back to article Microsoft polishes up Chromium as EdgeHTML peers into the abyss

Microsoft could be preparing to ditch the EdgeHTML layout engine of its unloved Edge browser in Windows 10 in favour of Chromium, according to reports surfacing on the eve of the company's developer event Connect();. The reports point to a mystery project, codenamed Anaheim, which will replace Edge as the default web browser …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Begone foul beast :o)

    I, personally LIKE Edge, it does what I need and is cool - posting as AC because YEAH RIGHT :oP

    How one of the mainstays of the IT business cannot get the web side right is actually beyond me, here's to the little guys, taking up the slack

    [/] irony

    1. AMBxx Silver badge

      Re: Begone foul beast :o)

      It's strange to think back to IE4 and how well the UI worked (security is another matter). It also just looked a lot nicer than Netscape.

      Then they stopped. Strange channels in IE5, then just tidying up.

    2. David Webb

      Re: Begone foul beast :o)

      I was using Opera with Ublock Origin installed, it's a nice enough browser but every update would see them adding their own items to the start page, and if your own start page link was, for instance, Amazon, Opera would somehow find it appropriate to change your link to an affiliate link. Same for any site they have affiliate links for.

      Because of that I switched to Edge, sure it has some pretty annoying quirks but you can install Ublock Origin and it doesn't try to hijack your links, or put links you delete back onto your start page.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Begone foul beast :o)

      Edges problems are mainly the horrendous UI and festureset from 5 years ago, not the engine.

      However if this means I can use SharePoint in Chrome, that's a good thing. Tired of Microsoft trying to make me use their crap browser because my company decided to use their crap wiki... (It's hard to call SharePoint a DMS)

      1. Bod

        Re: Begone foul beast :o)

        Don't really get the complaints about the UI. It's a browser. Mostly it's showing a web page, and looks like any other browser. UI for changing settings I'm not fussed about. Favourites are largely dead with the ability to type a letter or two and jump to a favourite page.

        That said in tablet mode the UI or rather UX becomes important and Edge is better than Chrome there. Chrome remains a windowed application but Edge behaves as a UWP app, adapting to tablet mode properly.

        The engine, isn't really a problem these days. Changing it to Chromium won't change opinions which are based on image with most people still thinking Edge is IE and sheep like hype that says "install Chrome". Why? "because".

        Not that fussed,though if this means we get a UWP Chromium based app, then good.

        1. JohnFen Silver badge

          Re: Begone foul beast :o)

          "Don't really get the complaints about the UI. It's a browser. Mostly it's showing a web page"

          Yes, but the UI bits that aren't showing the web page are absolutely terrible.

          "Favourites are largely dead with the ability to type a letter or two and jump to a favourite page."

          For you. There are many people, however, that don't use (or want to use) autocompletion.

          "Edge behaves as a UWP app, adapting to tablet mode properly."

          Maybe that's OK on mobile (I dunno, never used it there), but the UWP apps I've seen on the desktop (including Edge) are horrid.

          "won't change opinions which are based on image with most people still thinking Edge is IE and sheep"

          I think that you're being overly dismissive here. You may get along well with Edge, but plenty of people don't. Not because they have a false image of the browser, but because they've used it and found it wanting. I am one of those people -- Edge is perhaps my least favorite mainstream browser.

      2. P. Lee Silver badge

        Re: Begone foul beast :o)

        So Brave will be good for catch-up tv, yt, bitchute and share point?

        Cheers MS!

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Begone foul beast :o)

        SharePoint Online is fully compatible with Chrome as is SharePoint 2013 and 2016. In fact, if you call MS for support on any of the O365 web apps and tell them you're using IE or Edge, they'll ask you to give Chrome a go.

        https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sharepoint/install/browser-support-planning

        https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sharepoint/install/browser-support-planning-0

        https://support.office.com/en-us/article/which-browsers-work-with-office-online-ad1303e0-a318-47aa-b409-d3a5eb44e452

        If your company has told you not to use Chrome it's because they don't want to support it.

        If your company's intranet doesn't display cirrectly in Chrome then it hasn't been designed properly.

        You're welcome.

    4. ozof

      Re: Begone foul beast :o)

      Now if we could just get Sony to follow suit...

  2. N2 Silver badge
    Devil

    I did use Edge...

    Once.

    It seemed jammed full of largely inapropriate adverts.

    I downloaded Firefox and that was the end of Edge.

    1. Wade Burchette

      Re: I did use Edge...

      I tried it too. But the UI was so confusing and illogical that I quickly gave up. I don't care if it can solve world peace, if the UI is illogical than nothing else matters. That is why Edge is unloved. Adopting Chromium will not fix that fatal flaw.

    2. macjules Silver badge
      Mushroom

      Re: I did use Edge...

      Hey, it could be a lot worse. They could have adopted Safari.

      1. katrinab Silver badge
        Flame

        Re: I did use Edge...

        They are both derivatives of Konqueror. How is that going to make much of a difference?

      2. Hans 1 Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: I did use Edge...

        Where is the joke icon ? Blink comes from WebKit, which Safari uses ...

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I did use Edge...

      I'm assuming the downvotes were for the word "inappropriate". I struggle to see how any ads pushed at the user by a browser can be considered appropriate.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I did use Edge...

        "any ads pushed at the user by a browser can be considered appropriate"

        Isn't that like saying that your car is pushing adverts at you because you drive past a roadside billboard?

        1. georgezilla

          Re: I did use Edge...

          " ... Isn't that like saying that your car is pushing adverts ... "

          Only if your windshield is only 27 inches, and they auto-play at a very loud volume and pop out in the middle of the road.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: I did use Edge...

          Isn't that like saying that your car is pushing adverts at you because you drive past a roadside billboard?

          Eeeerrrrrr, no. I don't own the billboard, do I.

        3. Adrian 4 Silver badge

          Re: I did use Edge...

          More that it chose a route that took you by it's selection of billboards.

      2. katrinab Silver badge

        Re: I did use Edge...

        Edge doesn't push ads. It doesn't come with Adblock by default, just like many other browsers, but Adblock is available in the Microsoft App Store, and you can actually install Adblock before running Edge for the first time, thus ensuring that your eyes (and ears, and computer) don't get polluted by these ads.

        There are lots of reasons to hate Edge, this isn't one of them.

        1. georgezilla

          Re: I did use Edge...

          " ... There are lots of reasons to hate Edge, this isn't one of them. ... "

          Yes it is. And it is just one of many.

          1. AMBxx Silver badge

            Re: I did use Edge...

            By adverts, I think the OP is referring to all the crap displayed when you start the browser, not the adverts shown as part of web pages.

            In terms of UI, there is one good bit - the scroll bars don't keep disappearing. If only that were true of the rest of Windows 10.

    4. Timo

      Re: I did use Edge...

      I also used Edge as it came with a new work laptop. It did seem faster and fairly integrated. But after the silent "upgrades" blew away my bookmark files for the third or fourth time, I decided it wasn't polished enough to be ready for actual use. Too many other options out there that don't shit the bed on the easy stuff.

