Microsoft to Block Windows 11 Browser Workarounds(thurrott.com)
thurrott.com
Microsoft to Block Windows 11 Browser Workarounds
https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-11/259208/windows-11-to-block-windows-11-browser-workarounds
105 comments
I think after about a week, the Windows Search Index goes to work. I only noticed it because it caused my mouse cursor to go from pointer to hourglass every 2 seconds. Went on for about 3 or 4 days.
I dual boot with manjaro and Windows is significantly slower. It's probably just Windows.
Ctr-alt-delete/ task manager, will show you what is using the most cpu.
Ctrl+Shift+Esc is the superior shortcut in my opinion ;)
same, and I have done all this -- the issue is my box is subjectively and obviously lagging, but perfmon shows like zero util...
Its just weird.
Its just weird.
Move any windows around if it is not instant, save everything (just in case) and kill dwm.exe (DWM will restarts on its own)
Seems to be a bug that it slowly gets slower and slower especially if many windows are open.
I couldnt find that process in W11... however - I did a hard reboot and it came back to normal, but first I went in and turned off a lot of autostart cruft - but after doing that I rebooted and it still didnt fix it until the hard reset.
Its name is simply "Desktop Window Manager" but the process is dwm.exe the file is under \Windows\system32\dwm.exe
Its defensively there without it there would be no desktop environment visible.
Its defensively there without it there would be no desktop environment visible.
Ah - I am an ideout.
I was looking for "DWM.EXE" in Here: https://i.imgur.com/qz53ome.png
And as you can see, I didnt equate the two.
---
An aside: this really reveals how much knowledge in one's field disappears over the years... I have been a windows admin and everything since windows 3.1....... etc.
But when youre doing other things years after that, on the 'meta' levels, if you will.... christ -
I used to bullseye Exchange DB Corruption in my IBM T42 back home. They're not much bigger than a couple hundred gigs.
I was looking for "DWM.EXE" in Here: https://i.imgur.com/qz53ome.png
And as you can see, I didnt equate the two.
---
An aside: this really reveals how much knowledge in one's field disappears over the years... I have been a windows admin and everything since windows 3.1....... etc.
But when youre doing other things years after that, on the 'meta' levels, if you will.... christ -
I used to bullseye Exchange DB Corruption in my IBM T42 back home. They're not much bigger than a couple hundred gigs.
I get that on my fairly high end Windows 10 laptop. I resort to rebooting it nightly. Windows Defender does like to go completely nuts occasionally as well.
I've got to complain though. I spend more time pissing around working around issues than doing anything productive on this infernal pile of dung.
I've got to complain though. I spend more time pissing around working around issues than doing anything productive on this infernal pile of dung.
I'm not using Windows 11 yet. Using dual monitors, I prefer to have my task bars on the inside edges of those monitors. I do not like to group multiple open windows in a single task bar entry.
These are not huge things, but then again, all I really want from my operating system UI is the ability to put things where I want them.
Windows 11 decreased quite a few user preference/customization options. It's clearly not their objective to do what the user wants, but whatever Microsoft wants (and this is/was one of the few core differentiators for me between Microsoft and Apple, and it is shrinking rapidly EDIT: I will not change my comment here but I think my point is more the overall ecosystem/buy-in; i.e. requiring XCode to write for iOS, needing iOS to use a Watch, being unable to choose the browser/engine on iOS, and largely being unable to customize/upgrade Mac hardware).
This latest decision is atrocious, but also inline with previous decisions they've made regarding Windows 11. User be warned.
These are not huge things, but then again, all I really want from my operating system UI is the ability to put things where I want them.
Windows 11 decreased quite a few user preference/customization options. It's clearly not their objective to do what the user wants, but whatever Microsoft wants (and this is/was one of the few core differentiators for me between Microsoft and Apple, and it is shrinking rapidly EDIT: I will not change my comment here but I think my point is more the overall ecosystem/buy-in; i.e. requiring XCode to write for iOS, needing iOS to use a Watch, being unable to choose the browser/engine on iOS, and largely being unable to customize/upgrade Mac hardware).
This latest decision is atrocious, but also inline with previous decisions they've made regarding Windows 11. User be warned.
> Windows 11 decreased quite a few user preference/customization options. It's clearly not their objective to do what the user wants, but whatever Microsoft wants (and this is/was one of the few core differentiators for me between Microsoft and Apple, and it is shrinking rapidly).
My theory is that the OS is rushed and they haven't had time to add and test even the most basic configuration options.
My theory is that the OS is rushed and they haven't had time to add and test even the most basic configuration options.
I am currently using StartAllBack that restores the Win10 task bar features like seeing task labels and 'never combine' for the windows of the same application(A feature that Mac OS does not have). It costs $5 after a long trial and it's worth it if someone is missing the old task bar in Windows 11.
Can you move the main taskbar off the main screen?
Win10's supported until at least 2025. Not sure why anyone would jump on Win11, unless some software they're using requires it—which seems unlikely for some time, considering how long previous Windows version have retained good 3rd-party software support.
> Windows 11 decreased quite a few user preference/customization options. It's clearly not their objective to do what the user wants, but whatever Microsoft wants (and this is/was one of the few core differentiators for me between Microsoft and Apple, and it is shrinking rapidly).
Huh. I've used Mac for about a decade, after 15 years of Windows + Linux (and some DOS before that) and never felt that Windows is in any sense "freer" than OSX/MacOS, as far as configuration or what I can do with it.
> Windows 11 decreased quite a few user preference/customization options. It's clearly not their objective to do what the user wants, but whatever Microsoft wants (and this is/was one of the few core differentiators for me between Microsoft and Apple, and it is shrinking rapidly).
Huh. I've used Mac for about a decade, after 15 years of Windows + Linux (and some DOS before that) and never felt that Windows is in any sense "freer" than OSX/MacOS, as far as configuration or what I can do with it.
