Mozilla has defeated Microsoft’s default browser protections in Windows

https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/13/22671182/mozilla-default-browser-windows-protections-firefox

by hadrien01 • 5 years ago

840 383 5 years ago

_fat_santa• 5 years ago

As I was reading this article I kept thinking to myself "Microsoft is going to boot Firefox from Windows" before realizing that MS doesn't have that sort of power (compared to say Apple).

It's really interesting how MS will approach this. Unlike Apple, MS doesn't have direct control over which apps go on the operating system, they aren't even in a position like Google where their app store is the dominant platform for getting apps.

This will be interesting, interesting to see how MS responds. Will they give in and let users easily set their default browser or will this turn into a cat and mouse game.

Lastly I think what MS is doing with the default browser is foolish. Did they learn nothing from the antitrust cases of the 2000's

barryvan• 5 years ago

I suspect they will buckle -- but only partially, with an allowlist of browsers blessed with this ability. This will quiet the noise, but will also make it harder for small and innovative browsers to compete, as I doubt Microsoft will build out the processes to become blessed due to cost/benefit.

bluGill• 5 years ago

Probably, but for security reasons the only correct thing to do is remove the ability of Edge to set default browser within the browser.

The only option app developers - including internal Microsoft ones - should have is open some OS settings app in a supported way, but the user has to accept the selection.

heavyset_go5• 5 years ago

This seems to be an industry-wide trend. Google, somewhat recently, also banned "unauthorized" browsers from logging into Google accounts at all.

anothernewdude• 5 years ago

That's silly. Chrome has become so dominant that it'd be a good move on MS's part to help segment the browser market by supporting Firefox

joncrane• 5 years ago

Isn't Google the single largest contributor to the Mozilla Foundation?

wubin• 5 years ago

I doubt MS wants that kind of segmentation if they themselves rely strongly on the Chromium project.

rocqua• 5 years ago

I've been wondering. What happens if Edge beats chrome? Chromium is developed by google, and used by Edge. Will google continue developing chromium just to have Microsoft reap the rewards. If not, is google going to abandon chromium? Will microsoft pick up the slack? If so, are they going to fork chromium and develop on the form, or are they going to work on the original repo? What about the chromium name / trademark.

If this goes wrong, what is google going to think of open-source development. If the second biggest (I think) open source application turns out to have been a failure for the company backing it, what is that going to do to commercial open-source development?

I find this a scary prospect.

orbital-decay• 5 years ago

Microsoft were doing this for ages... From the NT kernel to the shell. To stay above competition, they have tons of different undocumented APIs they keep for themselves to use, and don't guarantee it to exist or stay unchanged in future. In fact this is the response. Nothing special about this particular one. Developers reverse engineer those, and try to rely on them, all the time.

kmeisthax2• 5 years ago

Every OS and library has some form of undocumented/internal APIs that they don't want users of that library or OS to be relying upon.

Hell, Linux even uses DRM (not the Direct Rendering Manager, Digital Rights Management) to check if your LKM is licensed properly to call those APIs. GPL-incompatible libraries only get to link to functions that are rough equivalents to syscalls.

ilaksh3• 5 years ago

They do have some control though. If you don't list with their app store they default to accusing your software of being malware and hiding the run button.

whywhywhywhy• 5 years ago

and hiding the run button

This isn't completely accurate, if the app is being seen only in very small numbers the run button is hidden under "More Info" but when Smartscreen has seen your app enough that it can be more confident it's less harmful the "Run Anyway" button is surfaced.

garaetjjte4• 5 years ago

That's not related to app store though, just the CA protection racket.

pc86• 5 years ago

My guess is they'll just leave it. You'll have the one-click for Edge, whatever this workaround/RE is for Firefox, and everything else will be the same. Maybe Mozilla will open source this workaround.

iggldiggl• 5 years ago

They'd have to go out of their way to not open-source it.

2OEH8eoCRo0• 5 years ago

Did they learn nothing from the antitrust cases of the 2000's

They learned for awhile- until the rest of the industry caught up.

This might sound weird but I've actually been rooting for Microsoft a lot lately. A majority of their revenue is not from ads and lock-in BS and they weren't called in front of Congress recently over antitrust concerns. I was hoping they would set themselves apart from the pack in an odd way by making good software and hardware products that people enjoy using. (xbox, windows, office, WSL, VSCode, Visual Studio, hololens, phones, laptops, Halo on Steam, etc.)

Seeing the new browser war and direction Windows 11 is headed, now has me worried. The widgets pane is obviously for serving ads.

I understand that these public companies are required to act in the best interests of shareholders but I fear that the obsessive push for revenue gains only benefits short term shareholders. Long term shareholders get the shaft when every decision is aimed at squeezing revenue just for the next quarter.

Edit: I'm not a Microsoft/Windows-Stan either, I've been using Linux intermittently since 2006-ish and now daily drive Fedora as my main.

bayindirh3• 5 years ago

I was also kinda liked The New Microsoft and prepared to put my anger towards them to the side (I remember the ACPI memo days). Also, as a grown-up computer user, I got appropriate number of licenses (for every Microsoft application we use) for my family and personal computers.

However, the latest GitHub Copilot stuff, their agreement with OpenAI, return of their embrace, extend, extinguish tactics with GitHub, VSCode and other stuff undone everything.

It's their DNA now. All Microsoft Empire is built with crushing monopoly as their core value and driving force. Changing this requires more than changing a mere CEO and posting a "We Love Linux" banner.

The only really good thing they do is hardware.

Posted from my Debian 11 box using Microsoft Keyboard.

yessirwhatever• 5 years ago

I suspect it that this is like the usual situation at MS, most employees think this strategy is dumb, but there's that one guy who's still living like it's 1991 and he's got good connections with management, so they let them run unchecked. That's the person who's coming up with such idiotic strategies.

cabalamat3• 5 years ago

The widgets pane is obviously for serving ads.

If Windows is going to have ads at the OS level, that I can't get rid of, I simply won't use it.

Long term shareholders get the shaft when every decision is aimed at squeezing revenue just for the next quarter.

True

ravenstine• 5 years ago

I understand that these public companies are required to act in the best interests of shareholders but I fear that the obsessive push for revenue gains only benefits short term shareholders. Long term shareholders get the shaft when every decision is aimed at squeezing revenue just for the next quarter.

Never so succinctly have I seen described the economic problem of the modern age; endless growth for its own sake. Sure, it's motivated by profit, but society and global elites don't act as if there are significant downsides to an investment-driven economy. Rather, it's treated as a virtue, else we wouldn't all be buying into it, literally and figuratively, for the bare minimum of not losing our wealth.

Halo on Steam

Hah, you don't hear much about Halo anymore. But it's entirely possible you may be able to play Halo on Steam on your Linux machine in the near future. Combat Evolved plays really well on my M1 Macbook through Parallels (even with Anniversary mode, given some settings tweaks) and Reach is playable but drops a lot of frames; if you ever get a Linux machine that runs on ARM then you can virtualize Windows for ARM in a way that blows away any x86_64 emulation I've seen in the past.

Of course most of the work to make that a reality isn't even because of Microsoft besides their compiling of Windows for ARM.

Besides that...

xbox, windows, office, WSL, VSCode, Visual Studio, hololens, phones, laptops, Halo on Steam, etc.

Honestly, the only decent things you mentioned are Office, VSCode, and Halo, which are all things that just about any other company could have created. Office itself is begging for a viable alternative, but has been effectively grandfathered in to being a necessity for businesses. I mentioned Halo but not Xbox because, IMO, Xbox is an obsolete concept and Microsoft knows this.

There's GitHub, but it's only a matter of time before Microsoft decides to add "plans" for features that are already free as well as forms of prioritization for all things Windows.

I guess I'm not exactly sure what point I'm trying to make besides that I kind of agree with you in the sense that M$ has been less problematic than other Big Tech in recent years. With Windows 11, now I'm not so sure.

PaulHoule• 5 years ago

Microsoft's ad problem is that they damage their existing products to advertise new products that are a lost cause.

