[HN Gopher] Over the edge: The use of design tactics to undermin...
___________________________________________________________________
Over the edge: The use of design tactics to undermine browser
choice
Author : ChrisArchitect
Score : 372 points
Date : 2024-02-03 04:35 UTC (18 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (research.mozilla.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (research.mozilla.org)
| ChrisArchitect wrote:
| Related discussion from earlier in the week:
|
| _Microsoft stole my Chrome tabs, and it wants yours, too_
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39179929
| Animats wrote:
| Is it that bad with the enterprise edition?
| vladvasiliu wrote:
| Anecdotally, I haven't seen any notable difference between the
| enterprise edition I have at work and the pro I have at home. I
| don't use Windows that much, actually, so I'm fine with Edge.
| Even so, I get the feeling that every other day it's trying to
| get me to "improve my experience by using Edge" or some such.
|
| The best part is the "let's get you connected" or whatever crap
| it says when you first start it. I often connect to fresh VMs
| over RDP, so it's always a joy to get to sit through the crappy
| stuttering animations just so I can tell it to leave me alone.
| the8472 wrote:
| I've had Outlook start opening Edge even though Firefox was set
| to as default browser. This was on EE.
| RedShift1 wrote:
| There's something worse: only the enterprise edition respects
| certain group policies which it doesn't in the pro, all related
| to default application settings and such. Same with Office 365
| subscriptions, you need some higher level than for example
| business standard to have it honor the "open links with system
| default browser" group policy. Unfortunately not covered in the
| Mozilla report.
| echelon_musk wrote:
| LTSC is how Windows 10 should be. It's a pleasure to use.
| echelon wrote:
| Do Google next, Mozilla.
|
| Oh wait.
| ekianjo wrote:
| yeah Mozilla never complains about harmful design on
| chromebooks. Strange!
| malermeister wrote:
| I mean, yes, Google pays Mozilla. But also, Chromebooks are
| barely relevant compared to Windows.
| youngtaff wrote:
| Windows is barely relevant compared to Android and iOS
| cassepipe wrote:
| Well browser choice is definitely not an issue on
| Android.
|
| Whereas iOS...
| IshKebab wrote:
| It is for Firefox.
| ekianjo wrote:
| If they were a non-biased actor they would commission a
| study across all systems, not just what's convenient for
| them and Google. They are more and more ridiculous by the
| day and deserve their tiny market share.
| AlexandrB wrote:
| Why does it matter whether they're biased if they're
| correct? Plenty of short sellers are biased (massively
| so) yet that doesn't necessarily undermine their
| analysis.
| jampekka wrote:
| They did.
|
| https://research.mozilla.org/browser-competition/5wg/
| Vinnl wrote:
| Also https://github.com/mozilla/platform-
| tilt/labels/vendor%3A%20...
|
| Part of
| https://blog.mozilla.org/netpolicy/2024/01/19/platform-tilt/
| devl547 wrote:
| Do Mozilla next, Mozilla!
| sccxy wrote:
| Deep analysis of Pocket and other crapware would be nice.
| visarga wrote:
| Well, of course we use Pocket if the native browser
| bookmarking function doesn't save the full text of the page
| for search. Why can't we have the tiniest improvement for
| bookmarking in browsers in 25 years? It's like they took an
| oath to never improve it.
| sccxy wrote:
| I removed it all the time, but after update it came back
| like a malware.
| sideshowb wrote:
| Is there a way to use bing chat from Firefox yet?
| zipping1549 wrote:
| Not an answer but better alternative: Kagi. Paid, but it pays
| for itself. Not affiliated. Just satisfied.
| dizhn wrote:
| How about for people where having to log in to search is a
| nonstarter? Has a method to be able to take payments without
| the ability to track the users been invented yet?
| zipping1549 wrote:
| If you are not comfortable with trusting their claims of
| not saving search history(which is very reasonable not to
| belive so imo), you don't have to use it. They also take
| Cryoto so if you think crypto is .. a thing, you can do
| that.
| flexagoon wrote:
| Use a burner email and pay via Bitcoin?
| pasc1878 wrote:
| Kagi does not have an equivalent to Bing Chat does it. The
| latter is an AI.
| zipping1549 wrote:
| https://help.kagi.com/kagi/ai/assistant.html
| inrodos wrote:
| It does have a competing product. AI chat augmented with
| search results.
| freeAgent wrote:
| It has exactly that with access to OpenAI, Anthropic, and
| Mistral AIs, but you have to pay for the Ultimate plan.
| Audiophilip wrote:
| >Is there a way to use bing chat from Firefox yet?
|
| Bing Chat has been working with Firefox for a while now.
| asadotzler wrote:
| Works fine for me and has since I first learned of it months
| ago.
| ustad wrote:
| Well done to Mozilla for commissioning this report. An
| interesting read that confirms what we always thought was
| happening. We should encourage similar kind of reporting.
| andersrs wrote:
| iPhone browser choice: https://imgur.com/a/jFa5A5j
| dotancohen wrote:
| Please don't post memes to HN.
| cyanwave wrote:
| Are you being serious?
| andersrs wrote:
| It's fair enough I shouldn't have posted it.
| hiddencost wrote:
| User hostile design patterns are everywhere these days... I wish
| that there were inspectors who were as powerful as health
| inspectors, empowered to make companies to fix their dark
| patterns.
| gbxyz wrote:
| I kind of get the vibe that Mozilla is laying the groundworks for
| Microsoft vs Netscape Round II - or at least some kind of
| antitrust litigation.
| tussa wrote:
| About time!
| geysersam wrote:
| I hope so. But a lot has changed, notably the financial power
| and sheer size of their counterparts. We're talking about three
| of the most valuable companies in the world.
| doix wrote:
| I really wish they'd go after Apple and Safari. Safari is
| basically the modern day IE. Whenever I do anything slightly
| weird, I'm fairly confident it works in chrome/Firefox and
| almost sure that it's broken in safari.
|
| The fact that you can't test on Safari without osx is insane.
| Some bugs can be reproduced in other WebKit browsers (I test
| with epiphany) but some are safari only. Not to mention the
| fact that Safari is the only choice on Apple mobile devices.
|
| I believe Apple is significantly worse than Microsoft in
| regards to browsers. I wish Mozilla would focus on them.
| m2mdas2 wrote:
| They won't. They already have given both Apple and Google
| pass when chrome was launched or when smartphones took of.
| Mozilla sees Microsoft as devil's incarnation while Google
| and Apple are the ally in their holy war.
|
| I am saying this as a developer who was using Firefox since
| firebug v0.8 era.
| Vinnl wrote:
| There is https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/26/24052067/mozilla-
| apple-io... and
| https://blog.mozilla.org/netpolicy/2024/01/19/platform-tilt/.
| janci wrote:
| Tip: winget install Mozilla.Firefox
| YPPH wrote:
| Windows just keeps getting weirder. There's this regrettable
| dichotomy between (1) a rock solid OS core with great features
| like Hyper-V, PowerShell and exceptional back-compat, and (2) a
| crap, sluggish, inconsistent UI slapped on top, laden with ads,
| "Rewards" Points and tracking.
| urbandw311er wrote:
| Many years ago, they used to charge a not inconsiderable amount
| for Windows. Given the trend towards making an OS cheap/free, I
| wonder is this some corporate response driven by a department
| somewhere that is charged with balancing the books.
| jonathantf2 wrote:
| That's the worst part (and I know that most people will never
| buy a license because they get it through their OEM or just
| crack it) but Microsoft are still happy to charge you PS220
| for a Windows 11 Pro licence [0] and shove ads in your face.
|
| [0] https://www.microsoft.com/en-
| gb/d/windows-11-pro/dg7gmgf0d8h...
| Izmaki wrote:
| The second all my games are fully compatible with Linux
| natively, I'm ditching that horrible "does it all, but
| poorly" corporation.
| jeffparsons wrote:
| How recently have you tried. Obviously YMMV, but all mine
| already are. Proton is a thing of beauty.
| LtWorf wrote:
| Microsoft kicks me from online play if I use proton...
| Coincidence?
