Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Microsoft Edge preview builds are ready to try (microsoftedgeinsider.com)
94 points by thomaspark 63 days ago | hide | past | web | favorite | 139 comments



Edge's "IE Mode" is depressing. We fit exactly into the problem space it aims to solve (enterprise with a mix of both Java Applets and modern "internal" web sites that could target current web-standards if not for the Java Applets backlog).

The problem with "IE Mode" as implemented is that it only works for devices connected to AD/fully managed. Our "internal" sites (both Java Applet and modern) are externally accessible and via BYOD like a lot of enterprises today. Employees work from home. Employees work remotely.

I can see why "website list" would be their preferred solution to routing, but unfortunately it won't work for a lot of enterprises in 2019. We aren't using internal sites like 2005 anymore, they're "internal" only in name and function, they're very much externally accessible (even via VPN in some cases, but you aren't managing the actual device).


In the enterprises I've worked in, BYOD devices are still fully managed. Usually, you must enrol your device in enterprise MDM in order to connect to the corporate VPN.

Presumably, this type of enterprise is the type Microsoft is targeting with IE compatibility mode.


That seems pretty inflexible, and a potential invasion of employee's privacy.

I'm talking about employees being able to input their leave/overtime into an externally facing "internal" web-portal, or looking up tickets/jobs.

Requiring that they allow full enterprise control of every device that would access an internet facing website seems dragonian.


BYOD gives you the freedom to pick whatever device you want and do the actual work with it, not just enter working time and book vacation. But you're connecting that device to the network and using it to access the most sensitive parts of that network, the most delicate data.

Most users have little to no "tech hygiene" so allowing random devices maintained by these users to connect will open your company to a world of hurt.

For basic standard activities most companies offer locked down environments like Citrix or externally facing portals that can be safely accessed form any home computer. The alternative is to use a company issued device for work.


> But you're connecting that device to the network and using it to access the most sensitive parts of that network and the most delicate data.

That's not the usage I set out above at all. Not even ballpark.

I am talking about an externally accessible "internal" enterprise website, and that IE Mode cannot be used well with it. I'm not sure how you got from website to "access sensitive parts of the enterprise network." Employees are BYOD to access the company's "internal" website from an external endpoint. That's the topic. That's where IE Mode applies.

It reads like you and the sibling comment forgot what is even being discussed. This is IE Mode for websites. Specifically for "internal" enterprise websites. I am discussing the highly common practice of allowing access to "internal" websites externally (inc. via privately owned employee's devices over the internet).


> That's not the usage I set out above at all. Not even ballpark.

I replied to to your later generalization related to the devices' "managed" status, the one turning your original point into an "inflexibility" and "employee privacy" issue. BYOD is/should not be 100% your regular private device. Moreover it's there to allow you more flexibility not less, so you don't have to use a company device and work from the office. You can't give perfect flexibility/privacy to your employees while ensuring even a modicum of security. And someone will always complain about something.

The problem isn't that companies manage BYOD devices, it's that they still use legacy sites that only work with IE. So coming back to your original point, the solution as I already said is to provide you with something like Citrix or equivalent (device is no longer relevant), or for the company to fix its websites. Not for MS to implement the magic button that makes your company's legacy sites work for another 20 years. But if you have a security team at all your BYOD will still remain a (partially) managed device regardless.

MS is on one hand intentionally restricting the compatibility mode to force lazy companies with bad practices to upgrade their aging sites without straight up cutting them off. On the other hand I'm not sure if MS could even implement a true "IE mode" since nobody wants that legacy code in any modern browser.


At this point any such site that you want universally accessible should be refactored into a true standards compatible website.

Trying to fix the problem on the browser side is the wrong answer, which is what Microsoft is trying to nudge enterprises to by progressively making it harder to use legacy dependent apps like that.


> At this point any such site that you want universally accessible should be refactored into a true standards compatible website.

That logic could be used to magic anyway any need for IE Mode for anyone. Why even take part in this discussion if you dismiss the need for the very thing we're discussing? Seems fruitless.

I honestly have no interest in discussing the merits of IE Mode conceptually. I am talking about the implementation from the point of it existing on-wards. You're welcome to find someone else to argue this with however.