Windows has always offered (well, since Vista at least) some out-of-the-box customizable color schemes. MacOS has the ability to set a global accent color, but it tends to surface in fewer places than Windows' similar option (some default Apple apps, that's it).
MacOS (still, and has always) allowed moving the task bar to a different side of the monitor. Windows 10 allowed any of the four sides, MacOS allows all except top. Windows 11 is bottom-only. Earlier in the beta they also forced the application icons into the center of the taskbar (Mac-like), but they've since moved back on that and allow left-aligning them (Win10-like).
They're both pretty light on global, out-of-box customization. If we're counting pennies here, I'd say Windows is still slightly more customizable, and if they re-added moving the taskbar to other sides of the screen, it'd definitely be more customizable.
MacOS (still, and has always) allowed moving the task bar to a different side of the monitor. Windows 10 allowed any of the four sides, MacOS allows all except top. Windows 11 is bottom-only. Earlier in the beta they also forced the application icons into the center of the taskbar (Mac-like), but they've since moved back on that and allow left-aligning them (Win10-like).
They're both pretty light on global, out-of-box customization. If we're counting pennies here, I'd say Windows is still slightly more customizable, and if they re-added moving the taskbar to other sides of the screen, it'd definitely be more customizable.
I have less experience (with MacOS), having only used it for perhaps a year for work, a couple years ago. But I do know that when it comes to the overall system, I have vastly more choices when it comes to hardware, being able to upgrade, being able to repair. There's just far less coupling between the operating system and the hardware than you find with Mac. So it certainly doesn't feel as free to me.
But the UI might be similarly as open as Windows - I don't have sufficient experience to know.
But the UI might be similarly as open as Windows - I don't have sufficient experience to know.
The differentiator for macOS versus Windows is the Apple stuff actually works properly and doesn't get in my way at all. I really don't give a shit any more if it costs 2x as much or isn't repairable or the or that because that's a cheaper TCO than the friction and mental anguish of having tools made of shit dissolve in your hands daily.
Whenever I have to dive into my corporate windows box for work, it's like someone is kicking me in the balls 20 times a day. For example today, I achieved nothing productive today thanks to windows. WSL2 bug open since 2019. Probably never get fixed.
Whenever I have to dive into my corporate windows box for work, it's like someone is kicking me in the balls 20 times a day. For example today, I achieved nothing productive today thanks to windows. WSL2 bug open since 2019. Probably never get fixed.
I desperately want Android apps on Windows. But not as much as having my taskbar on a secondary monitor.
The lack of consumer protections in the US is problematic.
When something is defined as a "monopoly" they can go in and do all kinds of pro-consumer stuff, but legally very few things are monopolies in the US (duopolies are more common). I wish stuff like this and iOS's ban on browser push notifications (because it competes with apps) was reviewed by a Federal consumer rights agency.
What is frustrating that Edge-Chrome is actually a pretty good browser, Microsoft don't need to be doing this petty stuff to make it popular, yet here we are. Feels like the engineers at Microsoft just want to make cool shit but the management are stuck in this 1990s toxic mindset that keeps the company's image in the toilet (see also the Hot Reload controversy with the Visual Studio VP).
When something is defined as a "monopoly" they can go in and do all kinds of pro-consumer stuff, but legally very few things are monopolies in the US (duopolies are more common). I wish stuff like this and iOS's ban on browser push notifications (because it competes with apps) was reviewed by a Federal consumer rights agency.
What is frustrating that Edge-Chrome is actually a pretty good browser, Microsoft don't need to be doing this petty stuff to make it popular, yet here we are. Feels like the engineers at Microsoft just want to make cool shit but the management are stuck in this 1990s toxic mindset that keeps the company's image in the toilet (see also the Hot Reload controversy with the Visual Studio VP).
I would like to know what is happening inside MS and what is actually behind this move. From the outside looking in we can speculate all kinds of abusive behaviour, especially with Microsoft's past in mind. But there is so little information...
Say there was some QA team that found that some serious protected fallback mechanism was required to reduce support costs, that might be somewhat valid. But even then you'd expect to at least see some information appear about that, and that hasn't happened either. Heck, even security-wise they could come up with a story on how browser hijacking and protocol handler hijacking in windows is super bad and this was their only move (not true of course, plenty of other moves available) to mitigate it. But we get nothing, except broken behaviour and no real publication as to why. They can't throw it all on UX either, because if that's what they wanted they wouldn't be able to support an incompatible variety of PCs.
Say there was some QA team that found that some serious protected fallback mechanism was required to reduce support costs, that might be somewhat valid. But even then you'd expect to at least see some information appear about that, and that hasn't happened either. Heck, even security-wise they could come up with a story on how browser hijacking and protocol handler hijacking in windows is super bad and this was their only move (not true of course, plenty of other moves available) to mitigate it. But we get nothing, except broken behaviour and no real publication as to why. They can't throw it all on UX either, because if that's what they wanted they wouldn't be able to support an incompatible variety of PCs.
The only halfway valid technical reasons I could imagine for those microsoft-edge:// urls would be that they provide some special features that make only sense in a Windows installation - but none of the situations we have seen so far seem to use such a feature.
I could imagine special features being a good reason for such a protocol, but the special features themselves might not be a good thing to have (i.e. IE's ActiveX controls, that was 'special' too).
Say you have an OS with functionality that depends on a webpage, and you don't want a user to end up clicking on a thing and not getting anywhere because the custom browser they installed was broken, that would be a reason to have a built in or 'fallback' browser, even if you just end up using it to install another browser. But then you could also have some form of checking if the user didn't get what they wanted and have a 'try again in Edge'-button or something like that. Might not be the best UX, so that's another factor. Is the UX for the masses, the UX for administrators or the UX for power users more important.
I'm glad I'm not the person responsible for making those choices, but I'm curious about the processes and people that are on that path. Doubt MS will ever really publish that.
