- Users of Google Chrome on Windows 10 and 11 are reporting that they have suddenly found themselves using Microsoft Edge, with their Chrome browsing sessions appearing in Edge.
- This may be due to a bug or an accidentally clicked-through dialog box related to a feature in Edge that imports browsing data from Chrome.
- The setting, called “Import browsing data from Chrome,” continually imports data from Chrome every time Edge is launched, unlike the one-time import offered for Firefox.
- There have been concerns about Microsoft’s tactics for pushing its own browser, including notifications, pop-ups, and full-screen messages promoting Edge and Bing.
- Microsoft has become more aggressive in pushing various subscriptions and features in recent years, making a “clean” Windows install feel less so.
- It remains unclear whether the Edge data-import issue is intentional or a bug, highlighting concerns about Microsoft’s methods for promoting its own software.
I love how Outlook opens your links in Edge and gives you a little message about how it knows it’s not your default browser but it thought you’d like to open in Edge anyway.
I can always count on Microsoft to help me fix my default browser settings which I keep changing by accident. Silly me.
This has been annoying the shit out of me recently. I use several different computers so I keep running into this dumb shit. I feel like I’m in an endless fight to not use Edge. Microsoft knows I don’t want to use it but they keep shoving it in my face again and again regardless. I really wish regulators would step in and put a stop to this nonsense.
Gasslight Gateskeep Girlboss
They’re not going to step in to fix it. They have no justification for daring to stand up to a 3 trillion dollar company.
They might throw a 5 million fine at them or something, but nothing that’s actually going to stop this horrible anti-consumer monolith of practices
You don’t seem to be familiar with the history of browsers or the billion dollar fine Microsoft received in the 90s.
EU regulators can and will make Microsoft hurt if they want to.
Or this fine from 2013 which related to Microsoft breaching the settlement agreement from the first fine: https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-fined-731m-by-eu-in-browser-choice-screw-up/
Bitch please. Those fines are barely parking tickets to a 3 trillion dollar company.
And you don’t know me so stfu
You were presented with proof that your claims are wrong and you respond immediately with ad-hominem attacks.
You are a low quality contributor and Lemmy would be better off without you.
On-topic: I agree with your claim that EU regulators can and will make Microsoft hurt if they want to, and that both fines are examples of that.
Off-topic: frankly the other user unleashing at you was deserved. Your “You don’t seem to be familiar […]” boils down to “I assume that you’re an ignorant, so let me enlighten you little thing”. Stick to the argument dammit, your assumptions on the others are irrelevant garbage.
Also, you’d do a great favour for everyone if you didn’t use “ad-hominem” [SIC] as a fancy reword for “waaah, he insulted me!”. The argument is there, alongside the insult.
In the meantime: @Bizarroland@kbin.social, stop bring guns to a sword fight. While the above was patronising (as I am being towards both of you here - except that I’m being explicit on it), your “waaah shut up! shut up!!!” (ipsis ungulis: “stfu”) sounds like a redditor whining.
You bunch of kids, go back to the kindergarten. Both of you are being dead weight hier.
My assumption was that they were unaware rather than wilfully spreading misinformation which is the generous position to take.
People who get upset over being factually corrected are of low value to online communities.
Their response also contained no facts or evidence only further claims which I won’t waste further time addressing.
Since you love ad-hominem with a dash of unsupported claims:
It looks like you’re suggesting we assume every commenter is speaking factually. What an absolute fucking muppet you are. It’s free speech absolutist moral panic driven morons like you eroding society as a whole.
I.e. you acknowledge that you were making shit up about the other poster.
Seriously. We [people] don’t know shite about each other on the internet. Let us not pretend that we do.
That is not an ad hominem either. I didn’t even argue against your on-topic claim, I outright agreed with it. I’m complaining about your tone and highlighting that you partially deserved the other user’s aggressive reaction.
But since it seems that you’re some ignorant, unable to grasp the concept of ad hominem, let ⟨blink⟩me⟨/blink⟩ enlighten you, o poor little thing:*
Argumentum ad hominem is when you claim that something is false because someone said it, and the person has cooties or whatever. For example:
or, in fancier words, when the validity of the claim is questioned not because of the claim itself, but because of who uttered it.
*I’m doing this on purpose to highlight how obnoxious you sound. Now cover it with a Reddit style façade of politeness, and then you get your tone.
“As an assumer, I assoooome” territory? Again?
I did not say anything remotely interpretable as that. (It’s kind of funny, as you’re assuming that I’m assuming.)
The other muppet clearly mentioned those fines as an example, that fines can harm Microsoft if so desired. Of course they’d need to be scaled up given that MS is considerably more wealthy than back then.
Aside from the fact that they were being condescending in their reply, that 900 some odd million dollar fine was only a small fraction of the profits they made from doing crimes and misdemeanors.
If you can rob a house and the only penalty is that you have to give the cops some of your loot then there’s not really a reason to not rob houses.
Anybody with a lick of sense would say that if you do a crime you don’t get to keep any of the profit.
So while 900 million looks really good on paper and it really looks like you’re sticking it to the big bad Microsoft, when they made tens of billions of dollars off of those crimes it’s a giant nothing Burger.
Now that Microsoft is a 3 trillion dollar company, any fine that isn’t over a hundred billion dollars is something that they can easily ignore.
If you’re talking about these fines: it was 1.35 billion euros in total, the “900 million” number only refers to the biggest one. And there were two complicating factors:
I do agree that it’s a bit small, considering their size back then (they were already a 300B company), but the case still triggered some action from MS, forcing it to release a WMP-less version of Windows.
And, if this happened today, with Edge, I predict that the fine would be considerably larger, since MS has today ten times the market share that it had in 07, and because browsers are seen as a bigger deal than media players. Perhaps not hundreds of billions, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was 50B.
I also predict that it would be far more effective because their strategy with Edge is to push it down your throat until you don’t spit it back, so an “Edge-less version” would be actually seen as desirable by the customers.
Same thing with MS Teams, except it didn’t give me any messages. It just started opening all my links on Edge overnight. I was very confused when I double checked my OS settings and Edge wasn’t my default browser. I had to manually set Teams to use the same as my OS default instead of Edge.
This whole thing reeks of higher execs pushing stuff no one wants or needs, while a poor dev has to implement shit like this and cry in bed at night.