There was that "crash your desktop" bug caused by an ad for Teams but longer ago there was OneDrive... DropBox, Box, Google and many others could make file sharing programs that could sync successfully, but somehow Microsoft couldn't.

To add injury to insult they made OneDrive the default way to save files in Microsoft Office, but sometimes a problem with OneDrive would mean YOU COULDN'T SAVE YOUR WORK AT ALL.

If you've had that experience ONCE you are NEVER going to use OneDrive ever.

Then there was that time that OneNote was a pretty good product but Microsoft killed it by inserting at least five icons on and around your desktop (practically up your nose) signalling that it is absolute garbage that they're trying to force up your A*.

Google kills products after the launch, but Microsoft kills them in the process of launch with it's internal advertising.

syshum4• 5 years ago

>and lock-in BS

Microsoft has all kinds of ways they do vertical lockin, it is not has overt as say Apple, but do not think for a second that the company that promoted Embrace, Extend, Extinguish does not have methods to lock in users

prox• 5 years ago

I wish I could give you an award or magically transport you to the MS office where these ridiculous choices are made. You hit nail on head I think.

It’s the same manager mistakes over and over again.

smt882• 5 years ago

I understand the temptation to root for New Microsoft, but we should all remember that large corporations are extremely powerful psychopaths. Anything they do that seems ethical is self-serving, not part of a moral code that they will follow even when it hurts them.

ChrisSD4• 5 years ago

I understand that these public companies are required to act in the best interests of shareholders

This is not true. Public companies are only required to be honest with shareholders, no more or less. The shareholders are free to invest elsewhere if the don't like how a company is run, or to exercise whatever voting rights they bought with the shares.

akira2501• 5 years ago

and they weren't called in front of Congress recently over antitrust concerns

Congress hasn't exactly been a hotbed of anti-trust activity over the past 40 years. I wouldn't take the absence of action here as anything particularly meaningful.

Angostura2• 5 years ago

MS doesn't have that sort of power (compared to say Apple)

That's an interesting question. I suppose Apple could refuse to sign the executable, which would make things tricky but could they actually boot Firefox from MacOS?

I think not.

cma2• 5 years ago

Yes, remember this?

Apple has released a silent update for Mac users removing a vulnerable component in Zoom

Removed not by antivirus you can disable, removed by an OS update.

vishnumohandas2• 5 years ago

Apple

FWIW, on iOS, links from Google apps open up on Chrome if it's installed, regardless of what your default browser is. Apple seems to be okay with that.

dev_tty013• 5 years ago

Any app can do app specific URLs on iOS to invoke particular apps with content. I would guess that Google apps detect the presence of Chrome and modify the URLs to be Chrome specific rather than generic https URLs. Its ok with Apple because that is a standard supported mechanism on iOS.

heavyset_go5• 5 years ago

Any browser on iOS is just UI over Safari's rendering engine and JS runtime.

Chrome, as in Blink and V8, is banned by Apple from running on iOS.

cabalamat3• 5 years ago

This will be interesting, interesting to see how MS responds

Maybe they'll make a better browser, so people will prefer theirs to Firefox and Chrome? Nah, that's unlikely.

pbhjpbhj4• 5 years ago

That can just cripple Office.com to browsers other than Edge, then it looks like they have a better browser -- much easier!

worrycue• 5 years ago

To be fair, Edge is basically just Chrome now no? It isn’t too bad although I stuck to Firefox.

ocdtrekkie• 5 years ago

I suspect Microsoft will modify their undocumented API that they have no obligation to maintain as-is so that it only accepts EXEs in Edge's program folder or something.

boomboomsubban5• 5 years ago

that MS doesn't have that sort of power (compared to say Apple).

They could mark the install executable as malicious in Windows Defender.

pbhjpbhj4• 5 years ago

Or the domain as having PUP so people visiting get a warning and hoops to jump through.

bogwog2• 5 years ago

Which is similar to what Apple does for MacOS (and Google for Android).

They haven't prevented people from installing untaxed software, but they have made it a scary and difficult process for the average user, and made it very difficult for anyone to sell software without giving Apple/Google a cut.

account427• 5 years ago

It would be funny if Firefox would warn you about downloading Firefox because it is marked as malware. Would server Mozilla right for letting Google maintain that list, who have shown they do not care about false positives.

dev_tty013• 5 years ago

Of course Apple allows Mac users to set the default browser as a choice on the very first General preferences panel. Trivial to change.

sitzkrieg2• 5 years ago

yea the flawless mac experience, what next being able to uninstall apple music or podcasts?

jonnycomputer• 5 years ago

I can install apps on Mac that aren't in the store.

zaat• 5 years ago

So I was at my parents house some time ago and my mom's computer is for some reason set allow installing software from the Microsoft store only. Nobody knows how that was set, my mom's computer usage is characterized by randomly clicking on things until the website she wants open, but somehow that option have appeared for her to click on.

criley22• 5 years ago

Windows 10S only allows Microsoft Store downloads and you have to change to Home/Pro to allow .exe's to run at all.

Iv• 5 years ago

Did they learn nothing from the antitrust cases of the 2000's

They learnt that all they risk is a slap on the wrist a decade later, and a fee that's a drop in their profits.

tgtweak2• 5 years ago

Just wait for those "store-only" versions of windows to grow in distribution, then Microsoft touting store policy for not allowing Firefox in the store...

heavyset_go5• 5 years ago

I kept thinking to myself "Microsoft is going to boot Firefox from Windows" before realizing that MS doesn't have that sort of power (compared to say Apple).

Actually, when it comes to Windows and macOS, Microsoft has about the same power as Apple does when it comes to limiting what software can and can't run on their operating systems.

Defender on Windows works like Gatekeeper does on macOS. Defender gets to decide what runs or doesn't run on a Windows system, using a similar approach to Gatekeeper.

Both Apple and Microsoft require developers to regularly buy certificates to sign the software they intend to distribute to macOS and Windows users, and they require developers to remain in good standing with either company. Unsigned software is treated as if it is radioactive by both operating systems, and macOS on M1 Macs goes one step further by deprecating unsigned binaries entirely.

If Apple or Microsoft want to, they can revoke a developer's certificates, and any app that was signed with them will be prevented from running by Gatekeeper or Defender. They can also choose not to renew a developer's certificates, preventing apps from running when the certificates they were signed with expire.

To 99.9% of users, apps signed with revoked or expired certificates will be portrayed as either being broken or malicious by macOS or Windows.

krzyzanowskim• 5 years ago

let's not forget 2001 antitrust law case triggered by Internet Explorer itself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....

Everything old is new again.

metalliqaz• 5 years ago

except now the US' will to prosecute antitrust is essentially dead

the land of corporate power

AnIdiotOnTheNet4• 5 years ago

Honestly its will wasn't even that strong back then, hence the slap on the wrist settlement on appeal.

dataflow• 5 years ago

They probably look at their market share and decide they're not a monopoly anymore.

NelsonMinar2• 5 years ago

Unfortunately the US kind of has forgotten. The Bush administration took power and undermined all that anti-trust stuff and it lay forgotten for most of 20 years. The Biden administration is picking up some of it now.

approxim8ion2• 5 years ago

They're not really "protections", to be fair.

notRobot• 5 years ago

Exactly. They're not protections. They're strategies to make it harder for non-super-users to change their default browser.

As technical people, it's easy to underestimate just how well these tactics that introduce friction work at making "regular" folks shurg and say "meh, okay, whatever -- sure, I'll use Edge" just because they don't want to repeatedly have to figure out how to change their default browser.

sebazzz• 5 years ago

They are. Default file associations are protected in Windows 10 [0][1]. The default browser is in essence also an file association.

[0] https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20170517-00/?p=96... [1]: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20190724-00/?p=10...

dralley5• 5 years ago

They are not. This is not some generic "are you sure" prompt, it is specifically coded to nag users to use Edge instead.

https://www.itsupportguides.com/wp-content/uploads/Windows10...

approxim8ion2• 5 years ago

It's one thing to push "protections" on your users because you think you know better and they can't navigate their way around their devices without ruining them. That's the Apple way.