Say you have an OS with functionality that depends on a webpage, and you don't want a user to end up clicking on a thing and not getting anywhere because the custom browser they installed was broken, that would be a reason to have a built in or 'fallback' browser, even if you just end up using it to install another browser. But then you could also have some form of checking if the user didn't get what they wanted and have a 'try again in Edge'-button or something like that. Might not be the best UX, so that's another factor. Is the UX for the masses, the UX for administrators or the UX for power users more important.
I'm glad I'm not the person responsible for making those choices, but I'm curious about the processes and people that are on that path. Doubt MS will ever really publish that.
I suspect at some level of deliberation in MS, it’s as simple as wanting a predictable and controllable view portal to their content and site resources, rather than worrying about Google or whomever else “accidentally” and temporarily breaking something. I know there’s a lot of room to push on this - that MS themselves have myriad broken links and useless endpoints on the web so a browser is least of their worries. Nonetheless, the thinking may be about predictable user interface between the OS and the manufacturer’s online resources.
If it's anything like when I've tried to get them to do anything about a support case, I suspect no one gives a fuck about the customers any more unless they're big spenders. Everyone else is seen as a revenue drain.
To MSFT staff who I know hang around on here: prove me wrong by getting this turned around.
To MSFT staff who I know hang around on here: prove me wrong by getting this turned around.
My experience with MS support is nothing like you describe. I'm in a very small company that uses Office 365. One of the principal reasons we continue using it is the excellent support we receive from MS. The support folks know their tools and stay on the line until they're sure the problem is solved. In a couple of cases, we've even received a follow-up call 48 hours later to make sure that we're still in good shape.
You can be an ISV partner and you just get the runaround constantly and shifted from one HCL contractor to another for months on end when you ask questions.
Regulations only help the current top stay that way by creating arbitrary barriers to enter competition and politicizes the whole thing, leading to lobby instead of research and development.
Microsoft is not a monopoly. Neither is Google, Facebook etc. They are dominant in their niches.
Use Linux, use firefox, use duckduckgo, use mastedon, use Rumble, odyssey, etc.
The only reason they stay dominant is because instead of dropping their usage, people complain, point fingers and still use them. Because at the end of the day its a feeling of entitlement instead of being proactive supporting the better alternatives. The free market will solve the issue so long we protect freedom in the market.
Microsoft is not a monopoly. Neither is Google, Facebook etc. They are dominant in their niches.
Use Linux, use firefox, use duckduckgo, use mastedon, use Rumble, odyssey, etc.
The only reason they stay dominant is because instead of dropping their usage, people complain, point fingers and still use them. Because at the end of the day its a feeling of entitlement instead of being proactive supporting the better alternatives. The free market will solve the issue so long we protect freedom in the market.
> Microsoft is not a monopoly. Neither is Google, Facebook etc. They are dominant in their niches.
This is why the more appropriate term is anti trust. Businesses don't need to be monopolies what matters is whether their position is dominant.
This is why the more appropriate term is anti trust. Businesses don't need to be monopolies what matters is whether their position is dominant.
This is a weird view, albeit a common one among die hard free market lovers (I've even heard the "dominant in their niches" thing verbatim, although I doubt folks could expand on what that means).
The typical individual outside of our profession is not choosing a browser because of a feeling of entitlement. They have maybe 5 hours of free time in their day outside of work / commuting / kids / etc. I doubt they have any idea beyond "this browser works, is fast" or heck "it's installed" as a reason to choose their browser, especially if it's a mobile browser.
Free markets do not solve the issues of monopolies. You don't even have to look to history or the current market to understand that. Monopolies are an unfortunate natural tendency that the market heads towards when uninhibited, because they afford the maximum amount of profit. It also, at least until the monopoly hits a certain point, affords the max amount of efficiency and quality to the consumer.
Unfortunately, by the time the monopoly takes over, there remains no real "choice" left for the consumer to run to. At that point, the profit maximization takes over completely and quality begins to drop. After all, the incentive is just to be better than the "others" who remain, who likely have almost no resources (and moreover the monopoly probably introduces proprietary standards to make remaining alternatives worse).
At that point, we get stagnation, which I would argue the world has seen a good chunk of in recent years. Price fixing, collusion, all too common among the top (see the recent controversy with Google and Facebook working together). Why fight for the "free market" as you call it, when we can work together to rest comfortably?
The typical individual outside of our profession is not choosing a browser because of a feeling of entitlement. They have maybe 5 hours of free time in their day outside of work / commuting / kids / etc. I doubt they have any idea beyond "this browser works, is fast" or heck "it's installed" as a reason to choose their browser, especially if it's a mobile browser.
Free markets do not solve the issues of monopolies. You don't even have to look to history or the current market to understand that. Monopolies are an unfortunate natural tendency that the market heads towards when uninhibited, because they afford the maximum amount of profit. It also, at least until the monopoly hits a certain point, affords the max amount of efficiency and quality to the consumer.
Unfortunately, by the time the monopoly takes over, there remains no real "choice" left for the consumer to run to. At that point, the profit maximization takes over completely and quality begins to drop. After all, the incentive is just to be better than the "others" who remain, who likely have almost no resources (and moreover the monopoly probably introduces proprietary standards to make remaining alternatives worse).
At that point, we get stagnation, which I would argue the world has seen a good chunk of in recent years. Price fixing, collusion, all too common among the top (see the recent controversy with Google and Facebook working together). Why fight for the "free market" as you call it, when we can work together to rest comfortably?
>Use Linux, use firefox, use duckduckgo, use mastedon, use Rumble, odyssey, etc.
What about the rest of the owl?
Many people/businesses can't just swap over to Linux on a whim. I can go through the rest of your examples one by one, and explain why many people/businesses don't have those as realistic options, if you'd like. But it seems excessive.
What about the rest of the owl?
