rumor has it MicroSoft will separate the Edge browser from Windows Updates with upcoming Redstone 3

[zMeul]

source: https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-will-unbundle-its-edge-browser-from-the-windows-10-os-with-redstone-3

 

 

Quote

On Tuesday, Microsoft is expected to unveil Windows 10 Cloud at its #MicrosoftEDU event. The new SKU of the OS will only run apps that are designed for the Windows Store, and it's meant to be a competitor to Chromebooks in the educational space.

 

Unfortunately, there's still one big problem with Windows 10 going head-to-head with Chrome OS. Chrome is updated frequently and seamlessly by Google; however, Microsoft's Edge browser is only updated - aside from security updates - in new feature builds of Windows 10, which only happens twice per year.

 

But according to internal sources, that's all going to change in September, when the next feature update to Windows 10, codenamed Redstone 3, is released. Users will finally be able to get updates to the Edge browser via the Windows Store, which will allow Microsoft to add new features more frequently.

 

hold your horses there MicroSoft, "you" are committing one huge mistake

I dunno how many people would go signing in through the MS Windows Store just to update the browser they don't use 

 

I don't even understand what the fuckheads at MS are even thinking ...

Windows Update checks for updates basically daily, so why not receive updates from there? is it that much of a problem to separate Edge updates from the OS updates? they're already thinking to pass them trough the Store

why not do what the other browsers do and check for updates each time they're started?

[The Sloth]

its a rumor, remember that.  

[will2135]

its ture

[Misanthrope]

Probably ahead of another legal nightmare with the EU I'm sure.

[The Benjamins]

4 minutes ago, zMeul said:

source: https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-will-unbundle-its-edge-browser-from-the-windows-10-os-with-redstone-3

 

hold your horses there MicroSoft, "you" are committing one huge mistake

I dunno how many people would go signing in through the MS Windows Store just to update the browser they don't use 

I signin to a Microsoft account as my main login so the store will auto update the apps/games I use.

[zMeul]

2 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

I signin to a Microsoft account as my main login so the store will auto update the apps/games I use.

I don't

I do not log in with a MS account, I do not use the Store - I see absolutely no reason to do so

I also do not use Edge - why I don't use it? because it delivers extensions only through the Store

[19_blackie_73]

even with no microsoft account, my standard apps like groove music are updated via store automatically. 

And all i can say is that edge isn't that bad if you just open it and browse, I don't understand people bashing it like it would make your pc explode if you use it. It actually gives me way better battery life as any other browser i tested, and that's a huge deal for me as I'm constantly on the go.

I agree that Internet explorer was shit and very outdated, but edge performs fairly well. 

That rumour is interesting news and I would appreciate that move.

[tlink]

4 minutes ago, 19_blackie_73 said:

even with no microsoft account, my standard apps like groove music are updated via store automatically. 

And all i can say is that edge isn't that bad if you just open it and browse, I don't understand people bashing it like it would make your pc explode if you use it. It actually gives me way better battery life as any other browser i tested, and that's a huge deal for me as I'm constantly on the go.

I agree that Internet explorer was shit and very outdated, but edge performs fairly well. 

That rumour is interesting news and I would appreciate that move.

edge itself is fine, its the practices behind it i don't support. edge is a pretty good browser, never heard anyone say otherwise tbh.

[Gnun1x]

This is why i run Linux.

 

[vetali]

Would make more sense if it updated on its own instead of relying on the MS store. Otherwise its a good move. Updates twice a year to a browser isn't frequent enough, especially for a browser as "raw" as Edge. 

 

 

[GoodBytes]

33 minutes ago, zMeul said:

hold your horses there MicroSoft, "you" are committing one huge mistake

I dunno how many people would go signing in through the MS Windows Store just to update the browser they don't use 

 You don't need to sign-in in the store to get app updates

 

33 minutes ago, zMeul said:

I don't even understand what the fuckheads at MS are even thinking ...