But what Microsoft has done here is push their own product in the name of protection. That's much more malicious. To argue whether it is a protection because they call it one is semantics.

CRConrad4• 5 years ago

Get back to us with that when it's less of an utterly transparent lie. When, for instance, switching your default handler for .txt files leads you through three dialogs that ever more insistently extol the virtues of MS Notepad for this purpose.

thrower123• 5 years ago

Good. The better product will win out.

If I was working on the Edgeium team, I would beg the Windows and Bing people to be less heavy-handed. It's a quality product, but the advertising and nudging is souring me.

jfk13• 5 years ago

Yes, indeed. I do choose to run Edge sometimes, but the constant attempts to push or trick me into making it the default are really grating.

ilaksh3• 5 years ago

Why should we have to keep begging them or something? Using Linux instead of Windows is a moral issue.

LeonB• 5 years ago

Software constantly uses dark patterns and even “well-behaved” software asks questions with answers like “yes” (large writing) and “maybe later” as the only no option. It’s completely normalised.

burnished2• 5 years ago

It's not a realistic answer for the vast majority of users.

skrebbel• 5 years ago

You don't, you're not working on Edgium.

squarefoot3• 5 years ago

The better product will win out.

The more advertised one will win. Chrome is a joke privacy-wise compared to Firefox, but at the moment the winner is Chrome. Also the target audience is important: to the average Windows user, if Microsoft says Edge is best, then Edge is best, and Mozilla has no resources to fight back on equal terms since it's Microsoft deciding what runs on their operating system and what their users read or watch.

colinmhayes• 5 years ago

No one outside this website cares about privacy.

kuschkufan• 5 years ago

TFA seems to say that Chrome and others don't yet do it like Firefox does. If this really turns out to be an advantage watch the others copying the reverse-engineered code. I assume you could look it up in the Firefox repo now?

wyattpeak• 5 years ago

I think it's very likely Firefox want everybody to copy them. This is a fight best fought with everyone against Windows, and it's no particular skin off Firefox's nose if Chrome is also easy to use: since Chrome is basically the default non-Edge browser, everybody choosing Firefox is already aware of Chrome and has decided against it.

CA0DA• 5 years ago

The default browser switch in Windows 10 was using multiple dark patterns to get you to stay with Edge. Good for Firefox.

squarefoot3• 5 years ago

Wait a minute. Firefox is Open Source; wasn't Microsoft in love with Open Source? (their words) So it appears they are only when they don't smell competition.

One of the reasons why I'm extremely worried by whatever they're planning to do with Linux.

trutannus5• 5 years ago

whatever they're planning to do with Linux.

Why? Microsoft does not own Firefox or Linux? If you don't use MS products then you're not going to be subject to their choices.

p_j_w3• 5 years ago

They don't need to own it to EEE it.

wasmitnetzen• 5 years ago

Related bugzilla entries:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1637357

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1703578

Apparently, the new one-click method is called UserChoice.

userbinator2• 5 years ago

"UserChoice" - what a doublespeak name.

It's been there since Win8 or so, and defeated just as long ago:

https://danysys.com/set-file-type-association-default-applic...

http://kolbi.cz/blog/2017/10/25/setuserfta-userchoice-hash-d...

(Note the messages about "fixed false positive from Windows Defender"...)

lawl• 5 years ago

Here's the relevant commit: https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/e928b3e95a6c3b725...

(I think)

vxNsr• 5 years ago

This is what I was looking for.

jftuga• 5 years ago

An interesting excerpt:

    // When Windows creates this key, it is read-only (Deny Set Value), so we need
    // to delete it first.
    // We don't set any similar special permissions.

Someone12342• 5 years ago

Looks like it is going to:

Computer\HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\FileExts

For ".html", ".htm" and:

Computer\HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\Shell\Associations\UrlAssociations

For "https", "http" then:

- Nuke the UserChoice key because Microsoft put special permissions on it.

- Re-create the UserChoice key setting the ProgId to Firefox and then calculating the hash.

- The hash is calculated using, in part, a hard-coded Windows internal GUID see FormatUserChoiceString here:

https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-release/diff/7e775ce...

The whole thing looks super easy for Microsoft to break in a future Windows release unfortunately.

Egoist• 5 years ago

Interestingly, the first two registry steps are actually the same as the previous windows. Having it behind a hash seems way too user hostile though.

bob10292• 5 years ago

The whole thing looks super easy for Microsoft to break in a future Windows release unfortunately.

There are more aggressive techniques available that cannot be turned off very easily. TrustedInstaller is the first one that comes to mind. If you cant politely ask the registry, you can always nuke edge from orbit.

I hope Firefox keeps pushing down this route. Make your installation process as inflammatory as possible. I would encourage a "Remove all existing web browsers" checkbox in the final pane of the installation process - Default selected, of course. Give them a proper taste of their own medicine.

deoxykev• 5 years ago

Looks like the hard-coded Windows internal GUID is found in C:\Windows\SysWOW64\Shell32.dll

If you search for the string: "User Choice set via Windows User Experience", you'll find the GUID used to calculate the hash.

layer8• 5 years ago

Sounds like what SetUserFTA does: https://kolbi.cz/blog/2017/10/25/setuserfta-userchoice-hash-...

arsome• 5 years ago

The fun bit (the generation of the "UserChoice" hash) is here:

https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/browser/compone...

ndiddy• 5 years ago

In Windows XP the "set default programs" control panel had a one-click "non-microsoft" setting that would change all default programs to your installed alternatives. It seems like the effects of their 90s antitrust trial seem to be wearing off.

AnIdiotOnTheNet4• 5 years ago

Many here would argue they have less of a monopoly than ever. Even as someone who thinks Windows does and will continue to dominate the desktop for at least another decade, I find that hard to disagree with given the mass migration of users from desktop to mobile.

kunagi7• 5 years ago

I expect that Microsoft won't like this and they will patch it.

Even if Firefox does this with good intentions, malware creators can follow Firefox's example to do the same. Since Firefox is open source they only need to copy the code from the repo.

tinus_hn• 5 years ago

The way to do this has been known for years.

https://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/vstudio/en-US/bb630...

causi2• 5 years ago

While Microsoft offers a method to switch default browsers on Windows 10, it’s more cumbersome than the simple one-click process to switch to Edge.

Where the hell are the regulators who handed out billion dollar fines just for bundling Internet Explorer with Windows?

bserge• 5 years ago

Working for Microsoft or retired.

AnIdiotOnTheNet4• 5 years ago

You mean the same regulators who stripped the initial remedy of its teeth and essentially slapped MS on the wrist?

jeroenhd• 5 years ago

Those regulators have let Apple enforce Safari for years, I don't think they care about browsers like they used to.

yborg• 5 years ago

Enforce what? My default is set to Firefox on macOS, took one click.

Mountain_Skies• 5 years ago

Where were they when AT&T joined all of the Baby Bells back together? It was ok because the competitive landscape changed during the decades in which AT&T was broken up. Same here. Microsoft has nowhere near the power over general computing that it once had. What they did with IE back in the day was only a problem because of their dominant market position. Others doing the same from a minority market position would have been fine. Now that the majority of devices are running something other than Windows, it's more difficult to claim Microsoft dominates the market unless you define the market very narrowly, in which case, lots of other companies would also be in trouble.

garaetjjte4• 5 years ago

In what world Windows is in minority market position? It is de facto desktop OS.

bogwog2• 5 years ago

The only thing that changed was that other companies started doing the same evil stuff Microsoft was doing when they got in trouble, except instead of regulators going after those other companies too, they've... idk, disappeared?

So in a weird way, I agree that it's unfair that Microsoft can't do unfair things while all the other companies are doing unfair things. That puts them at a competitive disadvantage!

