Does anyone who uses Firefox realize for a long while they were primarily funded by having Google pay them to be the default search engine?
Does anyone who uses Firefox realize for a long while they were primarily funded by having Google pay them to be the default search engine?
The difference between using an application that prompts "make this default?" and a specifically targeted ad showing up on your start menu is that the user used the application that threw the prompt...That might actually be helpful.
The fact is, if Microsoft wants me to switch to Edge, they need to tell me the benefits. A chart will do fine comparing it to other common options. I don't need a targeted ad that proves they know and keep track of what browser I'm actually using. That's literally ridiculous.
the idiots are winning.
Thank you for giving a example of why we can't use the term "free software" any more. Also fuck Ubuntu.
I stopped using Ubuntu a while ago due to a large number of individually minor "missteps", so I don't have any equally blatant/memorable (or particularly recent) examples, but there were enough of them to be a constant hazard of updating anything.
(For similarly large, there's systemd and wayland, but neither those are specific to Ubuntu.)
Also, someone (for analogy) dumping toxic waste into a drinking water supply, and then listening to feedback and ceasing to dump toxic waste into the water supply, still seems like a damn good reason to say "fuck those guys in particular" to me, and that's what shipping malware in a software update amounts to.
I just want a “no never” button.
I turned the ad off... there's nothing but 32 pixel icons in my start menu.
I simply never see the outrage, customize your Windows install and move the fuck on.
That's why Linux gets jacked off all the time right, customizability?
(that was rhetorical, I support Linux and realize the most beneficial aspect is it's open-source nature)
But that's not what this article is about, it's a Microsoft hit-piece. That's all journalism is nowadays, mercenaries for hire.
And final point, if the ad isn't for me or anyone else here for that matter, why are we seeing an article about it? And why did noone else here mention you can turn it off?
Microsoft is not the harbinger of ads and they never will be, Google was and is. If you want to war ads, take it up against Google, their browser, their OS, and their search engine.
Ironically MS put an adblocker in Chromium by default.
You people and your biases...
Same thing. Abuse of monopoly.
Also saying "oh all corps do stuff like that calm down" is a really bad defense IMO.
This is pretty harmless in my opinion.
But I think it's just post purchase rationalization.
Microsoft’s behavior is like taking a stroll in a forest or open field and suddenly having walls erected around you and cameras pointed at you.
Concerning at best, since they're using first party grounds for advertising but that does not make it harmful.
I'm also using a stock Android and have never used Chrome on it. Play Store, Play Games, Find my Device, and the Google app work just fine and haven't tried to push Chrome either.
I guess I should prepend these observations with "Yet", as I'm not at all of the opinion that it'll never happen.
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&tab=TT&sl=auto&...
Historically Google has relentlessly advertised Chrome to Firefox users on Youtube and their main search page ... probably the most valuable advertising space on the Internet. Maybe they've cut back, for some or all users.
What's even worse is that their CAPTCHA stuff prefers chrome/chromium users off the bat with reliability scores.
What is funny in this case is that Microsoft is going after Firefox users, specifically, so, similar to how an HN commenter would ask "Why is Microsoft being singled out?", we could actually ask, "Why is Mozilla being singled out?" Why not target the users of some other browser.
It should be obvious that this type of question is not aimed at producing a useful answer. I predict we will see this suggestion of "unfairness" again in the next heavily-commented, front page item that is critical of Microsoft. It has been remarkably consistent.
For your comparison to be valid, a Linux distro would have to be showing antagonistic adverts when its mandatory telemetry gathering detects that you are not using Firefox, and doing so to increase their market share. They do not and distros are not Mozilla, so the comparison falls flat.
It is completely reasonable to be skeptical of Microsoft's actions here, as they have a history of anticompetitive behavior in the web browser market.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
https://about.gitlab.com/pricing
https://about.gitlab.com/solutions/open-source/program
GitHub is doing the bare minimum to compete while relying on network effects from its existing user base - better than nothing, but not enough to justify showering Microsoft with praise.