Many people/businesses can't just swap over to Linux on a whim. I can go through the rest of your examples one by one, and explain why many people/businesses don't have those as realistic options, if you'd like. But it seems excessive.
> They are dominant in their niches.
This is the essence of anti-trust law (commonly refered to as anti-monopoly law), if a company is dominant in a market (or niche), they must refrain from certain anti-competitive practices which would help them to gain dominance in another market.
The law does not prohibit dominance in a market, nor does it prohibit gaining dominance in another market, and while some anti-competitive practices are generally prohibited, others are only prohibited in the context of a market dominant company gaining dominance in another market.
In general, pricing well below costs is prohibited as dumping, but these cases are tricky. When pricing well below cost is in a new market for the company and the old dominant market is subsidizing the costs, there's more room for scrutiny. Enforcement on dumping is light though, because of perceived customer gains when a subsidized product has no direct cost.
Ordinarily, bundling products is acceptable, but forcing a new market product to be purchased with a market dominant product is scrutinized.
Mergers and acquisitions are generally ok, but market dominant companies may need to show that competition remains after the merger.
This is the essence of anti-trust law (commonly refered to as anti-monopoly law), if a company is dominant in a market (or niche), they must refrain from certain anti-competitive practices which would help them to gain dominance in another market.
The law does not prohibit dominance in a market, nor does it prohibit gaining dominance in another market, and while some anti-competitive practices are generally prohibited, others are only prohibited in the context of a market dominant company gaining dominance in another market.
In general, pricing well below costs is prohibited as dumping, but these cases are tricky. When pricing well below cost is in a new market for the company and the old dominant market is subsidizing the costs, there's more room for scrutiny. Enforcement on dumping is light though, because of perceived customer gains when a subsidized product has no direct cost.
Ordinarily, bundling products is acceptable, but forcing a new market product to be purchased with a market dominant product is scrutinized.
Mergers and acquisitions are generally ok, but market dominant companies may need to show that competition remains after the merger.
Before I spend time writing a rebuttal to this, I’d like to ask, are you genuinely interested in seeking a better understanding of this topic, or are you already convinced in your view and not interested?
This is a pretty silly argument. It’s not the consumers fault that a monopoly exists.
It's been very clear for many many years that Microsoft's interests are quite opposite the consumer's interests.
I'd love to see consumer protections spring up on the topic, but it'd also be nice if people started considering something that's designed with them in mind, and stopped throwing money/data at such a user-hostile company.
I'd love to see consumer protections spring up on the topic, but it'd also be nice if people started considering something that's designed with them in mind, and stopped throwing money/data at such a user-hostile company.
I mean they are just mirroring apple with their forced browser engine on IOS...
I previously stated:
> Ah, the eternal cycle of: Microsoft does something bad, then people move to Linux, then they get dragged by Linux's rough new user experience, then they leave Linux, then things are fine for a while, then people mock Linux users for being paranoid, then Microsoft does something bad...
here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28971110
Looks like we're going for another whirl around the cycle! Wheee!
> Ah, the eternal cycle of: Microsoft does something bad, then people move to Linux, then they get dragged by Linux's rough new user experience, then they leave Linux, then things are fine for a while, then people mock Linux users for being paranoid, then Microsoft does something bad...
here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28971110
Looks like we're going for another whirl around the cycle! Wheee!
I upvoted you but I disagree with
Arch, Gentoo, etc -- yeah those are terrible recommendations for "I want to use Linux for the first time."
The first Linux distro I installed, I was 14 and had grown up on Windows XP + Vista. I went with Linux Mint and it felt like Windows (the UX).
And that was a decade ago. Things were so much worse + more difficult on Linux then too.
You have distros now like ElementaryOS that are made to mimic OSx, which is about as "I dunno computers" as you can get.
And Ubuntu or any derivative like PopOS are also friendly and great first experiences.
This is all opinion of course.
-----
EDIT: For context/bias: posted this from Windows 11 Insider
Switched to Windows ~1 year ago, and mostly regret it. I had (what I consider) a better experience on Ubuntu/Pop with Regolith as a tiling WM. YMMV, etc.
"Then they get dragged through Linux's rough new user experience."
Arch, Gentoo, etc -- yeah those are terrible recommendations for "I want to use Linux for the first time."
The first Linux distro I installed, I was 14 and had grown up on Windows XP + Vista. I went with Linux Mint and it felt like Windows (the UX).
And that was a decade ago. Things were so much worse + more difficult on Linux then too.
You have distros now like ElementaryOS that are made to mimic OSx, which is about as "I dunno computers" as you can get.
And Ubuntu or any derivative like PopOS are also friendly and great first experiences.
This is all opinion of course.
-----
EDIT: For context/bias: posted this from Windows 11 Insider
Switched to Windows ~1 year ago, and mostly regret it. I had (what I consider) a better experience on Ubuntu/Pop with Regolith as a tiling WM. YMMV, etc.
I am an experienced Linux user and I sometimes find myself wondering how much more I will put up with. Oh, sorry, did you not like that unexpected UI change? Fsck off, some GNOME developer decided to do it and you are not allowed to change it unless you install some random "extension" from some random developer on Reddit. Oh, sorry, did you spend a day getting Pulseaudio to work as well as ALSA had worked? Great news, Pulseaudio was replaced with PipeWire, which is "functionally compatible" but only for the specific configuration a handful of developers happened to have on their systems, so get ready to spend another day trying to get audio working. Oh, you had a ZaphodHeads configuration working with Xorg for a few years? Cool story bro, now we use Wayland, and it is definitely the same as X11 in all the ways we care about, but that does not include anything like Zaphod, because we're busy with other stuff and anyway who cares about multihead systems?
I suppose that is what I get for using Fedora, which was supposedly Red Hat's "desktop strategy" but was never even remotely ready for a typical desktop user...
I suppose that is what I get for using Fedora, which was supposedly Red Hat's "desktop strategy" but was never even remotely ready for a typical desktop user...
