you want me as the default" in all of the other web browsers so I had to go and manually change settings. Microsoft Edge is pretty nice especially compared to IE but this default to Edge should have only occurred if your current default is IE.

maratd 11y ago
To be fair, they reset all defaults. For images, video, everything. Google Chrome pops up a bar that takes you directly to the settings. It's literally two clicks to change it back. Microsoft should have preserved the defaults, but I think Google's solution is preferable to a complaint letter.
- emn13 11y ago
  How is that fair? Note that this isn't a technical choice (you can preserve the previous defaults, that's just a well-hidden non-default option during the upgrade process) - it's using your monopoly position to make life hard on other software manufacturers. How reasonable would it be if a chrome install had a light-grey disabled-looking customize word hidden amongst a wall of text that if you didn't find and click it would replace windows with chrome os? This sounds like a power-grab.
- BinaryIdiot 11y ago
  > To be fair, they reset all defaults. For images, video, everything. For what it's worth I'm not a fan of upgrades working that way. Granted I could see where that is ideal but web browsers not so much. > Google Chrome pops up a bar that takes you directly to the settings. It's literally two clicks to change it back. See, Google Chrome never popped up a bar for me. I had to go into the Chrome settings which took me into the Windows 10 settings where I could then change the default app. I wonder why I didn't get that bar.
- simoncion 11y ago
  > To be fair, they reset all defaults. For images, video, everything. Oh god. Kubuntu's KDE4->KDE5 transition did that to me. I really don't want to go through that again on my video game machine. :( I guess I'll wait a month or so to see if MSFT changes their mind about the value of their "Replace the user's preferences with our defaults." position.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

solidangle 11y ago

It's absurd that you have to press on a button called 'Customize' (which is really scary sounding for non-experts) to get any privacy in Windows 10. If users are brave enough to press this button they get a list of nondescript options that barely explain what kind of data is sent to Microsoft. Microsoft should show always show all the privacy options to users and they should explain the pros and cons for each setting. Explain them that Cortana won't work anymore if they don't enable something, but also explain them that the NSA will be getting all their keystrokes if they do enable it. Here in Europe we are not protected by US law against the NSA (although there seem to be all sorts of loop holes in the US too), so we should expect here that all the data that Microsoft collects is directly sent to the NSA. It's unacceptable that they offer a one click 'share everything with the NSA'-button when there is no matching 'keep all my data private'-button. But the absolute worst thing ever is that they seem to throw away old settings after some updates. So even when I make sure that my parents computers are properly protected against Microsoft or even the NSA spying on them, I still can't expect that they will stay that way in the future.

DanBC 11y ago
To be fair if your attacker is the NSA you're fucked no matter what MS does. Most people need better security to protect them from the US companies slurping all their data.
- TallGuyShort 11y ago
  If the NSA is a targeted attacker, then yes, the James Mickens "Mossad / Not Mossad Duality" applies. To paraphrase, "either your attacker is or is not the Mossad. If your attacker is not the Mossad, you can use strong passwords and avoid shady websites and you should be okay. If your attacker is the Mossad, there's nothing you can do and you are definitely going to die". However, the average citizen is not a target of the NSA. They can tap all sorts of public infrastructure and record it, etc. But much of my activity is spread out over many networks, and is encrypted in ways that may still not be super-convenient for the NSA to constantly crack. The problem with these privacy settings is they're causing WAY more stuff to go over infrastructure easily targeted by the NSA than before.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

