Microsoft keeps shooting itself in the foot with Edge
xda-developers.com
xda-developers.com
People forgot what it was to Google back in the day, where google was always showing a notification box to download their Google Chrome. So MS now uses their tactics. But they have grater leverage - they control OS and browser. And in this way they are not shooting themselves in the foot, but trying to keep the casual user base who doesn't care what color their internet gatway is.
The only pity would be Windows not respecting default browser choice when opening links.
And talking about Manifest V3 is some kind of mistake from MS... well, it is a chromium browser, what would you expect? Guess MS doesn't want to fork too deep from chromium. If users care about Manifest V3 then MS greatest competitor - Google - is also out of equation.
Right now MS is playing the browser game again. And it is beyond me why it thinks people want to use Bing for search.
Sometimes I have this impression that Microsoft has some collective amnesia where they think they’re in the 90s-00s again where they dominanted the market with their tactics. Quite curious why it hasn’t been sued yet by the DOJ.
Of course, their objective is not to create great software but to monopolize whole sectors and extract value = techno feudalism.
A single corporation owns the proprietary OS running what must be upwards of 80% of the world's corporate and government workstations that is known to be laden with copious amounts of telemetry and privacy invading logging is probably quite an attractive partner to the various TLOs of the US government.
I read some fan-fic conspiracy theory that MS is actually a facade for an intelligence agency a couple of decades ago. Getting less and less certain about the weight of "theory" these days.
All US corporations are effectively compelled to collaborate with US authorities at any given time. There is some pretend/acting going on for the benefit of paying consumers (like Apple resisting unlocking phones for smalltime cops, while likely passing iCloud data to the big boys), but that's it.
I am also posting these remarks with a tongue in cheek. I am sure they (any) do liaise with government agencies when requested but not that they are primarily intel branches with a retail mask.
It's not about what people want, it's about the ads they can be shown.
What do you mean "back in the day"? My daily driver is Firefox, and every other time I go to look something up on Google Maps, it tells me I'd get a better experience using Chrome.
The rare times I use Windows I use Edge, and I can't remember the last time I've used Google Maps there, so can't tell whether it shows it too.
GMaps in Firefox has 3D views just fine. The experience of browsing GMaps is better in FF than Chrome itself.
It does though? Links from Microsoft/Windows applications only open in edge.
I also remember web results from the start menu opening in Edge before I ran one of those decrapifying scripts which disabled them completely.
Some might argue that's just being prudent and shipping only the minimally marketable features but my riposte to that is the layer upon layer of shit they continue to apply whilst ignoring broken core features on many of their products.
I am in the UK, use Firefox on Windows and Android, and it constantly asks me if I want to save card details. Annoying.
My point was to confirm that FF asks me to store card numbers even though I'm not in the US. I'm sure I could disable this in the settings but I never get around to it. So I have no-one else to blame for my annoyance.
1Password, at least a couple years ago, did let you store your full CC details.
It still does.
I’d like to pay for Gmail but I don’t want a hegemonic company to have unrestricted access to my credit card. Google’s size is a deterrent to its own growth.
Is this true? Why shouldn't Chromium-based browsers be able to maintain V2 indefinitely?
And of course to bring yourself up-to-date with each newly introduced disappointment.
Should be
> Microsoft wants you to do things its way
It thinks it owns your data, owns any interactions with you, like all corporations do. This is all supported legally. Once it has an online only OS, this will be obvious.
It's a choice to go along with this nonsense, isn't it?
Mozilla is a corporation. Do you hold the same opinion of Firefox?
Of the Firefox browser project the answer is "no" notwithstanding some controversial choices related to the way self-hosted Firefox sync has been deprecated and the shenanigans around Pocket integration.
I use ff btw.
Those of us that, for whatever reason, see it coming, should keep calm and steady and keep ocasionnaly presenting our view in a non-confrontational way, and support groups or legislative efforts which may be allies.
If you, like me, don't have the mental bandwidth for all of that, just try to keep frustration to a low when possible and keep rowing for the good side.
Yes.
> and support groups or legislative efforts which may be allies.
No. Legislative bodies are part of the problem. Most groups too . The governance structure is fascistic already - it is government and corporations working together. The tanker cannot be redirected, it's not a case of voting someone else in.
If that's negative, sorry, but don't blame me. I'd rather deal with reality than a false hope.
The deeper answer for me, lies with each individual. Each of us gets to choose.
So, increased accountability is what's needed.
More good newspapers/magazines with good research/investigation. More literacy. More time to do those things. More money to support good work.
But this talks to the heart of the issue - who has authority over the individual? Is a social structure (laws, convention, the understood history provided by that society, religion etc) superior to an individual and their lived experience? Can we say it is right for society to forcibly extract wealth and resources from those it purports to govern, for the greater good? Or is all that self-serving nonsense, to justify slavery?
And then you might wonder what the purpose of this experience is for oneself. Is it to accommodate oneself to power in the best way one can, accepting it as inevitable, thereby tacitly consenting to the system we find? Or do we even embrace the system, to get all the goodies we can? Or does one grasp at something more intangible such as doing right and being guided by truth and love, trying to recover or even improve one's soul?
People crave confort. Be it a god, a church, the state or a feudal lord who promises everything will be alright.