They've been shy about it because of their history, but I predict Microsoft will eventually lock Windows down in the same way Apple and Google lock down their operating systems. Or, knowing Microsoft, they'll probably take it as far as they possibly can.

sealeck2• 5 years ago

The "majority of devices" if you count IoT, etc. However, Windows has market dominance in desktop computing.

CivBase• 5 years ago

Others doing the same from a minority market position would have been fine.

So where's the interest in slapping billion dollar fines on Google for bundling Chrome and Google Search with Android? They own the majority market share for both mobile operating systems, web browsers, and search engines.

I guess they probably get away with it because they bundle it with Google Play Services instead of Android, but you could make an argument that GPS is fundamentally a part of Android given it is necessary to provide the features generally associated with the OS. It's not rock-solid, but it's at least a better argument than any of the other big-tech monopoly cases the US has been pursuing.

account427• 5 years ago

Lots of companies should be in trouble.

NelsonMinar2• 5 years ago

They got discouraged after the Bush years when all their antitrust actions were undermined.

arp242• 5 years ago

This kind of stuff has been going on for years as well; it's not something new. I don't normally use Windows, but a few years ago when I got a new ThinkPad I figured I'd have a looksie around with the pre-installed Windows 10 just to see what it's like out of curiosity since I never used Windows 8 or 10, and it displayed all sorts of stuff trying to force Edge on people, including "ads" that just pop up; see [1].

I'm not sure what I find more objectionable: that they're trying to push Edge so hard, or that they feel this is so important to pop up unprompted notifications for it distracting people from the actual work they're doing. I've been using Linux or BSD for a very long time for the simple pragmatical reason it just works better for me, and this sort of user-hostile behaviour only strengthened that.

The difference, I suppose, is that IE/Edge doesn't have the position it had in the past with >95% market share. Both macOS and mobile platforms removed a lot of teeth from Microsoft compared to the early/mid-2000s. Still, the actual behaviour is worse, even if the effects are less bad.

[1] https://www.arp242.net/browsers-conflict-interest.html

userbinator2• 5 years ago

Every time you hear something being done for "security" or "protection", think more carefully about what they're actually trying to protect or secure. That's something I wish more people would do. In this case, it's protection for securing Micro$oft's monopoly.

sdflhasjd3• 5 years ago

Microsoft is using "protected associations" to keep people using Edge, but I think people are forgetting how badly this used to be abused before Microsoft added this feature.

Applications would regularly change default associations without any user notice or consent.

For example, installers would bundle Adware and even Google Chrome (hidden with common dark patters of the time), setting your default browser or changing your homepage.

Semaphor2• 5 years ago

I think it’s less that they block this (as much as us powerusers might prefer them not to), and more that they decided they obviously deserve to be exempt.

Someone12342• 5 years ago

You're right.

The issue is mostly one of fairness: If Microsoft played by the same rules as Firefox/Chrome, then there is no issue (e.g. UI pops up, you have to select Edge). The problem is that Microsoft has one rule for them and another for everyone else, then designed an incredibly hostile defaults UI on Windows 11 to make changing it to non-Edge time-consuming.

sdflhasjd3• 5 years ago

Yup, the fact the settings dialogue behaves differently if your current browser is Edge is clearly unfair, and Edge has already been doing what Firefox is doing how, and skips the UI entirely by spoofing the signature in the registry that served to protect against non-consensual changes.

josephcsible3• 5 years ago

The concept of protected associations is reasonable. What's completely unreasonable is giving Edge an exception to the protection.

tgsovlerkhgsel• 5 years ago

The concept of protected associations is only reasonable if you ignore the fact that there will be a default. It is, de facto for many users, making it impossible to change that default.

dralley5• 5 years ago

Sure, fine, put in a generic "are you sure you want to do this" prompt.

But that's not what they have right now. What they have now is designed to promote and nag you about using Edge, specifically.

https://www.itsupportguides.com/wp-content/uploads/Windows10...

sdflhasjd3• 5 years ago

Sure, fine, put in a generic "are you sure you want to do this" prompt.

That's how it used to work (and how it works with non-browser associations) before the more recent Edge-pushing dark patterns.

aitchnyu• 5 years ago

Outlook and Teams on Android force me to install Edge to view links. I can't even paste links to non MS apps since the plaintext will be a notice instead.

hamilyon2• 5 years ago

Wait, what? Isn't it a definite violation of android rules around usage of intents and actions?

itsme-alan• 5 years ago

I am using Teams for Android and Outlook and I don't have even have Edge installed and links work fine.

rejectfinite• 5 years ago

That is probably a configuration/compliance policy set by your IT department via Microsoft Endpoint Manager. That is not standard I think?

aeharding• 5 years ago

If Microsoft's concern is default app hijacking by malicious players, why isn't there some sort of app-signing process to provide programs the better API?

kevincox• 5 years ago

It should just be a one-click UAC window probably "Are you sure you want Firefox to do this". But these dark patterns are common.

josephcsible3• 5 years ago

I'd be fine with this if a UAC approval were also needed to make Edge the default browser.

gadders• 5 years ago

Offtopic, but does anyone find Firefox really slow for gmail? I'm wondering if Google do stuff to slow Firefox down deliberately.

dralley5• 5 years ago

Gmail performance is pretty horrific, for what it does. It used to be even worse (twice as much memory and CPU as Youtube according to about:performance), but they've improved a bit since then.

It's still pretty bad, though.

trident50002• 5 years ago

You're getting downvoted but they actually did this with Youtube. So the answer is yes its possible.

maskros• 5 years ago

Not really, but I'm still using Basic HTML gmail!

It's a very well hidden option, but the https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/h/ link should take you there.

fleaaaa• 5 years ago

It was once unusually fast on FF right after google shortage a couple of month ago. Everything I click was instant, never had those kind of experience.

Now I feel like it's slow on both. There might be a priority issue but I doubt its slowness is FF only.

iamAtom• 5 years ago

Imagine how many decisions were made similar to this at the cost of smooth user experience. This is why windows or any MS products will never be my favourite because user experience takes back seat mostly.

tyingq• 5 years ago

Somewhat related, also see "EdgeDeflector": https://github.com/da2x/EdgeDeflector

It's a really handy utility to force windows to actually use your default browser in spaces where it currently forces Edge. You've probably seen this opening links from other Microsoft products where Edge unexpectedly pops up. Like from MS widgets on your toolbar, some links within MS Teams, etc.

nuxi7• 5 years ago

I need this, but for all the android apps that are refusing to open links in my chosen browser.

hashworks• 5 years ago

This. Changing the default browser in Windows and the application for *.htm? links is not enough - especially Microsoft Apps just ignore that and call Edge directly.

Strom• 5 years ago

The new Windows 11 defaults manager is amazingly user hostile. [1] Microsoft decided it's a great idea to make non technical users manually adjust 15 different file and protocol associations in order to change the default browser.

Microsoft's statement on this: we are implementing customer feedback to customize and control defaults at a more granular level, eliminating app categories and elevating all apps to the forefront of the defaults experience.

More granular control is nice and all, but I don't buy for a second that it couldn't be behind some "advanced" button. I think the most probable explanation for removing the app categories is a calculated move to steer people towards Microsoft products which have access to backdoor internal functions to change all of these automatically.

I do remember how bad things were back in Windows XP days when every random toolbar would change all the associations. I don't wish for that experience to come back for non technical users either. Microsoft could perhaps look into allowing digitally signed apps to change the associations automatically (a single summarizing OS confirmation prompt might be wise), and non-signed apps would have to instruct users to manually change things.

[1] https://www.theverge.com/22630319/microsoft-windows-11-defau...

syshum4• 5 years ago

If only we had actual Anti-Trust enforcement, because this is EXACTLY what they got wrist slapped for in the 90's

nvrspyx6• 5 years ago

More granular control is nice and all, but I don't buy for a second that it couldn't be behind some "advanced" button.

In fact, they could've just kept it the same as Windows 10 because this exact system was under "Choose defaults by app", along with a "Choose defaults by protocol" option, at the bottom of the defaults apps pane.

