Searching for Chrome on Bing? Microsoft has a new clingy tactic to beg you to stay
As Microsoft Edge is Windows' default browser, many users often use it to download Chrome through the Bing search engine. Many will know that the browser often delivers a message stating why it's worth using Bing instead, but Windows Report has noticed a new comparison banner pops up.
When typing in "Chrome" using Bing on Edge, there's now a banner that takes up a big part of the page before web search results are shown. The report found a comparison between the two browsers, stating " Microsoft Edge offers the speed of Chrome with the security of Microsoft."
Notably, it also details what Edge offers and what Chrome doesn't, including Microsoft Rewards, a built-in VPN (although this isn't available in all regions), AI personalization and Microsoft's "recommended" for optimized browsing.
This is a "Promoted by Microsoft" ad, and a large one at that. It's yet another way Microsoft is urging users to stay on Edge, although I'm not sure if this will stop users in their tracks.
When trying this myself, I received another banner that showed the Microsoft Reward points to gain by trying Edge, with tiles showcasing Amazon, Starbucks, Xbox Game Pass and Roblox gift cards.
Either way, instead of just a small pop-up notification, there's now a full-on banner before reaching the list of search results for Google Chrome.
Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips.
With Chrome continuing to be the most popular browser around, it comes as no surprise that Microsoft wants you to stick with Edge. According to statistics from analytics firm Backlinko, there are an estimated 3.69 billion users worldwide, compared to Microsoft Edge's estimated 292 million users.
Thankfully, those in the EU won't have to put up with Microsoft begging you to make Edge your default browser, thanks to the Digital Markets Act. However, the rest of the world will still get pop-ups to give Edge a go.
Interestingly, research has shown that Chrome is the hungriest browser around, with Microsoft Edge using far fewer system resources. However, Bing itself, which Edge uses, is only a few steps behind Chrome in the amount of data it collects.
With Microsoft Edge now being promoted as an AI browser, it still has a lot of competition in the market, with Perplexity AI launching its first AI browser, and Opera offering its own agentic AI browser.
We're sure to see more tactics Microsoft uses to turn Edge into the browser for all (instead of Chrome), but if you want to uninstall Microsoft Edge instead, that's always an option.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
National security experts raise concerns after Microsoft program exposed as possible avenue for Chinese spying
A new ProPublica report accused Microsoft of allowing China-based engineers to assist with Pentagon cloud systems with inadequate guardrails in an effort to scale up its government contracting business, raising espionage concerns from national security experts. The report cited current and former employees and government contractors who worked on a cloud computing program deployed by Microsoft in 2016 that would allow the tech giant to sell its cloud services to the government, known as a "digital escort" framework. The security measure, meant to meet federal contracting regulations, was effectively a program that included a "digital escort" chaperone for global cybersecurity officials, such as those based in China, so they can work on agency computing systems. Defense Department guidelines require that people handling sensitive data be U.S. citizens or permanent residents. According to sources who spoke to ProPublica, including some who had intimate familiarity with the hiring process for the $18-per-hour "digital escort" position, the tech employees being hired to do the supervising lacked the adequate tech expertise to prevent a rogue Chinese employee from hacking the system or turning over classified information to the CCP. The sources elaborated that the escorts, often former military personnel, were hired for their security clearances more than their technical abilities and often lacked the skills to evaluate code being used by the engineers they were supervising. In China, people are governed by sweeping laws compelling government cooperation with data collection efforts. "If ProPublica's report turns out to be true, Microsoft has created a national embarrassment that endangers our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines. Heads should roll, those responsible should go to prison and Congress should hold extensive investigations to uncover the full extent of potential compromise," said Michael Lucci, the CEO and founder of State Armor Action, a conservative group with a mission to develop and enact state-level solutions to global security threats. "Microsoft or any vendor providing China with access to Pentagon secrets verges on treasonous