There are a few solutions:

1. Move away from what is probably a home grown bespoke time tracking system and use one of the many SASS vendors. The company can easily pay some consultants who would gladly take their money.

2. Provide a company device.

3. On the extreme, setup some Citrix terminals they can log into from their devices.


> Move away from what is probably a home grown bespoke time tracking system and use one of the many SASS vendors

It is already. But I don't see the relevance.

> Provide a company device. On the extreme, setup some Citrix terminals they can log into from their devices.

In order to use a web browser to connect to an internet facing website? I genuinely don't understand what you think got said for this reply to make sense. It certainly doesn't seem relevant to the discussion of how IE Mode routes.

It is a public facing "internal" enterprise website. It has mixed content (Java Applets and web content). It has to target IE11 for web content due to the Java Applets. IE Mode doesn't solve this well because any device an employee can use can also access the site (it is on the internet after all).

A Citrix terminal(???) is a worse solution than just having everyone use IE11 as today.


It is already. But I don't see the relevance.

The relevance is that instead of the corporation biting the bullet and moving away from a home grown app and expecting Microsoft to support them forever, the company should be investing in newer (ie less than a decade and a half old system).

In order to use a web browser to connect to an internet facing website? I genuinely don't understand what you think got said for this reply to make sense. It certainly doesn't seem relevant to the discussion of how IE Mode routes.

The internet facing “website” that is still using proprietary old IE technology is no more of a modern definition of a website than one requiring RealPlayer or a Gopher client.

And depending on any Java applet doesn’t help the majority of users who are using mobile devices.

It is a public facing "internal" enterprise website. It has mixed content (Java Applets and web content). It has to target IE11 for web content due to the Java Applets.

The problem is that depending on Java applets in 2019 doesn’t serve the employees well and neither did whoever decided it was a good idea not to start a migration strategy a decade ago....


I feel like you aren't reading my replies so I'll keep this short.

- We know Java Applets don't work on non-IE11 browsers and mobile devices, that's why we've spent the last three years migrating to modern web standards, that's why we have mixed legacy/modern content, which incidentally exactly the scenario IE Mode was invented to solve. Thus the entire point of this feature and my post.

- If you ONLY have Java Applets IE Mode does nothing for you. It is a migration helper.

- Our time management system is from a popular vendor and uses modern web technologies, it isn't relevant here.

- No "proprietary IE technology" is used. The website has Java Applets built using Oracle's technology on it. IE11 supports Java Applets. Edge, Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and others do not.

- Companies have invested tens of years into now defunct technologies. Suggesting they migrate tens of years of investment in an eighth of the time isn't at all realistic or constructive. It is an ongoing process. We'll be stuck mid-migration for another five-ish years (thousands of man hours still to go).

- Thank you for telling me what the company should have done 12 years ago, and 8 years before I joined. Very constructive.


1. No "proprietary IE technology" is used. The website has Java Applets built using Oracle's technology on it.

2. IE11 supports Java Applets. Edge, Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and others do not.

Those two sentences don’t go together. For all intents and purposes using Java applets in a browser is “IE only”.

Companies have invested tens of years into now defunct technologies. Suggesting they migrate tens of years of investment in an eighth of the time isn't at all realistic or constructive.

The industry has been moving away from Java applets since the introduction of the iPhone in 2007. Java applet deprecation is not a new or unforeseen development.


> Java applet deprecation is not a new or unforeseen development.

Not really a point of contention. Also not really relevant to this discussion. The whole "12 years ago a company [I didn't even work at] should have done X Y Z" isn't constructive, or remotely relevant to a discussion of IE Mode today and how it operates.


It’s not about you. It’s about how should Microsoft move forward, and how long should they support older tech because companies don’t prioritize migrations from older technology.

One of the major issues with Windows has always been that they have hack on top of hack to keep backwards compatibility. You can read Raymond Chen’s MSDN blog to get an idea of how bad it is.

The answer has to be somewhere between Apple - not long enough to be appropriate for the Enterprise - and too long in the case of Microsoft where it slows down development, causes an increase security vulnerability surface, and causes Windows to be a resource hog compared to other operating systems.


> If you ONLY have Java Applets IE Mode does nothing for you

Well that's the whole point. MS is forcing your company's hand into doing something about that site that's very important for you but somehow was ignored for years. Everyone knows most companies won't move a finger without external pressure. MS is providing that pressure.