    5. JLV Silver badge

      Re: I did use Edge...

      It also lacked quick access to a menu or a bookmark bar.

      They might be there, somewhere, but I dislike Windows menu-lessness as much as its Ribbons. Firefox, Vivaldi, Chrome all recognize bookmark bars are key (and if you don’t agree, allow you to decide to hide them).

      Changing the rendering engine ought to help MS render html standards. Won’t help with their lobotomized UI. The rancid ghost of Sinovsky lives on.

      1. JohnFen Silver badge

        Re: I did use Edge...

        "I dislike Windows menu-lessness"

        Oh, I agree with this SO MUCH. That and the awful trend these days of hiding all the controls.

      2. keith_w

        Re: I did use Edge...

        In the settings main pull down there is a switch to turn on the favorites bar.

      3. largefile

        Re: I did use Edge...

        Menu / bookbar?

        Click the three dots in upper right corner and everything you could want is there. It's safe to assume that most of the commenters here haven't looked at EDGE in a few years. As for the article's headline...it's NOT unloved, it's just unused. Oh well...they will move to another engine and it will give Reg haters one less thing to complain about with Microsoft. Meantime.....I'm productive on Windows 10 and my MSFT stock investments have never looked rosier.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: I did use Edge...

          my MSFT stock investments have never looked rosier.

          You mean they're in the red???

  3. rg287

    It is hard to see much of a downside to Microsoft ditching EdgeHTML in favour of Chromium. Aside from a little wounded pride within the bowels of Redmond and some fanboys desperate to see Microsoft "beat" the likes of Google, many developers would be relieved to see a reduction in target platforms.

    Diversity. I don't want to see Microsoft "beat" Google, but I do want to see at least a few different implementations of browser engines. Let's not forget that MS disbanded much of the IE dev team after IE6, feeling that they had "won" the browser wars. Consequently the development of web technologies stalled for at least a couple of years until Mozilla started pushing niceties like tabbed browsing in their "niche" Firefox product, and then Google stomped on everybody with the blistering V8 JS engine.

    MS wanted to own the web. They imposed their own ActiveX controls and various other proprietary standards. A legacy that many organisations are still dealing with.

    Google also wants to own the web, and perhaps in the past they have been less closed-shop than MS were - a benevolent dictator. But fundamentally, allowing one corporation to effectively dictate the planet's technology choices is not a good thing. The web has always worked on the principle of an organisation pushing out a new feature or protocol, and if people like it (e.g. SPDY), then it gets adopted more widely until someone eventually writes a standard (like HTTP/2). On the other hand, if it's not so popular, it gets to die a death.

    But in order for that process to work, you need a community. Multiple browsers, hopefully running multiple engines (I'm looking at the slew of Chrome-a-likes here, Vivaldi, Opera), and multiple servers at the other end.

    The server side is reasonably buoyant at the moment - IIS, Apache, nginx, Litespeed, GWS, et al. The browser side not so much. There's no shortage of browsers touting new user-side features or interfaces, but they're all just a glossy skin on top of Chromium...

    1. sabroni Silver badge

      Came here to post exactly that (though less eloquently).

      If true this change is bad news for everyone but Google.

    2. clocKwize

      Re: Diversity

      I don't want diversity. I want every website to work in every browser I use on whatever device I use it. Chromium the rendering engine is open source and isn't developed by few in one organisation. Yes its the engine behind Chrome, but then it is also the engine behind other browsers. I'm happy for there to be diversity in browsers, pick which ever one you think has the most usable UI (everyone has a different opinion). People shouldn't really care what rendering engine it uses, as long as pages look the same for everyone everywhere, which really is the goal.

      1. Badger Murphy

        Re: Diversity

        "I don't want diversity."

        Maybe not, but, and you may not realize this bit, you don't want a monoculture. You may only use one browser, and therefore feel that the other browser technologies are irrelevant to you. You are mistaken there, though. There are trade-offs in every situation, and this one is no different. With fewer rendering engines, it may be easier for developers to write pages that render well everywhere due to less testing surface, but it is at the cost of this necessary diversity. If we all use the same rendering engine, then there is more incentive to create exploits for that engine. Once an exploit is formed, it works on every single device running that browser (you know, the ONLY browser).

        Reducing the web browsing options to an ever decreasing number of rendering engines is putting all of our eggs in an ever decreasing number of baskets.

  4. Dave K Silver badge

    So, MS maybe about to take a hint that their strategy with Edge isn't working.

    Now, how about a similar change of heart regarding Windows 10's biggest bugbears?

    1. Aladdin Sane Silver badge

      That would involve them turning Windows into a Linux distro.

      1. a pressbutton

        No, turning windows 10 into Windows 7 would be good enough for me

        .. or even better XP

        1. N2 Silver badge

          Why not go the whole hog

          And turn it into 2000 ?

          1. Sgt_Oddball Silver badge

            Re: Why not go the whole hog

            Surely you jest? Windows 3.11 would make a better choice surely?

        2. anthonyhegedus Silver badge

          Yes, XP, which was better at running viruses than actual software

      2. katrinab Silver badge
        Flame

        "That would involve them turning Windows into a Linux distro."

        Complete with SystemD? No thanks. How about a BSD distro?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          BSD? Naaah, windows users wouldn't be able to handle THAT much speed and reliability increase... Best to wean them onto linux!

          1. MyffyW Silver badge

            just an idea

            Turn Windows into a Linux distro?

            Why, they don't even need to do that much. Just release it as a Window Manager and Desktop Environment on top of Debian.

            Windows started life on top of a command line OS, seems appropriate to return there...

            1. katrinab Silver badge

              Re: just an idea

              If you look at the server versions of Windows, it kind of does again. You can theoretically do everything from Powershell and not install a desktop.

          2. Wolfclaw Silver badge

            "speed and reliability increase" .. wash your mouth out for those dirty words, this is Microsoft after all.

        2. Fungus Bob Silver badge
          Coat

          "How about a BSD distro?"

          Microsoft BSD? They already did that. You've heard of the BSOD.....

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            BSOD? That anything like an OD on other illicit drugs? What sort of highs does this MS BS give you?

        3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          "How about a BSD distro?"

          Somebody could go and rummage in the attic for the Xenix source code.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Periodically I try Linux and after a few hours of trying to get everything working, I give up and go back to windows.

        1. Maventi

          > Periodically I try Linux and after a few hours of trying to get everything working, I give up and go back to windows.

          Same in reverse here. I guess everyone has different needs.

        2. Hans 1 Silver badge

          I gave up trying to get everything to work on Windows ... works fine on Linux ...

          1. Usermane

            Wait untill the MS programs come in .Deb and others.

      4. Adrian 4 Silver badge

        Worked for Apple (for Linux, read BSD)

  5. iron Silver badge

    > many developers would be relieved to see a reduction in target platforms

    But, the intelligent ones will decry the loss of diversity and promotion of a monoculture leading to worse malware issues.

