zlacker

I'd say it's far better because messing at the OS level is straight out evil.

On Firefox I can stand the suggestion to use Chrome when I use google, I can even block it with uBlock, but haven't really bothered to.

Now, when they keep tweaking my OS settings, and use every upgrade as the excuse to reset my browser settings over and over, then I get mad. When I get ads on my start menu too. That's why I don't use windows anymore.

>>dietr1+(OP)
I agree in general but Google has done things like let YouTube be slow in non-Chrome browsers or “accidentally” break GCP logins or Meet for months at a time.

>>acdha+z9
TBF internal sites break on firefox for months too. People foocus on Chrome outside too, I think it's just that the mindset of coding against the standards and tracking all the version rollout for multiple engines is gone now that many "browsers" are just chorme reskins.

>>dietr1+(OP)
This doesn't make much sense to me

> I can even block it with uBlock

You can also block such things in your OS. It requires more expertise to modify machine code rather than obfuscated HTML, but in the end, it's cosmetically altering software to make it look the way you want it to.

Equal levels of 'evil' either way, to me

If they had gone out of their way to add DRM specifically to the pop-up (detecting div deletion for the web version, for example), that would be more evil, but such things aren't being done for showing browser advertisements (might come as a side effect for Windows licensing, but one who chooses to employ licensed software naturally invites that)