In December, we announced our intention to adopt the Chromium open source project in the development of Microsoft Edge on the desktop. Our goal is to work with the larger Chromium open source community to create better web compatibility for our customers and less fragmentation of the web for all web developers.
Today we’re embarking on the next step in this journey – our first Canary and Developer builds are ready for download on Windows 10 PCs. Canary builds are preview builds that will be updated daily, while Developer builds are preview builds that will be updated weekly. Beta builds will come online in the future. Support for Mac and all supported versions of Windows will also come over time.
At this point, the builds really do feel like Chrome with some UI modifications, so I don’t see any reason other than curiosity and developer prep to use these builds. Still, I’m keeping it installed to keep up with the progress, but at the same time, I’m surprised it doesn’t seem to update through the Microsoft Store, instead opting for its own update mechanism.
These are the kinds of tiny details they ought to sweat, because the one advantage these application stores do have is centralised updating (like Linux systemshave had for ages).
Central updating is not the “one” advantage. Another would be a central, and single DRM platform, built in at the system level, which obviates the needs for dozens of buggy, insecure, unstable third party root-kit based DRM systems, if opened up properly. We saw a similar cleanup of the PC games industry once many vendors started to standardize on just whatever is in Steam. Over time, games have even been re-released with a primary difference being the removal of the old DRM nonsense.
Now imagine if all Steam did was leverage the DRM built in to the Microsoft store. Imagine further if Microsoft removed the ability to even install or implement DRM systems in Windows completely.
There is a way to engineer such a system. It’s too bad most of these platforms companies (Microsoft, Apple, Google, etc.) can’t seem to see the benefits of a slightly more open system (than current app store models) like this. It would really only be a half a step away from Apple’s current model, and having additional store fronts on the same foundation could go a long way to solving the race to the bottom problem software vendors love to stress. Imaging if Steam, Origin, the MS Store, Battle.net, etc. were all on the same DRM and commerce platform.
Ah, but we have too many competing concerns, and almost no cooperative spirit in the computer industry, so it’ll never happen.
CaptainN-,
Eesh, this utopia of yours make me cringe, I for one am quite glad industry leaders have not succeeded in consolidating the industry to the point of having only one global DRM and commerce platform. Only a few giants would hold all of the keys, it would mark the complete collapse of any meaningful competition.
I don’t get this – DRM is bad, but having only one DRM – per OS – that’s also bad? I just don’t get this way of thinking. It’s clearly a thing that people think they need (they don’t need it, but they think they do – let’s make that clear), and they will clearly continue to demand such nonsense. So why not have these companies build it in to the platform (and not just one – one per OS – even per distro)?
It would be straight up better than the either of the two extremes of the current situation (closed, single vendor “app store” walled gardens – which is at least a few steps worse a “Utopia” than what I’ve described vs. a free for all, everyone installs their own root kits situation on the other side).
(A side point – it doesn’t even have to be “good” DRM – Steam’s DRM is not super tight – most apps will even launch without Steam running. It just has to be there, and more importantly, the other rootkit based solutions need to go away.)
A missed opportunity: They should have called this Internet Explorer 12 and release it through Windows Update for all Windows editions back to Windows 7.
That would help us developers (and users!) much more.
As for IE compatibility, the IE11 engine could remain on the system and be hidden behind a special “legacy mode” button.
IE as a brand name is tarnished now. They have kept the similar logo as “average joes” do still look for the “E” for eeenternet (see what I did there?)
Moving to open source development of what was once a lynchpin of MS’s strategy is a major major change in direction. I think reminding people of the IE days and way of working would be counterproductive.
Heh, I was linked here by OSAlert to related https://www.osnews.com/story/14015/internet-explorer-has-a-future/
” I’m surprised it doesn’t seem to update through the Microsoft Store, instead opting for its own update mechanism”
Why are you surprised by this? Chredge is not a Windows 10 program (store app) so it will not update as a Windows 10 program. At the moment it makes perfect sense to work on 1 updater (like Chrome) that works on all platforms. Maybe when Chredge will reach Beta (or more likely RTM) they will start working on “optimal platform updaters” so Chredge might work on “Windows 10 in S mode”, but I am quite sure that on the list of “take Edge, swap out the rendering (and javascript) engine, loose/keep non-Chromium features (pdf/inking/set-aside-for-later/readingmode/bookmarks/sync/import), adjust UI, add multi-OS, keep performance/battery, security, installer, updater” the updater wouldn’t be a high priority item.