Windows Update checks for updates basically daily, so why not receive updates from there? is it that much of a problem to separate Edge updates from the OS updates? they're already thinking to pass them trough the Store

why not do what the other browsers do and check for updates each time they're started?

Edge is made of 2 layers. The engine and the Interface (GUI). The Engine is part of Windows, built-in. It is there for UWP apps that incorporate Edge inside their app, so that the devs don't need to built their own web browser from the ground up for something small or whatever, or do a web wrapper app or something.

 

The GUI/Interface, this is the app we interact with. This is where you have extensions, tabs, right-click menu, Inspector, etc. all the features of the app.

 

Edge engine is update with the OS, through Windows Update, and as promised, with large Windows Update, like Anniversary Update, Creator Update, etc. beside security related fixes which are delivered as soon as they are fixed through normal Windows Update.

 

The Interface layer will be updated through the store, as it is an app, like other apps.

[Misanthrope]

9 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

 You don't need to sign-in in the store to get app updates

 

Edge is made of 2 layers. The engine and the Interface (GUI). The Engine is part of Windows, built-in. It is there for UWP apps that incorporate Edge inside their app, so that the devs don't need to built their own web browser from the ground up for something small or whatever, or do a web wrapper app or something.

 

The GUI/Interface, this is the app we interact with. This is where you have extensions, tabs, right-click menu, Inspector, etc. all the features of the app.

 

Edge engine is update with the OS, through Windows Update, and as promised, with large Windows Update, like Anniversary Update, Creator Update, etc. beside security related fixes which are delivered as soon as they are fixed through normal Windows Update.

 

The Interface layer will be updated through the store, as it is an app, like other apps.

Well Linux can usually update even the graphical engine and the entire desktop environment without affecting the kernel. You can usually just kill the desktop environment and restart and you have an update, no reboot necessary really GDM stop and start for example.

 

I get what you're saying that they build it into the OS itself but it's not necessarily that, it's just that Windows isn't designed to be as modular as Linux for example. Which can be both a virtue and a pitfall don't get me wrong.

[GoodBytes]

5 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Well Linux can usually update even the graphical engine and the entire desktop environment without affecting the kernel. You can usually just kill the desktop environment and restart and you have an update, no reboot necessary really GDM stop and start for example.

Does Linux have a web browser that other apps can use within themselves with like 1-2 line of code?

Microsoft is pleasing devs on Windows side, because apps can break if the engine code changes, and that will make you go and say "XYZ Windows Update breaks app! You see the problem with forced updated!!!"

 

5 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

I get what you're saying that they build it into the OS itself but it's not necessarily that, it's just that Windows isn't designed to be as modular as Linux for example. Which can be both a virtue and a pitfall don't get me wrong.

Edge is module if Microsoft wants to be. Essentially, it is like any other app. But UWP with .NET is a fancy framework that allows devs to make fancy apps with a few line of code which would otherwise be daunting.

 

Oh, I forgot. You can make UWP app with JS/HTML/CSS. These apps are of course rendered using Edge web browser engine. Another issue that can happen. If updates are delivered every 6 month or so with big Windows Update, it gives the ability for devs to have time to test their app under the Insider Program, and fix whatever needs to be fixed, if anything, so that their app continues to work with the newer version of Edge.

[Sniperfox47]

12 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

Does Linux have a web browser that other apps can use within themselves with like 1-2 line of code?

Microsoft is pleasing devs on Windows side, because apps can break if the engine code changes, and that will make you go and say "XYZ Windows Update breaks app! You see the problem with forced updated!!!"

Does it really need to? Between awesomium, sciter, and all of the many many many many other Blink, Gecko, and Servo based HTML UI Frameworks out there?

 

Like I get that Microsoft wants people to use their browser, but it seems more like something they're throwing out there to entice developers so it's harder to port to a different platform down the road, as opposed to something that will save much time on the developer's end.

