MS is interrupting Chrome/Firefox installs to promote Edge in latest builds

[mikeymikec]

https://betanews.com/2018/09/12/mic...fox-installations-to-promote-edge-windows-10/

From Slashdot:
"If you open Edge and search for "Chrome" or "Firefox" using Bing, Edge's default search engine, you'll be presented with a massive banner informing you that "Microsoft Edge is the faster, safer browser on Windows 10 and is already installed on your PC." Four boxes below then show you how Edge lets you browse longer, and faster, offers built-in protection and built-in assistance. If that doesn't stop you, then Microsoft has a new, much nastier trick up its sleeve -- when you go to install Firefox or Chrome it intercepts the action and pops up a window promoting Edge with the same line about how its browser is faster and safer. It then gives you a blue button to click to open Edge, or a grey one you can click to install the browser you actually want to use. Oh, and this window will keep appearing, unless you go into Settings and stop Windows 10 from offering you app "recommendations.""

My mind boggles at the idea that there are people at MS who a) apparently don't recall the amount of flack MS caught for their monopoly tactics and b) thought it was a good idea to flog the dead horse by bothering to recommend Edge at a time when the user obviously doesn't want it.

 

[quikah]

Hopefully it is just one of those dumb insider experiments.

 

[EXCellR8]

I've noticed this too; while it's certainly annoying it is effective with the less savvy crowd--the people who, if offered something that says it's better, will probably use it. People who've already chosen their favorite web browser (some of us decided this years and years ago) will likely just ignore it and install the alternatives anyway.

I know interrupting the installation of other said browsers is the point but Windows is a MS product so I don't think that they're too far out of bounds with what they're promoting. It's absolutely low road tactics though; I don't like it either.

 

[mikeymikec]

I know interrupting the installation of other said browsers is the point but Windows is a MS product so I don't think that they're too far out of bounds with what they're promoting. It's absolutely low road tactics though; I don't like it either.

You think that in a commercial paid-for piece of software, it's reasonable to throw up adverts that get in the way of the user doing their work?

 

[EXCellR8]

Like I said... it's low road tactics but it's not illegal or anything. By installing Windows you're paying for a license to use it; not buying the actual software itself. This basically means the manufacturer can do what they please because it's still their product. If you don't like advertising, you have the option of opting out of recommendations and adhering to a more private session. I'm certainly not taking sides here, just pointing out what's real.

You must be doing some pretty world-changing work if you can't take the time to X out or scroll down out of a banner ad

 

[SMOGZINN]

This is not just advertising. This is straight up malware. In any other software this would be described as page Hijacking or code injection. If they get away with this what is to stop them from straight up changing parts of web pages that they don't like?

Write an article critical of Microsoft? Edge browser replaces it with one written by their own staff that praises Microsoft.

 

[BSim500]

Like I said... it's low road tactics but it's not illegal or anything.

Not illegal where? Actively sabotaging researching competitors products is far more of an abuse of monopoly than merely passively bundling Media Player was which landed them a €497m fine back in 2004 and has forced them to offer "N" editions of Windows 7-10 in Europe ever since. With any luck the EU will hit them again and this time force them to offer a consumer W10 version of Enterprise LTSB (the only version of W10 that actually feels like you're using your own PC and not borrowing someone else's...)

 

[mikeymikec]

Like I said... it's low road tactics but it's not illegal or anything. By installing Windows you're paying for a license to use it; not buying the actual software itself. This basically means the manufacturer can do what they please because it's still their product. If you don't like advertising, you have the option of opting out of recommendations and adhering to a more private session. I'm certainly not taking sides here, just pointing out what's real.

Me personally, if I'm paying £90 for a piece of software, I'm buying it. They can call it what they like ("licensing"), but the moment they try to take it from me or fundamentally alter how it works to my disadvantage, that's class action lawsuit territory. I didn't ask whether you thought it was illegal.

You must be doing some pretty world-changing work if you can't take the time to X out or scroll down out of a banner ad

I totally agree, however if MS insist on purposefully wasting peoples' time, they should compensate people for that wasted time.

 

[EXCellR8]

Me personally, if I'm paying £90 for a piece of software, I'm buying it.

Ok great, but that's still not how it works... if someone "bought" Windows MS would no longer own it. They provide a product/service and you pay (for a product key) to use it. If you have physical media, great! You can use it to troubleshoot and repair but there's nothing of value on there if the key's already been used etc. This is primarily why installation media isn't provided anymore and a lot of deployments are fully digital.

Way less of an issue than people are making it out to be. I've maybe seen an ad for Edge twice or three times before installing Chrome as I normally do; hasn't been an issue since. Sure, the line between ads and spam and malware can be blurry but there's nothing malicious about trying to promote a feature just because you don't like it. I don't like it either but at the end of the day I don't get caught up on it.

 

[mikeymikec]

Ok great, but that's still not how it works... if someone "bought" Windows MS would no longer own it.

Don't be obtuse. If I buy shampoo, I own that item: The company cannot demand it back, or make changes to it after I have bought it without my permission. The company that made it still owns the trademarks, intellectual property, copyright, still bears responsibility for the improper function of that product. Don't try to dance around the point.

The fact that MS obviously has in their licence agreement a point that grants them permission to make changes to the user's Windows installation via Windows Update is the only thread that your argument hangs on at present, but that would in demolished in court in short order if say MS started bricking Windows installations on purpose or through gross negligence or did anything that enough people were significantly injured in some way by. For example, if their free Windows 10 rollout in 2015-2016 had gone awry and left millions of legitimate users without a working Windows installation, there is a pretty high chance that MS would have had their pants sued off, especially if some businesses had been affected.