rhaps0dy 11y ago
Well then, Netscape would exist. Which was pretty neat.
- scholia 11y ago
  It certainly was, for a while. But not for some time before it was sold to AOL and then died.... Mozilla has been a much better influence on the web, I think.
- jd3 11y ago
  yeah, perhaps I worded that I bit strangely. I was just commenting on how Microsoft's monopolistic behavior caused Netscape to open-source and eventually get bought out by AOL, thus forming Mozilla through the open-source release.
  - scholia 11y ago
    AOL open-sourced Netscape because it lost, for a wide range of different reasons. They included trying to charge for browsers while giving away free betas, not letting PC magazines distribute the code, not letting ISPs customize the branding, discontinuing Netscape and replacing it with Commander (? this is all from memory), buying a whole bunch of server companies (thinking it could use its client to sell server software), behaving with extreme arrogance to the rest of the web industry, using Netscape to feed users ads on its home page, various bits of really crap marketing and a lot of crap code. I could go on. Netscape was really badly run. Apart from all that, Microsoft just outsmarted them by rewriting IE in parallel (ie two project teams) to componentize the code, and by making IE more standards compliant than Netscape, and by some really good marketing. Did you know that AOL continued to distribute IE even after it bought Netscape? In fact, Microsoft had more and better programmers and just out-iterated and out-distributed Netscape in a fast-moving market. Netscape didn't have a clue until it was too late. When Netscape was the best browser, it had an 80% market share even while Microsoft was bundling IE. It really wasn't the bundling that killed it.

JustSomeNobody 11y ago

Love the hubris in using the CEO's first name.

username 11y ago
I'm guessing Chris knows Satya on some personal level.
- JustSomeNobody 11y ago
  Maybe. And I get that as CEO's they can be regarded as peers, but if you're going to call this a "letter", I think it would have been better to use either full name (which is how it's signed BTW), or Mr.
mentat 11y ago
This is not some random guy but another CEO.
- JustSomeNobody 11y ago
  Who used HIS full name in the signature. At the very least he should have use MS CEO's full name.
  - ashmud 11y ago
    I confess that I use this same pattern frequently for work emails outside the company. Inside the company, I only sign with my given name. [GivenName], [Body] [Closing], [FullName]
  - mentat 11y ago
    Usually people use their full name in signatures. Still don't see what the issue is.
myth_buster 11y ago
It's quite common in US to refer to people by their first name perhaps an attribute of low context culture. I particularly like it having come from a high context culture as it reduces friction and gives people the confidence to voice their opinions irrespective of their social strata.

jacquesm 11y ago

Foxes will change their coats but not their ways.

arihant 11y ago

This is not rolling back the clock. Here are some important points to the debate: 1. Windows 10 users are upgrading from 7 and 8.1, these versions were heavily shipped with bloatware. If it took away default browsing from Firefox, it also took away volume control from OEM Volumizer 2010. 2. Your browsers like IE, Mozilla and Chrome might have Malware toolbars installed. Nobody can deny that it is far too common on Windows PCs. If it opened the infected browser the first thing after update, how secure is your PC now? 3. Microsoft has taken deliberate steps to make Firefox the default browser easier. The is an entire section now in Settings that lists 8-10 typical apps like browsers and one can easily set Firefox to default from there. It is not like old days when you had to go fidget with individual settings of each browser. 4. If you were savvy enough to put FF as default on Win 7, you are savvy enough to change it on Win 10. People not as savvy need a robust unbreakable solution. 5. The XYZ browser you were using might not be fully Windows 10 compatible. It is absolutely weird to expect default apps to remain same after a major upgrade. The cannot give individual vendors like Mozilla or Google special treatment here, nor can they take responsibility for their development cycles. 6. It's not bad for users. They aren't defaulting on IE7. Edge is fantastic. 7. In 2015, browsing should be considered a core OS feature that cannot be broken for upgrading users. 8. Microsoft had a weird history of over preserving user settings. It didn't leave them any place good. They still remain the most backwards compliant in any aspect. 9. Windows 10 does preserve old settings for extensions it doesn't support out of the box. But the biggest point left out in this debate is that Microsoft has made it as easy as mobile to change default apps. I fail to see how this will not help Mozilla.

Spivak 11y ago
> They aren't defaulting on IE7. Edge is fantastic. I really don't know where to start. I tried out edge for a few days and although the browser itself is pretty and functional it completely falls flat compared to existing players, including IE. I don't care what features they've announced for the future that may never happen. As the browser currently stands it's a toy and isn't the "browser for doing." I had hoped that that tagline would mean it would be a browser for power users but what we got was a gimped "mobile" browser. No add-ons, no real settings, gimmicky features that you'll use twice and then never touch again, no customization, and designed with touch given priority over mouse and keyboard. Any browser, as long as it has sane defaults, would be fine for causal users but it's like they don't understand what people who care about such things actually do with a browser.