    1. badger31

      Is it a promotion of a monoculture if Microsoft are getting a seat at the Chromium table, not just Google? Just a thought. I haven't done much web development, thankfully, but getting cross-browser support was a pain and seemed really hacky. I can't imagine there's many webdevs saying "oh, no! Fewer browsers to support!"

      For the record, I've never used Edge so I cannot comment on its merits.

      1. JohnFen Silver badge

        "Is it a promotion of a monoculture if Microsoft are getting a seat at the Chromium table, not just Google?"

        Yes. The more companies that sit at that table, the more of a monoculture we have. The diversity that's important isn't in the number of companies using the same engine, it's in having several different engines.

        "I can't imagine there's many webdevs saying "oh, no! Fewer browsers to support!""

        I'm sure you're right, but let's talk frankly here -- as an end user, I don't give two shits about how hard the life of web developers is, just as so many of them don't give two shits about me.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          The diversity that's important isn't in the number of companies using the same engine, it's in having several different engines.

          Especially with the auto-updating of stuff these days even without users wanting it.

          Diversity means competition. That means there's stronger incentive to improve the engine. It means malware has a harder time taking hold (though the google malware is everywhere anyway :( ).

          It also means we users get a variety of choices and we can try something different from time to time.

          If you want one model or brand of everything, go back to the 1950's-80's Russia (as portrayed in American movies).

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          As a web dev, I find this statement to be widely inaccurate. In regards to developers "not caring about you". Sure, you have the big top 10 websites implementing a lot of features nobody asked for a lot, but when it comes to the average developer designing a page for a site or a client it actually sucks a lot when you have to rewrite something to make work on all browsers because one doesn't play as nice as others. When developing a site, I have to make sure the most heavily used browsers work 100% and then write workarounds for those that don't work so nice or try again from scratch. It's all because users do matter and will either not stay, complain or hate a design if they can't get what they want easily and fast. UX, UI, the user(you) matters a lot, and you're the ones we try to satisfy the most to ensure that we have repeat business from a client and just a matter of integrity in making a working product. I have had arguments with site owners or co-devs because they want to change something like a menu or main interface to look "cooler", provide more information or simply be different. You can't do that because of UX. If a user expects to click a logo on the left of the page in most sites and you have it below the menu to the right, a user will likely not see it at all, because they are trained to look in hot spots. See FB, YT, Twitter, etc. They all fundamentally have UI hot spots that, if changed, will alienate people.

          1. JohnFen Silver badge

            Well, I was being a touch hyperbolic, but I do think that the essence of what I said is true.

            Yes, writing around differences in browser really does suck. But that developers continue to do this simply perpetuates the underlying problem by removing the incentives for browser manufacturers to fix their software. Web developers should just write to the standard and if it doesn't work with some browsers, divert users to complain to those browser manufacturers.

            I do understand that, in the case of websites that need to make money, the economics dictate that you should pander to the broken browsers. But doing so just ensures that things won't get better in the web generally.

            "UX, UI, the user(you) matters a lot, and you're the ones we try to satisfy the most to ensure that we have repeat business from a client and just a matter of integrity in making a working product. "

            Yes, I hear that a lot (particularly from the UX crowd), but I don't see it in practice that much. I'm not really talking about simple layout here, but functionality. Web designers seem to prioritize two things: making the site look shiny (according to whatever the current fashion is) or make use of the latest trendy technology, and (backed up by a tremendous number of articles and commentary on web design sites) being effective at manipulating users to do whatever it is the site operator wants them to do. Neither of those are treating the user with respect.

          2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            "users do matter and will either not stay, complain or hate a design if they can't get what they want easily and fast."

            The thing that most effectively causes me to not stay is a page that displays nothing at all or a list of URLs it wants Javascript from. If it doesn't work reasonably with NoScript in action then as far as I'm concerned it's a dead loss.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        For the little web site stuff I did I just wrote to standard and made sure it worked with the more common browsers - except IE simply because trying to get it to work for IE meant maybe doubling the code and quadrupling my work load. So IE users were given a page that was functional (if their browser was up to scratch - many lingered on the default on XP for so long!) and a polite suggestion to upgrade to something better.

        Browsers should enhance the standards, but a page written to standard should work in any browser that claims to be compliant.

        1. JohnFen Silver badge

          "Browsers should enhance the standards"

          I disagree. Browsers should adhere to standards and not enhance without changing the standard first. Enhancing standards has always been caustic to the web and is how we end up with nonsense like sites that only work with specific browsers.

          1. h4rm0ny

            I disagree. Browsers should adhere to standards and not enhance without changing the standard first. Enhancing standards has always been caustic to the web and is how we end up with nonsense like sites that only work with specific browsers.

            So basically you hate Chrome with its myriad of non standard HTML and CSS extentions, and like Edge which has been far stricter about sticking to actual agreed standards. Right? Right?

          2. rg287

            I disagree. Browsers should adhere to standards and not enhance without changing the standard first. Enhancing standards has always been caustic to the web and is how we end up with nonsense like sites that only work with specific browsers.

            That's not how the web has ever worked. HTTP/2 is a standardised version of SPDY. Google put it out, people with a compatible browser (Chrome) got SPDY, people with a non-compatible browser got HTTP/1.1. HTTP/3 is being built significantly on QUIC.

            Nothing wrong with that, provided that the developer is ensuring cross-compatibility before they bolt on experimental features.

            The risk comes in a browser/engine monoculture where the incumbent (Google) is in a position to say "Chrome now uses n by default. Too bad if your server doesn't support it". This is what we had when IE6 ruled the web, Netscape was dead and MS could bolt on proprietary features.

            In my examples, Google is the origin of both SPDY and QUIC, but they didn't have the power to simply say "this is what you're using now" (like MS did) because other significant browsers and browser engines existed (Gecko, Trident, EdgeHTML). They had to sell the protocols to the community and convince them to adopt and support them, eventually being written up as standards.

            Enhancing standards is fine. So long as it's done in a graceful, open and backwards-compatible fashion. If it's a bad idea, it won't matter and eventually will die. If it's a good idea, someone will eventually write a standard for it.

            Hell - HTTP wasn't a standard. TBL knocked together this new protocol, people preferred it to Gopher, and eventually it became a standard because everyone was using it.

          3. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Browsers should adhere to standards and not enhance without changing the standard first.

            Not quite what I meant. They should adhere to any existing standards, but can improve how some things are handled. A page written for Firefox should render the same in any other browser. Rendering without 300MB of ram per byte of page code would be a nice enhancement though.

            If one browser does not try something new, there is no reason for the others to catch up. There's less incentive for improvement and a great deal less of a web site. I'm pretty sure that JS did not come about because all the standards were written before the first browsers began to adopt it, nor were HTML and CSS fully written out before browsers began to use them.

      3. Fungus Bob Silver badge

        "For the record, I've never used Edge so I cannot comment on its merits."