The only alternative would be to build support for Java applets into a modern browser. Which is exactly what everyone tried to get rid of. So expecting IE mode to fix that issue for you makes no sense. I don't understand how this could even be a complaint.


> MS is forcing your company's hand into doing something about that site that's very important for you but somehow was ignored for years.

You just replied to a post that said verbatim: "we've spent the last three years migrating" with this. So, no. If you had read the previous posts in the thread you'd know that already.


The point I’m making is waiting until 2016 to move away from Java applets is about like waiting until December of 1999 to be sure your system is y2K compliant. I was working with companies in 2008-2010 to move away from Java applets. Everyone saw the writing on the wall a decade ago when it came to depending on plug ins.


this is our network as well (6k + desktops/laptops)


For what its worth, I have been running Edge Chromium for the last few months, and when I first installed it I thought it would have a bunch of bugs that forced me back to Chrome.

Nope. Its totally solid, and has completely supplanted Chrome on my Mac, including for web development (it has the same Chrome development tools).

Highly recommended - sort of like the VSCode of browsers in my opinion.


What makes it better than chrome or other browsers? Does it have some key features that make it good appart from not being owned by google?


No Google spyware is the key feature from my perspective, but I also feel like the interface is cleaner as well.


Yes, Microsoft seems to be better at UI for sure but spyware its just replaced with Microsoft's i guess.


I have app history disabled in Windows 10 but they don't care they send that information to servers anyway


Ah stop it.

MS not even close to the decadent stuff that G is doing, insensitive, business models, product users are also completely different.


But MS clearly wants to be funded by advertising: obviously signalled by not charging for Windows 10 upgrades, and the "telemetry" and tendency towards an intrusive advertising model (e.g. "join Teams" popup on login in recent update).


I don't think Microsoft wants to be funded by advertising. They and Apple are trying to run the exact same playbook of not charging for OS upgrades, and instead focus on value added services on top (App Stores, Cloud Services, etc).

Apple telemetry and intrusive advertising for their services is so similar on iOS on volume/scale/purpose to everything people are complaining about on Windows 10, but I guess Apple gets a free pass because they are the "scrappy underdog" that also had a larger market cap for a few recent years?


To be fair, Apple doesn't have as much of a reason to misuse your data as Microsoft, and their main way to benefit off you is by selling you more devices. Microsoft failed in the mobile department, so they mostly have desktops, laptops, and high end tablets, but their money comes largely from software running on those devices, and a lot of those services use personal data.

So, Apple wants to make sure you have a good experience on their devices so you'll buy more, Microsoft wants to know which of their products will fit your usage.

To me, Microsoft's telemetry is more creepy than Apple's, but both pale in comparison to Google's tracking. I choose to avoid all three companies' products as much as possible because I don't like being tracked.


Microsoft advertises their own products and wants you to pay for products in their ecosystem. They will shove the same stuff down your throat (Azure, Onedrive, etc) pretty much whatever you do, which means they don't have a vested interest in behavioral advertising.

Google on the other hand shows ads across the internet, so they have to track you a lot more intimately in order to make you buy a new toaster or whatever (I haven't seen online ads in years, so I don't really know what they're like).


Agreed. "Aggressive" telemetry is still annoying, but google is on a whole other level.


Can't you install the OS version of Chrome for that? (Chromium)


Can Chromium play any DRM-ed content?


Widevine and proprietary codec support (you'll want h.264) are optional components of Chromium, it depends on the build settings. But yes, you can. You can even go as far as enabling Google sync if you so choose but I don't see why you wouldn't just use Chrome at that point unless you had other customizations and did your own builds.

The one thing I'd like to see out of the thousand Chromium clones is one which modularizes the install more. I don't care about flash, bluetooth/usb, all of the SSDP stuff, PNACL, the PDF viewer, the hidden Google extensions, and others I can't think of right now but they are an absolute pain to remove and even harder to keep removed while staying up to date.


On my ancient MacBookPro circa 2012 running Windows 8.1, it just pops up very fast, where as Chrome takes several seconds to start.


It could be because it is already running as part of the desktop environment - just like Chrome in ChromeOS.


