Slashdot Mirror
Former Edge Browser Intern Alleges Google Sabotaged Microsoft's Browser (ycombinator.com)
Joshua Bakita, a former software engineering intern on the Edge team at Microsoft, says one of the reasons why Microsoft had to ditch EdgeHTML rendering engine in Edge browser and switch to Chromium was to keep up with the changes (some of which were notorious) that Google pushed to its sites. These changes were designed to ensure that Edge and other browsers could not properly run Google's sites, he alleged. Responding to a comment, he wrote: "For example, they may start integrating technologies for which they have exclusive, or at least 'special' access. Can you imagine if all of a sudden Google apps start performing better than anyone else's?" This is already happening. I very recently worked on the Edge team, and one of the reasons we decided to end EdgeHTML was because Google kept making changes to its sites that broke other browsers, and we couldn't keep up.
For example, they recently added a hidden empty div over YouTube videos that causes our hardware acceleration fast-path to bail (should now be fixed in Win10 Oct update). Prior to that, our fairly state-of-the-art video acceleration put us well ahead of Chrome on video playback time on battery, but almost the instant they broke things on YouTube, they started advertising Chrome's dominance over Edge on video-watching battery life. What makes it so sad, is that their claimed dominance was not due to ingenious optimization work by Chrome, but due to a failure of YouTube. On the whole, they only made the web slower.
Now while I'm not sure I'm convinced that YouTube was changed intentionally to slow Edge, many of my co-workers are quite convinced -- and they're the ones who looked into it personally. To add to this all, when we asked, YouTube turned down our request to remove the hidden empty div and did not elaborate further. And this is only one case.
For example, they recently added a hidden empty div over YouTube videos that causes our hardware acceleration fast-path to bail (should now be fixed in Win10 Oct update). Prior to that, our fairly state-of-the-art video acceleration put us well ahead of Chrome on video playback time on battery, but almost the instant they broke things on YouTube, they started advertising Chrome's dominance over Edge on video-watching battery life. What makes it so sad, is that their claimed dominance was not due to ingenious optimization work by Chrome, but due to a failure of YouTube. On the whole, they only made the web slower.
Now while I'm not sure I'm convinced that YouTube was changed intentionally to slow Edge, many of my co-workers are quite convinced -- and they're the ones who looked into it personally. To add to this all, when we asked, YouTube turned down our request to remove the hidden empty div and did not elaborate further. And this is only one case.
"but due to a failure of YouTube."
You mean a failure of Edge?
Can you imagine if all of a sudden ________ apps start performing better than anyone else's?
Yes we can. Ask the DR-DOS team.
I believe this 100%. Google Docs has basically become unusable unless you're using Chrome.
We may be seeing Microsoft getting a taste of its own medicine.
embrace and extend...lesson learned sensei!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Google site supported open standards, and its features were build around open standards. And not Microsoft specific features, that other browsers don't support.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Chrome is repeating all the tricks that Microsoft used in the 90's to ensure browser dominance.
Don't be evil. Yeah, right. Sell eyeballs at any cost.
Specialist Mac support for creative pros, Melbourne
I guess Microsoft does't require interns to sign an NDA...
Remember Explorer vs. Nautilus and the rest?
In Italy we say "Chi la fa l'aspetti", in other words what goes around comes around
Whoever wins... we lose.
#DeleteFacebook
Contrary to MS in the 90ies, Chrome (Chromium) is FOSS. Everyone can use it, everyone can fork it, everyone can deploy it to their platform. Even MS. (sic) The technology and the core software itself is objectively good, while MSes was objectively evil.
Googles tactics were probably neccessary to prevent MS from doing their MS-threestep. Given, Google, like no other, profits from a strong web, especially because they own it with their key product, Google Search, but no one is preventing MS from building their own video streaming site that competes with youtube.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
This has been well known for a while. The biggest problem for MS was that they buried the browser updates with OS updates. It should have been able to be updated separately to confront these issues.
