Microsoft Edge still forcing itself on users in Europe

Last month, Microsoft said that for customers in Europe, its Insider build of Windows 11 now opens web links associated with Windows system components in the user's actual default browser instead of in Microsoft Edge. This was supposed to happen in Windows 11 Insider Preview Build 23531, and subsequent versions of Windows in …

[Caver_Dave]

Is this different from Outlook -> File -> Options -> Advanced -> File and browser preferences -> Open hyperlinks from Outlook in: -> Default Browser

This seems to have tidied up things for me.

Caveat emptor: I am on Windows 10, but was suffering with almost everything suddenly appearing in Edge, including emails

[The BigYin]

It shouldn't be different.

The desktop environment is providing the framework, the applications should use it. The only exception I can think of is if you are using an application that is geared towards a different desktop environment, then (and only then) you might need to update the option in a couple of places.

This is just MS ramming their shonky crap down people's throats, as ever. I hope the EU boots right in the bank balance for it. Not like the UK will do anything.

[John Brown (no body)]

"This is just MS ramming their shonky crap down people's throats, as ever."

I think that sums it up nicely. Other than trying to force people to use Edge, there's no other reason to have "special" links to force one browser over the users own choice. I think that's called anticompetitive behaviour, hence the EU ruling. I'm surprised the US isn't all over this too, it's not as MS doesn't already have form in these sort of monopolistic, anticompetitive actions. On the other hand, the US seems to be even slower than the EU in this sort of area, tending to wait until it's more or less too late.

MS next step, of course, will be for those external links to fail in some way if not using Edge because every one will absolutely require some "special" feature that is only in Edge.

[Neil Barnes]

but include a button for opening the page in the associated app instead.

Some websites (youtube, google maps, duolingo for example) would much rather you opened in the app than in the browser (android), and slap a big button over the website. As far as I can see this comes from the website, not the OS, but of course I could be mistaken.

What's the great advantage of an app, apart from the inability to kill the adverts?

[ttlanhil]

Re: but include a button for opening the page in the associated app instead.

Are you asking about the advantages for the website, or the user?

Depending on the app, there definitely are some, for both

E-commerce websites definitely don't need an app, but things like maps (set up to have a widget, directions on lock screen, etc) or media players (allowed to play in background, etc) have a use-case.

If most of the data and files are static (or rarely changing, or you want them offline) then an app is an advantage (both to you, since it loads faster & offline, and to the site since it drops data costs)

for a good app performance should be a lot better too

Plus for the website, there's some ego trip, but also having the icon on your phone's home screen is bonus advertising every time the user notices it

For most apps I actually want, there's no adverts anyway (some do it, but unless you install an alternative browser on your phone you'll still get them in the website as well)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: but include a button for opening the page in the associated app instead.

If most of the data and files are static (or rarely changing, or you want them offline) then an app is an advantage (both to you, since it loads faster & offline, and to the site since it drops data costs)

Unchanged files are cached by the browser and not downloaded again. Or at least they are not in any sane environment. So this is a wash.

for a good app performance should be a lot better too

Most app are writing using web tooling (or are just wrappers around a browser). So this is also a wash.

bonus advertising

Ding! Ding! Ding! Winner, winner, chicken dinner. This is (bar those apps with explicit client use cases) all apps are for. Getting advertising, grabbing data, monitoring, tracking and so on.

Mobile browsers are advanced, there should be almost no reason to use an app.

[Flak]

Annoyingly persistent

When you tell it 'no' it behaves like the bunny boiler and pops up when you don't want it to.

Problem is that it thinks it should be the default application to open many file types - not just HTML.

Can't wait for it to be properly unbundled - and ideally no longer pre-installed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Annoyingly persistent

Microsoft has form on this and has already proved that they'll use this sort of behaviour if they can get away with it. From the article:-

> "Altering user defaults (e.g. so searches get handled by revenue sharing partners) is a common tactic among abusive and malicious apps and browser extensions."

Like the time following the launch of Windows 10 when MS was trying to railroad Windows 7 and 8 users into upgrading, and not just "forgetting" or ignoring user requests explicitly saying "no", but going so far as to override tools explicitly designed to enforce those users' refusal in the face of such behaviour?

That was on top of their use of "dark patterns" in the same case (e.g. redefining the implicit (and ingrained) understanding that "close" on a dialog request meant "no" or "cancel" into "yes, go ahead") and abuse of the trust in the Windows Update service to push these upgrades as essential when they weren't.

There was a reason that even the blandest, most mainstream IT sites were comparing Microsoft's tactics to malware back then.

[Peter2]

Re: Annoyingly persistent

On Windows 10, Microsoft keeps changing the default program that certain programs (PDF especially) opens with to Edge with most security updates. Which wouldn't be so bad, if Edge was actually capable of reading 100% of PDF files, which unfortunately it isn't.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Annoyingly persistent

if I remember correctly, unbundling IE took several years. Why would anyone expect this to be reduced to just 'a few years'?

[mark l 2]

If I set a default browser on my PC, then it should open all links in that browser not be up to the publisher of the OS to decide when i should respect my choices.

Plus you should be able to remove the default browser from YOUR device, whether that be Edge on Windows, Safari on iOS or Chrome on Android. Also on Chromebooks but since the entire UI on ChromeOS is the Chrome browser removing Chrome would bork the device.

[navarac]

Disgraceful

Microsoft is a disgrace. I use Linux and with the Brave Browser I have no problems. Gave up on Microsoft and their shenanigans with the death of Windows 7.

I suppose to be fair, all the corporate IT companies are just as bad.