verusfossa 11y ago

Mozilla hasn't made me very happy lately with their "choice" tactics. Resetting people's default search engine to Yahoo of all things on update was very opaque. Also the AMO signing fiasco, Pocket and Hello. Feels like an "It's only okay when we do it" kind of thing.

madars 11y ago
Changing search engine for existing users was a very unfortunate bug, which got fixed (https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1041571#answer-677594 https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1041571#answer-6...). Of course, changing the default for new users is nothing to be ashamed of.
- Spivak 11y ago
  I mean, it should be but it seems as though most people have accepted it.
oso2k 11y ago
I agree. And I extend that sentiment to their approach to Web Standards a few years ago too, like WebSQL [0] and NaCl [1], Dart [2]. That felt like NIH [3] or some other non-collaborative or ultra-competitive motivation on their part. Not a place of "speak for the Web". IMO, the choice of IndexedDB over WebSQL set the Web back 20 years. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_SQL_Database https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_SQL_Database [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Native_Client https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Native_Client [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dart_(programming_language) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dart_(programming_language) [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here
- Lazare 11y ago
  > IMO, the choice of IndexedDB over WebSQL set the Web back 20 years. Yep. I recognise that this may not have been a winnable fight, but I absolutely judge the people who were on the other side. WebSQL was a much better tech than IndexedDB. Was the dependence on Sqlite problematic? Sure. But Mozilla had the resources to make a pretty good try at fixing it; instead they refused to even implement it and gave us the relatively terrible IndexedDB instead. Which, in turn, Apple has refused to implement[1], and now here we are. Thanks Moz[2]. (I'm less concerned about NaCL and Dart, because it's less clear to me that these were obviously superior technologies that obviously needed cross-browser adaption. You're certainly right that the pattern is suggestive though.) [1]: Yeah, I know, they claim to have implemented it. Anyone who's tried to use their implementation will recognise this claim as a subtle joke. On us. [2]: Their blog post justifying themselves[3] has not aged well. I especially love the bit where they say IndexedDB is better than WebSQL because it has better "developer aesthetics", as if anyone is actually casually coding against IndexedDB without using some sort of wrapper or compatibility layer. Or as if anyone actually likes the IndexedDB syntax and API. [3]: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/06/beyond-html5-database-apis-and-the-road-to-indexeddb/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/06/beyond-html5-database-apis...

dguido 11y ago

Doesn't Firefox make a dozen HTTP requests the first time you open it? And have ads on the start page? And have the only modern browser without a sandbox? This emperor has no clothes.

brokentone 11y ago

Total aside -- Interesting how Satya Nadella doesn't seem to have the recognition yet to stand alone, but calling him "Microsoft's CEO" is the most descriptive way to identify him for the purposes of this writing.

nacs 11y ago
Probably because this is directed at Microsoft in general instead of saying Satya Nadella was directly responsible for the changes.

Lazare 11y ago

Meh. Is this an ideal thing for MS to have done? Fuck, I dunno. Probably not, I guess? But this isn't that bad; the hyperbolic title ("don't roll back the clock on choice!") makes this sound like something actually serious. Or major. Or permanent. It would be the right headline to protest MS making it impossible to use a third party browser, or at least impossible to change the default browser. Instead it's being used to protest...some options being reset when you upgrade your OS? Because heaven knows I've never lost any settings upgrading my OS before... Plus, Mozilla is...mmm. Not my first choice for an organisation to be leading this charge; they've done too much shady shit lately. I have a feeling that Mozilla may be badly overestimating how much goodwill they have among developers right now.

cottsak 11y ago
Right. So if you want to be worried about something --serious-- be worried about this https://edri.org/microsofts-new-small-print-how-your-personal-data-abused/ https://edri.org/microsofts-new-small-print-how-your-persona...
- bryans 11y ago
  This sounds like paranoid cherry picking, at best. Nearly all of these "worrying issues" are the default behavior of every mobile Android and iOS device on the market. Specifically, the sync and Cortana portions are complete non-issues. For example, you need to provide all of that information for a service like Cortana, or Google Now, or Siri to even function properly. And you will find nearly identical verbiage in the Android and iOS user agreements, allowing them to access, transfer, and use your data. Yet, I don't see any of this righteous indignation about the non-Microsoft services.