Not yet, Microsoft hasn't made any deep integrations yet.


Edge still is not 100% compatible with Chrome. I know a website which is render correctly in Chrome and Firefox but broken in [the latest stable version of] Edge.


The stable version of edge is not based on chromium yet


I see. Thanks. I've just started using Edge a week ago and expected it to be using the Blink engine already. BTW, is there a website that would display your browser details (engine details included) as you visit it?


This is different from the Dev channel that they had opened up awhile back, in case anyone else gets confused as I did for a few moments.

I really like it. In my opinion, its the best version of Chrom(ium) you can get on Windows and Mac. Very snappy.

And they already have some neat developer tooling around it. There is a vscode extension to do live reloads with with it, and see/manipulate the DOM and do other debugging/measuring of your application.

Good work here!


Just noticed this is not hosted a microsoft.com URL as I was about to download. Is this thing above board? Any way to confirm that it's from Microsoft even though it's not their origin?


SSL Cert is valid and from "Issued by: Microsoft IT TLS CA 1"



Well, this is the same site that has been providing Dev Channel builds for months now. Microsoft has a diverse set of domains and often uses project-specific domains.


What I want to know is whether I will be able to run Ublock Origin on it after Ublock Origin stops working on Google Chrome.


Backporting is not the problem, whether Raymond Hill continue working on uBlock Origin after >90% market share vanishes overnight is.



Presumably when Chromium adds the change that destroys UBlock Origin, it will be broken on all Chromium forks.

I don't see how it wouldn't, unless they added code back in on top of Chromium to support the API they're removing.


That's what other forks have committed to doing already (and have done with API changes in the past) so I don't see why you are skeptical Microsoft would be able to.


Indeed, of all the forks they're the most likely to have the resources to maintain a fork which diverges that much.


Preinstall and postinstall scripts for the Edge browser (macOS). Sudo-ing telemetry data.

https://github.com/sizeofcat/microsoft-edge-macos-scripts/tr...


yeah why the heck do they need sudo for their send event command?


"The attributes that you say matter most in your browsing experience are performance, privacy, and reliability. So that is where we are starting."

Sounds good.


Does not inspire confidence, if we were to look at what Microsoft did to Skype and all the mandatory telemetry they added in Windows 10.


The difference is that they're a nobody in the browser space. Like Chrome did at first, they have no choice but to legitimately be better until they win market share. Then we'll see.


Not sure if I agree with this. They used to be a major player in the browser area, remember IE?

The somehow lost the market share, possibly because they focused on something else instead of innovation and solving the problems of the users.

I think it is naive to expect them to suddenly change, especially given the recent history of clearly going against user's interests in introducing mandatory telemetry. Case in point: win10 still overwrites user's default application preferences and fonts pretty much on every update.


I believe the point the person you replied to was trying to make was that while they add telemetry and have issues with the products where they dominate the market, they try much harder to produce the best product when they are underdogs.

With IE, they started being user-hostile and taking their users for granted because they owned the market. The same thing they are currently doing with Windows 10. They do this because they feel like they can.

However, in markets they are trying to win, they are much more user-friendly and provide great products. You can see this in VS Code and the new Edge (personal opinions). Though, I do agree that just because they are being friendly now doesn't mean they won't do the same shit they did with IE once they gain the market back.

This isn't about Microsoft or Google's culture or history, this is the fact that any company that has little to no actual competition for a market will abuse that fact and take their users for granted.


I am impressed with the options page and the site permissions page in particular. I ws able to set most preferences as I wanted fairly quickly. I was dissapointed that continue running background apps was enabled by default however. It feels like it would be reasonable to wait until I tried to use something that required it and only then bother asking me.

Edit: Whatever goodwill on settings was eaten up when change default search provider was hidden two levels deep, first under "Privacy and Services" and then under "Address Bar".

Edge team, you know full well most people will want to change this at first. It should have its own settings top level page, more or less in line with firefox.


So, no more "Add Notes" feature? That's what made me use Edge as my main browser on my personal machine. Being able to quickly save a page, add notes by hand using a stylus, is just great.


Hopefully it will come back. (It may be a ghost of its former self if it does, because they announced the EPUB and PDF readers are definitely dead. Chrome Edge will have Chromium's [arguably inferior] PDF support instead.)