        Those here that have used it seem to be focusing in it's demerits.

        1. h4rm0ny

          Edge is my primary browser. It's fast, reliable and has a nice, clean minimal interface. It has an Adblocker I can install if I wish (I try to avoid that because I want sites to earn money) and the ability to turn off auto-play for videos (I use that because fuck auto-playing and audible ads).

          It's got an excellent level of standards compliance and its existence is an important part of the marketplace. I fervently hope this is a false rumour and it is not going to become a thin skin on top of Chrome.

  6. 0laf Silver badge
    Flame

    Take your browser and fuck off

    If you try to forecfully get me to use something I don't want to you can go fuck yourself sideways with a pointy stick and I really don't care how good/fast/shiny it is. You've pissed me off therefore I will not use your goods no matter what.

    I didn't even mind Edge that much functionally but the constant popups of "why not try edge" when I clearly DO NOT WANT TO USE EDGE get on my tits.

    This goes for all manufacturers. So fuck Chrome as well.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Take your browser and fuck off

      I bet you're still mad about Windows 95 starting up automatically after upgrading from 3.1?

    2. Ben1892
      Coat

      Re: Take your browser and fuck off

      Are you suuuuuuure you don't want to make Microsoft Edge your default browser? You sound like you're on the fence a bit here

    3. Thagomizer

      Re: Take your browser and fuck off

      I have a similar attitude. Given the Microsoft virus that forced people onto Win10, I was in no mood to accept the new ways MS was trying to use to turn me into a commodity. So local accounts only, no apps from the Windows store, all “we really want you to try this” crapware removed, automatic updates bypassed (WiFi only connnection) and all data gathering and advert presenting bloatware uninstalled or rendered inoperable, That included anything infected with Bing (a propaganda engine, not a search engine) such as Edge, Windows Search and Cortana. Of course, this means my Win 10 PC will not work the way MS want it to, and I’ve missed out on lots of security features (I’ve avoided all updates since installation) which makes my PC insecure. But I’m happy with that: I am aware it’s an insecure and possibly dirty device, so don’t use it for anything I don’t mind hackers seeing. I do anything sensitive on my iPad or Android phone.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Take your browser and fuck off

        Ohh fiesty..

        So you advocate the Google tax and blatant privacy intrusion of Alphabet ?

        [Yeah.. yeah.. worms.. can open.. Windows telemetry.. but telemetary is different to selling my identity online]

        running away to hide as people "go nuclear"..

        1. JohnFen Silver badge

          Re: Take your browser and fuck off

          "So you advocate the Google tax and blatant privacy intrusion of Alphabet ?"

          Nope, but in terms of those issues, I don't see a huge difference between Google and Microsoft. They're both horrible and abusive companies.

        2. georgezilla

          Re: Take your browser and fuck off

          " ... but telemetry is different to selling my identity online ... "

          No it's not. Your identity online is telemetry, and it is that telemetry that is being sold.

          And just makes you think that MS ISN'T effing selling it like everyone else is?

      2. kat_bg

        Re: Take your browser and fuck off

        Well, if you use Chrome, I guess you are already a commodity, just for a different corporation. Just saying...

      3. largefile

        Re: Take your browser and fuck off

        "I do anything sensitive on my iPad or Android phone."

        I think restricting your viewing of pornography to those devices makes sense.

    4. Persona

      Re: Take your browser and fuck off

      I use both Edge and Chrome. Of the two Edge performs much better on my underpowered tablet. The only downside for me is if I use any Google web site it nags me to use Chrome.

    5. David 132 Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Re: Take your browser and fuck off

      0laf, I regret I have only one upvote to give.

      Hey Microsoft, here’s a tip for you: if something’s genuinely good, people will tend to discover it on their own or by word-of-mouth. If you have to cajole people into using your browser, you’ve already lost.

      I remember reading here quite recently that MS had tried the tactic, in a Windows test build, of intercepting user attempts to run Firefox_Setup.exe and showing an interstitial “Are you suuuuuure you won’t try Edge?” wheedling dialog. Pathetic, and would have ticked me off even more than does the nag when you try to change default browser.

      Basically, Edge is the browser equivalent of Talkie Toaster.

    6. N2 Silver badge

      Re: Take your browser and fuck off

      "I didn't even mind Edge that much functionally but the constant popups of "why not try edge" when I clearly DO NOT WANT TO USE EDGE get on my tits.

      This goes for all manufacturers. So fuck Chrome as well."

      Hello,

      it looks like you are writing a letter? would you like me to:

      1. Fuck it all up for you

      2. Format your hard disk

      3. Or just piss you off and lose all your work

      Make three choices from the above list.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Take your browser and fuck off

        "This goes for all manufacturers."

        And while we're at it, can we include non-manufacturers? No I will never sign up to Prime so stop pushing the crap at me. No I will not let PayPal remember my password to add a "Not even later" option. And on and on....

  7. Teiwaz Silver badge

    Seeing a pattern here.

    Rather like the phone, and other attempts, release, push it far too aggressively with promises that it can't deliver.

    If there's not enough take-up, drop it like a dead frog.

    Why would anyone invest in a new Windows product under those circumstances.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Seeing a pattern here.

      drop it like a dead frog.

      Nobody told Steve Ballmer that that was not in fact hipster slang for 'do a dance'.

      1. Teiwaz Silver badge

        Re: Seeing a pattern here.

        Nobody told Steve Ballmer that that was not in fact hipster slang for 'do a dance'.

        I've seen him dance, it was more passing electricity through a dead toad than dead frog.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Seeing a pattern here.

          >I've seen him dance, it was more passing electricity through a dead toad than dead frog.

          Anal electro stimulation ?

          Enjoy that graphic folks, sleep tight.

    2. LDS Silver badge

      Nadella the loser

      It looks under Nadella MS is refusing to invest in any sector it doesn't have a big lead to start from (excluding Azure) - a loser approach.

      That in turn, as you point out, will just worry many people about investing in any Microsoft technology - it's better to adopt any technology MS itself will adopt in one year of two. New icons may not be enough to convince users.

      That means MS will shrink more and more - and companies who survive on a single product/service are at bigger risks. They're going to lose a lot of skills, too.

      In this instance, an agreement with Mozilla could have been a better strategy. Unless Nadella eyes a job at Google in his future...

  8. Wellyboot Silver badge

    I'm possibly not alone here.

    My Linux & Firefox box has a user agent plug in fibbing that its win10 & Chrome68.

    Just thought I'd throw that in..

    1. Teiwaz Silver badge

      Re: I'm possibly not alone here.

      My Linux & Firefox box has a user agent plug in fibbing that its win10 & Chrome68.

      Just thought I'd throw that in..

      Try using a webkit browser, then the entire internet suddenly thinks you are an apple gullible idiot rather than a pc gullible idiot.

      worth it for the change of scene - switch the fake windows dialogs trying to alarm you with the traffic lighty ones - it's like changing your desktop theme.

