zlacker

>>beezle+(OP)
As someone who used Firefox and has Windows 11, how is it going to affect me? My links open in Firefox only (and the only time I open links is either from WhatsApp or occasionally some link in a doc file or PDF I am reading). It works fine for me so far.

>>anshum+i1
I think it's only for 'microsoft-edge:' URLs, used by certain Windows features (e.g. Bing search from the start menu, or opening the online help via a link in the Settings). Most other links will just be normal http:/https: links and will use your actual default browser.

>>Liquid+45
But keep in mind the fact that any parts of Windows using microsoft-edge: URLs for any reason whatsoever is itself anticompetitive behavior.

>>joseph+F9
Is it really?

If I have an OS and I want to deeply integrate the browser into the OS for use-cases other than general browsing of the web, why can't there be browser specific URLs to accomplish that?

Is there a complete list of microsoft-edge:// use cases? I know there is a News integration to the taskbar.

I love standards but sometimes you have edge use cases that the entire world doesn't need or can adopt. Why can't a browser have proprietary features along with URLs that make sure that a browser supporting those URLs be used?

How do you even QA or support a deep browser integration into your OS when the browser can be switched to a 3rd party one?

If those deep integrations (News, etc) also prompt you to change your default browser for general web surfing then yes, that would be anticompetitive behavior. Does it do that?

>>matt_h+Nj
These are exactly the arguments Microsoft used in its antitrust defense.