It probably won't; Chrome Edge can't directly share so much OneNote code in the same way, and so presumably the focus will move to "Share with OneNote"/"Print to OneNote" instead.

In maybe better news, at least the "Collections" tools currently in "Experimental Options" sound like they may, when fully baked, be improved experiences over the venerable "Set Tabs Aside", maybe.


> EPUB and PDF readers are definitely dead.

Wut? That's exactly what I use Edge for.


Yeah, the Edge codebase change and its resultant loss of that UWP EPUB reader was listed as one of the key factors in that much publicized case of Microsoft entirely shutting down their Ebook store.

In early Windows 8 history the UWP PDF Reader (that went on to also be the EPUB Reader) was available as a separate app in the Windows 8 Store just called "Reader", before it merged into Edge. I wish they would spin it back out into a new Reader app again, just to keep a useful extra option around for PDF and EPUB files, but it sounds like the code shares too much with the EdgeHTML Renderer they are entirely spinning down for them to do that, which is a shame.


I wouldn't mind a reader app to keep using the old Edge engine. It hardly needs new web standards support anyway.


The download page says "Investing in open source", but it also says "Not supported for Linux". I'm going to take a guess that no other open source operating systems are supported either, unless you count Android.

Maybe they have a Linux or FreeBSD version in the works. From what I'm seeing right now, the new Microsoft supports open source, so long as you're on a proprietary platform. Should I be surprised?


Lots of people invest in open source without supporting or investing in Linux. There's a whole universe of open source.


That's true, but Microsoft is supposedly making a push into Linux and by leaving it out you're cutting off a huge chunk of OSS enthusiasts.


They don't seem to be expecting a Linux release soon https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/c094uf/hi_reddit_were...

Chrome/Chromium on Linux isn't even all that well supported sadly enough.


> Chrome/Chromium on Linux isn't even all that well supported sadly enough.

What makes you think that? I'm using Chromium as my daily driver and it even comes with hardware video acceleration (chromium-vaapi package from Fedora + RPMFusion). In my experience Linusmx support is a lot better than Firefox'.


Chromium-vaapi probably works well enough for most users but that doesn't mean it's officially supported, there's a reason it's a separate package instead of in the mainline build (i.e. it's been up to merge multiple times and declined each). Even then >60 FPS display and HDR do not function on Linux (though that doesn't affect as many as the decoding/GPU acceleration issues).

It is definitely better than Firefox on Linux but that doesn't make it well supported.


Excited for this, although I'm really hoping we get a linux release soon as well.


Isn't it now based on webkit like Chrome, Safari, and Opera are? I don't understand the hubub if their performance and features will be so identical.


It's based on Chromium which uses Blink as its rendering engine, which was forked off WebKit (which was derived from KDE's KHTML and now powers Apple's Safari).

Opera is also based on Blink.


It's more about which features they add/remove etc. So the core will be webkit, and will share those quirks.

Meanwhile we still have stuff like extensions, privacy policies, dev tools, etc. Also they have the ability now to tweak webkit to their needs.

You're right, most "new browsers" are essentially just chromium, I'm hoping since MS is large enough that they'll make it unique in some way - great dev tools and privacy would win me over for example.


Finally! a stable Chrome alternative that allows an average Chrome user to switch away from Google without any loss of comfort! This is genius!


I've been using whatever the current Edge browser is in Windows10 for several years. (I don't know if that is current the "Chorme" Edge or not.)

But I am tired of 2 problems that never seem to get fixed and am contemplating switching to Firefox because of this:

1) Bookmark (favorite) maintenance still sucks. As one example, try moving a folder in the favorites bar from the bar to the ordered favorites list.

2) Edge advertises syncing (bookmarks, open tabs, etc.) across machines with the same user signed-in, but I have never gotten this to work.


Current Edge is not the "Chrome Edge" (or "Edgmium" has become a common name I've seen), which is linked to download here, as "Chrome Edge" only just made it out of Developer-focused Alpha testing to user-focused Beta testing (which is why it was reposted to the HN front page today).