    2. nagyeger

      Re: I'm possibly not alone here.

      Someone who's endpoint IP address said they're in the Ukrainian Republic has told their browser it's a

      googlebot.... Which shows an odd attitude to security, since they' were about the only browser that can't talk TLSv1.2. connecting to a site I administer. They need to pretend to be something different or update their browser if they want to pretend that now.

      1. bpfh

        Re: I'm possibly not alone here.

        Probably a great way of bypassing some press website paywalls, as much as they bitch about Google ´stealing’ their content they still want it fully indexable, and some sites forgo content truncation or JavaScript limitations when the googlebot comes a crawln’

      2. JohnFen Silver badge

        Re: I'm possibly not alone here.

        "They need to pretend to be something different"

        I block Googlebots on my websites, so for me, Googlebot would have to pretend to be something different. :)

  9. simonb_london

    Open Source

    "Microsoft engineers have been contributing to the open source Chromium codebase,.."

    Being able to do this is part of what makes a browser successful. Once open source becomes the norm for an evolving application, nothing else need apply. Same with web servers.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Open Source

      It can also make the playground less diverse...

      We don't want to go back to the days where people "write for" known bugs, even if it is oss. (yes, oss can be fixed quickly, but if it's dominent there will be no rush, and people takes ages to upgrade - companies need to audit etc.)

    2. georgezilla

      Re: Open Source

      "" ... Microsoft engineers have been contributing to the open source Chromium codebase ,.."

      So it isn't enough that Microsoft eff up their own shit. Now they want to eff up someone ( everyone ) else's stuff too?

      How nice of them.

      1. Teiwaz Silver badge

        Re: Open Source

        So it isn't enough that Microsoft eff up their own shit. Now they want to eff up someone ( everyone ) else's stuff too?

        When you're in your own home, you can leave the bathroom and kitchen in a shit state every morning and worry about it later.

        When Sharing is a different matter. Other people will be able to see how badly you clean up after yourself and will rightly complain.

  10. Graham Jordan

    Edge off a ledge.

    I just recently formatted my laptop, and in a bid to keep it super clean I tried my hands at Edge.

    "Why the fuck can't I type a fucking letter into the drop menu on Edge? You're going to make me find a result like a fucking Neanderthal? "

    "Oh shit I just hit back space and actually went back a page, what the fuck is going off?"

    "Stop zooming in when I move the fucking mouse track pad!"

    I manged 4 days before installing Opera. Fuck you Edge. Fuck you to death.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "Oh shit I just hit back space and actually went back a page"

      Didn't you ever notice such behaviour in the past twenty years? How do you believe people not using a mouse go back?

      Or you're quite new to those things called "browsers"?

      1. anthonyhegedus Silver badge

        Re: "Oh shit I just hit back space and actually went back a page"

        So you make your browser pander to the tiny proportion of people who don't use a mouse, rather than the majority of people who don't want the backspace button to delete the last character typed?

        1. georgezilla

          Re: "Oh shit I just hit back space and actually went back a page"

          " ... the backspace button to delete the last character typed? ... "

          Ummmmm .........

          The button does say backSPACE on it. And NOT backPAGE.

          That's what it says on my keyboard anyway. And has for all the years that I've owned one. But hey, I'm old. What do I know?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            "The button does say backSPACE on it. And NOT backPAGE."

            How many keyboard keys get different "meaning" in different applications? If you're in a text-editing field, backspace will delete the previous character. If you're outside it, it will go back one page. I think Mosaic did it too - I never used Tim's first browser, but maybe it did it too. What should they have used? Maybe an eMacs combination like Ctrl+AltGr+LeftShitt+CursorLeft+B? Or a vi command like :b1wp

            Think, pressing the spacebar will also scroll the page. Usually that large button says nothing, so maybe it's right? Yet BACKSPACE means to go back one space, not to delete the character. Because in typewriters, when it appeared first, it did exactly that. So it's time to rename it?

            Anyway my keyboard has only a long left pointing arrow. Many non-English keyboard have only a symbol. Also, when first browser appeared, not every system had the keyboards with all the keys PC users are used to.

            Full keyboard support is very useful when you don't have a mouse (in some server rooms, it happens...), or you have a real bad mouse support in some remote consoles.

        2. JohnFen Silver badge

          Re: "Oh shit I just hit back space and actually went back a page"

          "So you make your browser pander to the tiny proportion of people who don't use a mouse"

          Good interface design includes the ability to use an application entirely with the keyboard with no loss of functionality. Most people rarely need to do this, but sooner or later, most people will encounter a situation where it's necessary.

      2. Maventi

        Re: "Oh shit I just hit back space and actually went back a page"

        > Don't you ever notice such behaviour in the past twenty years? How do you believe people not using a mouse go back?

        > Or you're quite new to those things called "browsers"?

        I've been using "browsers" for over 20 years. It's been a long time since I've used one where the backspace key went a page backwards, probably some old version of IE. It's a silly feature anyway as it's prone to accidents when focus moves out of a text field so I don't miss it in the slightest.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So wither those "MS Only" outfits ?

    Like my former employer. Everything HAD to be MS.

    Then Windows Phone bought it - so they were forced to go BYOD (as no one was going to dish out iPhones on the company dollar).

    But at least they had Internet Explorer (which was the only internally supported browser). Which left then insisting you had to use it even as Chrome hit 50%. Ooops.

    1. David 132 Silver badge
      Headmaster

      Re: So wither those "MS Only" outfits ?

      Good point. But I am a compulsive pedant and cannot stop myself from pointing out that the word you want is “whither”.

      Unless you were urging MS only outfits to decay and atrophy and shrink. Which I suppose works, too.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: So wither those "MS Only" outfits ?

        "Unless you were urging MS only outfits to decay and atrophy and shrink. Which I suppose works, too."

        It's a very good interpretation, especially as they were his former former employer. It would be a good reason to move them from current to former status and get out ahead of the crowd.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    ahahahahahahhahaha

    hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha !!!

  13. Si 1

    I for one welcome our new Chromium overlords

    Actually, no I don’t. I’m quite shocked the author thinks web developers wants a rendering engine monoculture. I rarely bother to test all the browsers these days because compatibility and standards compliance is very good, unlike the bad old days where I’d need to test every f***ing version of IE and write custom CSS hacks for it.

    I don’t want to go back to the bad old days of zero web innovation or progress, MS ditching Edge can only be a bad thing.

  14. mark l 2 Silver badge

    The only reason MS produce a free web browser is to direct users to ads and services they control to try and monetise the end user. To spend money on developing your own rendering engine just to do this does seem like a waste from a commercial perspective. So if you can just use a already existing open source engine with your own skin on top you can achieve the same result for less costs.

    Most users of Edge probably wouldn't realise that the underlying rendering engine had even changed. They just use it because it has the 'e' logo which is what they have always used to connect to the internet since the days of IE.