Windows 11 is a step back from more granular control considering there is no longer the option to change defaults by protocol. Instead, you need to go through multiple apps to see which protocols each app supports rather than going straight to the protocol/file type you want to change the default for.

warning26• 5 years ago

Windows 10's version was definitely better, but it still had its own brand of sketchiness.

Specifically, they had chosen a window size that placed the "default web browser" selector conveniently scrolled off the bottom. It would never be scrolled into view by default, even if the defaults control panel had been explicitly opened for the purpose of setting a default browser.

bryanrasmussen• 5 years ago

Windows 11 is a step back from more granular control considering there is no longer the option to change defaults by protocol. Instead, you need to go through multiple apps to see which protocols each app supports rather than going straight to the protocol/file type you want to change the default for.

haven't had a Windows machine for a couple years so I'm wondering - is there still a registry and are protocols still registered in it? I'm obviously not thinking about everyday users going through that to change permissions, just thinking about me.

xdfgh1112• 5 years ago

Of course it's calculated. Try putting Chrome/Google search on a fresh install of Windows and see how many times you are one click away from being reverted back to Edge/Bing. It must be over a dozen

DiabloD3• 5 years ago

I used to share your belief, but as I got older, I realized... Windows isn't targeted to us, the faux technocratic elite that grew up with computers: it's targeted to the average person, and the average person, largely, is technologically illiterate to some degree.

You cannot get file/uri associations correct in a UX in a way that handles all situations. Essentially, this is a subset of the "many to many relations in database tables fundamentally suck" problem, and every time this happens where it is directly exposed to the user it has never turned out well.

Combine the potential UI/UX nightmare of this with literal actual criminals putting malware on the PCs of technologically illiterate users: it now hijacks 15 different file/uri associations in ways that are not easily fixed.

What Microsoft should do? Do an Android-style ask (yes, the one that all the people like us hate) every time a new handler can be associated. What they can't do? Expressly this because it didn't exist in Win98 when they added uri handler system to the existing file handler system, and Microsoft is obsessed with backwards compat.

Side note: Technically, Firefox could trigger the OTHER existing API for this that UWP apps are forced to use as per MS Store sandboxing, from the C++ WinRT API; any app could. It isn't well documented, and isn't the intended use but WinUI 3.x's path is allowing apps to piecemeal their way into the future without all-or-nothing rewrites. I'm not going to insult Mozilla by saying they "choose not to", I'd rather someone else jump in the deep end first on that.

How Microsoft ended up fixing the actual issue at hand? Removing the need to get another browser in the first place, but still allowing technologically literate users to install one if they want. Edge is Chrome, but without the boneheaded decisions Google makes ruining it, and actually moving forwards in usability.

Edge has vertical tabs built in, it has an actually visually correct dark theme built in[1], has the existing bookmark/history/open tab/etc syncing (which some Chromium-based browsers still do not, as they have to write their own backend), it has an Android version (many desktop Chromium browsers do not have a matching phone version), it has the beginnings of a ABP/uBlock style ad blocker built in (its already in the Android version as well) (Chrome will never ship with adblocking built in, Google's entire business model depends on their ad network), its the first Chromium-based browser that supports the VBS-based hardware-enforced browser sandbox (Microsoft wants to bring it to all Chromium-based things including Electron apps), and it also has tab collections built in (which is also supported on the Android version), and last but not least, they have an actually working PWA container on the desktop (reviving the code Google killed because they didn't want a future where Android couldn't be a vendor lock-in moat).

The number of extensions I need to make Edge actually productive is less than any other browser.

You know what Mozilla brought me? Panorama, which is now gone. An extension system that could actually deeply modify the UI (thanks to XUL), which is now gone (and has been replaced with a partial WebExtension implementation). A PWA-first OS, called FirefoxOS, that would be lighter and faster than Android by several magnitudes, which is now gone. An Electron alternative that used Gecko instead, called Positron, also gone. A PWA container for the desktop called Prism, also dead.

Almost everything Mozilla thought of, half-assed, and then killed, Edge has succeeded, and brought to not only Windows, but OSX, Linux, and Android too, and also salvaged the slowly rotting Chromium codebase at the same time.

[1]: Dark themes should never have backgrounds darker than 16, as the eye has poor "bright on dark" focusing, but most monitors, even ones being sold today, have very poor tracking of values below the limited 16-240 range (even HDR monitors); the two of those together make standard viewing conditions (dimly lit office or indirect sunlight lit room or single 60W equivalent on a desk in a small bedroom, with a 100 nits monitor (sRGB defines optimal brightness as 80 nits + offset for ambient, BT1886 defines SDR white as 100 if not otherwise calibrated, BT2020 defines SDR content in HDR display mode as 100)) hard to read for standard distance and DPI monitors (ex: 24" 1080p or 27" 1440p at ~29 inches, given a 1.2 ratio of screen size to distance) at the standard text size (16px).

Dark themes that have pure black for misguided reasons should be eradicated for user accessibility reasons; contrast and readability are very important for everyone, not just people with diagnosed vision problems.

badRNG2• 5 years ago

I used to share your belief, but as I got older, I realized... Windows isn't targeted to us, the faux technocratic elite that grew up with computers: it's targeted to the average person, and the average person, largely, is technologically illiterate to some degree.

I mean, the average user has been capable of installing and using alternative browsers for a significant period of time. Most folks exist as some shade of gray between your Grandma with an Ask toolbar and the "HN elites." If anything, I think there is often an underestimation of what regular users understand and are willing to do with their tech (to improve their experience, privacy, etc.) If you need some sort of a sanity check, see how your friends and peers (that don't work in software) configure their systems. See what browsers they use, what adblockers they configure, etc. I predict you'd be surprised.

I rarely meet this "average user" who is often discussed on HN; this person who isn't interested in using non-standard software, who doesn't care at all about their privacy, who will use only the easiest and cheapest solution possible, etc. Dark patterns don't just work on these "average users," they work on plenty who even work in tech. I click "Accept All" on the cookie banner on this one-off website if it's the fastest way to read the contents, I will put off changing default apps if I have to hunt for the correct settings, heck I've been charged for subscriptions an extra month because I put off dealing with the hassle of cancelling the thing.

I think this "average user" is constructed in the collective imagination because it makes implementing user-hostile design choices a little more conscionable if you view your users as tech illiterate morons. Considering the state of the industry, one where dark patterns and user hostility permeate nearly every design choice, it doesn't surprise me that HN, a subset of this industry, holds this dim view of its users.

Miraste• 5 years ago

"Open all browser file types in a single browser I select" is good enough for both the average user and the "technocratic elite" in basically all cases, and there are certainly zero cases where choosing every file association manually is better for someone who doesn't know what they're doing.

I don't understand your complaint about Firefox's dark mode; I've been using it for years and I don't remember any pure black elements. And as far as extensions, Firefox may be missing a couple minor APIs but it's the only browser that doesn't block the important ones (e.g. the ones uBlock Origin needs) so ad companies can make more money.

frosted-flakes• 5 years ago

I use dark themes with pure black backgrounds precisely because it maximizes contrast and increases accessibility. I don't understand your dislike for them and desire to eradicate them, especially when they can exist alongside grey dark themes (as is commonly the case with Android apps).

chrismorgan• 5 years ago

Panorama, which is now gone.

It was removed from the core browser because they reached the point where it could be entirely implemented in an extension, and also wasn’t as popular as they’d hoped. … it should then be noted that it can no longer be perfectly implemented in a WebExtensions world; there are some compromises that need to be made, comparatively minor is my impression but I don’t use it (I used Panorama at first, but found before long that multiple windows and Tree Style Tab was more useful to me).

An extension system that could actually deeply modify the UI (thanks to XUL), which is now gone (and has been replaced with a partial WebExtension implementation).

Replaced for entirely legitimate performance reasons, even if you ignore the security and maintainability arguments. As with many things, it’s a balance. So long as userChrome.css still works, I’m fairly OK with where things lie.

Firefox OS, Positron, Prism

Sigh. Yeah. I’d count XULRunner here too. I won’t comment on Firefox OS or Prism, but I believe a substantial reason in the killing of XULRunner and Positron is that they were too hard to maintain and held progress on Firefox back.