As a user of current Edge:

1) The Favorites Bar shows up as a folder in the Favorites list sidebar, and doing in the list sidebar seems to work better for moving things around, in my experience. (I currently feel like favorites management is worse in Chrome Edge, but mostly because I don't like a lot of the feel of Chrome.)

2) Syncing has more worked than not for me over the years, but it's never been entirely reliable. Bookmarks have seemed reliable, but I don't use them much and wouldn't likely notice if they synced very slowly. Open Tabs have never synced, but the History of them does (and shows up in the Windows Timeline thingamajigger), and faster usually than I expected, but sometimes hit or miss. Overall reliability seems to fluctuate with project priorities, and right now with Edge work on "Chrome Edge" being the focus and it having an entirely different synchronization system, I am not surprised that reliability is especially all over the place right now.


I even got 2nd tier Microsoft support on a call for the second problem. That level of MS support is usually quite good, but in this case it was totally ridiculous. The engineer did not even understand the advertised functionality, but instead kept steering me to bookmark export/import.


> I don't know if that is current the "Chorme" Edge or not.

It's not. But hey! Good news! When this Beta will become stable Edge release, all you issues will be solved!


Not necessarily, in some ways the Chromium-based Favorites tools feel like a regression from current Edge's, even accounting for how buggy it [production Edge's favorites side panel] still sometimes feels.

Also, the synchronization engine is entirely different from both past Edge and Google's proprietary Chrome stuff, so all new places for all sorts of new bugs.

Switching to Chromium won't be a magic fix for Edge's issues.


> Finally! a stable Chrome alternative that allows an average Chrome user to switch away from Google without any loss of comfort!

Firefox?


Firefox isn't as stable in a few areas. Since it's been released, the main UI has changed drastically many times compared to Chrome which has been the same forever. Not the settings UI, but the main UI and menu system... Furthermore, nobody fucks with Chrome's settings on any Linux distro like they do with Firefox. And then the integration occasionally resets settings and other bad things happen when packages get updated. Can't stand that.

The other kind of instability with Firefox surrounds the corporation that produces it. Mozilla is a bit of a wildcard because you never know what sort of guerrilla marketing advertisement or third party integration they're going to throw into your browser without giving you much of a choice. I actually trust them less than Google because there are way fewer eyes on them.

Finally, in my opinion, it's just not as consistently good as Chrome. I don't think Mozilla can compete with the level of production quality that Google has put into Chrome. Not even close. Where Chrome is modern, crisp, clean and beautiful looking with a great UX, Firefox is just ugly, primitive, old smelling and annoying to use.

I know Microsoft can do better than Moz on the production quality front. Who knows what if their UX will remain stable though. They kinda ruin everything with the constant push for signing up to a Microsoft account. Mostly I care about the production quality and the general UX though.


Interesting that the download button says "Not supported for Linux" when you're using Linux. But what if I want to try this out on Windows, but use Linux to acquire the software? Sniffing the useragent and providing the relevant message is annoying for users, because if they want the software, they are going to find ways of acquiring it, regardless of the useragent sniff in place.

Note: I downloaded the beta version, and within 10 minutes of using it, it crashed. I reported the crash however so hopefully they can fix this


If you click on "More platforms and channels" and then scroll down to "Other Platforms", there are download links for Windows and macOS that work regardless of your useragent.


Yeah, I don't like it. I opened both old edge and this side by side with only this HN thread open. Scrolling on old feels way quicker... no white, un-rendered areas as in the chrome version when quickly jumping through the document. Memory usage went up 50ish percent (initially had committed a lot more, but it seems to by now have freed that half gig it used earlier). "Read aloud" TTS seems to read significantly slower on 2x speed than old edge (same voice). All of this before adding adblock to beta, but I'd expect this only makes it worse with nothing but HN open.

At least they kept some of the most garbage parts the same... like the addon store not even having a search function. Apparently not even sort beyond alphabetically. But that fits MS apparent mantra of dumbing down stuff so much as to make more advanced use-cases near impossible. And doesn't seems to have uBlock anyway, so who cares... I just hope I don't have to search a new trustworthy one once current edge is gone :(

Yeah, still a long way off from what I'd wish for...


>And doesn't seems to have uBlock anyway, so who cares...

You can install add-ons from the Chrome Web Store.