No, it's one thing (OS) pushing another (browser). The equivalent would be opening chrome and it popping up a message, "Still using Windows? Click here to upgrade to ChromeOS!"
I'm not defending this behavior, but unfortunately the norm has been set.
When Microsoft does these things, it's not just a matter of "well go with someone else". There is no-one else, a lot of times. So we're trapped, and Microsoft says: by the way, now you have to deal with advertisements in your operation system. And we're going to do one that totally tweaks our nose at the antitrust issues of the 90s just because we can.
None of that is ok! It's not an overreaction to say, hey guys, knock it off.
If this is just a general suggestion that gets pushed out to all Windows computers, then it's not so much targeted as merely questionable use of platform.
When you switch browsers for the first time, Win10 will ask like a whiny little bitch, "Are you sure you want to not use Edge? It's really nice."
An anti-Firefox ad on Win10 would not surprise me.
No longer in development but the latest version works fine. Anyone is welcome to take over: http://www.classicshell.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8147
Haven't tried this fork yet: https://github.com/Open-Shell/Open-Shell-Menu
They still are.
First of all, this isn't just about this ad. As I said in my comment, it's "this -- and every other screw-up in the same vein". Like the other Start Menu ads, like the dark patterns in privacy-related config settings. But okay, let's talk about this one specifically.
The "old Microsoft" (specifically, to put it in context: the one with the Halloween Documents [0]) that I don't trust (I want to emphasize this part for reasons that I'll explain in a minute) is a company that:
1. Specifically used its dominating position in the operating systems industry to push its browser and eliminate competition in that space
2. Engaged in competition partly by spreading FUD about other products (note that this is not a post-hoc exaggeration: the internal memos specifically call FUD by this name, and refer to it as an entrenched, well-known internal technique)
3. Was deliberately dismissive of competing open source software in its public statements, even though it sometimes uses it internally
4. Set out a strategy to compete against open source (note though -- I think the documents predate the term "open source"?) that went beyond merely spreading FUD, and was based on embracing, then extending existing protocols in incompatible ways.
This "meh ad" is just the latest in Microsoft's constant, and extremely irritating push for Edge (e.g. see the system's behaviour when you try to change the default browser). It's the same stuff we've seen back in 1998 -- not as aggressive, seeing how Microsoft nearly got broken up when it tried something that aggressive, but it's in the same vein. And looks very much like #1 above.
It's also not happening just in the browser space. For instance, until recently, Windows wouldn't shut up about the damn OneDrive thing, either.
Things are different in the cloud and server space -- where SQL Server, Azure and .NET core happen -- because Microsoft isn't even close to being in a dominating position. Of course Microsoft can't elude competition there. They could ban Linux from Azure if they wanted to, but more than half of their marketshare would evaporate with it, too.
But I don't see any reason to think that this is part of some internal reform of some sort -- it's just the corner Microsoft painted themselves in. Of course they have to play the "Microsoft loves Linux" PR game, too: a whole generation of open source developers grew in a climate of mistrust about Microsoft, and it just so happens that the software written by this generation of open source developers powers much of the cloud space, of which Microsoft would reaaally want a slice. A long time ago, Microsoft also sold software for the Macintosh. Then it stopped. Then it started selling OS X software again. They aren't dumb, and they certainly don't lack good engineers -- Microsoft can compete on technical merit when it needs to.
Just like you, I don't generally care to support a large company, and while I do earn about half my yearly income writing or support Linux software, I don't really have a stake in it (honestly, I'd much rather write or support QNX software but that ship has sailed...). I'm not... OK, I'm no longer a Linux fanboy, which I definitely was twenty years ago but we all did a lot of stupid things when we were young. This isn't about "loving" or "hating" Microsoft, it's about whether or not I want to trust them with my stuff -- and stuff like this makes me not trust them :).
Edit: man, the last time I wrote so much about Microsoft I was fifteen, I think...
Even later edit: also -- as far as Windows 10 is concerned, save for the ads and data collection policy, I actually like it very much. I use it on one of my machines and I'm very happy with it -- so happy, in fact, that the moment this ads nonsense stops, I'll seriously think about switching to it :).