| lelanthran wrote:
| > The second all my games are fully compatible with Linux
| natively, I'm ditching
|
| I've been seeing this sentiment since 2001 at least. No
| one ever follows through; if they did we would have seen
| this already in the desktop stats.
|
| You will, whether you consciously realise it or not,
| switch to playing windows exclusive games the minute all
| your games run on Linux, hence you will never switch.
| _dain_ wrote:
| _> I've been seeing this sentiment since 2001 at least.
| No one ever follows through; if they did we would have
| seen this already in the desktop stats._
|
| There has been an inflection point crossed lately,
| because of Proton and the Steam Deck. Linux is at 1.95%
| market share on Steam today. A year ago it was 1.3%.
| lelanthran wrote:
| As I pointed out to another reply, this fact is not
| relevant to the point I made.
|
| You may as well say "but the sky is blue", which is also
| true and just as irrelevant
| weberer wrote:
| >if they did we would have seen this already in the
| desktop stats
|
| Well you can see it. Linux is used by 4.25% of all
| English speaking Steam users. And its trending upward.
|
| https://www.gamingonlinux.com/steam-tracker/
| lelanthran wrote:
| That's a statistic that is irrelevant to my point.
|
| It is not a statistic of Linux desktop share, it's a
| statistic of existing Linux users, not windows
| migrations.
| weberer wrote:
| >It is not a statistic of Linux desktop share
|
| Yes it is. The Y axis is "Percentage of Steam users". The
| fact that the Linux percentage is increasing means that
| the the percentage of Windows users are decreasing. The
| graph shows a trend of migrating from Windows to Linux.
| lelanthran wrote:
| > Yes it is. The Y axis is "Percentage of Steam users".
|
| "% of desktops amongst Steam users" is significantly
| different from "% of desktops".
| Macha wrote:
| Stat counter also has Linux going from 2.5% in 2021 to
| 3.8% today: https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-
| share/desktop/worldwide...
|
| (And yes, this excludes ChromeOS and Android)
| heelix wrote:
| I think we are at an interesting reflection point.
| Desktop Linux is to the point where it does pass the
| grandma/cousin tests for usability/install. Games were
| one of the big items from a compatibility perspective.
| Combine that with Windows 11 not working on older, viable
| hardware... 2025 is going to be interesting.
|
| Those of us who used it on desktop Linux helped drive the
| handheld, which is really accelerating compatibility.
| When Windows 10 hits EOL, folks got to go somewhere - and
| many are not going to toss out their hardware for new.
| tremon wrote:
| Then stop buying games that are not?
| steve_rambo wrote:
| OEM licenses are not exactly free or cheap. I was perusing
| the local shops a couple of weeks ago and the same exact
| laptop without a Windows Home license is always $100
| cheaper, no exceptions. More than that for Pro or whatever
| the fuck it's called. So most people will buy a license,
| they'll simply not be aware of it. How convenient for MS.
| 7734128 wrote:
| "OEM" licenses sold by retail is not at all
| representative of what actual PC makers pay, which is of
| course going to massively vary. I wouldn't be surprised
| if some manufacturers, especially those who have been
| flirting with Linux, have instead been paid to install
| Windows.
| narag wrote:
| _Microsoft are still happy to charge you PS220 for a
| Windows 11 Pro licence..._
|
| You can buy Windows 10 Pro OEM licenses for less than 20EUR
| online. I did just that for a familiar three months ago.
| The installation was validated and associated with the
| Microsoft account no problem.
|
| Then you can "upgrade" to Windows 11 free of charge, if
| that's your thing.
| noduerme wrote:
| When I was a kid it was just a crappy, sluggish, inconsistent
| UI built on top of DOS.
| steve1977 wrote:
| That was the "Windows 95" lineage. NT was solid from the
| start (which is why MS then also made it the basis for XP).
| noduerme wrote:
| I should have added /s. It was Windows 3, actually. But I
| was just riffing on the parent to point out that we've come
| full circle.
| orbital-decay wrote:
| NT was far more resource-demanding (i.e. "sluggish") than
| 9x due to all the abstractions - it's just the hardware
| that progressed so fast in a few years that it was kind of
| irrelevant.
| noduerme wrote:
| I feel like almost all software since roughly the advent
| of the CD-ROM, when distro size stopped being a major
| limit, has been in a race to outbloat Moore's Law.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| That's true, NT was much more resource demanding but
| there were other mitigating factors too. Drivers were
| either inefficient and or badly written, the video driver
| imposed inflexible rules on software's access to the
| underlying hardware and its plug-and-play feature was
| brain-dead from the outset. Most of these problems
| weren't fixed until Windows 2000.
|
| Incidentally, I've always thought W2K--taken all round--
| as the best version of Windows, it's the version with
| minimal dross and useless stuff and MS hadn't got into
| spying on users by that stage.
| worik wrote:
| > NT was solid from the start
|
| IIRC in about 1989 NT 3.1 was a very solid an reliable
| system.
|
| The problem was it did no do IP
|
| It was mostly downhill from there.
|
| I got my first Linux machine in about 1992 and lost touch
|
| But keeping windows NT patched, and keeping it running IP
| reliably were incompatible for a while
|
| Did not stop its wide introduction in my world as IP
| servers.
|
| It was as if software managers did not know any other
| systems existed.
|
| Linux was considered "a toy" because it was free, it was
| _much_ more reliable than NT (as was BSD I hear)
|
| Sun were the other option but I saw no one spending the
| money
|
| It was buggy, unreliable, insecure NT servers all the way
|
| Still is for some. Squeezing into a Windows instance on
| Azure, fifteen mouse clicks, three context switches, and
| you have emulated rsync... Still making money selling
| terrible software, but now as a service....
| skrebbel wrote:
| It's weird right? 1. keeps me firmly on the platform, I find it
| a delight how often things "just work". Run a linux app? Just
| works. Hook up some niche 15yo printer? Just works. Run a
| game/demo made 20 years ago? Just works. Even MS Paint very
| much still just works.
|
| It all just works _and then_ the perfectly good Mail app is
| forcing my mom to switch to the new Outlook, which is Mail, but
| messier, with ads. What?
|
| I wish Satya Nadella would pull a Steve and yell at some people
| for this shit. It's eroding trust in the company that they
| maintained for so many decades, that can't be a good long term
| game can it?
| falcor84 wrote:
| > I wish Satya Nadella would pull a Steve and yell at some
| people for this shit.
|
| Just to check, are you suggesting a Steve Ballmer yell or a
| Steve Jobs yell?
| skrebbel wrote:
| Hahaha o yea forgot :-) I mean a Steve Jobs yell, not sure
| that a Ballmer yell would've worked equally well on the
| product people.
| speed_spread wrote:
| No confusion there for me, Ballmer's signature move is
| throwing chairs. Soo many chairs are waiting in the Windows
| department...
| jeroenhd wrote:
| Is that why Bill's party trick was jumping over chairs?
| Finally, the pieces are starting to come together?
| LtWorf wrote:
| Game made 30 years ago needs dosbox, an open source project,
| to just work.
|
| Game made with directx6 20 years ago will render in CPU and
| just work but be so slow to be unplayable. Then you need to
| replace the .dll and make it link with an open source library
| that reimplements dx and converts the calls to the new API,
| so that it can actually render in hardware.
|
| Yes, solitaire.exe still works. 3d games less so.
|
| I'm full of games like star wars jedi outcast or so that no
| longer work on windows.
| snazz wrote:
| Or my personal disappointment: Microsoft Flight Simulator
| X. Feels like that ought to work on Windows 10, but I
| couldn't get it to. If I remember correctly it did work
| fine on Windows 8.1 strangely enough.
| ezst wrote:
| Nadella probably cheers for more ads revenue, more Azure
| lock-in, more o365 subscriptions, more edge market share and
| more silly AI usage because those must be the KPIs at this
| point, and it doesn't really matter nor shows in those KPIs
| whether they grew from inherently user-hostile patterns or
| based on merit and quality.
| paulryanrogers wrote:
| Having been yelled at repeatedly by an exec, please don't
| really do this. It is never constructive. Even yelling by
| Steve Jobs was unwarranted. If you have to yell at people
| there is a bigger problem which must be resolved first.