Only way to make people switch is to make it privacy oriented like Safari now is... That would probably let Microsoft steal significant share away from Google. Privacy oriented Chrome, standards compliant, developer oriented. Do a 180 from the IE days which Google is now mimicking.


The two biggest privacy-oriented browsers, Firefox and Safari, have ~10% and ~5% desktop market share[1]. It seems like the overwhelming majority of people do not care very much.

[1] https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/desktop/worl...


They prefer the speed of Chrome. So give them that, with huge corporate backing, and privacy features and you have a good chance at taking some stuff away from Chrome.


> They prefer the speed of Chrome.

Judging by my experiences as a PC technician, 99% of those people wouldn't know if it's the browser that's slow or their PC or whatever crap adware they've managed to install or whatever. Most people don't know and don't care. Google has just leveraged their position as the dominant search engine to ensure their browser is the default. I've installed Firefox on enough devices to see that users just don't care - they'll use whatever is most convenient at the time and then they'll stick to it because they know it and because of habit. Hell, many people don't know what a browser even is, much less what the differences are between them. It's just that "internet thing".


Safari is only available on Apple devices hence the low market share.


And not all Apple customers use it because of the privacy features.


The number of desktop Apple customers - the only Apple customers that can use a third party rendering engine - is marginal compared to the number of iOS devices.


Or they don't know better. There's a very big difference. What's Edges market share? If Edge (or any other browser) suddenly gets added to the privacy-oriented list, the number of people using privacy-oriented browsers goes up, which is the important part. It doesn't matter if they care.


But why would Microsoft do this if it doesn't bring then new users?


Because it's the right thing to do. Yes, that sounds crazy to me too, but it's crazy that it's a crazy thing to say.


Well it's the right thing for users, but not for Microsoft and their shareholders.


A "user agent" should only act in the interest of it's user. If it does not, it shouldn't be used.


No matter how good they make the privacy in the browser, will people really believe it? Microsoft has done nothing but say how much they care about your privacy and security through the whole IE lifecycle.


Same as Safari. If any part of it is closed source, you're basically just taking their word for it that they're respecting your privacy.

Firefox is fully open source.


And how many people have actually inspected the source code of Firefox closely enough to be sure what it is doing?


Can someone explain how Safari is "privacy oriented" (or any other browser that claims that)?


Disallowing third party cookies by default, thus preventing most ad tracking. Some other browsers (ffox?) actively prevent fingerprinting techniques such as canvas fingerprinting.


> Privacy oriented Chrome

Brave already does this. Most people don't really care.


Not much hope for that when Windows and Office telemetry have been ballooning in recent years, with no end in sight.


Does this meant that Chrome will be able to stream 1080p on the desktop in the future, or will only Microsoft's build of chromium be able to do that?

*Stream 1080p with Netflix, Amazon, etc.


Yes - all of those work in the canary I have been running for the last few months.


The macOS download link at the bottom directs me to https://www.microsoftedgeinsider.com/en-us/{macos-link}

Is there somewhere else to find this?

EDIT - Use the "More platforms and channels" link under the big Windows download button, then the dropdown menus on that page to get the Mac version.



Who is the target market for this? Is this going to be the default browser in the next feature update version of Windows 10?


Current signs indicate that it is not for the next feature update version (19H2), but some later one. It's not even default in current Insider builds (currently in the fast ring) for the following feature update 20H1 yet.

When it will become the Windows 10 default is an interesting open question right now, and the exact roadmap doesn't seem entirely transparent yet. This move to the Beta release channel seems to indicate possible confidence in it.

Windows 10 isn't the only target market though. Microsoft has made it clear they want Windows 7 users, the odd minority of users still on Windows 8 and Windows 8.1, and even macOS users for this new Edge. This "cross-platform vision" was supposedly a key reason to rebuild on top of Chromium in the first place.

(Interesting rumors even state that Microsoft is hoping to push it as the "final" default browser for Windows 7 in a final security/feature update/mini-service-pack roll up sometime before the April 2020 end of security date for Windows 7 in a hope of leaving Windows 7 at the end of its ordinary security support life and the start of its extended support phase in a better place than Windows XP was left.)


Microsoft has announced that the default browser on Windows 10 will eventually be Chrome-based.


> Is this going to be the default browser in the next feature update version of Windows 10?