[Dan 55]

Re: Disgraceful

I would choose Firefox or Vivaldi over Brave. Brave is an advertising platform and also indulges in planet-burning crypto nonsense.

[Version 1.0]

Re: Disgraceful

"Microsoft is a disgrace." That's just the environment everywhere these days, I loved Windows when I had to do an installation with a floppy disk and buy an update if I felt like it a year later, just another floppy disk. Originally operating systems were created to help all the users, they made some profits for people like Gary Kildall (CP/M) and I was happy for them because the operating systems were great, so much easier to use than a pack of paper and a box of pencils (LOL) to get things done.

But these days ... "I have never seen a situation so dismal that a policeman Microsoft couldn't make it worse" ... so much in the world was predicted by Brendan Behan

[navarac]

Re: Disgraceful

Spot on "Version 1.0"

[Alan Bourke]

It's like when you download a PDF on Android and go to open it ...

... and there's 50 apps going ME! ME! PICK ME!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: It's like when you download a PDF on Android and go to open it ...

... and when you pick one, it's as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced

[Knightlie]

Why isn't this an Anti-Trust Issue?

Back in the 90's, MS was hauled over the coals for this kind of behaviour, and was threatened with being broken up. I really don't understand why they are not under the same scrutiny now for exactly the same kind of shenanigans.

Well, I do really...

[Dinanziame]

Re: Why isn't this an Anti-Trust Issue?

I think it's essentially because now they are not market leader anymore, unlike in the 90s. If the market leader makes it hard to move to the competition, it's an anti-trust issue. If the 5% market share holder does the same thing, it's a big shrug. There's not too much point in enforcing monopolistic behavior that is not even successful.

[Pot]

Re: Why isn't this an Anti-Trust Issue?

Its because anti trust and competition were not a thing the past 40 odd years and policing was dismantled.

Its making a comeback of sorts even if weak.

Worth following the current Google anti trust case. Though Google are turning it into a private trial.

[Big_Boomer]

EDGE is your MASTER!

"All your browser links are BELONG TO EDGE!" <LOL> I think that MS are suffering from the fact that the world saw Edge and went "Meh". Well MS, I can guarantee that you won't get market share by pissing your customers off, and your current mindset is doing EXACTLY that.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: EDGE is your MASTER!

Oh no, edge lords all over again....

[Marty McFly]

The browser wars continue

Back in the day it was Internet Explorer versus Netscape. That was a race to add features with not regard for security. MSFT knew that Netscape was developing a directory service and needed to slaughter their cash cow and stop the development funding. MSFT won the war and the result is Active Directory.

Now the primary objective is different. It is an arms race to control the eyeballs of the end user. Who gets to display the advertisements, and who gets the user tracking data. MSFT wants to edge out Chrome as the dominate browser and is making every effort to use their operating system to do so.

Might as well call it "Browser Wars, The Next Generation".

[navarac]

Re: The browser wars continue

Trouble is, MSFT are not even getting anywhere. There must be a story about "are they short of cash" that we don't know about?

[Dinanziame]

Re: The browser wars continue

They're definitely short of cash, they didn't give their employees a raise this year... Yeah ha ha no. They had record profits this year. I truly don't know why Edge is so unsuccessful. Even if Chrome's popularity is due to its connections with Google products, Safari has more users on the desktop, even though Windows computers still vastly outnumber OSX, and come with Edge as default.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: The browser wars continue

"MSFT wants to edge out Chrome as the dominate browser"

Aren't Edge and Chrome both based off Chromium anyway?

[Steve Davies 3]

What Ms says it will do and what it actually does

are to diametrically opposed things.

Those of us who are a bit long in the tooth (yes, I still have most of mine) you will have seen this more times than we would wish upon our enemies.

SATNAD and MS needs to be sued into oblivion. Kill them or break them up.

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft has until March 6, 2024 to comply

which is exactly why it hasn't happened. Probably until the last minute of that deadline and, VERY LIKELY past the deadline, when they've become aware that a potential fine to piss on that dealine is peanuts in comparison with revenue from not complying with this requirement.

p.s. yes, I wish fines, as a meaningful % of their revenue, were applied and clocked automatically, but... back in the real world!

[Ken Moorhouse]

Re: Microsoft has until March 6, 2024 to comply

They might find an excuse to say it should be the 3rd of June.

[petef]

I'm no Microsoft apologist but in my recent firing up of Windows 10 (22H2) I notice that Settings has stopped bugging me that my browser settings are sub-optimal. I forget the exact wording but the essence used to be that M$ thought that I should be using Edge instead of the preference I had set for Opera.

I'm referring to the top panel of Settings whose three remaining buttons are OneDrive, Windows Update and Rewards.

The computer in question is dual boot and spends most of its time in openSUSE Tumbleweed / KDE Plasma which I find to be an altogether more pleasurable experience.

[david 12]

Reasonable security settings

I've had to deal with infected computers over the years. It's entirely reasonable to use a web interface for some apps, including system components, and it's entirely reasonable to lock down the interface for some of those system components. You click on the MS 'help' button for MS help on MS system apps, you get the MS help in the MS browser. The failing there is the MS help, not the MS browser.....

But MS did head off in the wrong direction: this has never been a feature of Apple products that everybody liked, and, unlike Apple, MS was fighting a history of being an open platform.

And by "heading off in the wrong direction" I really do mean they got into the swamps: I was using a "canary" build of Edge that saved Edge shortcuts on the desktop instead of Hyperlink shortcuts: in spite of the obvious security and usability justifications, that became a reason for not using Edge, which in the end is not the direction even MS wanted.