Yes, the article clearly indicates MS stated purpose here was to ensure that an end user is presented with the default selection options and their choice is respected, regardless of administrator actions outside the user interacting with the settings panel. MS is not trying to force everyone to use Edge.
They aren’t talking about system administrators. They are talking about 3rd party software presenting a privilege escalation prompt (administrator access) and changing your default browser without you knowing about it
It’s not that’s it’s a problem per se, it’s that MS thinks it might leave them liable to punitive action under the DMA. While i’m not convinced whether MS is being honest or if it’s a bit of malicious compliance/dark pattern stuff, I fully believe that there’s some spite layered in there from the 90s regardless.
Yes, the article clearly indicates MS stated purpose here was to ensure that an end user is presented with the default selection options and their choice is respected, regardless of administrator actions outside the user interacting with the settings panel. MS is not trying to force everyone to use Edge.
Nowhere in the article does MS say that. It’s presented as an argument, while MS said “no comment”.
Nowhere does MS claim that.
I must have misread the comment from Kolbicz as a comment from a MS rep or something.
They say that, but I’ll believe it when I see the implementation.
But why? Is administrators forcing their company’s laptop to use certain browser actually a significant problem before?
They aren’t talking about system administrators. They are talking about 3rd party software presenting a privilege escalation prompt (administrator access) and changing your default browser without you knowing about it
Its more a issue in China where every browser (read malware) would make itself the default and it’s a pain to change it back.
Then just ask the user instead of assuming
Still doable for corporate-managed devices through GPOs, MS Intune, MECM, etc
It’s not that’s it’s a problem per se, it’s that MS thinks it might leave them liable to punitive action under the DMA. While i’m not convinced whether MS is being honest or if it’s a bit of malicious compliance/dark pattern stuff, I fully believe that there’s some spite layered in there from the 90s regardless.