| epolanski wrote:
| WSL2, power toys and hands down the best window management of
| any OS, I hate working on my MBP just due to the difficulty of
| managing different windows and aligning them on the same
| desktop.
| AB1908 wrote:
| Out of curiosity, how many window managers have you used on
| Linux? I found some superior choices there but I do agree
| that Windows is generally ok with Mac being dead last.
| cladopa wrote:
| I have a question for you: If you make a Pie Chart with the
| time you send on each OS: Linux, Windows and Mac, what will
| be the percentages? Specially while you were young.
|
| Of all the languages I speak, German is the more chaotic
| language by far. But most native Germans consider it the
| best/easiest.
|
| For me the Windows management of Windows is horrible, but I
| spent like 90% of my time in Linux were I was young, even
| using things like "screen" that uses the command line and
| shortcuts to be the most efficient thing I have ever used
| (while requiring learning the shortcuts before becoming
| productive).
|
| Today I use Mac like 95% of my time, control Linux machines
| with it and use Windows when the force of circumstance
| obliges me the 5%.
| fauigerzigerk wrote:
| When I was young I was mostly using Windows. For the last
| 15 years or so it has been macOS. I made a number of
| attempts (sometimes lasting months) to use Linux but it
| never stuck.
|
| My conclusion is that usability is mostly about getting
| used to how things work and a tiny bit of customisation.
| There are no significant usability differences between
| operating systems.
|
| The _only_ thing that I have never gotten used to and that
| keeps slowing me down is that app switching (Cmd+Tab) in
| macOS is MRU while switching windows (Cmd+`, Cmd+Shift+`)
| within apps is circular.
|
| I'm finding it impossible to remember whether I have to go
| forward or backward to get back to the window I'm looking
| for within an app.
| politelemon wrote:
| Is that Fancy Zones which is part of power toys?
| LtWorf wrote:
| power toys is buggy. It has had this bug that shows on non-US
| keyboard layouts, and of course it will never be fixed
| because who cares about non-US keyboard layouts?
|
| Meanwhile on KDE I have an easy option to swap caps lock and
| ctrl, without having to install some weird .exe file off
| github.
| 486sx33 wrote:
| Powertoys got a significant update for foreign users just 4
| days ago.
|
| https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/releases
| LtWorf wrote:
| I'm subscribed to the issue. I'd have gotten an email if
| it was fixed.
| 6c696e7578 wrote:
| Probably seems weird to you, but I've never got on with the
| Windows UI. There's too many things that steal focus. I've
| been XFCE for too many years now, but it doesn't change
| significantly that I find I have to invest time learning
| what's changed.
|
| There used to be a 'tile windows' since windows 2.0 or
| something like that, but it did just that, splatted the
| windows to take up all the space.
|
| One thing I like about X11 and Windows doesn't do it, is alt-
| dragging from anywhere in the window, last time I used
| Windows you couldn't move things around by holding alt and
| left clicking anywhere, you could only do that from the title
| bar, which means you can't slide the top of the window off
| the screen.
|
| The other major thing for me is selection copy, if you
| highlight text, you can't middle mouse button to paste it,
| you have to ctrl-c first, which is just more steps.
| narag wrote:
| _you can 't slide the top of the window off the screen_
|
| You can use "move" in the system menu. Once activated, the
| arrow keys in the keyboard will move the window outside the
| desktop window, not sure if you can do it using the mouse
| somehow.
| 6c696e7578 wrote:
| Interesting, I didn't know that, I think I'll stick to
| alt-moving, it's been very convenient so far!
| magicalhippo wrote:
| You can also use Win+Up arrow key to maximize the window,
| from there you can grab the title bar to drag it
| somewhere (preferably inside the desktop this time).
| user234683 wrote:
| I rarely get focus stolen on Windows 10. They now make it
| very difficult for applications to do this (see the allowed
| conditions here: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-
| us/windows/win32/api/winuser/... ). In contrast, focus
| stealing is a way of life on XFCE, and I just have to put
| up with it. The settings they recommend to fix it don't
| actually help.
| 6c696e7578 wrote:
| Really? There's two programs I know of that will take
| focus and they're both authentication prompts. The sort
| of thing that cranks my handle on Windows were mostly
| from the browser and almost anything else.
|
| With XFCE though, I'm quite happy with the level of focus
| stealing, things that seem to be justifiable are at the
| right level, like authentication prompts.
|
| Out of interest, what are the things that take focus for
| you? Maybe we're running totally different sets of
| programs which might give me an impression that isn't
| warranted.
| deadlydose wrote:
| Long time XFCE user here. Steam will absolutely steal
| focus. I usually start Steam and then move over to
| something else like the terminal or web browser and
| multiple times during Steam's startup it will steal
| focus. I just want it to start up in the background.
| Aside from that, I agree focus stealing isn't a huge deal
| in XFCE. (XFCE 4.18, Debian trixie/testing)
| fho wrote:
| Yeah ... As an exclusive Linux user for almost 20 years
| being forced to work in Windows for the first time is super
| weird.
|
| The two things that trip me up are that you able to move
| windows to a position that you can't move them away
| anymore.
|
| And that apparently maximized windows sometimes leave a
| 10px gap at the top so that you click on the window behind
| :-/
| 9029 wrote:
| > alt-dragging
|
| In case you hadn't come across it yet, there's a third-
| party piece of software called AltDrag [0] that lets you do
| it. It's kind of a must have for me whenever I have to use
| windows. Yes this should just be builtin
|
| [0] https://stefansundin.github.io/altdrag/
| atribecalledqst wrote:
| FYI -- on my MBP I use a program called Spectacle to snap
| windows around, and I now have no complaints relative to what
| you can do on Windows.
|
| Development on Spectacle ceased[1] and it looks like the
| community may have rallied around an open-source program
| called Rectangle, which is open source. At least, judging
| from this single Reddit thread lol:
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/osx/comments/kazpcn/spectacle_alter.
| ..
|
| [1] Although when I search for it now, I see an update from
| 2023 on softonic? Although the original dev's github repo for
| it hasn't been updated in years.
| https://github.com/eczarny/spectacle
| Rewrap3643 wrote:
| I use Rectangle for this purpose.
| pirates wrote:
| If you have it already, another alternative is to use
| BetterTouchTool and set it to override the behavior of
| the green corner button. For me it works just like
| Windows where there's "minimize" on the yellow button and
| "maximize" on the green. I still use gestures like expose
| but never have to worry about switching desktops or
| getting stuck in full screen.
| DreaminDani wrote:
| +1 to BTT. I also love how they have a (fully disable-
| able) drag to split, similar to Windows' hot edges
| Geezus_42 wrote:
| I use Amethyst, but it's keyboard, not mouse driven, so a
| bit different.
| user_7832 wrote:
| On the opposite side, would you (or anybody) know of a
| program to show windows in a cascade/overview style, on
| windows? So for example have one or 2 "main" windows, and
| have some/all the other windows in a cascaded view in the
| background. I would think it would help productivity a lot.
|
| (PowerToys doesn't do this by itself, you have to select
| every window in place if I'm not mistaken.)
| lolinder wrote:
| I use Rectangle and still have complaints about Mac window
| management. Rectangle itself is great, but it's discernably
| a patch over a bad window management paradigm, and the
| awkwardness underneath pretty regularly shows through.
|
| As just one example--the dock is atrocious for a browser-
| centric workflow. I only ever have 2 "apps" open at a time,
| but I have 6 Firefox windows and 2 IDE windows, and
| remembering where I put a specific window (or even that I
| already have it open!) is a chronic problem. I know about
| right-click to show all, but the text that pops up is small
| (it's a context menu, not a first-class navigation element)
| and that doesn't help with the discoverability problem.
|
| I'm sure that there are other apps to patch the other
| aspects of the system that irritate me, but if you have to
| install 4 third party tools to get something close to how
| good Windows is out of the box then I'd say OP has a good
| point.
| frizlab wrote:
| *bad window management _for you_ Believe it or not, some
| people actually do like to have free moving windows and
| such.