This is what you get for using an user hostile distro though, if you don't want changes forced down your throat you shouldn't be using either Fedora or Windows.
> Oh, sorry, did you not like that unexpected UI change? Fsck off, some GNOME developer decided to do it and you are not allowed to change it unless you install some random "extension" from some random developer on Reddit.
> Oh, sorry, did you spend a day getting Pulseaudio to work as well as ALSA had worked? Great news, Pulseaudio was replaced with PipeWire, which is "functionally compatible" but only for the specific configuration a handful of developers happened to have on their systems, so get ready to spend another day trying to get audio working.
> Oh, you had a ZaphodHeads configuration working with Xorg for a few years? Cool story bro, now we use Wayland, and it is definitely the same as X11 in all the ways we care about, but that does not include anything like Zaphod, because we're busy with other stuff and anyway who cares about multihead systems?
Yeah, I've been through all of these and suppose I just never thought about it.
(Well, not the "Zaphod" thing, not familiar with what that is, but the general X11/Wayland debacle).
Agree about GNOME - I'm very happy with the relatively unopinonated KDE now.
Older audio systems still work, I just swapped to PipeWire this week in 10 mins and had no issues. Try the current release.
Xorg has been on maintenance for years, Wayland isn't a flawless replacement yet but with the irreparable flaws in X and it's security risks I'm personally glad to jump ship now.
Older audio systems still work, I just swapped to PipeWire this week in 10 mins and had no issues. Try the current release.
Xorg has been on maintenance for years, Wayland isn't a flawless replacement yet but with the irreparable flaws in X and it's security risks I'm personally glad to jump ship now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0506yDSgU7M
Linus Tech Tips wanted to try Linux and see how user friendly it was. Somehow the PopOS steam package decided to uninstall the whole DE. Say what you want about the warnings he ignored,why is this even possible on a PopOS type system? Linus has pointed out that without understanding the terminology and packages, you would have no idea what the error message means. I think user friendly distros are much better but have quite a ways to go.
Also as Linus points out, even picking the right distro is tough if you don't already know a lot of the Linux terminology.
Linus Tech Tips wanted to try Linux and see how user friendly it was. Somehow the PopOS steam package decided to uninstall the whole DE. Say what you want about the warnings he ignored,why is this even possible on a PopOS type system? Linus has pointed out that without understanding the terminology and packages, you would have no idea what the error message means. I think user friendly distros are much better but have quite a ways to go.
Also as Linus points out, even picking the right distro is tough if you don't already know a lot of the Linux terminology.
> Somehow the PopOS steam package decided to uninstall the whole DE.
> Also as Linus points out, even picking the right distro is tough if you don't already know a lot of the Linux terminology.
Then the typical user goes into the shopping mal during the weekend, sees a nice gadget in sales, does an impulsive buy.
Back at home they wonder why it doesn't work at all.
After 30 years, unless one is deep into Linux technical knowledge and "search before buy", that impulsive buy is going to end in tears.
Even with "search before buy" the adventure can turn out bad, because the device that apparently has Linux support, actually only works in specific serial numbers with the right firmware in place.
Back at home they wonder why it doesn't work at all.
After 30 years, unless one is deep into Linux technical knowledge and "search before buy", that impulsive buy is going to end in tears.
Even with "search before buy" the adventure can turn out bad, because the device that apparently has Linux support, actually only works in specific serial numbers with the right firmware in place.
I don't have much experience trying to use external hardware with Linux because I don't tinker much outside of software.
Only mouse/keyboard/monitor, and then a few MIDI devices.
But that's valid -- I could see this being a problem with anything new/exotic, and it did bite me in the ass when trying to use a brand-new GPU on most recent LTS release.
Only mouse/keyboard/monitor, and then a few MIDI devices.
But that's valid -- I could see this being a problem with anything new/exotic, and it did bite me in the ass when trying to use a brand-new GPU on most recent LTS release.
I switched from Windows to Mint 20.x recently. There are many paper cuts. Some particularly annoying examples:
* It freezes hard when it runs out of RAM, while Windows stays somewhat usable in that situation. The OOM killer takes 10 mins to kick in, if it does so at all. The situation is probably made worse by the default 1GB swap partition size (why so small? I would have expected at 16 GB to match the RAM size).
* hibernate doesn't work out of the box. `pm-hibernate` exits printing no error message (code 128). After installing `uswsusp` it'll call `s2disk`, which works. I still need to figure out which config files to add so hibernate shows up in the power manager and shutdown menu.
* When using the graphical updater, the boot partition will fill up, preventing further kernel updates. `apt-get autoremove` fixes that.
* It freezes hard when it runs out of RAM, while Windows stays somewhat usable in that situation. The OOM killer takes 10 mins to kick in, if it does so at all. The situation is probably made worse by the default 1GB swap partition size (why so small? I would have expected at 16 GB to match the RAM size).
* hibernate doesn't work out of the box. `pm-hibernate` exits printing no error message (code 128). After installing `uswsusp` it'll call `s2disk`, which works. I still need to figure out which config files to add so hibernate shows up in the power manager and shutdown menu.
* When using the graphical updater, the boot partition will fill up, preventing further kernel updates. `apt-get autoremove` fixes that.
The kernel OOM killer just isn't designed for desktop at all, it seems like. Back when I didn't have a ridiculous amount of RAM, I used this instead and was happy with it:
https://github.com/rfjakob/earlyoom
The boot thing you mention always seemed a very odd default to me. It doesn't happen to me any more on my work ubuntu machine, but maybe I configured something to fix that and forgot about it.
https://github.com/rfjakob/earlyoom
The boot thing you mention always seemed a very odd default to me. It doesn't happen to me any more on my work ubuntu machine, but maybe I configured something to fix that and forgot about it.
> What distros do you feel have a poor experience for new Linux users?