Almost everything Mozilla thought of, half-assed, and then killed, Edge has succeeded

It’s funny how these things go: an early implementer before its time, and then later something else reinvents much the same thing but actually succeeds at it. The first two examples of this that my mind always springs to are actually both Microsoft: HTA, which was basically Electron lite, but in 1999; and tablet PCs in the mid-2000s, that quite flopped because the hardware wasn’t quite right yet, and so Microsoft abandoned the space and licked their wounds for another decade before returning (with the iPad and Android tablets having occupied the space, including things like ASUS’s Eee Pad Transformers).

And the related phenomenon of cycles like how OSes used to be all colour-customisable, then they steadily lost that, then eventually they all added dark modes back in again, treating it as something all new and never-before-seen.

Dark themes

You’re subscribing to the common fallacy that dark themes are just one thing. The fact of the matter is that there are actually several substantially different types of dark modes. This is theory I’ve been mulling over for the last few years; I’ve vacillated between reckoning three and four types and exactly where to draw lines, but I’m currently going with four: ① æsthetic, which is fairly low contrast and certainly avoids true black and white; ② accessibility, which is high contrast in both colours and styles (that is, no gentle gradients, just harsh boundaries between colours), and uses true black and white—note here that light accessibility mode is much more likely to be useful than dark accessibility mode, but both have a place; ③ low-light, which uses true black and mostly fairly bright whites up to and including true white, but is not scared of in-between colours or actively trying for super-high contrast; and ④ power-saver, which is largely for things like OLED panels, where true black definitely uses less power and can look great, and certainly not for TN LCD panels where true black tends to look awful. Which type of dark mode is most appropriate depends on the user’s eyesight, the device screen type, the ambient lighting conditions, the nature of the content being presented, user preference, and power availability.

cm21872• 5 years ago

But what makes it even worse is that Microsoft overrides your choice frequently on OS updates, which means you will need to repeat all these manual steps not just for each machine, but also for each major OS update. And you can’t script it.

msoucy• 5 years ago

Microsoft just forced all of their office suite file extensions to look at their MS Office... which I don't (shouldn't) have installed. I happily use LibreOffice. But suddenly things are going to different apps!

User Friendly, as long as by "friendly" you mean "actively sabotaging"

davidjade3• 5 years ago

I see this statement repeated often but I have never had this happen - not even once. I use Windows Pro and don’t do anything special either, I just apply Windows updates. If this is happening, I wonder why it is not happening to me.

otikik• 5 years ago

If I'm reading this correctly, it can be scripted. It's just that the API that does it isn't public.

pxeboot• 5 years ago

We have been scripting it for years with this utility: https://kolbi.cz/blog/2017/10/25/setuserfta-userchoice-hash-...

DelightOne2• 5 years ago

Microsoft will never change.

StreamBright• 5 years ago

I guess it just shows how much Microsoft is user focused.

The only reason why I was not using Windows was that it did not have enough user options.

Cthulhu_• 5 years ago

It's a dark pattern, it reminds me of the cookie banner opt-out flows where they make it intentionally overly complicated.

I hope the EU sues them again over this. Same with the cookie banner, by law there should be a single click 'no thanks' button.

jareklupinski• 5 years ago

that's pretty much their MO: keep pushing the envelope until you get sued, then take 2 steps back and start again

inter_netuser• 5 years ago

Why is Firefox marketshare so low?

pomian• 5 years ago

Maybe it is not as low as it appears. Since most of the privacy settings are the default, installs and usage isn't counted?

mixmastamyk2• 5 years ago

Android happened and combined with a popular desktop Chrome, well the rest is history.

deadbunny3• 5 years ago

my experience with HN usage is that "its not as fast as chrome" or "the dev tools arent as good as chrome".

My experience with "normal" people; we the nerds told them to install chrome 10 years ago and now they are used to it.

Personally I use Firefox and have done since it came out as it's fast enough for me and I'm not a front-end dev so the dev tools suit my limited use.

random_ind_dude• 5 years ago

Mostly because of a multi-billion dollar ad campaign by a megacorp whose name rhymes with Moogle.

notriddle• 5 years ago

Because the reasons why its market share ever got as high as it did to begin with no longer apply. Firefox isn't basically competing with a piece of abandonware that happens to ship with Windows any more.

DelightOne2• 5 years ago

Dark patterns from Microsoft and Google. They nag users to set their own applications as the default. You can't expect users who don't know any better to to always say no, they get tired and then say yes.

slaymaker1907• 5 years ago

On a related note, I find it really frustrating that I can't just select a default text editor. I even want to use a MS product, VS Code, but there is not really an easy way to tell Windows to use VS Code for all text files.

Really what I would like is a two step association list. Be able to specify what category a particular file type is under (i.e. text file, web browser file, etc.) as well as specifying which text file or web browser should be used in general. Obviously many file types only need a direct association with an application, but that is not always the case and as is the case with text files, it may not be possible for an application installer to know all extensions it needs to associate with itself.

tracker13• 5 years ago

I seem to remember a checkbox during install for this. Though if you use winget/chocolatey, unsure of how to do it after the fact.

Though, 99% of my VS code use is launched from terminal anyway, and I can always right-click. That said, the Win11 right-click menu buries most of the options.

graycat2• 5 years ago

My solution to that problem is mostly via my favorite text editor KEDIT and some good directory tree walking via some simple Rexx scripts.

So the usual way of working is to use a text window (with a nicely juiced up set of environment variables) to go to a relevant directory. Uh, several directories are fairly easy also since a command line MARK A will set environment variable MARK.A to the directory name and command G A will make that directory current, for A, B, AB, C, ABC, .... Then with a directory current, use command K to run script K.REX to run KEDIT which right away displays the directory contents and right away gives me lots of ways to edit, manipulate, select lines in the display. Then one keystroke can view a file, that is, run my KEDIT macro VIEW.KEX which is pretty smart on what program to run to process that file.

I have, let's see, in my main collection of KEX macros 265 macros!

That process works for essentially all my typing for any and all reasons -- email, blog posts, macro writing, code writing, TeX word processing, PDF file reading, movie watching, etc. I'm thrilled, happy as a clam, especially with the Windows file system NTFS -- not so thrilled with some other aspects of Windows.

deadbunny3• 5 years ago

I recently gave a friend my old PC, I installed Windows, updated it then did a factory reset so they could go through the first run setup themselves. Watching them set the machine up and blindly agreeing to all telemetry without even blinking really opened my eyes to how much "normal" people dont care about telemetry.

The great irony here is that we - technical people - have done this to ourselves. We opt out of telemetry (as we should IMO) as a default so out usage patterns never get sent to the mothership. So of course Windows gets dumbed down, options disappear, and the OS gets targeted at the normal folk.

I have no horse in this race to be fair as a linux user but I do find it amusing.

antisthenes• 5 years ago

The great irony here is that we - technical people - have done this to ourselves. We opt out of telemetry (as we should IMO) as a default so out usage patterns never get sent to the mothership. So of course Windows gets dumbed down, options disappear, and the OS gets targeted at the normal folk.

There's no irony here. Even if every single technically apt user sent their feedback to Microsoft at once, it would still be drowned out by the 99% of the general population that clicks through everything without reading or adjusting.

It's not even close, and we shouldn't be giving MS the benefit of the doubt anymore, considering what they've done to Windows in the last 10 years. They did it deliberately, while hiding behind "improving user experience" and "security".

hef198983• 5 years ago

I have my first Linux machine since this weekend, and I really love how that feels a lot like old school Windows. Just an OS running on your own hardware, no calling home, no cloud, no account somewhere if I don't want to. And surprisingly easy to install as well, again not really more difficult than, say, setting up Windows XP yourself. or Windows 2000.

It is really quite refreshing to have some of the freedom from the "old days" back. Honestly, I don't think I'll go back for private usage. Work is different, a) because employers provide hard- and software and b) because Office 365 is quite good for corporate use.