|
| Also you seem to be ignorant of a lot of features of
| macOS, like cmd-tab, focus an app, cmd-up arrow to show
| the windows of the app, and so forth. Or swipe down from
| the trackpad on a Dock icon to show the windows of the
| app.
|
| Anyway, YMMV as always. Personally I find the window
| management atrocious not because of the way it was
| designed, which definitely works for me (and I hate the
| Windows' one), but because of the bugs which they insist
| on never ever fixing...
| lolinder wrote:
| > like cmd-tab, focus an app, cmd-up arrow to show the
| windows of the app, and so forth
|
| It's not that I'm ignorant of these, it's that they're
| clunky for a browser centric workflow. The abstraction of
| an "app" is just plain wrong for the way that I and many
| others use computers these days, because one app (the
| browser) is home to most of the tasks I'm working on and
| already has its own second-level navigation in the form
| of tabs. The "app" layer means on Mac there are _three
| levels of navigation_ to get to what I 'm trying to do,
| which is too many.
|
| What makes Windows (and most Linux DEs) better for the
| browser-centric world is that windows themselves are
| first class citizens--I don't have to pass through
| Firefox to get to GitHub.
| bartread wrote:
| I think this must be a matter of preference. I absolutely
| _hate_ Windows' window management. I waste endless time
| fussing around getting windows where I want them to be.
|
| This happens every time I unplug my laptop from external
| monitors, or plug it in to external monitors (even if
| they're the exact same model and configuration as other
| monitors I've previously used). It's aggravating and
| distracts me from what I'm trying to do.
|
| Whereas I never have any issues on OSX, always find my
| windows where I expect them to be, and spend a lot less
| time moving and rearranging them.
|
| The two operating systems do have different approaches to
| window management and to me it sounds like you simply
| prefer Windows, whereas I prefer OSX.
| kuchenbecker wrote:
| I use BetterSnapTool.
| torginus wrote:
| Sorry for being off topic, but just tried powertoys based on
| your post, and holy cow! What an amazing piece of software. I
| particularly like the file unlocker feature, and the Windows
| implementation of Quick Look.
| eshack94 wrote:
| BetterSnapTool is great for this. Check it out.
| ta8903 wrote:
| >hands down the best window management of any OS
|
| Huh? You can't even snap windows to screen edges.
| suslik wrote:
| I can really recommend yabai for window management. I have
| reached a nearly identical config between my work mac with
| yabai/xkhd and my i3wm-based linux workstation.
| steve1977 wrote:
| Some much this. I wish there was an option with the current
| core but something like a lightweight Windows 2000 UI.
| userbinator wrote:
| WinPE and other stripped-down unofficial "distros" of Windows
| do exist. Someone will try to run the Win2k shell on a Win11
| kernel, if it hasn't already been done. Based on what MS has
| done with backwards-compatibility, I wouldn't be surprised if
| it almost "just works".
|
| Win10's UI on Win11:
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows11/comments/o6ysyb/so_i_repl.
| ..
| steve1977 wrote:
| I actually once saw the Win 7 UI appear behind the Win 11
| UI in Acrobat Reader.
|
| Not sure if this was some Acrobat specific stuff or if it's
| still "there" in general.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| For compatibility mode, there's a bunch of old theming
| stuff. If you manage to crash a program in the right way,
| you can even get a Win2k-style grey-and-blue window to
| appear in some places, though it's hidden well.
|
| This is the company that put the entire Windows 95 memory
| manager into later versions of Windows to keep
| compatibility, there are tons of old code paths still
| lying in wait for old software to reuse.
|
| You can't use this stuff as your main UI well, it's no
| longer tested or optimised for that use case.
| p0nce wrote:
| I don't know, Windows 11 came with many things I've wanted for
| years:
|
| - notepad with tabs
|
| - shell UI with tabs, VT-100 support and ability to replace the
| shell
|
| - Paint.net with AI
|
| - even Windbg has massively improved
| squigz wrote:
| Ahhh, tabs... it only took 40 years!
| explorigin wrote:
| Meanwhile Notepad++ has been free for 20 of those.
| ryandrake wrote:
| I sometimes think I'm the only person in the universe who
| doesn't prefer tabs. I already have a way to manage
| multiple windows worth of content: my OS's Window Manager.
| Why would I want every application I run to also implement
| its own custom window management--visually and functionally
| inconsistent from every other application's custom window
| management?
|
| I feel applications that do tabs are just like applications
| that do their own custom quirky File-Open dialog even
| though my OS provides a standard one.
| squigz wrote:
| They manage 2 entirely different contexts. When I want to
| check my mail, I know I just have to go to Firefox and
| hit the first tab; not cycle through 200 unorganized
| windows
| card_zero wrote:
| With five tabs open in Notepad, since they are placed in the
| titlebar, there remains only about 1 cm of titlebar by which
| I can grab the window to drag it around. This area is
| distinguished only by a short vertical pale grey line like a
| pipe character, because it's not cool to have a border around
| any interface element any more apparently. So I often drag a
| tab off the window by mistake and have to put it back and
| hunt for the small part that's actually the titlebar.
|
| Then there's the way they put search into a fixed floating
| window, which when you search upward sits on top of the
| search result, obscuring it.
| spacecadet wrote:
| This is a great summary. Terminal and WSL2 were really nice
| additions to all of that other cool shit like hyper-v, sandbox,
| etc. But, I still rather just use Proxmox/Linux...
| halfcat wrote:
| > laden with ads, "Rewards" Points
|
| Serious question: Where do you see ads? I've used Windows 11
| since it came out, and have never experienced a single
| advertisement.
| neogodless wrote:
| Did you install it? They advertise cloud storage, office
| software, and gaming in the setup process.
| halfcat wrote:
| Maybe that's it. I untick all of the boxes during install
| and use a local account instead of a Microsoft account.
| gertop wrote:
| You had to fight the install process to get that local
| account, though.
| OkGoDoIt wrote:
| The hoops you have to jump through to use a local account
| are a prime example of user hostility. Sure it's
| technically possible, but only if you are power user that
| searches online and figures out how. That's the general
| feeling I have with Windows these days, it is technically
| possible to get it to work the way I want, but it
| generally feels like I'm fighting an adversary. Sure it's
| currently possible to win, but it's definitely not a good
| feeling, and not moving in the right direction.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| Note if you installed with a local account and expect
| Bitlocker to work: make sure to actually enable it. With
| a local account.
|
| Bitlocker may state that it's on, but by default, it
| doesn't encrypt the drive unless you log in to a
| Microsoft account or manually add a key protector.
|
| This is documented on a Microsoft site somewhere, but
| it's shit like this that make me wary of the "bypass
| Microsoft's shit" approach; the bypass methods often lead
| to behaviour that Microsoft never bothered to test and
| has side effects they don't bother to warn you about.
| pyrophane wrote:
| What comes to mind are the Office subscription prompts that
| come up frequently with updates and the OneDrive, basically,
| ad that is in the settings app.
|
| I think there are others, but I believe I've figured out how
| to turn most of it off.
| lofaszvanitt wrote:
| It's getting more and more non human like. Like it was not made
| by humans. Interesting.
| ametrau wrote:
| Powershit is a good thing?
|
| Here's a genus idea, put an object oriented language in the
| _terminal_.
| chinathrow wrote:
| They even let Edge running at startup in the background -
| ignoring that my choice on Windows will always be Firefox.
|
| https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/articles/startup-boos...
| netsharc wrote:
| Aha... thanks for reminding me. Firefox asked me yesterday if I
| wanted to let it run on startup. The options were "Activate"
| and "Not Now"
|
| To me this reads like it's going to behave like many apps
| nowadays, there is rarely a "No, go away", but only "No, but
| annoy me again in the future".
|
| One time after an update Firefox loaded a page that said "Thank
| you for loving Firefox". Eww, no?
|
| God damnit, why do I tolerate such asshole behaviors from our
| OS and browsers? Chrome also deserves a duck you..
| visarga wrote:
| > there is rarely a "No, go away", but only "No, but annoy me
| again in the future"
|
| Same with those damn YouTube shorts. They even have a
| dedicated button in the toolbar that cannot be hidden, on the
| mobile app.