    1. LDS Silver badge

      "The only reason MS produce a free web browser is to direct users to ads and services"

      Which, incidentally, is the same reasons Google produces its browser....

    2. Bod

      Some people I know don't know what Chrome is and only know it as Google, because they have a G icon it goes to Google home page. They disliked Edge because it wasn't Google, because it went to Bing and the icon is an E. Change the home page and, "oh, so it's Google then".

  15. Wibble

    And in another project...

    ... MS engineers replacing the Windows kernel with something a bit more reliable and ending in *NIX?

    1. wallaby

      Re: And in another project...

      "... MS engineers replacing the Windows kernel with something a bit more reliable and ending in *NIX?"

      Yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

    2. s2bu

      Re: And in another project...

      The kernel itself is actually decent, after all Cutler designed it after VMS. Granted they did manage to mess it up by shoving the GUI into it, but for the most part it’s decent. It’s just the rest of Windows that’s a bloody mess!

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        "ranted they did manage to mess it up by shoving the GUI into it,"

        Look where the graphics code went in Linux too....

        No way you can have a fast GUI today while going back and forth continuously from ring 0 and 3.

        Or look at the tricks kernel developers used in all OSes to make page available without going through rings transitions - which Meltdown exploited.

  16. Charlie Clark Silver badge

    The rewrite that never was

    Edge was never a rewrite from scratch of IE. Not only did it share some of the same bugs, writing a new browser from scratch is a huge undertaking. Edge was IE without bits of shit like ActiveX. It had a new JS runtime and some other with bangs but basically built on the rewrites that started with IE 9. But without the lockin of ActiveX and no mobile base, it was obviously never going to be much more than the help viewer on Windows.

    The IE team from IE 9 should be given credit for picking up the pieces of an abandoned project and working hard to implement web standards and continuing to do this with Edge. I think this means that Edge is a little bit more standards-compliant than Safari. Not bad considering where they were 10 years ago.

    1. JohnFen Silver badge

      Re: The rewrite that never was

      "Not bad considering where they were 10 years ago."

      It's just too bad they couldn't do that and produce a browser that wasn't terrible at the same time.

  17. steviebuk Silver badge

    Really?!

    "and more secure than its competitors."

    My video shows otherwise

    https://youtu.be/kd_0O0aUBDk

  18. Alan Bourke

    Use Firefox

    Or Chrome, if somehow you think Google data slurping is morally superior to MS data slurping.

    1. Teiwaz Silver badge

      Re: Use Firefox

      Or Chrome, if somehow you think Google data slurping is morally superior to MS data slurping.

      Considering you are 'paying' Google for use of everything it provides by your usage, while Windows also theoretically* can still come with a pricetag, so you are paying MS twice.

      I'd say, potentially, yes, Google slurp is morally superior (not that that is saying much).

      * I say theoretically, as most people get it with a computer and regard it as free. As I go out of my way to avoid any bundling options with my computer purchases, if I wanted to use Windows I'd have to buy it.

      1. JohnFen Silver badge

        Re: Use Firefox

        "Google slurp is morally superior (not that that is saying much)."

        I can't go with you there, because, like Facebook, Google slurps your data whether or not you're using Google products (or even whether or not you're using the internet). As far as I know, Microsoft doesn't present as comprehensive an attack as that.

  19. elgarak1

    Wow. Have you looked at the desktop OS market share recently? Since September, Windows market share is dropping pronouncedly, and something unknown is coming up. I don't think people are running away in droves ... but it seems they're fed up with spying and data-mining and turning their privacy protection up to 11.

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Either that or the heuristics in the analysis are off…

      1. elgarak1

        I don't think they have changed anything in September. If they had, there should be more discontinuity in the numbers.

        Something happened on the user side that prevented them to be counted to "Windows". It prevented them to be counted to one of the other named OSs. The users counted went from "Windows" to "unknown". The easiest explanation is that those users changed their telemetry settings – stopped browsers and the OS from reporting the correct data.

        We don't see it on other statistic services because they have a different metric. Netmarketshare, for instance, was always criticized for counting only corporate users using a specific set of web applications (biasing towards Windows). Those users are unlikely to wiggle their privacy settings.

        Now, one can wonder why this is happening, and happening now. There's an easy suspect.

    2. the Jim bloke Bronze badge
      Coat

      turning their privacy protection up to 11

      because 10 offers none at all...

  20. Wenlocke

    The problem with edge has never really been the rendering engine itself. It's always been the UI and ancillary bullshit.

    As a prime example, for the longest time (I haven't used Edge in yonks so I don't know if they finally changed it) there was this "feature" in edge and IE that would turn phone numbers into clickable links so you could skype people from a web page (or presumably on a winphone, just dial them). You could turn it off in IE's internet options if you didn't want to to do that. Edge, however, didn't listen to those settings, and just did that bit of formatting, whether you liked it or not.

  21. Archytype

    Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

    IE in alĺ it's incarnations had it's uses, granted.

    Edge is shockingly poor.

    Come to think of it, Microsoft should just quit trying to provide a browser full stop.

    If only Windows 10 could be as usable as Windows 7.....

    And why does MS think it's a great idea to put a useless overlay on stuff like "setings"? There was nothing wrong with the Control Panel, so let us add another layer of obfuscation!

    1. Def Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

      If only Windows 10 could be as usable as Windows 7.....

      Not sure what you mean here. I use Windows 10 every day. I also used to use Windows 7 every day. Never had any problems with either.

      And why does MS think it's a great idea to put a useless overlay on stuff like "setings"? There was nothing wrong with the Control Panel, so let us add another layer of obfuscation!

      Yeah, I'm totally with you here. I really hate having settings panels that can be resized and don't rely on a thousand fiddly tabs and dialog boxes to control everything. I just don't get what they were thinking. Clearly the design team should be given a good talking to.

      1. JohnFen Silver badge

        Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

        "I use Windows 10 every day. I also used to use Windows 7 every day. Never had any problems with either."

        I use both every day, and I can't deny that Windows 7 is far easier to use than Windows 10.

        1. Def Silver badge

          Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

          I use both every day, and I can't deny that Windows 7 is far easier to use than Windows 10.

          I guess it depends what you're actually doing all day, but I tend to run the same software most days and the OS doesn't get in the way of me doing that. I've heard it opined that Windows 10 is a little faster and a little less resource heavy than Windows 7, but I have no solid evidence to back that up. I noticed virtually no difference in my day to day work when I switched to Windows 10. (I won't say the procedure was totally pain free, but it was a lot less painful than most macOS updates.)

          If anything, Windows 10 is slightly nicer to use - being able to layout the applications I use the most (that aren't pinned to the task bar) the way I want in the start menu is way better than the constantly reorganising recent programs list of Windows 7, and the applications list is infinitely better than the All Programs menu from earlier incarnations of Windows.