Microsoft had to ditch EdgeHTML rendering engine in Edge browser and switch to Chromium was to keep up with the changes (some of which were notorious) that Google pushed to its sites. These changes were designed to ensure that Edge and other browsers could not properly run Google's sites, he alleged.
I guess this is Google's version of the old Microsoft "It ain't done 'til Lotus won't run".
"The sites not rendered 'til Edge won't, uh, render" Ok it needs works.
Because Microsoft programmed it. Of course Windows 10 is good but the next version will suck.
Corporatism != Free Market
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Time for Microsoft to get a taste of their own medicine perhaps? (i.e. DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run, etc)
-Miser
So M$ doesn't like it when the shoe is on the other foot.
I guess Google have been studying and learning from MS.
Payback's a bitch
Anyone who remembers Microsoft from about 1988 through 2005 has to find the irony just delicious
strange game...the only way to win is not to play.
It would be a nice example of poetic justice: if a company is deserving of comeuppance, Microsoft is it. Mind you, Google is next in line for comeuppance, although that might take a few more years.
run "web"-services that relied on Microsoft-proprietary extensions that were built only to make it impossible for non-Windows-browsers to be compatible?
It's hilarious when it is Microsoft who complains about the strategy they have been using for decades to suppress healthy competition.
Google can go to hell, but Microsoft should lead the way.
A Microsofty complaining their cool little piece of tech was ruined by vast heartless corporation using a virtual monopoly. Does he see the irony there? Or the karma?
He (the intern) is probably too young to even remember those days.
So Google embraced some new piece of technology, extended it and then used that to extinguish the competition.
Where have I heard of a company doing that?!?
I love it when Microsoft gets to eat the same shit sandwich they've feed to so many others.
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
I agree with a lot of the other up-modded comments, but let me get this straight... MS worked on EdgeHTML for 4 years, and finally threw in the towel because of changes that Google kept implementing on their sites? Edge hardly even broke 2% of the browser market share - EVER.
Google makes a lot of little changes, all the time. And they probably do get 'insight' into the benefit of those before others. But I think it's pretty clear that MS didn't fail with Edge because of Google. MS failed because they still really don't play well with others. It's just that now, the others are the big dogs in the yard.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
That might be the #1 reason M$ is ditching their own engine ...
I find it hard to believe a company with 10's of thousands of software developers have a hard time overcoming an empty div. I'm old enough to regard anything coming out of Microsoft, regardless of the vehicle, as FUD.
BTW: The web version of Microsoft "Teams" runs fine with Chrome on Linux, but only if the "UserAgent" is faked to indicate a Windows-based browser. Exactly the same evil strategy, used as of today, by Microsoft.
I have noticed some slowness with the loading of Google sites with Firefox. I think these changes are also affecting Firefox. My initial reaction to slow loading gmail was to wonder how did the Firefox team mess up this up, but when I got thinking that it was very unlikely that they would not test on such a popular site. I then wanted to blame Comcast, my provider, but that also seemed unlikely with other sites loading okay. This makes a lot more sense. Come on Google, you can do better!
Yes, but its another villain doing it. Not really much justice to it.
It is schadenfreude thou.
http://progressquest.com/spoltog.php?name=Son+Of+Son+Of+DarkRookie
Hopefully Google will get a taste of that medicine too.
Then we would switch Microsoft for Google.
Not an improvement.
http://progressquest.com/spoltog.php?name=Son+Of+Son+Of+DarkRookie
I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you.
Why are you optimizing for one specific browser
There are standards. If you page is writing with them, then you shouldn't need to do it.
I doubt even Google follows them on their sites. Just make it so Chrome works the best.
http://progressquest.com/spoltog.php?name=Son+Of+Son+Of+DarkRookie
Either (1) stop crying and put your big boy pants on or (2) get out of the computer business. I hope you'll choose #2; the world will be a better place.
Circle the wagons and fire inward. Entropy increases without bounds.