| CaptainFever wrote:
| You can disable it using ReVanced.
| janwillemb wrote:
| Outlook has been a nightmare lately regarding this. It could be
| that it is my organization that pushed this, but links never open
| in the default browser, and get routed through a Microsoft link,
| which for some reason does not work on Edge. The only way to open
| links is to right-click them, copy, open browser, paste in
| address bar.
| RedShift1 wrote:
| Nope this is intentional by Microsoft and the group policy
| settings to change this only work on the most expensive Office
| 365 subscriptions. You can change it manually in the settings
| though to open with the system default browser.
| janwillemb wrote:
| Do you know how?
| RedShift1 wrote:
| Go to "File" -> "Options" -> "Advanced" and set "Open
| hyperlinks from Outlook in" to "Default Browser"
| noduerme wrote:
| MacOS allows you to "hard click" (long click) a text selection in
| any application, which pops up a bubble that lets you do a web
| search for that phrase. But the search only launches Safari. I
| wasted at least a couple hours scouring boards and kext files,
| screwing with automation macros, trying to find a way to make
| this potentially helpful shortcut _not_ open Safari, but instead
| open Firefox. Eventually I just gave up. Apple buried the
| decision so deep in the OS that it 's basically impossible to
| change the default browser for search.
| barbs wrote:
| It's bullshit like this that makes linux attractive.
| ARandomerDude wrote:
| I always think this, then remember I also like sound,
| Bluetooth, and low-power sleep.
|
| Maybe 2025 will be the year of the Linux desktop.
| Sprocklem wrote:
| Support for the other two may vary based on hardware, but
| sound seems to have mostly been solved by pipewire.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| All three work flawlessly for me. It takes either luck or
| looking up known incompatibilities before purchasing a
| laptop, but it's no longer 2008. Not buying hardware from
| certain vendors (Nvidia) helps improve your chances.
|
| The lack of hibernation with an encrypted system is an
| annoying problem, though. There's a good reason it doesn't
| work, and the explanation has made me doubt other
| hibernation implementations, but it's annoying that
| bypassing this restriction is so hard.
| sccxy wrote:
| Safari and Firefox does not allow other search engines also.
|
| For Chrome/Edge I have added a lot of small shortcuts for IMDB,
| post tracking codes, geoip and many more "not search" things to
| search bar. Just keyword and %s in search url is needed.
| aragilar wrote:
| Wait, what? There's OpenSearch and web extensions which let
| you add more search engines (removing builtin ones is harder
| though).
| sccxy wrote:
| Ok, then tell me how to add search engine to Safari
| iOS/Desktop and Firefox Desktop without building and
| downloading extra extensions.
|
| Search url: https://api.hackertarget.com/geoip/?q=%s
| metaphor wrote:
| For Firefox Desktop, just create a bookmark with your
| search URL and assign a keyword to it, e.g.
| URL: https://api.hackertarget.com/geoip/?q=%s
| Keyword: @geoip
|
| ...then Alt+D and queue off the keyword directly from
| address bar.
| sccxy wrote:
| Okay, it is possible. But firefox UX is the greatest. You
| must use bookmarks to config search.
|
| And now I have many nonsense bookmarks because I want to
| use them as search
| morsch wrote:
| The UI _is_ weird, that said, the feature goes back 20
| years, see e.g. http://johnbokma.com/firefox/keymarks-
| explained/comments.htm... I wonder if it existed all the
| way back in a version of Netscape Navigator?
|
| On Firefox Android, you can also just go to into
| settings, search, manage search engines, + add search
| engine. So, basically, exactly where you would expect it.
|
| I think on desktop it's just as easy? Can't you just
| right click on most submit forms?
| voltaireodactyl wrote:
| Just for the record, you can absolutely change the default
| search engine in Safari and Firefox. I use kagi in both, so
| bangs are supported everywhere.
| sccxy wrote:
| Firefox for iOS supports keyword and %s url scheme for
| search engines. I am not sure why extensions are needed in
| desktop.
|
| You can change default search engine, but you cannot add
| extra search engines in Safari without building your own
| extension (and paying apple for it)
| Macha wrote:
| > Firefox for iOS supports keyword and %s url scheme for
| search engines. I am not sure why extensions are needed
| in desktop.
|
| So does Firefox desktop...? Extensions aren't needed,
| just right click on a search field and add it. You can
| customise placeholders and keywords too
| sccxy wrote:
| It just creates messy bookmarks. Greatest UX for
| search...
| Macha wrote:
| https://superuser.com/questions/7327/how-to-add-a-custom-
| sea...
|
| The resulting search shows up in the search UI, whether
| you have firefox configured for a seperate search bar or
| have their default of the address bar also being the
| search bar. This is the same as the extension method.
|
| If your complaint is that they also show up in bookmarks,
| then ehh, whatever. Most people either don't use
| bookmarks or have a giant dumping pile. If you're one of
| the 1% that organizes them, just put all your search
| bookmarks in their own folder.
| ginko wrote:
| >I am not sure why extensions are needed in desktop.
|
| They aren't. Why do you claim things that aren't true?
| sccxy wrote:
| Okay, extensions or bookmarks must be used to create
| custom search.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39239822
| neogodless wrote:
| Parent is talking about MacOS, not iOS.
| tripleSex wrote:
| I utilize the 'select/highlight`-'search web` flow numerous
| times throughout the day. I am on iOS and, like you, was unable
| to force the 'search web` highlight selection option to default
| to a non-Safari browser. However, I use the functionality you
| speak of through a different invocation:
| 'select/highlight`-'define`-'search web`. Interestingly enough,
| this procedure -- once a non-Safari browser is set as the
| default web browser for the iOS device and/or the specification
| of preferred search engine -- redirects towards the user's
| browser (as well as search engine) of choice. I shall
| investigate these functionalities' behavior on macOS -- id est,
| desktop -- tomorrow possibly and will get back to you noduerme.
| {Edit: deletion: " . . . ~such~ redirects . . . "}
| moffkalast wrote:
| _the EU Commission would like to know your location_
| deely3 wrote:
| Meh. Apple already know your location, and its not in EU.
| D4ckard wrote:
| There's a great talk by Evan Czaplicki [0] that outlines the
| financial significance of browsers. It helps make sense of why
| Microsoft (and Apple) act(s) in this way.
|
| [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ3w_jec1v8
| hilbert42 wrote:
| When the fuck is this going to stop!
|
| Microsoft lost this monopolizing tactic in a court case decades
| ago. It seems either no one remembers this fact or that Microsoft
| hopes it's so.
|
| Regulators will you please damn-well regulate. In simple English,
| do your fucking job.
| passwordoops wrote:
| To be fair to the regulators, they have been busy lately:
|
| https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-googl...
|
| https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/09/...
|
| https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/01/...
|
| https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/12/...
|
| https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/01/...
| hilbert42 wrote:
| Perhaps so. But they're too late the damage has been done.
| Unfortunately, they should have acted 30+ years ago. The need
| to regulate back then was just as obvious as it is now.
| cjblomqvist wrote:
| It's not the same situation as back then. 1. They don't have
| the same browser market share at all. 2. They don't have the
| same operating system market share they used to either
| (specifically, they lost the mobile space - which is how
| majority of people in the world access the internet). 3. It's
| easier to use another browser now on Windows then back when it
| was at its worst in 00s (where IE was more or less part of
| explorer.exe / core of Windows).
|
| Above can make a huge difference legally. Specifically your
| reference to the previous court case, which was built on point
| 1-2 above. Key word here being monopoly and how it's defined.
|
| Apple lived (until a few weeks ago, still do outside EU) in a
| world where it's OK to have it basically impossible to install
| another (real) browser on it's biggest OS, or install any app
| of your choosing without their blessing (and a 10-30% cut on
| revenue!) for that matter.
|
| It's complex for sure.
|
| It's unfortunate imo that Mozilla/FF got squashed by Chrome,
| and also made some questionable strategic decisions in the last
| 10-15 years. Performance, simplicity, stability and keeping up
| with me web tech being key USPs of Chrome, compared to
| competition. Note that absent from that list is monopolistic
| abuse (even though Google has it's fair share of that as well).