BitwiseFool• 5 years ago

I am so comfortable with personal computers that I take it for granted how intimidating the setup can be for the average Joe and Jane. Telling someone to change which app handles a certain file extension is like a mechanic telling me how to adjust one of the valves inside of a carburetor. Certainly do-able, but a nightmare to someone who thinks they can break the whole thing with one wrong move.

roca3• 5 years ago

There is nothing wrong with well-implemented telemetry. It's an extremely valuable tool for improving software quality. I don't understand the antipathy some people have for it.

danudey• 5 years ago

I appreciate the way MacOS handles these sorts of things: Applications can say "I am a browser!" and then the user can choose their preferred default from a drop-down. Also works for e-mail and FTP clients, as well as possibly others.

facorreia• 5 years ago

This is the main reason my Windows 10 PC sits unused. It keeps trying to undo my settings after every update.

kbenson• 5 years ago

What I really want is a way to tell Windows to open a different application for the file or URL type based on the application it comes from. I run a dedicated browser for work that proxies all its traffic across an SSH SOCKS proxy, and really just want clicks from Outlook and Teams to load in it, and everything else to load in Firefox.

Instead, I wrote a little thing myself[1] to make a distinction based on the pattern matching the URL. I took the chance to learn a bit more about Deno and deploying standalone apps, which I don't regret, since it was actually super easy, but I still wish I didn't have to. (Note: that utility isn't quite ready to be used easily, it needs to default the config file to a more standard location for the user to be easily useful as an filetype/URL target).

1: https://github.com/kbenson/urlswitcher-deno

omegalulw• 5 years ago

but I don't buy for a second that it couldn't be behind some "advanced" button.

All you need is a single "apply to all prompt" when a user toggles for one of the extensions.

graycat2• 5 years ago

Long ago I gave up on letting Windows use associations. So, instead, I run programs (apps) via a script that makes the associations I want based on more than just a file extension.

Windows keeps thinking that it knows where I want files for music, movies, documents, images, etc. Nope, for me it knows no such things. If Windows was correct, then I would be making only nearly trivial use of Windows. Going back to PC/DOS, I knew where I wanted files, had my own way of keeping track of files, and still do.

account427• 5 years ago

Microsoft could perhaps look into allowing digitally signed apps to change the associations automatically (a single summarizing OS confirmation prompt might be wise), and non-signed apps would have to instruct users to manually change things.

I don't think that should be acceptable until Microsoft provides a way for developer to sign their programs at no cost.

HeavyStorm• 5 years ago

I'm pretty sure 11 is my new 7. I won't be using it (well, maybe my employer will, but that's one machine out of three I use regularly), and it's pushing me towards alternatives again.

Let's hope Windows 12 solves these problems, as 10 solved 8's.

NazakiAid• 5 years ago

This explains why the other day on a fresh Windows install, Firefox set its self to the default browser with just 1 click. Very easy and great especially as the computer was very slow.

Though I will admit, I thought something had gone wrong and it didn't work as it couldn't open the default apps dialog.

tester342• 5 years ago

Holy shit I noticed that lately

and thought Windows stopped doing this

rk06• 5 years ago

The key point here is that Microsoft has made a way to bypass those protections, so that people could switch to Edge from IE easily.

Firefox reverse engineered it and implemented it.

I suspect that in windows 11, edge will be set as default browser, and the backdoor will be removed :(

faebi• 5 years ago

I recently had to help my parents since they could not login to their email service anymore because Microsoft silently switched the default browser to edge. And of course their saved credentials aren't available anymore. They asked me what they did wrong. I had no other words to say than that Microsoft is literally abusing their position to force them to use something else. It's Microsofts fault and we can't do anything about it. Then I had to video call them to guide them through the anti-patterns when switching the default browser. So, I do like Mozillas behavior and wish Chrome offered the same.

tgtweak2• 5 years ago

The amount of dark design patterns around getting edge as the default browser is sickening. Opera was flagged as PUA by many AVs for simply changing the default browser after asking users post-install if they wanted to use that browser as their default - just as edge does (and before Firefox copied that same mechanism here). Now every post-windows update screen (which takes place before you even log in...) comes with a full-page nag screen asking you to "Use Microsoft recommended browser settings" [1]... This is on the heels of a screen that says "Let's make Windows even better - this shouldn't affect what you've already set up" [2]. Even more disappointing is not that they're doing this but that nobody is taking these platforms to court over it in a meaningful way.

[1] https://www.windowslatest.com/2020/11/15/windows-10-is-now-n...

[2] https://www.windowslatest.com/2020/06/07/windows-10-full-scr...

inetknght2• 5 years ago

Even more disappointing is not that they're doing this but that nobody is taking these platforms to court over it in a meaningful way.

Average citizens don't have the money needed to fight big corporate lawyers.

FTC, FCC, SEC, etc are all neutered in will and in budget.

Will nobody rid us of a corrupt collusion between government and corporation?

p_j_w3• 5 years ago

Will nobody rid us of a corrupt collusion between government and corporation?

We could by changing who we vote for.

seph-reed• 5 years ago

If anyone is going to save public sector from private, it's gonna have to be good-actors in private sector.

Public sector is long, long, long beyond corrupted. The only way forwards is to carefully migrate away from the infested wreckage into something built from the ground up.

It's like a code-base that's been hacked mercilessly, and was written in a dead language to boot.

CRConrad4• 5 years ago

Will nobody rid us of a corrupt collusion between government and corporation?

You need, Idunno, maybe a bothersome cleric.

trzeci• 5 years ago

+1 on that: It's still manageable to set a default browser which is not Ms Edge, but I found especially dark pattern - that Windows apps do not respect that setting. Take a look on the news feed in the recent Windows 10 release. When you click on a link, it opens Ms Edge regardless what you have set as default browser. I think I've seen also some user guides / support pages opening also in Ms Edge that way. Frankly speaking, even if I found some news feeds interesting, the fact it will be opened in MS Edge made me to disable the feed at all.

narag• 5 years ago

Let me add: last Windows update nuked VLC sound.

I wanted to report details of the bug, but after creating an account with VLC, I can't post anything unless I provide my phone number.

heywherelogingo• 5 years ago

"Wow, Microsoft has really changed!"

spodek• 5 years ago

Mozilla should consider creating an option to switch the whole operating system to Linux.

Obviously huge, but for some users maybe not hard. For some users welcome.

chris_wot• 5 years ago

The only truly crappy part of Windows, IMO, is drive letters and ridiculous legacy file system layout. And WinSxS (people will disagree with me).

Other than that, it’s a robust, well written system.

sealeck2• 5 years ago

I may be wrong (I am not a lawyer) but I suspect that if Microsoft prevent Mozilla from doing this, Mozilla may be able to win a lawsuit (probably not in the US, but in the EU seems likely) arguing that it is anti-competitive to restrict defaults in this way. See judgements against Google for similar restrictions on Android.

trident50002• 5 years ago

Sounds anti-competitive on Microsoft's part.

p_j_w3• 5 years ago

"A tiger's never gonna change its stripes."

chriscjcj3• 5 years ago

Meanwhile, Firefox released version 57 that killed most of their extensions and add-ons. Then it imposed terrible changes to their UI that you can't change with the new extensions. Want tabs below the address bar? Too bad. Github now has numerous projects for re-vamping Firefox's userChrome.css because its UI is THAT bad. And now there's Proton. I'm sure there's someone out there that likes it, but I haven't heard from anyone who does. Want to turn it off? Too bad. Mozilla thinks they know what's best for their users and seems incapable of internalizing any criticism. If Firefox is so great, why would so many calories get burned creating Waterfox? If Mozilla were really doing a great job with Firefox, giving people what they really wanted in a browser, they wouldn't need to be quite so concerned about Microsoft's shenanigans. If it were a great and wonderful browser, people would want it and do what they needed to do to install it. This is not an argument that what MS is doing is okay; it's not. But after everything Firefox has dished out over the last few years, it's just difficult for me to feel too sorry for them.

mftb• 5 years ago

So when FF reduces customization by changing the extension system they are bad. When they let you customize the UI ad-infinitum through userChrome.css it's because, "its UI is THAT bad.". Right, got it, FF bad. Some of the devs who have worked on the FF extension system over the years both before and after the changes have blogged about why they had to do what they did, https://yoric.github.io/post/why-did-mozilla-remove-xul-addo..., are security and maintainability difficult to grok? FF is large and has had to live in an increasingly hostile web for a very long time. As for your reasoning about why there are alternative browsers and ecosystems, it's simply not good. One of the main reasons people work on alternative browsers is they like making things. This is evident everywhere in Free Software/Open Source, where there are options for almost every part of every stack.

chriscjcj3• 5 years ago

Your point that extensions to modify the UI vs. userChrome.css is well taken, but I would argue that it's apples and oranges. I did a poor job of explaining myself. I'll attempt to elucidate and apologize if I do a poor job again. My argument regarding breaking extensions was in the context of allowing users to modify the browser's UI/UX to their liking.