It is no different that what microsoft did with each major os update. they always expect computer manufacturers, software companies and others to update their products to work with their new operating system. the shoe is on the other foot.
but if you want to talk about sabotage, microsoft has a history of it, all the way back to drdos and os/2
Microsoft can't keep up with a hidden empty div?
Apparently, Microsoft's goal was to create a fast rendering path that only worked on the one site they wished to brag about, and only if that one site never changed. "Good grief," they all whispered among themselves, "if we're forced to make our fast path robust we'll never climb this mountain fast enough to overtake competent competition".
If Google inserted custom code into Chrome with the only function of ignoring a hidden empty div, then I might enlarge my tiny violin to the manly scale of Schroeder's baby grand. After DR-DOS, it shrunk so small that my personal Jiminy Cricket hauls it out only when he needs a good mosquito repellent. I've got one earlobe that hasn't been bitten, yet.
Netscape had to contend with random and erratically documented behaviour from the entire operating system they ran on top of. One suspects that just one of those old Netscape greybeards from the 1990s could log roll the entire Edge team all by himself. While drinking scalding hot tea from bone china with those dainty handles—and not spilling a drop.
Microsoft world leader in Embrace, extend, and extinguish.
Look, google may have been dicking around with the code, I'll grant you that, but Edge was horrible even on non-google sites. Shit, it's horrible on MS sites.
They gave up because they haven't been able to bring a solid browser to market in nearly 2 decades and someone, somewhere, finally decided to call ToD.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Can you imagine? Why yes, I enjoyed Microsoft using this exact playbook throughout the 90s, thanks.
- former ECNE
When your a start up.
Listen to your workers, the people buying your products. The bugs they report.
Fix problems and thank the people who reported them.
Hire smart staff who can work on complex problems.
When your a national computing brand?
Listen to the gov/mil/brands/NGO/edu buyers using your products and services.
Have teams that can build, support and help the use of your products. Products you use in your company too.
Made it full multinational?
Language support and art work to help average users around the world rent and buy into your advanced systems.
Thank the people who reported problems with understanding the art work and text translations.
Let the competition make mistakes. Watch on as they hire average staff and their products lines become more difficult to support and use.
Want to be a great brand? Always look after your users. Always get the very best staff. Hire only on merit and have the best code, results every generation.
Code getting too complex? Hire better much workers.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
It's not fair!
Refrain of bullies everywhere when they're on the receiving end of the abuse.
The ironing is delicious.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I've removed edge from hundreds of computers, not because of anything Google did but because of everything Edge didn't do. Worst browser ever.
Have you ever written a bug report for any browsers? There are currently two types of development communities:
1. Chrome and Firefox: You write a bug report and someone will take a look. There will probably be a short discussion and your bug may get fixed or there is a reason why it won't be fixed. I wrote a but report last week for Chrome and the bug got fixed within two days. The current Chrome Canary build already contains the bugfix. Filing bug reports for these browsers is fun, because the development community works.
2. Edge and Safari: You write a bug report and nobody gives a sh&t. I wrote a bunch of bug reports for WebKit and the feedback was exactly zero. Nothing. Not even a confirmation that the bug is valid (or invalid). And of course the bugs are still in there and they are getting more and more, because the development community is broken.
So no, Edge and Safari are the new Internet Explorer, they suck and they will continue to suck. Chrome is almost years ahead, and the distance will grow. Mozilla has the right attitude and is trying hard to catch up with Chrome. I hope they will succeed, because otherwise we will be left only with Chrome, Opera and Vivaldi, which are all based on Chromium.
Signature deleted by lameness filter.
I think the real reason Microsoft Edge is a failure is because it's exclusive to one platform: Windows. People might embrace their products more if they didn't only work on one platform.
Unfortunately, Microsoft has a persistent problem of creating products not for the sake of making a good product, but to promote other products. In this case, Edge exists purely to promote Windows and is therefore an afterthought; if it were otherwise and Microsoft were serious about promoting it as a great browser that should be used by as many people as possible, it would be multi-platform.