| In other words, you don't win the browser war by simply using
| monopolistic abuse as a strategy, you need to primarily win on
| value to your end users. That's at least how it's been in the
| past.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _" It's not the same situation as back then. 1. They don't
| have the same browser market share at all."_
|
| That's essentially irrelevant because (a) Microsoft complied
| with the Court's ruling and allowed other browsers to be
| installed without hindrance, that's not the situation now;
| (b) you're painting a picture as if Microsoft was
| disadvantaged by the situation now and thus it's unfair to
| impose such restrictions again this time. To that I'd add
| that in case you haven't noticed Microsoft has just passed
| three trillion in value, it's only second to Apple in
| achieving this milestone. Thus the changed situation hasn't
| disadvantaged it one iota.
|
| I'd maintain that Microsoft has only managed this incredible
| feat because throughout its 48-year life it has consistently
| used unacceptable, bullyboy monopolistic practices at every
| opportunity.
|
| Essentially, Microsoft's growth has been at the expence of
| competitors who haven't had the size and finacial power to
| stand up to its market dominance no matter how good their
| products were. Such bad behavior has screwed both the market
| and product development for everyone--small and medium-sized
| developers, hardware manufacturers and end users. Just about
| the only entity that hasn't been screwed by its unacceptable
| business practices is Microsoft itself.
|
| The most significant reason for Microsoft's unfettered growth
| is that the regulators have been asleep at the wheel for
| decades--no doubt encouraged to 'sleep' by millions plowed
| into lobbying.
|
| On the matter of Mozilla, I'm certainly not an apologist for
| the company, in fact over the years I've been very critical
| of Mozilla including here on HN. Yes, the dominance of Chrome
| from that other monopolist Google has had a lot to do with
| Firefox's downfall, but that said Mozilla has been shooting
| itself in the foot for decades. Why and how is pretty obvious
| and well known so I won't debate that here.
| cjblomqvist wrote:
| I'm not arguing whether Microsoft's behavior is good or bad
| (that's a long, subjective, discussion) - I'm arguing that
| from a legal point of view it's not clear cut that it's the
| same situation, as was suggested.
|
| Company size is for example not considered (generally
| anyway) as relevant for whether a company has a
| monopoly/market dominance or not. This seems to be
| forgotten, and it seems few cares about why the definition
| is what it is (or even what it really is).
| ARandomerDude wrote:
| Get help, man. Don't let the internet make you this angry.
| politelemon wrote:
| > For example, Apple's decision to allow alternative browser
| engines is only effective in the EU.
|
| And don't forget it's been done in the most painful way possible.
| Yet, I've not seen any reports from Mozilla about ios' practices
| over the past decades, or the after.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| And don't forget Apple's restriction on alternative browser
| engines in iOS and iPadOS is the only thing keeping most
| websites from becoming Chrome only.
| izacus wrote:
| If that would be true, the websites would only support Safari
| and Chrome. But it's not true and websites work just fine on
| Firefox - so stop peddling this crap to defend lockout of
| choice.
| AlexandrB wrote:
| There are plenty of websites that have degraded performance
| or functionality in Safari and Firefox. The most obvious
| being many of Google's products.
| naravara wrote:
| Mozilla probably cares more about the Chrome/Blink hegemony
| than Safari. If not for iOS requirements inflating Safari
| market share the browser market would be at least 90% Chrome or
| a Chrome derivative.
| ksynwa wrote:
| If someone has to use Windows, I recommend using a version like
| LTSC. I use this version of Windows 10 for video games and it
| lacks anti-features like taskbar search talking to the internet,
| the nagging to use Edge. Even then I discovered Edge to be
| running in the background recently.
| whyoh wrote:
| If you leave Edge installed it will start automatically and run
| in the background by default. But that can be disabled in the
| settings.
|
| If you don't intend to use Edge, I suggest you uninstall it
| before you give Windows internet access. Because after Edge
| receives some updates, it becomes harder to remove.
| raingros wrote:
| The most annoying attempt to foist Edge as a browser is the
| (new?) setting of a separate default browser for opening links in
| Outlook 365. Took me 10 minutes to understand why Edge opens.
| WTF.
| deely3 wrote:
| Hey, do you remember where this setting is?
| bluelightning2k wrote:
| I know I am missing the point. But how did they not call this
| "The House Edge"?
| mnahkies wrote:
| I had to install Google Chrome on my (Mac) work laptop recently
| in order for the expo/react native debugger to work. Every time I
| open it I get a nag prompt to use it as the default (instead of
| Firefox)
|
| I tried editing the raw config files with some values stack
| overflow suggested would disable it but it hasn't worked. Not a
| huge deal because I don't need to open it too often, but still
| annoying that there isn't a "don't ask me again" button
| jeroenhd wrote:
| That's pretty interesting, because I don't ever get that popup
| when I open Chrome on Linux (usually for DRM reasons).
|
| Edit: crap, I tried to see what happens when I do set Chrome as
| a default and now that I've switched the default back to
| Firefox, I get the popup on startup too. At least Firefox has a
| setting to disable the check, now I need to figure out how to
| make Chrome shut up again.
| jqpabc123 wrote:
| Mozilla took aim ... and wiffed ... big time.
|
| Edge hasn't displaced Firefox, Chrome has.
|
| But they have about 600 million ($) reasons to avoid pointing
| this out.
|
| Let's face the facts --- Mozilla is Google's bitch and has been
| for a long time. And this is just the latest example.
| KingOfCoders wrote:
| 600 million ($)?
|
| They've got ~$6000 (?) million from Google over the years. In a
| total distortion of reality Edge is the downfall of Firefox,
| not the reason they spent $6000M for 3% market share because
| they made every mistake they could make. Everyone else would be
| belly up already, but $600M/year makes it hard to die.
|
| The fact that new browsers are popping up left and right (like
| Floorp) should tell Mozilla there seems to be demand for
| something that isn't FF.
|
| (Written from FF with Tab Center Reborn as a vertical tab)
| jqpabc123 wrote:
| _...there seems to be demand for something that isn 't FF._
|
| There is a demand for something that is _really_ privacy
| focused.
|
| In other words, something that isn't directly connected to
| Google with a blatantly obvious conflict of interest.
| AlexandrB wrote:
| But all the other alternative browsers use Google's Blink
| rendering engine. How is that _less_ associated with
| google?
| jqpabc123 wrote:
| _How is that less associated with google?_
|
| Blink is an open source rendering engine.
|
| This allows alternative browsers to fork Blink/Chromium
| and strip out and remove any and all tracking, telemetry
| and data collection and produce a product that is privacy
| respecting _by default_.
|
| Mozilla could easily do the same with FF --- but they
| simply refuse to.
|
| Instead, every install of FF downloaded directly from
| Mozilla is unique. It comes with a unique identifier
| embedded along with lots of telemetry and data collection
| enabled by default --- including allowing Mozilla to
| install and run "studies" on _your_ computer with no
| further consent required.
|
| https://www.ghacks.net/2022/03/17/each-firefox-download-
| has-...
| Alifatisk wrote:
| Isn't there a dumb / light version of Windows 10 that removes all
| these anti-features and bloat?
|
| I just want to play games and surf the web with FF.
| whyoh wrote:
| Windows 10 (IoT) LTSC 2021. It lets you uninstall Edge with
| just a right-click. And it doesn't have any 'modern apps' and
| Store preinstalled.
| freeAgent wrote:
| But a normal consumer can't purchase that version of Windows,
| can they _?
|
| _ in a non-shady/license-compliant way
| whyoh wrote:
| I don't know, honestly. But if it's just a matter of
| reducing bloat, you don't really _need_ LTSC. For example,
| you can remove preinstalled apps on Home /Pro with a line
| in Powershell:
| https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/4689-uninstall-apps-
| wind...
|
| LTSC is cleaner out of the box and has much longer support,
| but otherwise it's not that different. And Edge on LTSC
| still does annoying things, such as adding a Bing search
| box on the desktop, for example.
| freeAgent wrote:
| Checking with MS, unless you're a registered developer or
| enterprise customer, you can't purchase it. LTSC keys
| aren't supposed to be sold by the single, so any reseller
| doing that is breaking MS's terms.