behavior and should be treated as such." "This is like asking the fox to guard the henhouse and arming the chickens with sticks in case the fox gets mad," Michael Sobolik, a Hudson Institute foreign policy senior fellow, added. "It beggars belief." Microsoft uses its escort system to handle sensitive government information that falls below "classified," which includes "data that involves the protection of life and financial ruin," ProPublica reported. At the Defense Department, the data is categorized as "Impact Level" four and five, which ProPublica reported includes materials directly supporting military operations. A Microsoft spokesperson defended the company's "digital escort" model, saying all personnel and contractors with privileged access must pass federally approved background checks. "For some technical requests, Microsoft engages our team of global subject matter experts to provide support through authorized U.S. personnel, consistent with U.S. government requirements and processes," the spokesperson added. "In these instances, global support personnel have no direct access to customer data or customer systems." The Defense Information Systems Agency's (DISA) public information office was initially unaware of the program when ProPublica began asking questions about it, but it eventually followed up to point out that "digital escorts" are used "in select unclassified environments" at the Defense Department for "advanced problem diagnosis and resolution from industry subject matter experts." Fox News Digital reached out to the DISA and DOD but did not immediately receive a response. In 2023, Chinese hackers infiltrated Microsoft's cloud servers and stole data belonging to senior U.S. government officials, including data and emails from the commerce secretary, the U.S. ambassador to China and others involved in national security work. Hackers were able to access tens of thousands of emails from the Defense Department. A postmortem from the federal Cyber Safety Review Board, which has since been disbanded, cited Microsoft security failures that allowed hackers to infiltrate the cloud. However, the after-incident report did not include any links to the "digital escort" program, according to ProPublica. Microsoft said in response to the recent ProPublica report that it considers "anyone" with access to sensitive government systems, no matter their location or role, a potential risk. "We establish layers of mitigation at the platform level with security and monitoring controls to detect and prevent threats. This includes approval workflows for system changes and automated code reviews to quickly detect and prevent the introduction of vulnerabilities," a company spokesperson told Fox News Digital. The spokesperson added that Microsoft adheres to the federal security requirements outlined by the Defense Department and the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program, which was established in 2011 to address the risks associated with moving from entirely government-controlled servers, to cloud-based computing. "This production system support model is approved and regularly audited by the U.S. government," the spokesperson concluded. Still, if the ProPublica allegations are true, Lucci says the federal government should cease its work with Microsoft. "If these [ProPublica] allegations are credible, the federal government should never again rely on Microsoft to protect the data that keeps our men and women in uniform safe, especially given Microsoft's extensive record of being compromised by the CCP," Lucci said Monday. "Our military cannot operate in security and secrecy if a vendor repeatedly and intentionally invites the enemy into the camp."
The Verge
an hour ago
- The Verge
Now Microsoft's Copilot Vision AI can scan everything on your screen
Microsoft is rolling out an update to Copilot Vision for Windows Insiders that lets the AI tool see everything that's on your screen. Previously, the tool was able to look at two apps at a time and connect the dots between the two, but with this change, it can look at your whole desktop or 'any specific browser or app window,' Microsoft says. Unlike Recall, which can automatically take regular snapshots of what's on your computer screen, using Copilot Vision is more like screen sharing during a video call: you can activate the feature by clicking the glasses icon in the Copilot app and selecting the desktop you want it to see. Copilot Vision can 'help analyze content, provide insights, and answer your questions, coaching you through it aloud,' according to Microsoft. 'Get tips on making improvements to your creative project, help with improving your resume, or guidance while navigating a new game.' Microsoft initially started testing Copilot Vision last year as a feature that could see what you're looking at while browsing the web in Edge. Copilot Vision can also answer questions about what it sees through your mobile phone's camera.