Best viewed in Internet Explorer or Netscape experience of the late 90's
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Here's to the 90's and early 2000 when Microsoft did the exact same shit
> Google kept making changes to its sites that broke other browsers, and we couldn't keep up.
Maybe you would have been able to keep up if you updated your browser more than twice a year?
All I can say to Microsoft is that revenge is a dish best served cold with a side of irony. It sucks that the other browsers have to deal with this shit but Microsoft deserves this since it was their favorite thing to do back in the 90s.
Google is even better than Microsoft at being Microsoft. Microsoft came to dominance in a time where there were no dominant software players. They were pioneers in using their dominance to push out competitors to the detriment of consumers. Somehow they managed to completely fail and allow google to dethrone them in several key areas. While Google has not succeeded in their attempt to dominate every market, I don't think there are any examples of them ceding their existing dominance in any large markets.
...I'm back in the 80s
Excuse me while I cue up some XTC and Cure.
--
BMO
If you browser breaks b/c of empty div then I am glad that we are done with IE. Don't design software that is that fragile in the first place. We have wasted enough lifetimes with IE6.
Pot. Kettle.
Meet the new boss Same as the old boss -Pete Townshend
Microsoft and IE6 set the web back over a decade (throw in some Adobe Flash to add insult to injury) and Microsoft wants to whine about fair?
What they should do is say "Hey, we did the same thing 20 years ago and it was a mistake. We are sorry for being such assholes and screwing the entire world with regards to HTML. We see Google is apparently doing the same thing, and while it's karma coming to bite us in the ass, it doesn't mean it's good for anyone, so maybe someone other than us, since we are biased and anything but above reproach, should look into it."
While I disagree with what Google may be doing if it's intentional just to break Edge, I can't anything but joy in seeing Microsoft get fucked in the exact same way they fucked the rest of the world 20 years ago. I know I should be more angry, but I can't get past the fact that Microsoft is crying about being bullied the same way they bullied everyone else. So someone else needs to take the reigns on this and drive the discovery and corrective action (if possible).
Suckitup Buttercup - MS invented the 'crush the competition under the weight of a vertically integrated monopoly by breaking their own peripheral product' business model.
/. of all places.
Douchebag behaviour from any monopolist but hearing MS browser devs bleat about being on the receiving end. on
This perpetual motion machine Lisa made is a joke, it just keeps getting faster and faster. - Homer
MSFT was well known for doing exactly this. And often. I'm sure the ex-intern is much too young to know that the honor system doesn't work at MSFT, much less their browser team.
United States v Microsoft Corp. Look it up. It was sort of a big deal back in the day.
MSFT is just collecting karma, their account has been deep in the red for since last century.
https://slashdot.org/comments....
If you gave me a choice between a printer and a giraffe with explosive diarrhoea, i'll get my ladder and my raincoat
Back in the day (94-200x) MS pulled the same stunts so donâ(TM)t cry foul. But I will concede on the premise, yes we loose when companies do this type of crap instead of inovating. I have to use 2 browsers at work Firefox and Brave because of issues. Stuff that requires AD integration on FF and the rest on Brave. Compromise because Chrome and IE, Edge just suck!!!!!!! FF worked really well but having some issues on Guite Apps hence Brave. If I load chrome it just eats all resources up with the software_explorer and the sand boxing security containers, how can chrome eat up 1.5 gbs of ram in an hour, WTF is that, our machines are almost unusable. And yes we are a Google apps shop I have to put up with the childish loss of features like losing right click context menus. Unfortunately standard users donâ(TM)t have the ability of using these browsers and are stuck with Chrome and IE and are having to restart daily, sometimes twice a day because of this crap. In Corp where AD authentication integration is a requirement all of us just want something that works; users donâ(TM)t give a crap who makes it. Hoping Edge is the answer so we can finally rip out the frankenstein of a browser chrome off our image and reduce our calls about machine slow,â(TM) I think Inhave a virusâ(TM), nope you have 30 zombie chrome sessions reboot or run the kill chrome process script we have had to put on the start menu.