          The *one* issue I do constantly hit is that the Fn key is right next to the Windows key on my laptop and more often than not I hit the wrong one and suddenly enter Windows Tiling Mode instead of going to the start/end of the line. I should probably figure out how to disable the Windows shortcuts, but well... I'm lazy. :)

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

            being able to layout the applications I use the most (that aren't pinned to the task bar) the way I want in the start menu is way better than the constantly reorganising recent programs list of Windows 7

            That's easy to do in 7. Just drag them into place at the top of the list. I think once you move your first one you have a line appear, above which is the stuff you want there and below which is the auto-generated list. Which I think you can change as well. But been so long since I've installed 7 I can't fully remember, I just know that I have an organised list of my stuff where I want it :)

            1. Def Silver badge

              Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

              That's easy to do in 7. Just drag them into place at the top of the list. I think once you move your first one you have a line appear, above which is the stuff you want there

              Yep, and I did use that, but it was a bit limited space wise. Currently I have 30 applications pinned to the start menu in Windows 10, grouped and organised according to use and/or function. (Mostly - there are a few bits and pieces I haven't bothered organising fully, but it's got everything I need on a day to day basis within easy reach.)

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

                That's easy to do in 7. Just drag them into place at the top of the list. I think once you move your first one you have a line appear, above which is the stuff you want there

                Yep, and I did use that, but it was a bit limited space wise.

                Yeah that's a part of why I don't bother with Windows much any more. With Linux I can have more than one bar, even more than one at the bottom. So that gives me room for a normal Win7-like bar down the bottom (rather MS copied others but I say W7 like to make it easier to visualise :) ), and along the top I have a number of most-used stuff and some status stuff (CPU/RAM/Net monitor etc). If I am doing some work that's needing a few other things I'll put in left and/or right bars and add more to them.

                I can also have different bars on different physical screens (at least in Mate, haven't yet tried it with Cinnamon or KDE). That means I can have one set of tools in my main screen and other sets in my side screen(s) as desired.

                I'd say it's much more productive but my first day on a new machine is spent playing with combinations of icons :)

          2. JohnFen Silver badge

            Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

            "I guess it depends what you're actually doing all day"

            This is almost certainly true. I use Windows because I develop Windows applications. I don't use Windows on my personal machines, though, so my entire Windows experience is through the lens of a developer doing his job.

            "If anything, Windows 10 is slightly nicer to use"

            This is clearly a matter of personal taste, but I find Windows 10 less pleasant to use.

            "being able to layout the applications I use the most (that aren't pinned to the task bar) the way I want in the start menu"

            The start menu is one of my major gripes about Windows 10. Fortunately, that's easy to fix by using a replacement start menu. You and I clearly use the start menu differently, though, as I don't think I've ever reorganized the recently used list.

            "the applications list is infinitely better than the All Programs menu from earlier incarnations of Windows."

            I am of the exact opposite opinion!

            1. Def Silver badge

              Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

              I use Windows because I develop Windows applications.

              I'm a software engineer. :) I spend most of my time in Visual Studio. Aside from that, all other tools I use regularly are pinned to either the task bar or the start menu. My personal machines are my work machines, so it's Windows all the way for me - along with my ageing Mac and half a dozen iOS and Android test devices that is.

            2. georgezilla

              Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

              " ... the recently used list ... "

              It's not a " recently used list".

              It's the "shit I use all the time list".

              If it's "recently used", that means I don't use it often enough to need being on a "list". And I'll just go look for it again , whenever ( if ever ) I need it again.

            3. Patrician

              Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

              I vary rarely use the Start Menu any more; Windows Key and start typing the name of the software (not APP grrrrr) I want to use.

              1. JohnFen Silver badge

                Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

                Even though this has been a thing since at least Windows 7, it's not something that works for me. It requires me to remember the name of the application I want to run. If it's one I run a lot, then it's already pinned anyway, and if it's one that I don't run a lot then I'm unlikely to remember what it's called and will end up going through the list anyway.

        2. Adrian 4 Silver badge

          Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

          "I use both every day, and I can't deny that Windows 7 is far easier to use than Windows 10."

          I use neither every day, and it's getting harder and harder to use them occasionally as they hide formerly obvious choices behind layers of crap.

          Example: I reboot a laptop into windows and it gets really fussy about the wifi connection, connecting but constantly giving up on something that worked perfectly minutes earlier when the same hardware was running Linux.

          Microsoft are not only getting less relevant, they're making it increasingly difficult to go back to Windows once you're using something else.

          1. JohnFen Silver badge

            Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

            "they're making it increasingly difficult to go back to Windows once you're using something else."

            Yeah, that's always been the case, though. When I show up at work and have to start using Windows, it always feels like I've gone from driving a sports car to driving a Gremlin.

      2. the Jim bloke Bronze badge

        Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

        Clearly the design team should be given a good talking to.

        Waste of time if they wont listen...

      3. Patrician

        Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

        I general I can get on with Windows 10 but not the Settings Panels; Control Panel served it's purpose perfectly well and was one place to find, pretty much, all the settings. Now there are multiple pages of badly organised links that still don't lead you to what you want.

    2. Bod

      Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

      Settings change from control panel is intended to move from the 90s application UI and Win32 dependency to UWP which can run platform independent and in theory is more responsive to work on any device. It's great for tablet use. Was great for mobile, but they missed that boat so we've got ever changing confusing settings on Android devices instead ;)

      1. JohnFen Silver badge

        Re: Microsoft middle(nuisance)ware.

        "intended to move from the 90s application UI and Win32 dependency to UWP"

        I really wish they'd abandon that effort.

  22. James O'Shea Silver badge

    Edge exists on iOS? Really?

    Until I saw this article I didn't know that Edge was on iOS. I just had a look... it's in the App Store. It also has a 17+ age rating. I kinda wonder how that's enforced...

    Memo to Microsoft Marketing: you boys ain't doing your job. Y'all ain't gonna get many victims... ah, that is, 'customers'... if they don't bloody know that your product bloody exists! And putting in ridiculous unenforceable age restrictions ain't helping!

    1. elgarak1

      Re: Edge exists on iOS? Really?

      The age restriction is from the Apple store. Every browser in there is rated "17+" since you can access the naughty bits of teh Interwebz with them, and even Apple cannot restrict THAT usage for a mere browser. (It's enforced by the age setting in the used Apple account. Yes, you can lower the age setting if you give a device to your kid, or if you share your account with your family. No, I do not know how well this is working, how secure it is, or how easy kids could hack that, since I am an adult by my lonesome and never needed to meddle with that.) Further, the age restriction set in the App Store is, AFAIK, only for downloading and buying, not using (there may be something age restrictive for using, too, but, well, see above.)

  23. Barry Rueger Silver badge

    Edge on Android

    Really? This exists!? Who knew?

    I'm tempted try it just to say that I did.

    1. Hans 1 Silver badge
      Happy

      Re: Edge on Android

      I tried Internet Explorer on Solaris ... once ... the only thing ie was good at was running insecure ActiveX plugins we were forced to use ... and .... ie/Solaris did not run them so off it went.