I've had blocking problems with these 3: ElementaryOS, Ubuntu, OpenSuse. The problems include:
- Crash reports every 10 minutes - Segmentation fault error or something when opening the notifications section - Bricking my USB stick - Poor rendering in remote desktop - OS crashing unexpectedly and not starting at all afterwards - Noticeably poor performance for all apps (going full-screen for browser videos happens in 1 second and you see it freeze, in windows it's instant) - Desktop freezing if I press keys too fast (opening and closing the Ubuntu Dash menu quickly). Forced to restart the machine - Visual glitches during every boot - I don't remember now, but the list goes on
I've had blocking problems with these 3: ElementaryOS, Ubuntu, OpenSuse. The problems include:
- Crash reports every 10 minutes - Segmentation fault error or something when opening the notifications section - Bricking my USB stick - Poor rendering in remote desktop - OS crashing unexpectedly and not starting at all afterwards - Noticeably poor performance for all apps (going full-screen for browser videos happens in 1 second and you see it freeze, in windows it's instant) - Desktop freezing if I press keys too fast (opening and closing the Ubuntu Dash menu quickly). Forced to restart the machine - Visual glitches during every boot - I don't remember now, but the list goes on
What versions did you use out of curiosity?
Maybe my experience has been partially luck due to compatible hardware. I had some pretty bad experiences 10 years ago (install the OS, and the wifi driver doesn't work/wasn't installed, now can't get online to download it LMAO).
In the past 3 years I've had 2 issues:
See here for writeup on the NVIDIA thing:
https://github.com/pop-os/pop/issues/1199#issuecomment-68322...
Maybe my experience has been partially luck due to compatible hardware. I had some pretty bad experiences 10 years ago (install the OS, and the wifi driver doesn't work/wasn't installed, now can't get online to download it LMAO).
In the past 3 years I've had 2 issues:
1. I bought a laptop that had an NVIDIA RTX 2060 when they had only been out for a while. The LTS version of Ubuntu + Pop_OS didn't have the kernel updates with compatibility, so I had to upgrade kernel from the boot menu.
2. I connected two external monitors, one through HDMI and one through DisplayPort <-> USB <-> HDMI. I wanted to have one monitor vertical and one horizontal, I could not get it to work with a mix of vertical and horizontal layouts with 3 screens -- only with 2 screens.
See here for writeup on the NVIDIA thing:
https://github.com/pop-os/pop/issues/1199#issuecomment-68322...
You've already lost a new user with those opinionated recommendations with words they don't understand. Not to mention a different site or person will recommend different distros.
I was also getting into linux at about the same time. I used ubuntu 8.10, and had a horrible time getting my Broadcom wireless card working.
I think the onboarding is still very difficult for new users (installing, getting packages installed, etc.). The GUI ways of doing package installation aren't as reliable as they could be. As soon as you run into trouble and look for help online you're advised to open a terminal emulator.
I think the ecosystem has come a long way certainly. Technical expertise is a spectrum, and we've certainly lowered the barrier, but you still need to be well above the bar to get up and running, and then operating productively every day.
I think the onboarding is still very difficult for new users (installing, getting packages installed, etc.). The GUI ways of doing package installation aren't as reliable as they could be. As soon as you run into trouble and look for help online you're advised to open a terminal emulator.
I think the ecosystem has come a long way certainly. Technical expertise is a spectrum, and we've certainly lowered the barrier, but you still need to be well above the bar to get up and running, and then operating productively every day.
> I used ubuntu 8.10, and had a horrible time getting my Broadcom wireless card working.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29202511
> As soon as you run into trouble and look for help online you're advised to open a terminal emulator.
(Though it's hard to say -- if your average computer user who only uses the browser and things like Office tools, would be doing enough stuff to run into issues. Possibly, but I like to hope that pre-installed Firefox and LibreOffice/OpenOffice would be enough)
> I think the ecosystem has come a long way certainly. Technical expertise is a spectrum, and we've certainly lowered the barrier, but you still need to be well above the bar to get up and running, and then operating productively every day.
Goes to show how much technical bias I have, as it didn't even register.
IMO (again, opinion), if you can get it installed, and you're using everyday software, I do genuinely believe a non-technical person could use certain distros.
But yeah, have to install it first.
Linus Tech Tips, right now, is doing a series on switching fully to Linux and their WAN show from last week also talk about it.
For the average consumer, Linux can be a very, very bad time, in a way Windows doesn’t seem to be.
It can be very hard to imagine what kind of difficulties an average user has; but their videos give a small window into “no, it really isn’t ‘just that easy’ for everybody”.
Commandline is hard.
For the average consumer, Linux can be a very, very bad time, in a way Windows doesn’t seem to be.
It can be very hard to imagine what kind of difficulties an average user has; but their videos give a small window into “no, it really isn’t ‘just that easy’ for everybody”.
Commandline is hard.
If you're still looking for a TWM for Windows 11, I ended up developing my own this year which has been received fairly well by people who have migrated from Linux and macOS to Windows: https://github.com/LGUG2Z/komorebi
Indeed. After 20 years of doing this I eventually learned to just pay out for whoever is currently hurting me the least, not the best option, because there isn't one. Apple is currently hurting me the least.
I have gone through that cycle before, but this time after switching to Linux Mint now for ~6 months, it seems like Linux is sticking.
The only part of this I disagree with is mocking Linux users for being paranoid. I will mock Linux users for many things, but paranoia about Microsoft is not one of them.
It is quite normal that things break on the Windows Insider Preview builds from time to time right?
I'm pro Free Software, and therefore anti-Microsoft, but isn't it possible that, because of the changes to URL requests, they just haven't implemented support for having a difference standard browser? And that it may come in the upcoming weeks?
This would be an all-time low for Microsoft. It would give them a lot of hate. I find that hard to believe to be honest.
I'm pro Free Software, and therefore anti-Microsoft, but isn't it possible that, because of the changes to URL requests, they just haven't implemented support for having a difference standard browser? And that it may come in the upcoming weeks?