[GoodBytes]

15 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

Does it really need to? Between awesomium, sciter, and all of the many many many many other Blink, Gecko, and Servo based HTML UI Frameworks out there?

You need to implement those, which is not, for people who don't know how to code beside JS, HTML, CSS, and again, say you have a C++ UWP app, and you want to include a web browser. As mentioned it is a few lines with .NET, but here you need to implement a web browser, and YOU (the dev) are responsible in updating the engine in the case of security issue discovered that needs to be fixed to keep people systems safe. Here, devs don't need to worry about it, as it is Microsoft problem/responsibility. They just need to test and fix any issue (if any).

 

15 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

Like I get that Microsoft wants people to use their browser, but it seems more like something they're throwing out there to entice developers so it's harder to port to a different platform down the road, as opposed to something that will save much time on the developer's end.

That won't change a thing. There is already mass amount of work to port Win32 or UWP to another OS built-in framework. If the dev wants to be OS independent, well they can use alternatives like QT or GTK for example... and if you use .NET you also lock yourself to Windows, unless you limit yourself to .NET Core which is now open source and ported for Linux. But the reverse hold true as well. A Linux made program isn't easily ported to Windows, especially if you have a complex software. The only way to have a true portable software is if you do everything yourself, or embedded things in your project.. but you end up with an overly large software consuming possibly more memory, possibly slower to load, and you have to deal with many complexities not done for you. Unless your program is dead simple... like some command line thing, or really basic thing where porting is minutes work.

[Tataffe]

The only real question is: Will they stop the stupid question if Edge should be my standard browser? The only notable thing that the creators update gave me (besides short freezes in Outlook that didn't happen before) was that Windows completely forgot which applications to use for quite a number of file types I use. Like how do you even screw that up ...

[GoodBytes]

7 minutes ago, Tataffe said:

The only real question is: Will they stop the stupid question if Edge should be my standard browser? The only notable thing that the creators update gave me (besides short freezes in Outlook that didn't happen before) was that Windows completely forgot which applications to use for quite a number of file types I use. Like how do you even screw that up ...

If you use Edge web browser as your default web browser, you won't get this pop-up.

 

File association should be no longer an issue, if the app you use follow Microsoft documentation. If they use XP and older method and never updated since it was marked as deprecated (XP days), then that is the devs fault. If you use software like say iTunes, it should not cause any problem or resets.

[Sniperfox47]

2 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

You need to implement those, which is not, for people who don't know how to code beside JS, HTML, CSS, and again, say you have a C++ UWP app, and you want to include a web browser. As mentioned it is a few lines with .NET, but here you need to implement a web browser, and YOU (the dev) are responsible in updating the engine in the case of security issue discovered that needs to be fixed to keep people systems safe. Here, devs don't need to worry about it, as it is Microsoft problem/responsibility. They just need to test and fix any issue (if any).

 

That won't change a thing. There is already mass amount of work to port Win32 or UWP to another OS built-in framework. If the dev wants to be OS independent, well they can use alternatives like QT or GTK for example... and if you use .NET you also lock yourself to Windows, unless you limit yourself to .NET Core which is now open source and ported for Linux. But the reverse hold true as well. A Linux made program isn't easily ported to Windows, especially if you have a complex software. The only way to have a true portable software is if you do everything yourself, or embedded things in your project.. but you end up with an overly large software consuming possibly more memory, possibly slower to load, and you have to deal with many complexities not done for you. Unless your program is dead simple... like some command line thing, or really basic thing where porting is minutes work.

Umm... .Net works just fine on Linux. Mono may not be made by Microsoft but it is a thing and covers the vast majority of .Net 4.5 that devs would be using. That's why I quoted awesomium. It's .Net but supports Linux just fine.

 

Integrating and updating these engines isn't a particularly difficult task either. It's not even 20 minutes of work to get a project up and running with awesomium.

 

As far as security patches, most of the time for dynamically linked engines they're drop in replacements that require 0 API updates.