| 6c696e7578 wrote:
| The first and last pages are nothing more than a test of how much
| toner the printer can hold.
| throwaway13337 wrote:
| Dark patterns are certainly evil. I don't think they help the
| company in the long run.
|
| However, I just went on a sort of browser deep dive for the best
| browser on windows and came away, surprisingly, with edge.
|
| The requirements were vertical tabs, keep my chrome extensions,
| and got out of my way.
|
| Brave, firefox, chrome, and vivaldi all had issues that couldn't
| be resolved in the UI. For example, firefox's tree style tabs
| still kinda requires that you keep the top tabs for some uses.
|
| I didn't even consider edge at first. The
| rewards/shopping/bingwhatever integrations were disqualifiers.
| But apparently, you can disable all of them fairly quickly.
|
| The pdf viewer is also better than chrome's with extended
| options.
|
| I guess I also must admit the benefit of not fighting windows
| because I'm doing what they want.
|
| We'll see if their next forced update reverts to their awful
| defaults but for now, I'm happy with it. At least until arc
| browser is available.
|
| It's a real shame that Microsoft is so schizophrenia here. If
| they were to respect their customers, they would gain far more
| than they would lose.
|
| The dev-focused arm seems to understand long term customer
| goodwill but the OS/browser team does not.
| explorigin wrote:
| You're painting awfully broad strokes (Edge is the best for
| windows) for a very personal preference (vertical tabs).
| user_7832 wrote:
| I'm also in a similar position, trying to choose a good browser
| after a fresh windows install. While edge is nice, the lack of
| containers alone is making me want to switch to Firefox. Not
| dealing with Google's new cookie bs and not having a restricted
| ad blocker is just a bonus.
| Timwi wrote:
| > firefox's tree style tabs still kinda requires that you keep
| the top tabs for some uses.
|
| Hm, I've been using Tree Style Tabs for many years without the
| top tabs visible and I've never needed them back.
| wtallis wrote:
| Same here. There have been one or two occasions when I've had
| to temporarily remove a few lines from my Firefox profile's
| userChrome.css file, but never the ones that hide the top tab
| bar. I've been using Tree Style Tabs continuously through two
| extension mass extinctions, since back when you didn't have
| to edit userChrome.css to get rid of the top tab bar.
| m2mdas2 wrote:
| Hiding title bar and tab bar were confugurable before. When you
| installed tree style tab it automatically made the tab bar
| hidden at that time. It was the most customizable dev browser.
|
| Then they rewrote the the UI engine replacing XUL and made
| Firefox a more 'user friendly browser' copying all UI features
| of chrome sacrificing the customization options.
|
| I am a heretic now who is running Windows 10 with WSL2 and edge
| as primary browser due the points you mentioned.
| nusl wrote:
| I use Firefox as my daily driver though the browser has an
| increasing amount of annoying stuff. It's added a VPN, some sort
| of email relay, and other random popups I never asked for.
| youngtaff wrote:
| Are Mozilla going to fund the same study into Chrome's anti-
| competitive practices or are the only going to do it for the
| browser makers that don't fund them?
| bmitc wrote:
| What's sad is that it's a good browser behind all of this. But it
| takes a fair amount of work getting all the settings right to
| turn it all off.
| RajT88 wrote:
| Agreed.
|
| One of the most egregious things is the insistence on using the
| Bing start page. You have to install an extension to have your
| own start page (in fairness most browsers are like this these
| days).
|
| However, lately Edge just magically stopped letting new tab
| redirect work. At least it loads a blank page, but it is
| annoying. Microsoft seems hell bent on preventing user control
| all over their client ecosystem. The same extension works fine
| in Brave and Chrome - so it is definitely something they did.
| bmitc wrote:
| Yea, and when the browser updates they often switch settings
| back, such as the default search engine.
|
| I still use it but am aggressive about tightening up the
| settings.
| evilduck wrote:
| Why? What does it bring to the table over Chromium once you
| disable all the Microsoft nonsense?
| bmitc wrote:
| Because I don't like Firefox and dislike anything to do
| with Google. Google also plays all sorts of dirty tricks
| to try and get you to download Chrome. I primarily use
| Windows because I get Windows plus Linux. For example, I
| have Ubuntu and Nix running through WSL. Apple also plays
| dirty tricks and has all sorts of nonsense, they're just
| better at getting away with it.
|
| In general, I just use the browser that's "native" to the
| platform. On Windows I use Edge, on macOS and iOS I use
| Safari, and on Linux I use whatever I feel like at the
| time (Edge, Firefox, or Chrome). At the end of the day,
| features are effectively in parity, so I just don't care
| that much, and right now I use Edge on Windows and
| Android. Edge does have some nice features though. It
| doesn't keep me wanting.
| evilduck wrote:
| Ok... lots of soapboxing and tangents without answering
| anything.
|
| > Edge does have some nice features
|
| Such as? This is what I want to know. What value to you
| as an end user does Edge provide that makes it worth
| tolerating the nonsense?
| yakz wrote:
| setting it to load about:blank seems to kinda work
| RajT88 wrote:
| Yeah, my problem is on my devices I set a custom start page
| to something hosted on my NAS device's internal web server.
| Nothing fancy, just a simple HTML page with some links and
| a little javascript.
|
| It's surprising how much time such a little thing saves me,
| compared to trying to wrangle the default browser start
| pages into something usable.
| pyrophane wrote:
| What makes Edge a good browser among the several other Chrome-
| based browsers out there?
| djfdat wrote:
| Workspaces is the first instance of synced tabs in a browser
| that actually works for me.
|
| A lot of nice features are included in the browser, that
| maybe they are in other browsers now, but that hasn't always
| been the case. I was a Vivaldi user prior to switching to
| Edge, but here are some things I like:
|
| - Tab groups. Vivaldi has this also, and has better tools for
| collapsing tabs by host - Some of the built-in features are
| nice. QR code, send to other devices, split view, capture &
| markup, easier profiles. - Bookmark bar has a per-bookmark
| option to hide title. Doesn't delete the title, so you can
| still use it for search. But this makes a really handy app
| bar. - Probably not true, but I expect it to be better
| optimized for Windows vs other browsers - Cross-platform w/
| workspaces is great. I use a mac for personal and windows for
| work. Can't use Safari on Windows, and Vivaldi wouldn't sync
| tabs (at the time) - I expect Microsoft to integrate AI
| features in early and well, and I want to be on the cutting-
| edge to see what AI has to offer.
|
| I agree, I hate all the tracking BS also, but I turned a
| bunch of things off and the rest is probably a wash with
| everything else tracking me anyways.
|
| I really recommend you fire it up and give it a try. You're
| sure to be surprised, sometimes for the better, sometimes for
| the worse.
|
| Edit: Feature that I'm missing most from Vivaldi - the speed
| dial page was just amazing, running through bookmarks. I've
| mostly supplanted by using the bookmarks bar, but it's still
| not a perfect replacement for me.
| wintermutestwin wrote:
| Native Vertical tabs. Google Chrome doesn't even have viable
| extensions for this (and yet brave and edge have it native).
|
| (My oft spoken rant) Horizontal tabs are useless if you have
| more than 8 tabs open at once. Or if you are one of the very
| few that has a monitor with more vertical pixels than
| horizontal.
|
| Also, Safari's vertical tabs implementation is weak whereas
| Orion's is workable.
| blibble wrote:
| but it's not significantly better like the competition (like
| Chrome vs IE6)
|
| so they're resorting to their usual dirty tricks
| malablaster wrote:
| Not exactly an impartial source coming from their competitor who
| is also almost fully funded by their other competitor.
| watters wrote:
| Which specific idea(s) presented do you believe has its merits
| undermined by this lack of impartiality?
| notfed wrote:
| Erm, maybe this idea:
|
| > This report was commissioned by Mozilla
| notfed wrote:
| Point being: these researchers were chosen by, and paid by
| Mozilla to do this. The researchers have a strong incentive
| to be biased; to leave out details; to p-hack. Though they
| _claim_ to be neutral, no human is capable of being
| unbiased, especially when his paycheck depends on it.