  24. Charles3

    I appreciate stupidity for stupidity sake, but Edge is a much better browser. It doesn't replace Internet Explorer. It replaces Chrome. As Windows 10 is adopted more and more, Edge will own the market. Its just pacing itself. As for Chromium open source, Microsoft is embracing it, but as its open source nobody owns it and certainly not Google. So its best to just keep quiet about things you don't understand. I'm sure Microsoft is looking to create a chromium browser just like anyone else. Since Google is trying to hold it back from Windows 10 on Arm. Giving users options is the best way to ensure life is good for Windows.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      As Windows 10 is adopted more and more, Edge will own the market.

      Gartner said something like that about the Windows phone not long back either..

      I am the sole owner of the London-Paris road bridge. I find I am making far too much money from it however, and would like to sell off some of the shares in it to other people who wish to get 10,000% pa returns on their investment.

      I have chosen you for this exclusive offer due to your obvious intelligence and sophistication. If you would like to complete this purchase.............

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        "Gartner said something like that about the Windows phone not long back either.."

        So did Charles3 if you check his previous posts.

    2. JohnFen Silver badge

      "Edge is a much better browser"

      Better than what?

  25. JohnFen Silver badge

    Easy to see the downside

    "It is hard to see much of a downside to Microsoft ditching EdgeHTML in favour of Chromium"

    I know that the author was probably referring to the downside to Microsoft, but this has some big downsides to everyone else. It is increasing the web monoculture, it is entrenching Google's dominance, it is furthering Microsoft's intrusion into open source, etc.

  26. Teiwaz Silver badge

    I suppose

    Open Sourcing the dead Edge was never an option (and MS tell us they love open source).

    Maybe someone might have fixed the terrible ui problem for them.

  27. tcmonkey
    Flame

    Again with this Windows on ARM thing. Been done before, failed badly then, will probably do the same this time around (at least IMHO).

    Does anyone actually seriously use Edge for anything other than testing? Thus, does anyone really care what MS are doing with their browser? I'll have to hurry you, teams...

    1. David 132 Silver badge
      Happy

      No... as the article alluded., I just use the built-in browser to download a better alternative (Firefox, in my opinion/case).

      Actually - and I know this is vindictive, petty, and pointless of me - I make a point, on a clean Windows installation, of using IE to download Firefox, and not even using Edge for that. I just got annoyed too much by Microsoft’s sly attempts to force use of Edge (eg nagging when I try to change the default browser, and Edge icons re-appearing on the desktop after seemingly every Windows Update.)

      Fear my nerd wrath, Microsoft!

    2. georgezilla

      " ... Does anyone actually seriously use Edge for anything other than testing? ... '

      Yes, me.

      Or I use to. But for only one thing. To download a different browser.

  28. streaky Silver badge

    GG

    I've only been suggesting this for about 10+ years now Microsoft. Don't think it'll really help gain users but at the same time all that writing your own layout engine noise is a massive waste of resources..

  29. PhilipN Silver badge

    Surprised nobody has yet said it

    but memories fade, even about "embrace, extend, extinguish".

    And the Browser Wars

    And the DoJ case against Microsoft (q.v.)

    At least MS have learnt : last time around they went with the NCSA Mosaic donkey. Now they are riding the competitor's thoroughbred.

    P.S. I would not have wanted an Andreessen-controlled planet either.

    1. georgezilla

      Re: Surprised nobody has yet said it

      I'm old enough to remember them clearly.

      But apparently history, like facts, are not of any use any more.

      "History, facts, who needs them anymore. They just get in the way."

    2. kevinyeandel

      Re: Surprised nobody has yet said it

      Oddly I just posted the Embrace, Extend and Extingiush thing myself.

      "Comes versus Microsoft"

      From here, a well-worth watching video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVHcdgrqbHE

      Very shocking truths.

      If the Open Source community don't make a stand then there will be ONLY Microsoft (hopefully Apple will not fall into the trap).

  30. Mikel

    Deprecate Bing next please

    It's odd seeing Windows people moaning about monoculture as if they cared, and then following up with how great their own monoculture is.

    When they're done throwing IE and Edge on the heap they can send Bing on its way also. Never was more than a vainglorious assault on Google's air supply, accomplished nothing against the Google market share but swept all others from the field. And spent tens of billions of dollars. Enough money to build a Mars colony.

    1. JohnFen Silver badge

      Re: Deprecate Bing next please

      Bing has a real use though -- it's the best engine to search for porn with!

  31. kevinyeandel

    Embrace, Extend and Extinguish?

    Windows 10 was insistent Edge was faster. I'm confused?!?! I wonder if this is part of Microsoft's "Embrace, Extend and Extinguish" strategy. They embrace products and protocols, extend them with proprietary API's to Extinguish what was often open source, community driven creations.

    1. Teiwaz Silver badge

      Re: Embrace, Extend and Extinguish?

      Windows 10 was insistent Edge was faster. I'm confused?!?! I

      Just a product of an unbridled and undeserved corporate optimism.

      Like a restaurant selling half-raw pork as delicious juicy well-cooked roast chicken.

  32. Unicornpiss Silver badge
    Happy

    I take perverse satisfaction..

    ..when I change the defaults on a machine from Edge to IE (or anything else) and choose "switch anyway" when it admonishes me to give Edge a try first.

  33. David Gosnell

    Forced Edge

    This will help with the PR side of Microsoft's push towards forcing Edge on to users, as seen with links from their email client and of course the entire locked-down ecosystem of Windows 10S. At least now they can be perceived as pushing a desirable engine that is compatible with the de facto standard. As a developer, I've certainly been pleased to see Edge resolve many of IE's woes, but there are still some lurking horrors that I will not be at all sad to see the back of.

    1. JohnFen Silver badge

      Re: Forced Edge

      "At least now they can be perceived as pushing a desirable engine"

      Chromium is not universally considered a "desirable engine".

  34. arctic_haze Silver badge

    "Microsoft doesn't comment on rumours or speculation"

    Isn't it a corporate way of saying "Yes"?

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: "Microsoft doesn't comment on rumours or speculation"

      They're not sure which of them will turn out to be true.

  35. GX5000

    Opera to Fox

    Stuck with IE because of our environment (in house apps etc) on WIN7/10.

    Personally still using Opera (and Fox) since it's the only one that does speed-dial well, and the third party addons to block are plentiful and work well. Otherwise I set my clients to Firefox or Chromium (linux).

    Friends don't let friends install Chrome, not even once.

    31 years experience says so.

  36. ShortLegs

    I tried Edge once... it drove me over the edge to Chrome

    hat, coat...

  37. Howard Hanek
    Happy

    Right

    Lipstick and pigs, n' stuff.

  38. an0n1m0us

    I think Edge works great. Browsing is very fast, there are many features to use and security was not bad. I'm wondering what demographic The Register is referring to that states that Edge is "That browser I use to download Chrome". I used to like using Chrome, but it became buggy and every aspect of my browsing was tracked.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019