Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Removes Google’s Chrome Installer from the Windows Store

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 64 posts

Re: Microsoft Removes Google’s Chrome Installer from the Windows Store

#31

Post by Mindwipe »

pjc50 wrote: post #23

"Windows Store apps that browse the web must use HTML and JavaScript engines provided by Windows 10" Why is this restriction allowed? Isn't this a violation of the browser choice consent decree, or has that expired? Edit: I see this is "Windows S", which inherits from the failed "Windows RT" the attempt to jam everything into the walled garden of the store. This is unlikely to work and I hope it doesn't; only Apple h…

> Isn't this a violation of the browser choice consent decree, or has that expired?

It's expired (sadly, and rather than the better option which would have been that it should apply to all operating systems).

Re: Microsoft Removes Google’s Chrome Installer from the Windows Store

#32

Post by amelius »

paulus_magnus2 wrote: post #27

I'd like EU court to look into Apple iOS and now MS Windows, Google Chromebooks lock the user into a single source of "apps". It's like you were limited to fill / charge your car at stations owned by the manufacturer.

> It's like you were limited to fill / charge your car at stations owned by the manufacturer.

Sounds like the Nespresso business model too.

Re: Microsoft Removes Google’s Chrome Installer from the Windows Store

#33

Post by kogepathic »

headmelted wrote: post #28
pjc50 wrote: post #23

"Windows Store apps that browse the web must use HTML and JavaScript engines provided by Windows 10" Why is this restriction allowed? Isn't this a violation of the browser choice consent decree, or has that expired? Edit: I see this is "Windows S", which inherits from the failed "Windows RT" the attempt to jam everything into the walled garden of the store. This is unlikely to work and I hope it doesn't; only Apple h…

Windows RT, for the record, was a horrifically missed opportunity for Windows to compete with "low-end" ARM devices. I use quotes as I much prefer the ARM Chromebooks I've owned over the years to any other computer I've used, regardless of price. Thin, light, cheap and with battery life for millenia. Microsoft is trying to address this now with running x86 code on Snapdragons (which may well be too little too late),…

> Microsoft is trying to address this now with running x86 code on Snapdragons (which may well be too little too late)

I disagree. I think it's a fantastic idea. Windows has a lot of legacy software, which I'd guess is mostly closed source.

If you want to have a laptop with all-day battery life, but run the application from your defunct vendor that's x86 only, then this is a great solution.

For Microsoft, it's the best of both worlds. Lower power consumption of ARM and all the backward compatibility of x86, in one piece of (low cost) hardware. The only other ARM productivity OS (IMHO) is Chrome OS, but it's lacking backward compatibility with pretty much everything. Unless you're going to use a Linux chroot, but that's something only power users will do and not at scale.

The potential of this combination (ARM+x86 emulation) is so huge that Intel is threatening Microsoft/Qualcomm over it. [1]

[1] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/06/intel...

Re: Microsoft Removes Google’s Chrome Installer from the Windows Store

#34

Post by pjc50 »

headmelted wrote: post #28
pjc50 wrote: post #23

"Windows Store apps that browse the web must use HTML and JavaScript engines provided by Windows 10" Why is this restriction allowed? Isn't this a violation of the browser choice consent decree, or has that expired? Edit: I see this is "Windows S", which inherits from the failed "Windows RT" the attempt to jam everything into the walled garden of the store. This is unlikely to work and I hope it doesn't; only Apple h…

Windows RT, for the record, was a horrifically missed opportunity for Windows to compete with "low-end" ARM devices. I use quotes as I much prefer the ARM Chromebooks I've owned over the years to any other computer I've used, regardless of price. Thin, light, cheap and with battery life for millenia. Microsoft is trying to address this now with running x86 code on Snapdragons (which may well be too little too late),…

> Microsoft is trying to address this now with running x86 code on Snapdragons

Is this real Windows or a crippled app store only version?

Re: Microsoft Removes Google’s Chrome Installer from the Windows Store

#35

Post by swiley »

pjc50 wrote: post #24
skrebbel wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Edge (which is kind of a low feature Internet Explorer). I agree with your comment in general, but Edge really is significantly better than IE. It supports most modern web stuff, it's much faster and the UI is pretty nice and clean. Sure, the latter is a matter of taste too but it really beats IE on all fronts. Opinions clearly vary on whether it can compete with the likes of Chrome and Firefox, but it's not a "low…

Edge has ugly font rendering (seems to be common to all Metro apps) and loses all your tabs when you quit (total dealbreaker for me).

I really really wish Firefox would actually close the tabs when I quit.

Re: Microsoft Removes Google’s Chrome Installer from the Windows Store

#38

Post by lucozade »

paulus_magnus2 wrote: post #27

I'd like EU court to look into Apple iOS and now MS Windows, Google Chromebooks lock the user into a single source of "apps". It's like you were limited to fill / charge your car at stations owned by the manufacturer.

> It's like you were limited to fill / charge your car at stations owned by the manufacturer

Only if you're looking to find fault. The analogy to cars works fine but only if you compare like for like.

There's a direct analogy to fueling and that's charging, which can be done from any electric source as long as you have the right connector (like cars).

Apps are more like car modifications. For most modern cars this is very hard to do without using the manufacturers own fitters or preferred suppliers. Some modifications are possible without their consent but they'd definitely void any warranty and they're not exactly encouraged.

BTW I'm not arguing that this is fine. Just that cars are as much, if not more, walled gardens than phones.

To be honest, given the economics of most consumer goods, it's hard to find anything that encourages non-manufacturer modification or repair. If courts were to really start fighting this, they need to fight pretty much everyone.

Re: Microsoft Removes Google’s Chrome Installer from the Windows Store

#39

Post by PhasmaFelis »

paulus_magnus2 wrote: post #27

I'd like EU court to look into Apple iOS and now MS Windows, Google Chromebooks lock the user into a single source of "apps". It's like you were limited to fill / charge your car at stations owned by the manufacturer.

I'm sure MS would like everyone to get their software from the Windows Store, but I've been using Windows 10 for a year and a half and I've never used the Store. Regular installers still work fine.

Android is actually more restrictive, since you can distribute software outside the Google Play Store but hardly anyone does.

Re: Microsoft Removes Google’s Chrome Installer from the Windows Store

#40

Post by nikanj »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #7

The Verge understands Google created this installer app to combat the fake Chrome apps that can be found in the Windows Store, a problem Microsoft has been trying to address for years. It obviously hasn't been trying that hard.

User installs ”Chrome” from Windows Store, gets malware and crap. I’d bet 87% of the users would blame Google, not Microsoft.
Post reply on HN