Animats 11y ago

I am writing to you about a very disturbing aspect of Firefox 38.0.5. Specifically, that the update experience appears to have been designed to throw away the choice your customers have made about the Internet experience they want, and replace it with the Internet experience Mozilla wants them to have. When we first saw the Firefox upgrade experience that strips users of their choice by effectively overriding existing user preferences for the search engine and other apps, and forces the integration of Pocket and Sync, we reached out to your team to discuss this issue. Unfortunately, it didn’t result in any meaningful progress, hence this letter. We appreciate that it’s still technically possible to preserve people’s previous settings and defaults, but the design of the whole upgrade experience and the default settings APIs have been changed to make this less obvious and more difficult. It now takes more than twice the number of mouse clicks, scrolling through content and some technical sophistication for people to reassert the choices they had previously made in earlier versions of Firefox. It’s confusing, hard to navigate and easy to get lost. Sometimes we see great progress, where consumer products respect individuals and their choices. However, with the launch of Firefox 38.0.5 we are deeply disappointed to see Mozilla take such a dramatic step backwards. These changes are unsettling because there are millions of users who love Firefox and who are having their choices ignored, and because of the increased complexity put into everyone’s way if and when they choose to make a choice different than what Mozilla prefers. We strongly urge you to reconsider your business tactic here and again respect people’s right to choice and control of their online experience by making it easier, more obvious and intuitive for people to maintain the choices they have already made through the upgrade experience. It should be easier for people to assert new choices and preferences, not just for other Mozilla products, through the default settings APIs and user interfaces. Please give your users the choice and control they deserve in Firefox.

brighteyes 11y ago
Your sarcasm is entertaining, but the big difference is that while neither company/product is perfect, Microsoft still essentially owns the desktop with Windows. While Mozilla's Firefox is just one among several choices of web browser, currently #3 in the rankings. It is extremely easy to switch web browser. It is not easy to switch OS. On a Windows machine, if you are savvy enough, you can install Linux, but otherwise, you need to buy a Mac in order to avoid Windows. And you need to learn a lot in order to drop Windows (easy for us here on HN, hard for 99% of people). It's fine if you dislike some of Mozilla's decisions with Firefox. People have complained and in fact Mozilla has changed some decisions following that criticism. But the situation is just not comparable to Microsoft with Windows. For that reason, I don't see a point to diverting the conversation. The topic here is Windows 10.

amatwl 11y ago

I actually think Microsoft's change is better in regards to user choice. Either way, it still seems simple to me to change the default web browser in Windows 10. Here's a gif I made showing another way to change the default web browser to Firefox: http://i.imgur.com/FbdcfL3.gif http://i.imgur.com/FbdcfL3.gif (In the gif, both Cortana and Bing search is disabled, only standard Windows Search is used) Also, it's kind of embarrassing that Mozilla's official video for this shows an unactivated version of Windows 10.

callahad 11y ago
> Also, it's kind of embarrassing that Mozilla's official video for this shows an unactivated version of Windows 10. All pre-release builds of Windows 10 have that watermark. Why is that embarrassing? Edit: I stand corrected; there is an "Activate Windows" watermark distinct from the build identifier, which was added in the later preview builds. There was a window of time where new VMs couldn't be activated, since the Preview keys had been killed but the final release was not yet available. Looks like we recorded this on a fresh VM running a preview build, which can't be activated. Oh well. Cite: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/insider/forum/insider_wintp-insider_install/updated-activate-windows-watermark-on-windows-10/cae92439-f115-45ea-a109-14332c5f56ec http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/insider/forum/insider_win...
- amatwl 11y ago
  Um, no. Not all pre-release builds of Windows 10 have that watermark. I'm talking about the "Activate Windows" message. Also, the final version of Windows 10 has been released (and the video was recorded after the final version was released), so no reason to use a pre-release version of Windows in the video.
  - hartator 11y ago
    I don't get why you got downvoted, it's indeed not looking really serious to realese a video with this kind of watermark. Sure, well, whatever. I think the whatever has became the new moto at Mozilla.

