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

Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay later’ feature for Edge

portswigger.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 307 posts

Re: Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay later’ feature for Edge

#291

Post by musicale »

xiphias2 wrote: post #237
jw1224 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does “Sign up for iCloud” count as an ad? It’s a core (albeit optional) feature, included with the product the user has bought. The same could be said of Fitness+, or any of their other services. Yes, it’s “advertising”, but sits pretty inoffensively on the spectrum.

Even though I love my M1 Macbook Pro and iPad Pro, I have a lot of problems for them working together with my Android phone. I was thinking of switching to iPhone Pro Max (the only iPhone with big enough screen for my bad eyes), but it’s so thick and heavy (as thick as the tablet), that I feel like it would be uncomfortable for me.

> it’s so thick and heavy

Where is Jony Ive when we need him? ;-)

Re: Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay later’ feature for Edge

#292

Post by musicale »

roody15 wrote: post #197
macintux wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have seen a reminder once about time running out to buy an AppleCare warranty, which I appreciated. What other ads have you seen in Settings?

advertises iCloud .. advertises ApplePay advertises AppleCare advertises AppleMusic advertises Apple Fitness Not too much in your face but honestly it does come off as tacky.

It was a serious violation of good design principles for Apple to abuse notifications and (especially) the Settings app for pushing advertisements.

I'm not sure why they would want to destroy the positive brand reputation and goodwill that they've built over decades.

Re: Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay later’ feature for Edge

#293

Post by cyanydeez »

Spivak wrote: post #243
cyanydeez wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

anyone paying attention.?

I don't think this have been downvoted, this is a really really obvious thing to do with the raging success of both Apple Pay/Shop Pay/Android Pay/Samsung Pay/Paypal and Afterpay and it's clones. From the financial perspective of the big three companies that make browsers they're nothing more than shopping portals and all new user-facing features built into browsers support the user-stories of people buying things. P…

ive been readying about microtransactions for decades.

this is basically what thta is.

Re: Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay later’ feature for Edge

#294

Post by austhrow743 »

afavour wrote: post #209
austhrow743 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it not an answer?

Because no matter what their subscription price is it’s only reflective of the development work required to add features on top of Chromium, not of building a web browser. As such it’s not sustainable. If it ever became a competitive issue Google could very easily close source Chrome. Then suddenly all these Chromium-based subscription browsers would be on the hook for all browser development, security updates includ…

Do you see it becoming a competitive issue though? Even the commenter who brought it up doesn’t even think paid browsers will ever be mainstream. I certainly don’t.

Re: Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay later’ feature for Edge

#295

Post by paledot »

mbesto wrote: post #181
deergomoo wrote: post #118

I cannot stand how everything with internet access is just becoming a vehicle to shove ads down everyone’s throat. This web browser wants to sell me credit deals. My expensive TV has banner ads in the menus (well, it did until I blocked about two dozen domains). An increasing amount of apps are sending “offers” I never requested via push notifications on my phone. My belongings are not a fucking corporate billboard.

You can thank the capital side of the equation for this. Example: https://andrewchen.com/this-is-what-free-ad-supported-uber-r... They used to hide it, but because so much money is being made there's no point anymore.

It boggles my mind that this is being presented by the author as if it were a legitimately good idea and not another step on our collective descent into a dystopian hellscape.

Re: Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay later’ feature for Edge

#296

Post by swiley »

paledot wrote: post #295
mbesto wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can thank the capital side of the equation for this. Example: https://andrewchen.com/this-is-what-free-ad-supported-uber-r... They used to hide it, but because so much money is being made there's no point anymore.

It boggles my mind that this is being presented by the author as if it were a legitimately good idea and not another step on our collective descent into a dystopian hellscape.

Most mainstream things are like this now.

Re: Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay later’ feature for Edge

#298

Post by tacotacotaco »

msie wrote: post #156
phendrenad2 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maintaining browsers has become a significant undertaking, so complex that only well-funded corporate interests can afford to keep one patched and up-to-date with the latest web standards. It surpassed operating system complexity. It surpassed pretty much everything else too. So we can forget about it ever being truly "free" (and free from ads) unless we simplify the web somehow. I also don't think we're going to go…

A new HTML/JS/CSS standard should be defined based on lessons learned implementing past browsers. Such a standard would make it easy to implement a browser.

Except that corporations join standard bodies to exert influence in their favor. If a standard is easy to implement then there would be more competition. E.g. Microsoft pushed standardization of their Open Office XML format. A party critical of their standard printed out the two competing specifications. ODF sat on the table and OOXML sat on the floor. My memory is hazy but I think the OOXML stack was still taller than the ODF stack.

Re: Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay later’ feature for Edge

#299

Post by winrid »

iamstupidsimple wrote: post #153
deergomoo wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not against ads as a concept. If I’m getting something for free, I think it’s fair to say have a lot less say in what I see and when. What I am against is what seems to be a complete decline in any sense of taste and decency over the past 20 years, that means ads will be shoved anywhere if it can make a quick buck out of someone. I think it’s the interjection that really rubs me the wrong way. If the shop I was…

Yeah, the TV thing just rubs me the wrong way. TV channels have ads, which is why I avoid them, but TV menus is too much.

They probably justify it by comparing it to the old cable channel browser which had ads.

Re: Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay later’ feature for Edge

#300

Post by TheRealDunkirk »

WalterBright wrote: post #203
phendrenad2 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maintaining browsers has become a significant undertaking, so complex that only well-funded corporate interests can afford to keep one patched and up-to-date with the latest web standards. It surpassed operating system complexity. It surpassed pretty much everything else too. So we can forget about it ever being truly "free" (and free from ads) unless we simplify the web somehow. I also don't think we're going to go…

> It surpassed operating system complexity Gates understood that early on (that the browser would become the platform), hence giving Explorer away for free.

I think what you meant to say was that Marc Andreeson understood it would become the platform, and Gates came to realize that he was on to something, and used Microsoft's monopoly to steal the implementation of the idea.
Post reply on HN