MS is still playing the same tricks as it ever did before.
A lot of MS web based applications only work properly when using IE or Edge; you get bogged up pages or slow response when using other browsers, some things don't even work.
Think sharepoint, but also o365.
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
“Opera Software has accused Microsoft of deliberately engineering the MSN home page in order to make it look as if the Opera browser has a serious flaw in it” link
“We will bind the shell to the Internet Explorer, so that running any other browser is a jolting experience” link
I'd like to say "Boo Hoo" like the others. The truth is, it's just a boo hoo.
Here's the deal. What Google did was absolutely and completely compatible with the web. It wasn't a violation of standards. It wasn't much of anything other than a legitimate case where by using a transparent div, they could choose to provide overlays on the video. Now, if they had no intention of using it, it wasn't particularly relevant. But there's nothing particularly wrong with what they did.
If you read the HTML5 specs and you see the nasty crap associated with how the video tag works, modern browsers have to be coded to render to a 3D context (webgl is easiest). Video, for battery performance if often pipelined in a way that would offload rendering from the GPU. As such, it can be really problematic to render if there's overlays (meaning divs) while not hogging battery. So, the solution is to redirect video rendering directly to the frame buffer bypassing the fancy 3d rendering bits if there's nothing to render as an overlay on the video. In other words "If stuff on top of video is invisible, don't waste cycles rendering stuff on top of video". This is a simple optimization which they should do anyway.
I would love to call Boo Hoo, but in reality, we went through this for 20 years with Netscape and Microsoft and Google. We dumped our own rendering engine a million years ago because the web is just too damn big these days.
The best solution is that everyone just dumps their own rendering engines and all standardizes on Chromium at the core and then build something like the Linux foundation to support it independently. If Microsoft, Google, Apple and Firefox were to honestly try to stay compatible with each other through standards documents, it would just be a waste of time. We don't really need 50 different web browser engines anymore. Just make a single one and commit to it.
Are you sure you've got hold of the right end of the stick, and read the other comments here? Seems that "other browsers" are not affected except Edge. Seems that Edge had some benchmark cheating flummery in it that no longer works with Youtube, despite Youtube remaining standards compliant.
As for what Microsoft did in the 90's, they didn't stop their dirty tricks back then and continue them right up to the present - take the Win10 "upgrade" saga for example.
I guess this MS employee doesn't know much about the history of the company they work for.
Perhaps he does and assumes that MS can keep working the same way that they did - ie being in control of things, and expecting website developers to conform to their browser rather than being able to follow standards. Microsoft cannot cope with developing to standards, it is just not in their company culture, never has been.
"For example, they may start integrating technologies for which they have exclusive, or at least 'special' access. Can you imagine if all of a sudden Google apps start performing better than anyone else's?"
Boo hoo hoo.
- Former Netscape engineer
...if you didn't know about MS's sordid history, young one, then you've got a lot to learn. I suggest googling (or bing-ing) "cancer + linux" and "Embrace Extend Extinguish" also, just for fun, "developers, developers, developers"
You say it only works on IE6 ! And that nasty old Dr Dos is up to his old tricks again causing all those bugs on patch Tuesday ! Ain't payback a bitch
You live and learn, or you don't learn much.
Anyone remember when Steam was complaining that every update caused Steam to crash in a new and interesting way. They accused Microsoft of intentionally breaking the Steam Marketplace to get people to use the Microsoft Store.
I seem to recall Microsoft telling the world "There's not need to close the table tag" then proceeding to put an open table tag in their pre-CSS server side templates and encouraging others to do the same for no reason other than to break Netscape.
Some of us have memories and don't feel sorry for Microsoft even if we think Google of today is as bad as Microsoft of the late 90s.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.