rasz_pl 11y ago

One of the forced updates in W10 disabled overclocking of g3258 on chipsets not blessed by Intel. http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=441&title=kb3064209-breaks-the-g3258 http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=441&title=kb3064... You have a choice of bios that lets you overclock but W10 will only work on one core, or bios that takes away overclocking and works with forced patch. At least with W7/8 you can block this particular update.

jjzieve 11y ago

linux, problem solved.

kosigz 11y ago

So. Much. Vacuity. Not once was it mentioned that Windows 10 removes Firefox from users' machines.

michaelwww 11y ago

Microsoft has a new browser they'd like people to load up and try out. I don't see the problem with making it the default browser in a free major upgrade of the OS. Small price to pay. I'm not suprised Microsoft ignored his complaints.

BenjiBG 11y ago

What a false and whiny post. Mozilla is collecting the user's browsing history and sells it. All they care for is their own benefit. They are no different than Apple, Google, FB, Amazon and of course Microsoft. But they are false. Like Google telling us "don't be evil" ... ha, ha, ha They all want to make the world a better place. Yes, sure. And Facebook is building large drones to bring the internet to Africa for education. Oh, what a noble act.

vespergo 11y ago

Wow, I learned nothing from reading this letter. Note to CEO, if you want people to read your letters, actually have some content, not just your feelings on something vague.

tkubacki 11y ago

TL;DR Mozilla is complaining because MS is changing default browser to EDGE

Qwertious 11y ago
No, that's not what they're complaining about. For people on computers that have had the default actively and specifically changed to some other browser, e.g. Lynx (for a blind person maybe), upgrading that computer to Windows 10 will reset it back to a Microsoft browser, with no regard for your existing choices.

pauldbau 11y ago

Out of interest, how does Win 10 compare with Mac OSX in terms of being able to install and change default browser? Given Apple's penchant for lock down, I'd expect it's much the same as Windows?

bphogan 11y ago
OSX has always worked as Windows 8.1 and below did with browsers - the browser pops up and asks if it can be the default and you say either "yes" or "leave me alone." Windows 10 has made that a multi-step process, where the browser now bounces you to the control panel where you have to find the default browser section and make your choice.

reilly3000 11y ago

The core of this all is defaults. If somebody makes an experience with defaults that benefit themselves, that feels like America to be for better or worse. The important part, the crucial part is that they remain choices. While we could and do fight for a web with defaults that don't mean profits to big companies, shouldn't we also work to ensure that we have choices in the first place? When picking a platform are there choices you don't get to make?

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

skrebbel 11y ago
I'm not sure you completely understand what all this is about. It's not about whether Windows 10 is any good, its about the default privacy and browser settings. I really (really) like Windows 10, but it really annoyed me that the same privacy settings that Windows 8 defaulted to "off" were suddenly defaulted to "on" in Windows 10.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

rasengan0 11y ago

I can't use Firefox on my Chromebook unless i switch to dev mode and use crouton. That said, i enjoy Firefox and the Windows 7 PC at work

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

sangd 11y ago

"Before you start pointing fingers, make sure you hands are clean!"

batrat 11y ago

Seriously Mozilla, get over it. I know I use chrome and everybody I know uses Chrome. This is like a little kid who wants a candy every single day although he doesn't deserve it. Every single time I hear about windows/IE/Edge I hear about Firefox/Mozilla too. What is this? Want a slice of that stake? Work for it.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

typis7 11y ago

The article mentions the difficulty of preserving or changing the privacy settings in Windows. Ironically if you want to prevent Firefox to "phone home", you will have performs many obscure tasks: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/ Some of those require changing the internals of Firefox: about:config. I wish Firefox would just have a big red button, Disable All, instead or requiring me to preform all the tasks listed in the link, when I install Firefox. Or even better, make those choices opt-in, instead of opt-out.

yAnonymous 11y ago

Overriding browser choices, ridiculous privacy defaults... I see a nine-digit fine by the EU in Microsoft's not so distant future.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

avaxzat 11y ago

Mozilla Firefox ships as the default browser with almost every Linux distro. Why is this not a problem? Is that hypocrisy really lost on everyone but me?