cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/11483626
Here’s the detailed report from Mozilla Research: Over the Edge: How Microsoft’s Design Tactics Compromise Free Browser Choice (PDF, 5MB, 74 pages)
And the announcement post from Mozilla Research referenced in the The Register’s article is here:
Over the Edge: The Use of Design Tactics to Undermine Browser Choice
In order to be able to choose their own browser, people must be free to download it, easily set it to default and to continue using it – all without interference from the operating system. Windows users do not currently enjoy this freedom of choice.
To investigate Microsoft’s tactics and the impact on consumers, Mozilla commissioned Harry Brignull and Cennydd Bowles, independent researchers and experts in harmful design. Today, the researchers have published a report detailing how Microsoft prevents effective browser choice on Windows. In the report, they document how Microsoft places its own browser — Edge — at the center of its operating system and weaponizes Windows’ user interface design to undermine people selecting rival browsers.
In some cases, the use of harmful design tactics is contrary to Microsoft’s own design guidelines. In many cases, it can lead to (and exacerbate) consumer harm and undermine competition from rival browsers. This kind of behavior is particularly concerning for an independent browser like Firefox, which is reliant on the operating systems provided by companies who are also rival browser vendors.
Self-preferencing from operating system/browser providers is an area Mozilla has previously highlighted, for example, in the Five Walled Gardens report. Recently, details of many issues Mozilla experiences competing on major operating systems were published on the Platform Tilt dashboard.
Now, with the implementation of the Digital Markets Act in the European Union marking the start of a wave of global competition regulation, we hoped that the barriers to browser competition would be dismantled. However, even where there is movement in the right direction, improvements have been incomplete and are grudgingly offered only in markets where regulators have forced platform owners to make changes to respect browser choice. For example, Apple’s decision to allow alternative browser engines is only effective in the EU.
Similarly, Microsoft recently pledged to stop some of the actions it takes to force Edge on users who have selected other browsers. Unfortunately, these changes only address a small number of the tactics outlined in this report. And, to make matters worse, they will only be deployed to users in the EEA.
Windows users everywhere, especially in the rest of the world, continue to have their choices inhibited, overridden and undermined by Microsoft’s use of harmful design. Regulatory action around the world is needed to restore browser choice and competition across all of the major platforms.
I’m so tired of every major tech company claiming their monopoly is for “security reasons”. It’s fear mongering plain and simple.
Or claiming things happening due to a bug when the result is a clear benefit to them.
Big Ubisoft vibes.
“lol woops we put huge ads in the game our bad”
It’s even cars, dishwashers, cookers, and other white goods now. They can’t open even their APIs “because of security”. Each one has their protocols to their own servers. If you get any access, it’s via their cloud/servers. WHEN they abandon those devices, stop supporting their protocols on their servers, any smarts are crippled. It’s just so short sighted. So vendor locking. So anti repair. So anti digital freedom. It’s plain monopolistic digital serfdom. Purely software, on pure computers, is yesterday’s battle front.
A smart home is far more secure if every device isn’t connecting to some other company’s service that probably tries to save on IT costs. I don’t want an internet of things, I want a private network of things.
And when each thing is it’s own island, you lose some of the real benefits of having connected things. A smart home that I’d like is one where if I turn on the dishwasher or laundry machine, it checks the water softener to make sure there’s enough soft water that my dishes or clothes won’t end up with dissolved solids when they dry. Instead, smart water softeners that I’ve looked into are all about letting you check if you need salt from your phone or setting up a salt subscription service.
Your completely right. But it is a hard sell to the family. They only really see the loss of functionality. So what I do is two networks. My stuff is on the secure network and theirs is on the other one. When I’m asked why, I say their devices aren’t secure enough and their digital hygiene is too low. They can’t argue with me as I’m the one who knows the most about this stuff by a long long way. I do put my foot down about Alexa and open mic stuff, but lots of stuff has voice functionally I’ve disabled. My wife uses Google’s voice stuff on her phone, which means an open mic to Google and she doesn’t worry when it says “I’m sorry I didn’t understand that” at random times. Really politics need to catch up so we all protected more.
Not even saying that openness makes things more secure and this was supposed proven in late 90s and early 00s.
The world feels as if it’s generally become dumber.
I remember that in my childhood (born 1996, thinking 2004-2009) most adults would have right ideas about computing philosophically, even if not knowing a single specific thing and just pushing buttons.
Like that if somebody tries to frighten you into some action, they are crooks. Or that repairable things cost you less. Or that openness, modularity and interoperability are what our modern civilization is built upon, so these can’t be worse than their opposites.
You ever seen Idiocracy? Feels more and more likely…