Fast Company
2 hours ago
- Fast Company
Consumers win in Big Tech antitrust cases
Can you imagine your life without Google? Google Search, Google Chrome, Google Maps, Google Wallet, Google Drive, the Google Pixel phone—you could probably live your entire digital life within the Google ecosystem. Many, including the Justice Department, say that's a problem. The department recently won antitrust cases against Google's search engine and ad placement businesses. This may all feel abstract and perhaps invisible to most consumers. Google, Microsoft, Apple —they constitute the digital water we're all swimming in, and their monopoly raises prices, stifles innovation, and shapes our lives often to our detriment. The landmark antitrust case against Google marks a big victory against this status quo. Here's why it's so important. Monopolies create higher advertising costs Imagine promoting your business in a small town. You might buy an ad in the newspaper, put up a billboard, and run a spot on the local radio. Because these outlets are independent, you have lower prices and more advertising options. Now, imagine that the newspaper, billboard, and radio station are all owned by the same company. That shifts the dynamic: Because there is no competition for your ad dollars, prices are higher. That's essentially what the Google Ad business achieved, especially considering how critical digital advertising has become to businesses. People aren't watching commercials anymore. They're browsing the web during a commercial break. Google's monopoly on digital ads allows it to raise prices, making it harder for smaller businesses to compete and thrive. Google's monopoly created a less user-friendly internet Historically, about 90% of search traffic comes from Google, giving it a lot of power. For instance, Google uses an algorithm that examines web pages to score how relevant it is for search phrases, like 'pizza shop Minneapolis' or 'leaking fridge how to fix.' Because Google search is so dominant, people and companies who build and run websites do so with Google's algorithm in mind. That means the user experience takes a back seat to Google's preferences. If you've been to any recipe website lately, you know what I'm talking about. In a recent episode of the podcast Stay Tuned with Preet Bharara, former FTC chair Lina Khan noted that a monopoly is when a company can offer worse products and/or raise costs without suffering any substantial consequences in the market. 'You can understand this in some ways as a firm becoming too big to care,' Khan said. Many say the internet has become increasingly awful to use. The first page of search results are often dreck, in my opinion, written for Google's robots, not for humans. It's getting harder to find the information you're looking for, so a lot of people append their searches with tags for Reddit and YouTube, e.g. 'Hiking itinerary New Zealand Reddit' or 'best salmon dip recipe YouTube,' to cut through the SEO slop. Google's search monopoly could be a chokepoint for information Because of its dominance, Google can evolve in the direction of its own interests, rather than the interests of the user individually or collectively. It's not wild to imagine that Google can throttle searches for sensitive topics. During COVID, a 2020 Senate Commerce Committee hearing called Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and then-Twitter's then-CEO Jack Dorsey to question them about censoring conservative voices. Back in 2017, the World Socialist Web Site alleged that Google restrict ed access to 13 progressive and anti-war websites. For users, the question is not whether Google's algorithmic policies line up with your political views but whether Google can put its thumb on the scale regarding your access to information, based on what's advantageous for Google . It definitely can, and it definitely has. Monopolies stifle innovation Google can throw its weight around to thwart competition. In 2023, internet users noticed that YouTube (which Google owns) ran five seconds slower on the Mozilla Firefox browser than on Google Chrome. Ostensibly, Google tuned YouTube to purposely run slower on a competitor's browser to encourage users to switch to Chrome. Google, like many large companies, tends to acquire burgeoning competition rather than innovate in-house. Google has acquired hundreds of companies, from data analytics firms to rival search engines, from virtual reality developers to mapping products. When a company can buy out all the competition, consumers lose out on new ideas and better products, because the company has no incentive to pursue them. The ruling The ruling found that Google's default status with makers of smartphones, tablets, and laptops locked out rivals like Bing and DuckDuckGo, and that the integration of Google's adtech tools created a feedback loop that entrenched its monopoly. Google's ad business is facing its own antitrust lawsuit and may be broken up. The Department of Justice argues that Google's dominance in search (and its vast collection of user data) positions Google to achieve a similar feedback loop in AI -powered search and assistants—which could create a new monopoly. The DOJ has proposed forcing Google to sell Chrome and license some of its core search technologies to competitors, as well as ending default search agreements and allowing more visibility into how search results are ranked. The DOJ proposed Google give advance notice of AI-related acquisitions. Both sides have given their closing arguments and now await the judge's ruling, which is expected by August. This case is a blow against Big Tech in general, which has monopolized almost the entire digital world. I can only hope the FTC ' s antitrust case against Meta plays out in a similar fashion, and facilitates a return to a freer, more innovative digital world.