This would be an all-time low for Microsoft. It would give them a lot of hate. I find that hard to believe to be honest.
No, this is not an Insider build issue. Blocking apps from sneakily changing the default browser without user content is one thing. But in Windows 11 RTM, they specifically went out of their way to make it a lot harder to change your default browser (or any default app), by forcing you do to it separately for each protocol and file extension. This led to non-malicious apps (e.g. Firefox) pursuing an alternative method to avoid users having to jump through hoops.
It's quite interesting that if it's such a big security vulnerability Microsoft hasn't patched it in all these years, but when suddenly a browser maker wants to act in the users' best interests it's a "critical security vulnerability" that must be patched immediately.
Yes, malware could theoretically abuse the same loophole. But they simply cannot lie to our faces and say this is being blocked only to prevent malware when they've intentionally made it harder for users themselves to change the setting as well.
It's quite interesting that if it's such a big security vulnerability Microsoft hasn't patched it in all these years, but when suddenly a browser maker wants to act in the users' best interests it's a "critical security vulnerability" that must be patched immediately.
Yes, malware could theoretically abuse the same loophole. But they simply cannot lie to our faces and say this is being blocked only to prevent malware when they've intentionally made it harder for users themselves to change the setting as well.
The entire reason that the edge protocol exists in the first place is to bypass the user's desired default browser and open the URL in Edge instead. The fact that you could ever override that and make it open in your desired browser was pretty clearly a bug that accidentally made the feature less user hostile than intended.
> It is quite normal that things break on the Windows Insider Preview builds from time to time right?
Mostly it just makes my computer unusable every time they push an update, because it uses 100% disk capacity trying to background install while system is live. The background updates usually take 4-6 hours.
I also run Edge Dev and I HAVE had features break entirely on Edge, twice. Usually fixed within 1-5 days.
[1]: DON'T DO THIS! You cannot downgrade to Beta/RC from Dev, and it's the only channel that's like this!
Read the fine print. I receive updates sometimes multiple times a week and it's terrible.I have no problems believing it. They've been quietly turning the screws for twenty years now (beginning with Windows XP activation). And whenever they're called out for it, they double down. Where else have I seen that strategy lately?
Canonical is next on list?
I realize a side effect of this is it promotes Edge, but this feels like when websites would use JS to set that website to your homepage. Lots of bad actors use defaults in bad ways, so I'm fine with blocking them and having the OS manage this. My only concern is that this isn't a real problem now that most tasks are either idiosyncratic or in a browser. Maybe it was a fix needed in 2005.
It might not be clear - this is ignoring the user's choice and forcing Edge. This behavior is more like what you're describing than what it "fixed."
Ah, I missed that part. Yeah, not honoring the default browser for links opened by the OS is bad, but I also like that the OS manages defaults, not apps.
But it doesn't.
And Windows 11 removed the default web browser setting. You have to change every protocol and file type separately now. Or have an app do it for you.
And Windows 11 removed the default web browser setting. You have to change every protocol and file type separately now. Or have an app do it for you.
Why does Microsoft feel the need to force adoption of their browser?
The browser comes installed, and is not the best browser (for everyone, at least). If a user wants to change the browser, why does that matter to MS so much?
I'm genuinely curious because it seems like universally hated behavior by MS, but without any obvious benefit - so, what am I missing?
The browser comes installed, and is not the best browser (for everyone, at least). If a user wants to change the browser, why does that matter to MS so much?
I'm genuinely curious because it seems like universally hated behavior by MS, but without any obvious benefit - so, what am I missing?
For the same reasons that Google made a browser in the first place: it's an enormous source of data to sell to advertisers.
And just as all Google software is only accessible via a browser, Microsoft sees their future in Office 365 and related offerings, accessed from anywhere via a browser. Having a large browser market share is very much about securing their current and future business model, which is why both companies leverage their market position to force adoption of their respective browser.
Does MS have an ad business? Also, as I understand it, Google made a browser to ensure competitors couldn't lock out users from Google's search at the browser level. While they get data they can use to improve advertising, it doesn't seem like the model is there for MS in the same way.
Well it's the ad space itself more precisely
I feel like the article title is incredibly misleading.
From what I understand, the user can change their default browser and use whatever they want. However, there are some windows/OS processes that may automatically launch Edge to view a specific webpage (some types of help file rendering? Not super clear What process trigger this). It is Not a blanket ban on non-edge browsers.
Idk but I don't see it as being that big of a deal. It feels like like getting upset that my android phone uses Chrome for its WebView even though I have Brave set to my default. Sure it's annoying, but it's only being used to view some immediate page at which point I can exit and go back to my normal browsing.
From what I understand, the user can change their default browser and use whatever they want. However, there are some windows/OS processes that may automatically launch Edge to view a specific webpage (some types of help file rendering? Not super clear What process trigger this). It is Not a blanket ban on non-edge browsers.
Idk but I don't see it as being that big of a deal. It feels like like getting upset that my android phone uses Chrome for its WebView even though I have Brave set to my default. Sure it's annoying, but it's only being used to view some immediate page at which point I can exit and go back to my normal browsing.
It uses this URI scheme for the widget view and the start menu web search results IIUC. This is not just help files, it’s things that are front and center that users will use many times a day.
Does the Android web view pester you to make it your default browser?
What kind links are actually using this specific edge protocol?
Edit: ” Seemingly normal-looking web links all over Windows 10, the Cortana digital assistant, and Microsoft apps like Mail, News, and Your Phone force-open in Microsoft Edge rather than in your system defined default web browser.” https://www.ctrl.blog/entry/edgedeflector-default-browser.ht...
Edit: ” Seemingly normal-looking web links all over Windows 10, the Cortana digital assistant, and Microsoft apps like Mail, News, and Your Phone force-open in Microsoft Edge rather than in your system defined default web browser.” https://www.ctrl.blog/entry/edgedeflector-default-browser.ht...