They provide a product/service and you pay (for a product key) to use it. If you have physical media, great! You can use it to troubleshoot and repair but there's nothing of value on there if the key's already been used etc. This is primarily why installation media isn't provided anymore and a lot of deployments are fully digital.

If you like, I can look up some examples of lawsuits due to software makers thinking they can do what they like. Off the top of my head, a woman won a lawsuit with MS recently because MS pushed the Win10 upgrade on to her machine despite her not agreeing to it. She won something like $10k IIRC. It's the reason why MS has never actually deactivated a copy of Windows that it deems to be pirated, because if they get it wrong they will get sued big time and the PR would be terrible. So no, your "licensing" argument is bogus at present. AFAIK software makers often prefer to settle out of court for licensing agreement violations rather than running the risk of their absurd 35-page license agreements being thrown out for being a completely unreasonable demand for the average user to actually read in their entirety.

The only variable in this situation is how users react. If MS catches tonnes of flack for decisions like this, they will back off. If people act indifferently and believe that MS can do what they like, like you do, then MS and other companies will grow ever bolder.

Also, one of my copies of Win10 has physical install media... in fact, I've only recently started buying non-physical copies of Win10 for customers because it's a little cheaper.

 

[VirtualLarry]

but it's not illegal or anything.

It is illegal. It's abuse of Monopoly power.

It's high time to break up Google, Microsoft, and Facebook. Maybe Amazon too for good measure, or force them to give their workers living wages and decent working conditions, rather than treating them like slave laborersgig "workers".

 

[VirtualLarry]

This is pretty serious BS. I'm still running Windows 7 on my laptops, but I think I'm going to format my main Windows 10 box and put Linux on it. The only reason for keeping Windows, was the mining, and that's petering out.

ObAside: It's kind of ironic, that "Gamers" demonize "miners", as being a pariah on the online community, when it's really Gamers that are propping up Microsoft's desktop OS monopoly, and allowing it to foist this crap on users, because they encourage a dependency on Microsoft.

So, Internet, RISE UP AGAINST GAMERS AND MICROSOFT. Tell them that we won't stand for this user-manipulation and control BS. That we won't stand for DRM. And that we certainly won't stand for Microsoft. And it's been Gamers that have led us down this dark road.

 

[mikeymikec]

This is pretty serious BS. I'm still running Windows 7 on my laptops, but I think I'm going to format my main Windows 10 box and put Linux on it.

I was having the same quandary a few months ago, and jumped ship from Win7 to Lubuntu as my primary OS in June. For me the last straw was the pretty much complete BS that MS has been pedalling with 1803 where Windows Defender popped up with a security warning because a user didn't have OneDrive set up so they're not protected against ransomware. No MS, that's not sound security advice, that's you giving bogus advice to sell more OneDrive subscriptions.

 

[balloonshark]

This is pure adware. Telemetry is nothing but spyware. Both are still considered malware any way you look at it. At this point Windows 10 users (especially those that paid for a license) deserve what they get.

 

[EXCellR8]

ObAside: It's kind of ironic, that "Gamers" demonize "miners", as being a pariah on the online community, when it's really Gamers that are propping up Microsoft's desktop OS monopoly, and allowing it to foist this crap on users, because they encourage a dependency on Microsoft.

So, Internet, RISE UP AGAINST GAMERS AND MICROSOFT. Tell them that we won't stand for this user-manipulation and control BS. That we won't stand for DRM. And that we certainly won't stand for Microsoft. And it's been Gamers that have led us down this dark road.

Possibly the dumbest post I've read on this site or any other.

Because Linux and OSX have always been fantastic for gamers. Are you kidding me? Gamer's talking smack about miners is because of the GPU supply being royally F'd. Like gamers really give two damns about what you do with your cards... but I'm glad the giant digital circle jerk is basically over. We can't get all that energy back that you used making your little fake money empire but I guess live and learn.

Good luck on your anti-gamer smear campaign though... hilarious.

 

[mikeymikec]

https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/12/17850146/microsoft-windows-10-chrome-firefox-warning

Microsoft tests ‘warning’ Windows 10 users not to install Chrome or Firefox

I love the headline Wording is important, who knew?

The Verge understands Microsoft is simply testing this prompt for now, and that it won’t appear in the final October update.

(my emphasis) - that's reassuring!

 

[WelshBloke]

Like I said... it's low road tactics but it's not illegal or anything.

Well I'm certainly happy that we've set the bar at "not illegal" when I'm actually paying for something!

 

[ImpulsE69]

It amazes me how complacent people have gotten about corporate tactics.

Also, the article I read said this isn't going to be in the final build.

 

[bruceb]

The only easy workaround is 1): Disable Windows Defender .. 2): Be sure you have the proper setting to allow App from non MS Store to be installed (Settings, Apps, Installing Apps: Set to: Allow Apps From Anywhere)

 

[bbhaag]

Their OS their rules. If you don't like it move on. I honestly don't think this is any worse than Google removing ad blockers from the Playstore though and you don't see people up in arms over that. At least Microsoft allows you to navigate the through the "Install Anyway" option versus Google and Android where you have to root your phone or tablet just to install an ad blocker.

 

[BarkingGhostar]

I thought this was a strange move on M$'s part considering they were taken to court years back for their integration of IE in the Windows OS. I guess the climate is that with Trump out there running amuck things can be done--even if illegally. Just look at how robocalling and Spam marketing picked up after the current admin came into play. Not trying to make this political, but just making my observations available to others.