|
| I have nothing but utmost respect for Mozilla and these
| researchers, but the paper needs to be read not as facts,
| but merely conjectures, to be verified by other more
| neutral parties.
| pyrophane wrote:
| I've been trying Edge lately because I wanted to see if its
| "efficiency mode" would produce any noticeable difference in the
| battery life I experienced on my laptop.
|
| They've really made it almost impossible to use as a privacy-
| respecting browser that lets you pick your search engine. There
| are a very large number of "on by default" settings that I had to
| change to turn of things like "Microsoft Rewards" and "creator
| recommendations."
|
| The default search engine selection in buried in the settings
| under "address bar search." Even after you change that there is
| still an un-changeable page that comes up on new tabs that
| searches with Bing / Copilot, and other various ways to trigger a
| search that use Microsoft's search engine no matter what.
|
| Also, whatever search engine you use, Edge will send your seaches
| to MS unless you turn off another "on by default" option.
|
| And then, assuming you've managed to set everything up how you
| want it, MS will hit you with prompts after various updates to do
| things like return your default search to Bing.
|
| Together, it all really feels egregious.
| ljm wrote:
| I would genuinely hate to be an engineer working on the edge
| team. It feels like building a decent browser comes entirely
| secondary to moving the needle on marketing and growth targets.
|
| Not the only situation where it seems your Windows-running
| computer is basically held hostage by MBAs wanting to boost
| Bing's numbers.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| I wonder if devs on the Edge team gets some kind of sadistic
| pleasure out of ruining Edge. It used to be good for a sweet,
| short few months, but it's beyond saving now. There's no way
| the devs behind the Edge UX still believe they're improving
| the browser.
|
| I can imagine getting sort of a thrill out of suggesting
| something stupid like "let's steal ALL OF CHROME'S BROWSING
| HISTORY, then CLOSE CHROME, and OPEN EDGE and see if the user
| doesn't notice!" because _surely_ upper management would
| never sign off on that, but the day after you find out they
| _still did_. What other crazy shit can you think of? At work
| you roleplay as some kind of evil warlock, put all of your
| life 's frustrations into the "switch to Edge or we'll murder
| your dog" screens, and go home with a big sack of cash to
| watch Netflix on your Macbook.
| baxuz wrote:
| I sincerely doubt it's the devs coming up with these ideas
| and pitching them to management.
| executesorder66 wrote:
| I don't work for microsoft, but I and everyone else knows
| that that is the kind of shit you'll be working on (who
| suggested it is irrelevant) long before you'd even do an
| interview with them.
|
| Microsoft employees are certified assholes, and they know
| it.
| c0balt wrote:
| They should pull the BOFH of the edge team. For the greater
| good of all windows users.
| executesorder66 wrote:
| That's why microsoft only hires people who fail any ethics
| test you can imagine, and who pass any asshole test that you
| can give them.
| CatWChainsaw wrote:
| I wouldn't be surprised if some of the settings "accidentally"
| get reversed after the browser updates, since it's been known
| to happen with Windows settings...
| pyrophane wrote:
| I do think that happened to me at least once. I was happily
| using Kagi as my default search engine, and then after a
| restart suddenly I was using Bing.
| gertop wrote:
| I went through the same process you did and tried to make edge
| work for me and failed. I don't want to be constantly fighting
| my browser to respect my choices. That being said, the
| following is incorrect:
|
| > Even after you change that there is still an un-changeable
| page that comes up on new tabs that searches with Bing /
| Copilot, and other various ways to trigger a search that use
| Microsoft's search engine no matter what.
|
| If you change the search engine to something other than Bing, a
| second setting appears that controls the new tab search.
|
| This is obviously a dark pattern to trick users (why would you
| want the new tab search engine to not respect your choice by
| default?), but the option exists.
| pandacake wrote:
| > "They've really made it almost impossible to use as a
| privacy-respecting browser that lets you pick your search
| engine."
|
| Brave Browser let's you customize.
| pyrophane wrote:
| Yeah, I'll probably wind up with Vivaldi or something else
| I'm not thinking of now. Opera maybe? Brave seems fine as
| well.
| tristan957 wrote:
| Why not Firefox?
| baxuz wrote:
| I can't take a crypto-shilling browser seriously. They lost
| all respect from me the day they added that feature.
| csdvrx wrote:
| Mozilla receives money from Google, so I'd take whatever they say
| with a pinch of salt.
|
| Right now, the only serious alternative to Google Chrome is Edge,
| and if Firefox became too good or threatened Google in any way,
| Mozilla may see the money flow stop.
|
| I wish Google started innovating again, and that Firefox offered
| a good and competitive free software browser, but reality is what
| it is.
|
| So I've moved from Windows to Linux, but I keep using Edge,
| because it's a good browser (vertical tabs etc)
| alt227 wrote:
| Out of interest, what is it about Firefox which you consider
| not good or competitive?
| csdvrx wrote:
| I can't reproach to Firefox that it's refusing to bite the
| hand that feeds, but the last time I tried it, there were
| other issues:
|
| - it was prefilled with icons for facebook and twitter (bit
| let's say people who switch may be lost without these icons)
|
| - it keeps trying to push pocket to me (no excuse for that)
|
| - if had the feature for antitracking multi-account-
| containers, but didn't push them
|
| - it lacked advanced anti tracking (ex: fixing the canvas
| size, the fonts etc)
|
| I'd prefer Firefox with a focus on privacy and antitracking
| to Edge cool new features, but I think Microsoft has both a
| financial interest and the technical capacity to protect me
| from google panopticon while also delivering cool new things.
|
| I don't like Firefox interface including its lack of
| innovation (edge has tab groups, split screens), and how the
| only redeeming point that could make me consider Firefox
| (privacy) is not put front and center.
|
| I will keep checking Firefox now and then, but I don't see
| much chance of improvement as Google money keeps Mozilla
| warm, comfortable, and also totally disconnected for what its
| potential users would like.
| oneplane wrote:
| We need at least three parties with different browser engines
| with all of them at least having double digits percentage user
| share to prevent another IE5/IE6 mess. It doesn't even have to be
| on the same platform, one platform with one engine also works, as
| long as there are other platforms with other engines.
| shon wrote:
| I used to despise Microsoft for exactly this behavior. I've been
| more impressed with them lately for their investment in AI and
| willingness to take risks bringing new products to market.
|
| Unfortunately I've had the same problem with Edge after refusing
| to use any M$ browser for decades, I gave it a try to get early
| access to "Sydney" which was worth it all until they lobotomized
| it.
|
| Microsoft at its best, gave us the Xbox by abandoning Windows and
| focusing on making a good product regardless of ecosystem ties
| (and using its enormous money/muscle).
|
| Microsoft at it's worst uses deceptive lock-in tactics on its own
| users and is still not above force-feeding: "if you want to use
| this product, you HAVE to use these other crappy products you
| don't want."
|
| This is so strange to me for a company that has worked so hard to
| transform.
| pyrophane wrote:
| I think that this sort of behavior is really just in
| Microsoft's DNA.
| suddenexample wrote:
| Transforming PR is different than transforming. I don't think
| Microsoft is any less scummy than it was in the past, it's just
| gotten better at recognizing that its audience includes both
| "normal users we can trick with dark patterns" and "gaming/dev
| enthusiasts who will lose it if we try to pull anything shady".
| low_tech_punk wrote:
| My guess: some PM looking at a conversion funnel and proposed
| these "features" to move the numbers up.
| sub7 wrote:
| They're actually doing some pretty nice things with Edge despite
| these evil anti-competitive UIs/ad injections. I'd add telemetry
| to the list too, but since Mozilla does a lot of that they
| probably won't write up a nice doc like this on it.
|
| It is possible to get a clean Edge build running via
| containerization + disabling some Windows background services +
| blocking outbound/inbound requests to various Microsoft + partner
| IP addresses. Big hassle though.
| bawolff wrote:
| The 90s called and they want their talking points back.
|
| Fact is firefox is not competitive. Its not because MS is playing
| dirty. If it was then chrome wouldn't be dominating everything.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-02-03 23:01 UTC)