Microsoft user to buy an M1 and never look back (me at least)
This is essentially the same behavior that led to their anti-trust case about 20 years ago. Which initially resulted in a finding of monopoly behavior and an order to split up, which as we know was not pursued.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
Microsoft has since significantly upped their political spend.
Corporations see laws and bad publicity the same: they spend more money on it to work around them.
Corporations see laws and bad publicity the same: they spend more money on it to work around them.
This, combined with the recent cloning of Notion in Office365, should get them in hot water with the various regulatory bodies, but Microsoft learned how to grease palms back in the days of The Trial, so I'm sure their bases are covered.
You cant install windows 11 on older hardware > turns out you can
You cant update to windows 11 on older hardware > turns out you can
You cant set a different default browser > turns out you can
You cant set a different default browser (again) > turns out you can
There is zero reason to believe that this will stay. Also its a dev build its not like this breaks anyone's workflow unless someone choose to work on a dev build and therefore accepted such and way worse hiccups.
You cant update to windows 11 on older hardware > turns out you can
You cant set a different default browser > turns out you can
You cant set a different default browser (again) > turns out you can
There is zero reason to believe that this will stay. Also its a dev build its not like this breaks anyone's workflow unless someone choose to work on a dev build and therefore accepted such and way worse hiccups.
Absolutely worth it to read the linked post by the EdgeDeflect author too: https://www.ctrl.blog/entry/microsoft-edge-protocol-competit...
Even if you'll eventually somehow be able to circumvent this, I'm more baffled by the sheer amount of effort Microsoft puts into locking Edge as the (de-facto) default browser. The changes OP described show pretty clearly this is deliberate and not just for whatever technical reasons there could be.
E.g. even if microsoft-edge:// links had some proprietary features that are required for OS integration - say, opening the page in a specific existing process or something - it makes no sense to rewrite ordinary https:// urls into microsoft-edge:// urls - which Windows seems to be doing ("and links sent to the device from a paired Samsung or Android devices").
On the other hand, if they are so hell-bent on making Edge the default browser, why are they go through all the trouble with "link associations" and permit other browsers at all? By now it seems sort of odd they didn't simply hardwire https:// to Edge directly.
In any way, this smells like another antitrust lawsuit waiting around the corner.
Even if you'll eventually somehow be able to circumvent this, I'm more baffled by the sheer amount of effort Microsoft puts into locking Edge as the (de-facto) default browser. The changes OP described show pretty clearly this is deliberate and not just for whatever technical reasons there could be.
E.g. even if microsoft-edge:// links had some proprietary features that are required for OS integration - say, opening the page in a specific existing process or something - it makes no sense to rewrite ordinary https:// urls into microsoft-edge:// urls - which Windows seems to be doing ("and links sent to the device from a paired Samsung or Android devices").
On the other hand, if they are so hell-bent on making Edge the default browser, why are they go through all the trouble with "link associations" and permit other browsers at all? By now it seems sort of odd they didn't simply hardwire https:// to Edge directly.
In any way, this smells like another antitrust lawsuit waiting around the corner.
Why bother? I already know no one will talk about this in 3 weeks because its resolved and wont ever affect anyone running the release versions anyway.
Will it? So far it seems they are pretty persistent in blocking all workarounds. I don't think the users will bother so much, but the other browser vendors might take issue.
>they are pretty persistent in blocking all workarounds
Weird interpretation of reality. Nothing is or has been blocked on the windows people actually use.
Its only broken on a single dev build.
Weird interpretation of reality. Nothing is or has been blocked on the windows people actually use.
Its only broken on a single dev build.
I mean, we'll see. If you're right and this really was just a technical mistake, more power to you. But to me, the change looks pretty deliberate. And if it was, I see no reason why Microsoft would want to fix it - at least without significant external pressure.
Addendum: It's officially mentioned in the release notes [1]:
> We fixed an issue where OS functionality could be improperly redirected when microsoft-edge: links are invoked.
[1] https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insider/2021/11/12/releasi...
> We fixed an issue where OS functionality could be improperly redirected when microsoft-edge: links are invoked.
[1] https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insider/2021/11/12/releasi...
You can use https://github.com/rcmaehl/MSEdgeRedirect
Also this https://github.com/da2x/EdgeDeflector/issues/142#issuecommen... setting might me important for some people.
Also this https://github.com/da2x/EdgeDeflector/issues/142#issuecommen... setting might me important for some people.
This stuff doesn’t happen by accident. There’s clear intent here. They’re going to push as long as they can get away with it due to the inattentiveness or exhaustion by the public/tech community. These articles and this discussion is exactly the push back we need right now.
Fixing windows one clickbait article at a time.
Is there any browser vendor that doesn't do things against its users' interests, for business reasons?
I'm mostly using Firefox and Tor Browser, but there've been numerous disappointments, even there.
I'm mostly using Firefox and Tor Browser, but there've been numerous disappointments, even there.
That's not completely wrong unfortunately. By now, we have the OS, the browser and individual websites all using dark patterns to some extent, sometimes even against each other - e.g., by now, Windows will nag you if you try to switch to Chrome while Google will nag you if you don't switch to Chrome...
Sometimes it feels like modern UI has become a battlefield between different companies with the only one losing with certainty being the user.
Sometimes it feels like modern UI has become a battlefield between different companies with the only one losing with certainty being the user.
Recent and related:
You can no longer bypass microsoft-edge:// links using apps like EdgeDeflector - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29191244 - Nov 2021 (167 comments)
You can no longer bypass microsoft-edge:// links using apps like EdgeDeflector - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29191244 - Nov 2021 (167 comments)
I have the newest flagship laptop from HP Omen RTX3070 and Ryzen 58000 or something...
I am only using my browser, FF, and its still acting weird slow..
Any thoughts?