 

Your argument about bloat I could maybe see, but even that I'd question on anything other than Windows Mobile. There's enough apps out there already that pull ridiculous dependencies.

 

Maybe I just don't understand the point of having 3000 webapps as desktop apps when you can just put it on a website. I never understood that about Android either. Why make an app that just displays a WebView of your site to the user when they can just open their browser and go to your site...

[The Benjamins]

7 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

Umm... .Net works just fine on Linux. Mono may not be made by Microsoft but it is a thing and covers the vast majority of .Net 4.5 that devs would be using. That's why I quoted awesomium. It's .Net but supports Linux just fine.

 

Integrating and updating these engines isn't a particularly difficult task either. It's not even 20 minutes of work to get a project up and running with awesomium.

 

As far as security patches, most of the time for dynamically linked engines they're drop in replacements that require 0 API updates.

 

Your argument about bloat I could maybe see, but even that I'd question on anything other than Windows Mobile. There's enough apps out there already that pull ridiculous dependencies.

 

Maybe I just don't understand the point of having 3000 webapps as desktop apps when you can just put it on a website. I never understood that about Android either. Why make an app that just displays a WebView of your site to the user when they can just open their browser and go to your site...

it would be easier for the user to manager their "apps" as app then web pages/tabs.

[Sniperfox47]

Just now, The Benjamins said:

it would be easier for the user to manager their "apps" as app then web pages/tabs.

How often have you been sitting at your desktop and gone "Imgur... I really wish I had an app for that instead of having to take the second to type imgur.com in chrome!" or Tumblr or Facebook or whatever websites you use.

 

Even on mobile, when I load a site like Pinterest and it refuses to let me see their site because they want me to download their app which is literally just a WebView of their site, all it does is piss me off, not make me download their app.

 

Though maybe I'm weird that way.

[The Benjamins]

2 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

How often have you been sitting at your desktop and gone "Imgur... I really wish I had an app for that instead of having to take the second to type imgur.com in chrome!" or Tumblr or Facebook or whatever websites you use.

 

Even on mobile, when I load a site like Pinterest and it refuses to let me see their site because they want me to download their app which is literally just a WebView of their site, all it does is piss me off, not make me download their app.

 

Though maybe I'm weird that way.

Ya but you are not most users, and people like stand alone apps even if it brings nothing new. Think of the millions of stupid users.

[mr moose]

8 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

Ya but you are not most users, and people like stand alone apps even if it brings nothing new. Think of the millions of stupid users.

That's right, We are a tech forum full of enthusiasts who can and do lots of involved and awesome things.  But most users, (literally the majority) don't know script from a spread sheet from a hdd from a dog peeing in the snow.

 

MS, like most major software companies, code for the bulk of their consumers not for the minority enthusiasts who hate them anyway and don't use edge.

[Dabombinable]

I'll be happy if they separate it+ IE and make them die in a fire.

[SansVarnic]

This is a good thing for edge developers. Gets it away from the limited update schedule of the OS. 

[GoodBytes]

38 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

I'll be happy if they separate it+ IE and make them die in a fire.

Why? If Edge was not there, Google would continue with its power hungry Chrome on your mobile device (Laptops, Windows powered tablets/convertibles), Thanks to the attention that Microsoft brought to consumers. Heck, Opera scrap their 'not going anywhere' web browser engine, picked up Chromium, and showed a version, basically of Chrome, without Google tracking system, and how much power efficient it can be made. This clearly shows how much Google is starting to sleep, and starting to be like IE6 the more and more market share it gets.

 

Edge and IE11 has pushed the competition for making their web browser high-aware, and still pushing for smooth scrolling, smooth zooming without breaking the page layout, multi-touch support. Edge continue to push things further with Ink/pen support.

 

Competition is good, and even for a unpopular web browser, you can clearly see how competition, whether you like it or not, affects the market.

Also, choices never hurt anyone.

 

You should maybe break you image you have of Edge, and give it a serious try.