Installing an extension is a common practice performed by many people who possess little-to-no "computer skills." (for lack of a better way to put it.) Just about anyone can search for an extension, perform a few clicks, and install it. And this used to be a popular method for those who disliked UI changes Mozilla foisted upon them so that they could easily return to a UI they enjoyed. Unfortunately, the UI modifications that can now be made with extensions are minimal. Users are encouraged to modify userChrome.css instead. While this may seem trivial and perhaps preferred by some in the HN demographic, this effectively takes it out of the mainstream. Most users are not going to find their FF profile folder, create a chrome folder (which doesn't exist by default), and start coding css to make their browser look different. Nor are they going to have any idea that there are projects on github which would provide solutions for them. But let's say, for argument's sake that one did go to the trouble. Would you like to move the tabs below the address bar? Good luck with that. And then watch your css no longer work when Mozilla makes further changes making your modifications ineffective. There is one project that does manage to move the tabs below the address bar but it leaves a blank area above the address bar where the tabs would be. Mozilla has dug in on their tab bar dogma, user preference be damned. We're seeing it again with proton. It seems to be universally reviled, but guess what: you're gettin' it whether you like it or not. Want to use your operating system's printer dialog box instead of FireFox's incomplete and buggy one? Too bad. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1322589?page=2#a...

I also understand that people create derivatives of open source projects as an intellectual pursuit, which is wonderful. However, I used Waterfox as an example. Indeed, Waterfox appears to have begun its existence in much the way you describe. But fast-forward to now, on their website's main page, they trumpet their tab bar thus: "Fan-tab-u-lous - Everyone likes to use their browser in a specific way." And indeed, in the preferences there is a simple way to set the position of the tab bar. Why would that be so hard for Mozilla to do in Firefox? Why? They also highlight, "Limited Data Collection," "No Telemetry," and "The most extension support of any browser." Do you not think it safe to infer that this may be their current raison d'être and how they would like to differentiate themselves from Firefox?

Yes, I know there are alternative projects. My criticism is directed primarily toward the Firefox UI team. It is a mystery to me why an organization that expends so much energy and money marketing itself in an attempt to get new users, regularly angering its existing users to the point where they want to bail. This article is nice explainer: https://www.inc.com/karl-and-bill/its-cheaper-to-keep-em.htm...

chriscjcj3• 5 years ago

FWIW... here's a thread on the topic from /. today.

https://news.slashdot.org/story/21/09/12/181257/ask-slashdot...

vmoore• 5 years ago

Meanwhile, Firefox released version 57 that killed most of their extensions and add-ons

Palemoon supports older addons. Even has a archive of all the old FF extensions on its homepage[0]. I never needed that many addons though. I can't live without uBlock Origin though. It should ship with FF IMHO

[0] https://addons.palemoon.org/extensions/?all=1

awinter-py• 5 years ago

I don't understand -- US v microsoft was about literally this, except it was netscape. How do you go through the largest tech antitrust action ever and then just forget.

Why does msft even want their thing to be default? The only site I've ever seen recommend it is the NY DMV, and it was a bad recommendation -- they actually needed IE11.

swamp40• 5 years ago

In the end of days, amongst the smoldering ruins, a cockroach scurried over a keyboard and triggered yet another computer to default back to Microsoft Edge. As far as the eye could see, there was nothing left moving but the flitting of black vermin, illuminated by glowing screens filled with the sulky, impassioned, and now joyful gradient blue and green curved wave of the Microsoft Edge logo. It had won. It had finally won.

kipchak2• 5 years ago

Fun Fact, if you go to Settings -> More Tools -> Math Solver, Edge has a built in math tool that will solve for equations in the browser window when highlighted.

https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/articles/learn-how-to...

sitzkrieg2• 5 years ago

msft lunch break comment?

kipchak2• 5 years ago

I wish, just digging in Edge attempting to configure it for compliance purposes and I thought a Math Solver being a feature was mildly amusing

bobbob1921• 5 years ago

Keep in mind too- Microsoft is almost at the point of giving windows (as an OS) away for free. Whereas in the past they would charge around $99 for windows (or less per machine to OEMs). Other OSes have forced Microsoft to pretty much give their OS away for free.

From a msft/revenue point of view, Microsoft will now feel less inhibitions with regard to using windows to drive revenue via other Microsoft products. (Ie Windows will now be seen internally as a “loss leader” product that must drive revenue via other sources such as Bing, edge, office 365 etc)

tester7562• 5 years ago

Whereas in the past they would charge around $99 for windows

When was "the past"? 1990? 2000? 2004?

bob10292• 5 years ago

I would happily pay inflation-adjusted full price for a special edition of windows that doesn't treat me like cattle.

How big do we think this market is? Maybe I'm the crazy one these days...

dehrmann• 5 years ago

This might not be an issue for default apps, but there was a time when websites and toolbars abused setting the default homepage, so I have mixed feelings about this. It also improves the user experience if you use two browsers because when Chrome reminds me it's not the default, it's harder to accidentally make it the default.

aSig• 5 years ago

Any idea on how you would go about reverse engineering something like this on windows?

tuankiet65• 5 years ago

To be honest, Mozilla isn't the first one here. SetUserFTA (https://kolbi.cz/blog/2017/10/25/setuserfta-userchoice-hash-...) has been around since 2017, and this pastebin (https://pastebin.com/yVhWeQ3X) even predates it.

bluedino• 5 years ago

I came in this morning to find my computer was opening PDF's in Edge, as well as the default browser had been changed from Chrome to Edge.

Stupid.

heavyset_go5• 5 years ago

Tangentially related, but I recently spun up a Windows VM and used Edge to search Bing for "Firefox" and this is result I got[1].

It's a giant banner that says, "You're already browsing in Microsoft Edge. Keep using to get world class performance with more privacy, more productivity, and more value."

That banner is followed by another giant banner image telling me to get "Get Robux using Microsoft Edge. Join Microsoft Rewards and use Microsoft Edge. Get a 100 Robux eGift Card on us when you search with Microsoft Bing on Microsoft Edge for 5 days after you join."

I had to scroll to even see the relevant search results for my search term. I'm assuming most non-power users won't scroll because they were just assured that they were "already browsing in Microsoft Edge", which is apparently more private, productive and valuable than what they intended to search for.

[1] https://i.imgur.com/blHGMgX.png

liamwire• 5 years ago

Ostensibly this is the exact opposite function one wants out of a search tool, obscuring results. For Microsoft to design such an egregious UX for one of their key platforms, the incentives must be staggering. Calling this a dark pattern doesn’t go far enough, in my opinion. It’s outright user-hostile.

aguasfrias• 5 years ago

The targeted ad banner is hilarious. It reminds me of that scene in Silicon Valley where Dominos appears in a fantasy medieval universe because Dinesh mentions pizza.

Vanit• 5 years ago

Isn't this a security hole if an app can change Windows behaviour without prompts?

Mozilla has defeated Microsoft’s default browser protections in Windows

Related Stories