This will eventually replace the current Edge on Windows 10, so the answer is "yes - sometime in the future". Additionally, it's already available on Windows 7 and 8.

To me, this means many developers will be more able to argue the case for deprecating IE11 support.


I'm the target market, I suppose. I don't want to keep supporting Chrome because Google is too creepy. Firefox doesn't work for me on my laptops because the trackpad and touchscreen support is woeful. I have been using old Edge but that's discontinued (a real shame IMO). So Edge-ium really fits my needs.


It appears so. At which point Microsoft will presumably graciously permit its Windows 10 customers to uninstall Edge, and make Chrome-Edge mandatory.


How do you change the new tab page?

You can set which page to open on startup, but you can't seem to override the page that shows when a new tab is created.


Do extensions from the chrome web store work? If so, there are many extensions for swapping out the new tab page there.


Yes, they do. Just hit a toggle to "allow extensions from other stores" in the Extensions settings and then you can install directly from the Chrome store pages.


It's just strange that Chrome allows you to change the new tab page but Edge doesn't.


Can we start waving goodbye to IE11?


Use of IE11 is largely tied in to Enterprise applications. Whatever happens to Edge it won't make IE11 die any sooner.


False - https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2019/05/06/edge-chromium... they're bringing IE mode to Edge Chromium


Yes, that's still an IE11 window in an Edge skin. And that blog post specifically calls out "seamless enterprise compatibility" as being the reason for it.


Yes but it'll be left to sysadmins on which sites to enable this mode - "Microsoft Edge uses your existing Enterprise Mode Site List to identify sites which require IE rendering and simply switches to Internet Explorer mode behind the scenes." So user can't just turn it on himself


Yeah, that will work out as well as "Compatibility Mode" in previous versions. What you'll really get is a whole different browser that has to be tested against with it's own unique bugs to work around.


"IE Mode" is just IE11 virtualized into a tab container, with strict Enterprise-only opt in to it with a specific site list. It won't have the "Compatibility Mode" problems of needing to opt-out through strict DOCTYPES or server headers or trying to figure out magic like it thinks it needs "Compatibility Mode" because it is Monday on a leap year and uses a JS library with the name of the same JS library that would have a leap year Monday problem if it didn't run in "Compatibility Mode", at least.

It may prolong some Enterprise's dependency on very old sites or addons they should have weened themselves out of a decade ago, but you can't magically fix sunk costs (or stupid, for that matter).


Please do!

The more apps that politely say that IE11 isn't the right tool for browsing anymore, the quicker the user base will dry up.


>Investing in open source

>No support for the biggest open source OS.

The irony is stunning.


Does this have a level of telemetry comparable to that of Google Chrome? I've been looking for a Chromium-based alternative to Chrome and I'm still waiting. Vivaldi looks like it, but it's still a bit too rough around the edges to be used as a daily browser.


What about Brave?


I support Eich, but I don't like the idea of Brave. I want a neutral browser. Brave is not neutral, since it comes bundled with software that blocks ads and some crypto crap. I want to block ads, but I want to do it my way and to be in control.


You can lower shields with a global setting, not just per site.

Brave Rewards are off by default and you can hide the icon.

HTH


The BAT sh*tcoin stuff turned me off to Brave. I've been using Dissenter which removed all of that (and more crud) from Brave, but it doesn't seem to update very often. I like the every 6 week cadence that Edge is promising.


I run Brave shield with uBlock Origin over here, and disable the former on some sites when it inevitably breaks something because it can go a bit too far for the "modern development" world; but you can disable it globally.

I don't sign up for their crypto stuff either and there's a toggle to hide it.


You can turn the coins off. It’s not heavily in the UI. The blocking works fine. You’re in control, just click the blooming icon.


I would think so and that it would be more likely given M$'s track record.


I don't like that the start page is so "Microsofty"--it contains MSN News and you can't disable Bing.


I was able to change the search engine to Google or DuckDuckGo in a few clicks in the settings page.


Me too but it only seems to affect the address bar. The "new tab page" search bar still defaults to Bing.


@agdpf, I work in the Edge team and have passed this feedback to the relevant team.

In case you have any other feedback, I would encourage you to also use the smiley icon on the top right of the browser to directly them to us.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: